Duke Energy

public electric and gas utility holding company

Duke Energy

Industry Utilities

A public regulated electric and gas utility serving customers across several Southeastern and Midwestern states. Duke provides essential service, but investor ownership, monopoly territories, fossil generation, rate-base incentives, and policy influence keep it low.

Why this matters: Duke is a major comparison case for ordinary households that cannot freely choose their electric utility.

Letter grade F Malignant High confidence (AI) Rubric gcd-rubric-v1

Final Score -2* F - Malignant

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

Base Material20
Bonus+0
Cap35Ownership <= 2 and Governance <= 2
After Cap20
Penalties-22
!Not Verified
Represent this organization?

Request verification to have the evidence record checked against primary materials and organization-supplied documents. Verification does not buy a higher score; scores change only when review finds factual errors, omissions, or miscalibration.

Request verification

Evaluation Overview

F - Malignant

The score turns mainly on Scale Integrity, with the largest penalty coming from Ecological Harm.

Strengths

  • Scale Integrity4/5
  • Solidarity with the Unemployed3/7
  • Loss-Bearing Fidelity3/7

Penalties

  • Ecological Harm-6
  • High-Carbon Products-6
  • Policy Capture-5
  • Accountability Opacity-2

Evidence state

  • ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)
  • ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)
  • Linked claims16
  • Direct axis claims16
  • Coverage16/16

Scoring Axes

Axis Score Why this score
Ownership
?
Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control at 10.
1 / 10

Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1]
  • context Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2]
  • context Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3]
  • context Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4]
  • context Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5]
  • context Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6]
  • context Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7]
  • context Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8]
  • context Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Governance
?
Binding decision authority: centralized control at 0, democratic stakeholder control at 10.
1 / 10

Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • context Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1]
  • Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2]
  • context Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3]
  • context Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4]
  • context Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5]
  • context Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6]
  • context Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7]
  • context Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8]
  • context Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Extraction
?
Surplus allocation, wage share, CEO pay ratio, margins, and structured extraction judgment.
2 / 10

Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • context Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1]
  • context Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2]
  • Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3]
  • context Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4]
  • context Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5]
  • context Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6]
  • context Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7]
  • context Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8]
  • context Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Labor Sovereignty
?
Worker power: coercive conditions at 0, co-determination or ownership at 7. Employee dissatisfaction matters only when source-backed evidence shows concrete limits on worker agency, such as coercive scheduling, retaliation, wage theft, harassment, unsafe conditions, suppression of worker voice, or extreme turnover.
2 / 7

Duke Energy's linked public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • context Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1]
  • context Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2]
  • context Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3]
  • Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4]
  • context Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5]
  • context Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6]
  • context Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7]
  • context Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8]
  • context Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Solidarity with the Unemployed
?
Treatment of exits and nonworkers, including severance, redeployment, and non-competes.
3 / 7

Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • context Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1]
  • context Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2]
  • context Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3]
  • context Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4]
  • Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5]
  • context Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6]
  • context Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7]
  • context Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8]
  • context Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Loss-Bearing Fidelity
?
Willingness to absorb costs to preserve values, workers, users, and public obligations.
3 / 7

Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • context Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1]
  • context Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2]
  • context Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3]
  • context Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4]
  • context Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5]
  • Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6]
  • context Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7]
  • context Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8]
  • context Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Market Conduct
?
Pricing fairness, switching costs, lock-in, and rent extraction.
1 / 5

Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • context Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1]
  • context Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2]
  • context Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3]
  • context Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4]
  • context Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5]
  • context Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6]
  • Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7]
  • context Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8]
  • context Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Product Integrity
?
Preservation of quality rather than degradation for monetization.
3 / 5

Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • context Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1]
  • context Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2]
  • context Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3]
  • context Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4]
  • context Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5]
  • context Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6]
  • context Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7]
  • Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8]
  • context Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Scale Integrity
?
Whether growth improves or degrades fairness and accountability.
4 / 5

Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • context Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category. [1]
  • context Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2]
  • context Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3]
  • context Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4]
  • context Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5]
  • context Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6]
  • context Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7]
  • context Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8]
  • Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]

Penalties

Penalty Applied Why this penalty
Ecological Harm
?
Footprint, trajectory, irreversibility, culpability, and scale, including whether ecological harm is central to the model and continued after credible notice. Range: -30 to 0.
-6

Duke Energy's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • Duke Energy's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [10]
Policy Capture
?
Private-interest attempts to bend law, regulation, subsidies, taxes, enforcement, trade, labor, safety, competition, environmental, healthcare, housing, surveillance, civil-liberties, or consumer policy against workers, customers, citizens, affected communities, or ecological life. Public-interest advocacy is not penalized merely because it is lobbying. Range: -15 to 0.
-5

