I regret to say I'm unwilling to name a particular company. That's the reason I posted advisory sources with a caveat to define your investment decision according to any issuers prospectus of absolute GHG reduction. Many will fake "green" investors, and USC enacted by Congress will capitalized and permit such opportunists to mark-to-market asset amortization of future compliance with (minimal) RPS.

You've got to verify what capital expenditure (YoY or QoQ) each company in which you'll invest has actually committed to the principles (above) -- retail subsidy (switching costs!) and plant. CapEx illustrates the path of transition from conventional fossil-fuel extortion to renewable resource cooperation.

To my mind, theories of "demand-side" or "supply-side" management are irrelevant to real economy growth expectations in any one HH. That position is perforce ambiguous (profit motivated) and too abstract in scope to ease benefit decisions in any one HH according to risk and political volatility.

I'm on the "just do it!" ethical platform. Allocate your disposable income between (1) energy efficiency at home (NB. demand for consultation, repair, and equipment!); and (2) aggressive discrimination, object-oriented invesment in long-term "soft" (qualitative) AND "hard" (quant, monetary) returns.

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.