EPA GHGRP · reporting year 2023 · Power Plants
Middle River Power - top-third GHGRP parent
According to the EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), an upper-third Scope 1 reporter: 8 facilities across 3 states (2.2M MT CO₂e in 2023).
- MT CO₂e (latest facility reports)
- 2.2M
- Reporting facilities
- 8
- States covered
- 3
- Overall rank
- #205
Data updated May 2026
According to the EPA GHGRP, Middle River Power reported 2.2M MT CO₂e in 2023 across 8 facilities in 3 states (ranks among the top 10% of U.S. corporate GHG emitters (#205 of 2,289)) Emissions increased 150% over the tracked period.
- Overall rank #205 of 2,289
- #119 in Power Plants
- +150.4% since 2011
Middle River Power vs all U.S. GHGRP parent companies
Where this parent's reported Scope 1 CO₂e sits among every EPA GHGRP-reporting company
2,233,806 205th of 2289 higher than 2,084 of 2,289 companies
GHGRP parent companies, banded by reported CO₂e (MT)
Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more companies. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.
Source EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program · 2023
How Middle River Power spreads its footprint vs Power Plants peers
Facility count against total reported CO₂e for 21 Power Plants companies. A company can lead its sector from one concentrated site or from many smaller ones; the split below uses the median of this peer group (19 facilities, 26.77M MT).
You are here: Middle River Power.
Power Plants peer footprint table: Middle River Power, 8 facilities, 2.23M MT CO2e. Vistra, 40 facilities, 86.32M MT CO2e. The Southern, 26 facilities, 78.01M MT CO2e. Duke Energy, 39 facilities, 65.01M MT CO2e. CPN Management, 43 facilities, 47.58M MT CO2e. Nextera Energy, 19 facilities, 45.57M MT CO2e. American Electric Power CO, 22 facilities, 44.72M MT CO2e. Berkshire Hathaway, 27 facilities, 39.8M MT CO2e. US Government, 21 facilities, 38.21M MT CO2e. Entergy, 23 facilities, 33.86M MT CO2e. Xcel Energy, 28 facilities, 29.03M MT CO2e. PPL, 6 facilities, 26.77M MT CO2e. Dominion Energy, 22 facilities, 25.19M MT CO2e. DTE Energy, 12 facilities, 22.31M MT CO2e. NRG Energy, 14 facilities, 22.1M MT CO2e. Ameren, 11 facilities, 19.88M MT CO2e. Evergy, 12 facilities, 19.87M MT CO2e. Lightstone Generation, 4 facilities, 19.14M MT CO2e. Talen Energy, 11 facilities, 17.72M MT CO2e. Associated Electric Cooperative, 7 facilities, 15.57M MT CO2e. Aes, 8 facilities, 15.45M MT CO2e.
EPA GHGRP inventory plate
Parent middle-river-power · 2023 #205 · 2.2M MT
CO2E-MID · TOP-DECILE · PHOTO-FINISH · FAC-MULTI · SPAN-PAIR · SECTOR-POWER-PLANTS · TREND-SURGE · BOOK-RICH
- CO2E-MID 2.2M MT
- TOP-DECILE #205/2289
- PHOTO-FINISH Wheelabrator Technolo… · Waste
- FAC-MULTI 8 facilities
- SPAN-PAIR 3 states
- SECTOR-POWER-PLANTS Power Plants
- TREND-SURGE +150% since 2011
- BOOK-RICH 7/8 fields
Nearest CO₂e peer: Wheelabrator Technologies Holdings · Waste (±9K MT)
Upper-third parent rollup stamps: CO₂e band, corpus rank, peer, facility book, state span, sector, trend. Not an EPA grade.
2023 nearly all-CO₂ parent book
This parent's 2023 facility book is almost entirely CO₂ (99.9% of 2.2M MT CO₂e). CH₄ and N₂O together are only 0.1%, a CO₂-shaped GHGRP profile, not a methane story. Component shares sum this parent's facility CO₂ / CH₄ / N₂O rows for that year, not a corporate Scope 1-3 inventory.
- CO₂
- 99.9%
- 2.2M MT
- CH₄
- 0%
- 1K MT
- N₂O
- 0.1%
- 1K MT
CO₂e neighbourhood around Middle River Power
Lowest and highest poles plus nearest reported parents by CO₂e, not a full GHGRP corpus board reprint.
Largest sites in a top-third parent book
Middle River Power - top sites (MT CO₂e)
Middle River Power's largest facilities by latest available reported CO₂e
Emissions growth across reporting years
Middle River Power - rising annual GHG
EPA GHGRP 2011–2023 · million metric tons CO₂e
- Reported CO₂e in 2023
- 2.2M MT
- 13 annual EPA GHGRP reporting records
Middle River Power annual reported GHG emissions, 2011–2023
Middle River Power reported 2.2M MT CO₂e in 2023, compared with 892K MT in 2011 - a rise of 150.4% across the EPA GHGRP reporting record.
Multi-site facilities (8)
| Facility | Location | Emissions (MT CO2e) |
|---|---|---|
| High Desert Power Project Power Plants VICTORVILLE, CA | VICTORVILLE, CA | 1.6M |
| Tracy Combined Cycle Power Plant Power Plants TRACY, CA | TRACY, CA | 384K |
| Big Sandy Peaker Plant Power Plants KENOVA, WV | KENOVA, WV | 196K |
| Wolf Hills Energy Power Plants BRISTOL, VA | BRISTOL, VA | 46K |
| Midway Peaking, LLC Power Plants FIREBAUGH, CA | FIREBAUGH, CA | 12K |
| Malaga Power, LLC Power Plants FRESNO, CA | FRESNO, CA | 6K |
| Hanford Energy Park Peaker Power Plants HANFORD, CA | HANFORD, CA | 2K |
| Henrietta Peaker Plant Power Plants LEMOORE, CA | LEMOORE, CA | 2K |
Where Middle River Power's reported CO₂e sits by state
89.2% of this parent's latest facility CO₂e is in California (6 sites) ; next is West Virginia at 8.8% . Shares are GHGRP facility rollups for this parent, not state economy totals.
Middle River Power reported facility CO₂e concentration by U.S. state
Nationwide peers for a top-third GHGRP parent
Three EPA GHGRP peer sets for a top-third parent (2.2M MT): nearest totals, facility-book size, then per-facility intensity.
Similar reported CO₂e
Nearest parent totals (2.2M MT here).
Similar facility book
Nearest reporting-facility counts (8 here).
Similar per-facility CO₂e
Nearest average MT per facility (279K MT here).
Source: EPA GHGRP Data is based on facility self-reporting. Not environmental compliance advice
What to do with this
Using Middle River Power's emissions profile
- Middle River Power runs high-intensity per facility (279K MT CO₂e/site); see how it stacks up against the rest of the Power Plants sector on the Power Plants industry page.
- It ranks #205 of 2,289 reporting parents nationwide, compare it directly against specific peers on the compare tool.
- Not sure how to read a total-CO₂e figure or a per-facility intensity number, the how-to-read guide walks through what each field means and what it doesn't.
Related reading: How to read an emissions profile · Power Plants emitters · Methodology
Disclaimer: This information is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. Data is sourced from the EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). Consult a qualified professional before making decisions based on this data.