Direct Lobbying Transparency
| Overall Assessment | Comment | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Moderate | CenterPoint Energy provides a reasonable level of transparency on which climate-related policies it has engaged with, explicitly naming a series of bills and regulations such as Minnesota’s “Natural Gas Innovation Act,” the “2021 Special Session Omnibus Energy Bill H.F. 6,” and several state measures that govern transmission investment and resiliency cost recovery (e.g., “HB 1420,” “HB 1417,” “SB 1016,” and “HB 2555”). By identifying these laws and describing how its five-year innovation plan was submitted and ultimately approved under the NGIA framework, the company gives readers a clear view of the specific legislative and regulatory arenas in which it is active. In contrast, the description of how it seeks to influence those policies is sparse: apart from noting that its innovation plan was “submitted” to and must be “approved by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission,” the disclosures do not explain whether the company met with commissioners, sent letters, or relied on trade associations, nor do they identify individual decision-makers—leaving the exact lobbying mechanisms largely unspecified. The company is more forthcoming about the outcomes it wants to achieve through these engagements, stating that it aims to deploy projects that use renewable natural gas, green hydrogen, networked geothermal systems and onsite carbon capture, with the goals of “reducing or avoiding an estimated 1.2 million tons of carbon emissions,” creating “about 3,000 full-time equivalent jobs,” and leveraging “$17 million or more in federal clean energy incentives” for Minnesota. Overall, CenterPoint Energy is clear about the policies it is involved with and the climate outcomes it seeks, but offers only limited insight into the specific channels and targets of its lobbying activities. | 2 |