With California operating more than 20,000 EV charging stations and Alaska recording a score of zero, a state-by-state index reveals that America’s transition to cleaner fuels is advancing at very different speeds depending on where you are.
The decision to switch to an electric vehicle or alternative fuel source is, for many American drivers, less a matter of personal preference than practical geography. Whether charging stations are accessible, whether state policy makes the economics viable, and whether renewable fuels are even available at a local level vary so dramatically across the country that two drivers making identical choices can have entirely different experiences depending on which side of a state line they live on.
A new analysis from Ovoko, a European used-car parts marketplace, aims to quantify that disparity. Drawing on data from the US Department of Energy’s Alternative Fuels Data Center, the study constructed an Eco-Friendly Fuel Index for all 50 states, combining biodiesel station counts, EV charging station numbers, renewable diesel availability, and state-level laws and incentives into a single comparable score. Infrastructure accounts for 40 percent of the final index; policy support for the remaining 60 percent – a weighting that reflects evidence that legislation and financial incentives are the more powerful long-term drivers of consumer adoption.
The results are scaled from zero to 100. At the top sits California with a perfect score. At the bottom sits Alaska with zero.
What the Top of the Table Looks Like
The distance between California and every other state is the study’s most striking single finding. With 20,354 electric charging stations, 1,393 renewable diesel stations, 66 biodiesel stations, and 111 supporting laws and incentives – more than twice the policy count of any other state – California has built what Kazimieras Urbonas, Supplier Excellence Manager at Ovoko, describes as a self-reinforcing system.
“Infrastructure attracts more eco-friendly vehicle adoption, which in turn justifies further infrastructure investment,” he said. The state’s score of 100 reflects not just what it has built but the degree to which its policy environment actively encourages drivers to use it.
Washington state’s second-place score of 71.25 is notable for a different reason: its infrastructure is well distributed relative to its population, meaning accessibility is not confined to Seattle and its surroundings. With 2,972 electric stations, 24 biodiesel stations, 20 renewable diesel stations, and 54 supporting policies, Washington offers genuine coverage across multiple fuel types – a breadth that few states approach.
Colorado, ranked third at 68.76, illustrates a different pathway to a strong score. The state has virtually no biodiesel or renewable diesel infrastructure, but its 2,795 electric stations and 49 supporting policies have been enough to place it among the national leaders. “States don’t need to excel in every category to rank highly,” Urbonas noted. “Focused investment in a specific fuel type, combined with supportive legislation, can position a state as a clean fuel leader.”
Massachusetts (68.22), New York (65.67), and Virginia (61.94) follow, each with meaningful EV networks and above-average policy support. Illinois ranks seventh despite a relatively limited EV charging footprint, propelled by 495 biodiesel stations – a figure exceeded only by California.
The States Where Infrastructure and Policy Have Both Fallen Short
The bottom of the index presents a consistent pattern: minimal infrastructure, minimal policy engagement, and in several cases the interaction of both with challenging geography.
Alaska’s score of zero is unambiguous. It’s 81 electric stations serve the largest state in the union by land area. It has no biodiesel or renewable diesel infrastructure at all, and just five laws and incentives relating to alternative fuel adoption. While the state’s terrain and climate create genuine logistical complications, the policy dimension – five supporting measures compared to California’s 111 – points to a question of prioritisation as much as practicality.
Wyoming (16.05) and Idaho (16.50) rank 49th and 48th, respectively, both characterised by sparse infrastructure across vast rural areas and limited policy frameworks. Wyoming has implemented ten supporting laws and incentives; Idaho just eight – the lowest of any state other than Alaska.
“Without infrastructure, drivers won’t adopt eco-friendly vehicles,” Urbonas said. “Without demand, there’s little incentive to build infrastructure. Breaking this cycle requires deliberate policy intervention – which these states have been slow to provide.”
The Infrastructure Trap: Why Charging Stations Alone Are Not Enough
Among the index’s more instructive findings is the limited impact of charging station numbers when they are not accompanied by supportive policy. Florida has 4,531 electric stations – more than Washington or Colorado – yet scores only 50.10, held back by just 16 supporting laws and incentives. Texas has 4,118 stations and scores 58.13 for similar reasons.
