CLEVELAND, Ohio — Ohio is among the top states for solar power generation, though its position is slipping amid restrictions enacted by the super-majority of Republicans in the statehouse.

In 2024, the state generated 4,021 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity from solar power, more than doubling its output from 2023, when it produced 1,382 GWh, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

To put that into perspective, Ohio’s solar power generation in 2024 was enough to supply electricity to approximately 390,000 homes, based on the state’s average household consumption.

Ohio has steadily increased its solar power generation in recent years. In 2020, the state produced just 164 GWh, a figure that jumped to 673 GWh in 2021. Growth slowed in the following year but output still increased, with 921 GWh generated in 2022.

In 2024, Ohio ranked 12th nationwide in solar power generation, leading all other Midwest states. The top 11 states are all much sunnier, and for the most part, further south than Ohio. They are California, Texas, Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, Arizona, Georgia, Virginia, Colorado, Utah and New Mexico.

But thanks in part to state policies and a push to deny solar projects, Ohio fell from fifth to 13th place from 2023 to 2024 in rankings from the Solar Energy Industries Association.

This is amid a growing demand for energy overall, to power data centers and other major developments.

“Ohio is a really good state, frankly, to build more solar projects. There is a lot of flat, sunny land. It just needs to not get caught up on policy,” said Gilbert Michaud, policy division chair for the American Solar Energy Society and an assistant professor of environmental policy at Loyola University Chicago.

Michaud pointed to Senate Bill 52, passed in 2021, as a key obstacle to more solar growth. The law allows local governments to restrict or ban large solar and wind projects, creating uncertainty for developers and resistance from rural communities, particularly in conservative-leaning areas less supportive of renewable energy.

Ohioans and their elected representatives have killed enough solar development to roughly power the state’s three largest cities in the three years the law, one of the nation’s most stringent restrictions on new solar development.

“When a developer is trying to build a solar project in the Midwest, are they going to look to Ohio, which has a lot of debate over solar energy? Or will they maybe just build a project in central Illinois where there is support for things like clean energy? It seems like a pretty clear choice to me,” Michaud said.

Other Republican-led states, like North Carolina, have made significant strides in solar energy.

North Carolina climbed from 31st to fifth in installed solar capacity during the same period between 2023 and 2024. The state also ranked fifth in solar power generation in 2024 and has steadily increased its solar use since 2020.

Legislative efforts such as North Carolina’s House Bill 589, enacted in 2017, have reformed the state’s approach to renewable energy. In Raleigh alone, more than 1,500 solar installations were recorded by 2024, according to state data.

“Large utility-scale projects have been the main driver of solar development in Ohio, but opposition from local governments has created a lot of challenges,” Michaud said. “When developers face the risk of not getting projects approved, they’re more likely to invest elsewhere.”

That uncertainty has already led some developers to abandon projects in Ohio. Grange Solar, for example, withdrew its applications for projects in the state due to local opposition.

Michaud also highlighted the impact of Ohio’s Renewable Portfolio Standard, which was reduced from 12.5% to 8.5%. Under the reduction, Ohio now requires that 8.5% of electricity sold by Ohio utilities come from renewable sources by 2026, instead of the higher target.

He pointed to Illinois’ Climate and Equitable Jobs Act, which prioritizes solar accessibility for low- and moderate-income communities, as a model Ohio could follow to expand its solar market — if it had the political will.

Ohio also faces logistical hurdles in solar development, particularly regarding interconnection costs and grid infrastructure, he said.

In states like California, utility companies typically share the cost of connecting solar projects to the grid. In Ohio, however, developers often bear the full financial burden, leading to higher costs and delays.

California remains the nation’s leader in solar power generation. In 2024, the state produced 47,821 GWh of electricity, up from 41,001 GWh in 2023.

Despite the challenges, local advocates like Craig Ickler, energy democracy organizer at the Cleveland Solar Cooperative, continue pushing for more solar energy development in Ohio.

Ickler believes community solar is the future of renewable energy, especially in Ohio, where his organization is working on two community solar projects set to launch in 2026.

Community solar allows multiple people to share a larger solar farm, purchasing a portion of the energy it generates. Their share is credited to their utility bills, enabling them to benefit from solar power without installing panels on their own homes.

“It’s allowed thousands of people to legitimately own and benefit from solar energy without having to physically have it on their homes, and they’re able to see the benefits on their bill,” Ickler said.

He said participants in community solar projects can expect to save between 5% and 20% on their utility bills.

Ickler also noted geographical factors that impact solar power potential. States like Washington, known for cloudy, rainy weather, generated just 436 GWh of solar power in 2024.

“I think solar production in Ohio would be higher if we could move the state a couple hundred miles south. We might also enjoy a little bit nicer weather,” he joked, adding that states with more year-round sunlight, like Texas, Florida and Arizona, are naturally more attractive to solar developers.

Asked to grade Ohio’s solar policy and development efforts, Ickler gave both a “C.”

“I would also probably add a ‘see me after class’ when grading Ohio on solar power generation,” he said. “There is a lot of good in what Ohio is doing with solar energy, but, just like a student who earns a ‘C’ in class, there’s a lot of progress to be made.”

Below is a complete ranking that shows gigawatt-hours of electricity generated by solar power in each state in 2024. North Dakota did not have data available. The data comes from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

1. California (47,821 GWh)
2. Texas (39,547)
3. Florida (18,680)
4. Nevada (12,479)
5. North Carolina (12,267)
6. Arizona (10,786)
7. Georgia (8,780)
8. Virginia (7,031)
9. Colorado (4,939)
10. Utah (4,923)
11. New Mexico (4,319)
12. Ohio (4,021)
13. New York (3,380)
14. Indiana (3,102)
15. South Carolina (2,954)
16. Wisconsin (2,939)
17. Illinois (2,703)
18. Minnesota (2,357)
19. Massachusetts (2,246)
20. Arkansas (2,200)
21. Oregon (2,076)
22. Michigan (1,916)
23. New Jersey (1,787)
24. Mississippi (1,553)
25. Alabama (1,257)
26. Louisiana (1,210)
27. Pennsylvania (1,195)
28. Maryland (1,111)
29. Tennessee (1,101)
30. Maine (1,077)
31. Idaho (1,013
32. Hawaii (736)
33. Iowa (671)
34. Rhode Island (623)
35. Connecticut (501)
36. Washington (436)
37. Wyoming (423)
38. Montana (367)
39. South Dakota (338)
40. Oklahoma (297)
41. Kentucky (245)
42. Vermont (222)
43. West Virginia (207)
44. Missouri (200)
45. Nebraska (185)
46. Delaware (167)
47. Kansas (83)
48. Alaska (16)
49. New Hampshire (4)