Duke Energy's public record makes Policy Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • Duke Energy's public record makes Policy Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [11]
High-Carbon Products
?
Core products, services, financing, or supply chains that materially depend on fossil-fuel combustion, high-emissions transport, industrial animal agriculture, meat, dairy, or other unusually carbon-intensive activity. This is scored separately from general ecological harm so ordinary consumers can see carbon-intensive product exposure directly. Range: -10 to 0.
-6

Duke Energy's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • Duke Energy's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [12]
Subscription Capture
?
Manipulative recurring-payment, automatic-renewal, cancellation-friction, bundling, trial-conversion, or refund designs that profit from inertia or confusion. Range: -5 to 0.
-1

Duke Energy's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • Duke Energy's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [13]
Accountability Opacity
?
Material opacity, reputation laundering, or hidden accountability structures that prevent public accountability. Range: -2 to 0.
-2

Duke Energy's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • Duke Energy's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [14]
Surveillance Capture
?
Invasive surveillance, unreasonably non-optional tracking, facial recognition, biometric identification, or AI behavior scanning of customers, workers, bystanders, or the public. Range: -5 to 0.
-1

Duke Energy's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • Duke Energy's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [15]
Ideological Disavowal
?
Concealed ideology presented as neutrality, expertise, professional necessity, public-service administration, market inevitability, or non-ideological common sense while exercising power. Range: -3 to 0.
-1

Duke Energy's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Calibration notes

Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions.

Linked evidence
  • Duke Energy's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [16]

Bonus Credits

No bonus credits applied in this version.

Confidence Basis

Confidence Basis

Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not typed into the profile by hand.

High 81/100

16 verified linked claims 16 direct axis claims 0 disputed claims 16/16 components covered

This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail. AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.

Claim confidence 16/20

16 verified linked claims

Source quality 13/18

Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability

Direct axis-specific claims 14/18

16 direct claims across 16 active components

Dispute load 12/12

0 disputed claims on this entity

Recency 10/10

Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026

Reviewer status 7/12

Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding

Component coverage 10/10

16/16 evidence-bearing components have direct support

Evidence State

Evidence State

Profile stateAI draft / human-pending
VerificationUnverified
ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)
Correction routeUse “Challenge this rating” for factual errors, missing counterevidence, source problems, or calculation mistakes.
Company responseCompany representatives can submit source-backed corrections; payment never changes scores or reviewer authority.

Claims and Sources

Claims are the evidence record. Each claim needs a source link, axis category, status, confidence level, and timestamp before it can support a score.

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.
1Duke Energy's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the utilities category.

Ownership Verified High confidence Human-reviewed

2Duke Energy's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers.

Governance Verified High confidence Human-reviewed

3Duke Energy's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery.

Extraction Verified High confidence Human-reviewed

4Duke Energy's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution.

Labor Sovereignty Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed

5Duke Energy operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power.

Solidarity Unemployed Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed

6Duke Energy's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise.

Loss Bearing Fidelity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed

7Duke Energy operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice.

Market Conduct Verified High confidence Human-reviewed

8Duke Energy's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability.

Product Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed

9Duke Energy's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities.

Scale Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed

10Duke Energy's public record makes Ecological Harm relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Ecological Harm Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed

11Duke Energy's public record makes Policy Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Policy Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed

12Duke Energy's public record makes High-Carbon Products relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

High Carbon Products Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed

13Duke Energy's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Subscription Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed

14Duke Energy's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Accountability Opacity Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed

15Duke Energy's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Surveillance Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed

16Duke Energy's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Ideological Disavowal Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed

Alternatives

Competitors

Help Improve This Profile

Submit source-backed evidence or challenge a specific claim, source, axis value, or calculation below.

How This Page Is Maintained

Evidence comes in through contributors, is checked by verifiers, and is synthesized by reviewers. Founder authority remains narrow and visible; scores recalculate when verified claims or the rubric change.

Civic Note

Incorporation, limited liability, market access, and other institutional privileges are public grants. Good Companies Directory treats those privileges as conditional on accountability to workers, users, communities, and the public.

Submit evidence for Duke Energy Add one source-backed fact for review.

Challenge this rating Point to a specific score, claim, source, or calculation problem.

Audit Log

Recent public changes for this company or group. The full audit log is part of the Transparency record.

No company-specific audit entries have been published yet.

View Full Audit Log