The contrast with Vermont is instructive. Vermont has only 559 electric stations but scores 47.44, supported by 30 laws and incentives that appear to be driving meaningful adoption despite the thinner physical infrastructure.
“States can have significant charging networks, but without laws and incentives to encourage adoption, infrastructure alone won’t shift consumer behaviour,” Urbonas said. “Strong policy without accessible infrastructure leaves drivers stranded. Both are needed, and the states at the top of this index have understood that.”
A Competitive Dimension Emerging
Beyond the environmental argument, Urbonas frames the infrastructure gap as an economic issue with long-term implications. As vehicle manufacturers accelerate their electrification timelines and the proportion of EVs in new car sales continues to grow, states that have not developed supporting infrastructure risk falling behind not just environmentally but in their ability to attract and retain residents and businesses with modern transport expectations.
“The automotive industry is moving toward electrification regardless of state policy,” he said. “Regions that fail to build infrastructure now will find themselves at a competitive disadvantage – and the gap will become harder to close the longer they wait.”
For the large group of states currently clustered in the middle of the rankings – those with modest infrastructure and limited but not negligible policy frameworks – the study suggests the route forward is a deliberate combination of targeted infrastructure investment and practical consumer incentives. The model already exists in the states that have implemented it most effectively. The question is whether the political will to replicate it exists elsewhere.
About Ovoko
Ovoko is one of Europe’s largest online marketplaces for used car parts, connecting over 4,000 auto dismantlers, recyclers, and sellers with car dealers, mechanics, and enthusiasts. With more than 23 million parts available, Ovoko offers fast delivery across Europe, a 14-day money-back guarantee, and tools that help scrapyards go digital.
Founded in 2016, the platform supports a circular economy by giving auto parts a second life, reducing waste, and modernizing a traditionally offline industry. Headquartered in Lithuania with teams across Europe, Ovoko combines e-commerce, inventory management, and logistics into one powerful solution for sustainable automotive trade.
Methodology
This analysis evaluates how eco-friendly each U.S. state is in terms of alternative fuel adoption and government support. The study combines the availability of eco-friendly fuel stations with state-level laws and incentives to create a comparable Eco-Friendly Fuel Score Index, highlighting both current infrastructure and long-term policy commitment.
Data on biodiesel stations, electric vehicle charging stations, and renewable diesel stations was sourced from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Alternative Fuels Data Center. Information on state-level laws, regulations, and financial incentives supporting alternative fuel adoption was also gathered from the Alternative Fuels Data Center.
To reduce the impact of extreme outliers, both total eco-friendly fuel stations and total laws and incentives were log-transformed prior to normalization. Min-Max normalization was then applied, and the final score was calculated using a weighted approach: 40% infrastructure availability and 60% laws and incentives. This weighting recognizes that policy support drives long-term adoption and market development. Scores were rescaled to a 0-100 index, where higher values indicate more eco-friendly states.
Disclaimer
Artificial Intelligence Disclosure & Legal Disclaimer
AI Content Policy.
To provide our readers with timely and comprehensive coverage, South Florida Reporter uses artificial intelligence (AI) to assist in producing certain articles and visual content.
Articles: AI may be used to assist in research, structural drafting, or data analysis. All AI-assisted text is reviewed and edited by our team to ensure accuracy and adherence to our editorial standards.
Images: Any imagery generated or significantly altered by AI is clearly marked with a disclaimer or watermark to distinguish it from traditional photography or editorial illustrations.
General Disclaimer
The information contained in South Florida Reporter is for general information purposes only.
South Florida Reporter assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in the contents of the Service. In no event shall South Florida Reporter be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or incidental damages or any damages whatsoever, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tort, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Service or the contents of the Service.
The Company reserves the right to make additions, deletions, or modifications to the contents of the Service at any time without prior notice. The Company does not warrant that the Service is free of viruses or other harmful components.
