319.2 GW of Wind in U.S. Interconnection Queues

Wind power is asking for 319.2 GW of grid connections across the U.S. interconnection queues we track — a fifth-of-the-total slice of the 1600.7 GW that sits in line on the sealed snapshot of June 11, 2026. Sized against that national figure, wind is the third-largest technology by capacity, behind solar at 515.1 GW and battery storage at 442.0 GW.

Scale is not the same as certainty. A queue position is a request to connect, not a built, approved, or financed project, and 38.8% of wind entries are already withdrawn. This report reads the national wind picture from one sealed day across 5 ISOs and RTOs, leading with how wind compares to its peers before drilling into where it sits.

Wind requests 319.2 GW of the 1600.7 GW total in the covered queues.

This is a census of the published queues, not of every project on every grid in the country. Generation and storage projects sitting in the interconnection queues of the U.S. grid operators (ISOs and RTOs) that publish a machine-readable queue, as captured by US Tech Automations' sealed daily grid snapshots, are the entire scope.

Key Findings

• Wind requests 319.2 GW across the covered queues, the third-largest technology by capacity, according to the sealed interconnection-queue snapshot.

• Wind counts 1,722 projects in line on the snapshot day.

• The wind withdrawal rate is 38.8%, between solar and battery storage.

• MISO leads wind with 573 projects, more than any other operator.

• The largest wind entry, PATHFINDER RENEWABLE WIND ENERGY, is 3,000 MW.

Wind Against the Other Technologies

The fastest way to size wind is to set it beside every other bucket in the queues. The comparison frames everything that follows.

Wind's 1,722 projects and 319.2 GW put it third on both counts. Its 38.8% withdrawal rate lands between battery storage at 32.6% and solar at 45.1% — wind applicants leave more often than storage developers but less often than solar developers.

That middle position fits the technology. Wind projects need stronger siting — a consistent wind resource and transmission access — than solar, which raises the bar to enter but also weeds out some of the most speculative filings before they ever reach the queue. The result is a field that is smaller than solar's but, entry for entry, somewhat more committed.

Against the 1600.7 GW national total, wind is a major but not dominant share — the US interconnection queue index for June 2026 sets that full backdrop. Solar at 515.1 GW and battery storage at 442.0 GW both sit ahead of wind's 319.2 GW, so the renewable lead is a three-technology story in which wind plays the steady third.

Wind sits third by capacity at 319.2 GW, behind solar and battery storage.

Reading the Wind Queue

With the comparison set, the wind-only numbers fill in the picture. The distribution underneath the totals is the part worth reading.

A wind project in a queue is a utility-scale turbine farm requesting a connection point. The 180 MW median is larger than solar's 125 MW median — wind farms tend to be bigger because turbine economics favor concentration in high-resource corridors. PATHFINDER RENEWABLE WIND ENERGY tops the field at 3,000 MW. A median well below the largest entry again signals many mid-size farms with a thin tail of very large projects.

The 180 MW median carries a geographic message. Wind is not a land-anywhere technology the way solar nearly is; it needs a sustained, high-quality wind resource, which exists in a relatively narrow band of the country. That constraint pushes developers to build larger projects where the resource is strong, rather than scattering small ones, because the fixed costs of transmission and turbine logistics are easier to justify at scale.

It also means the wind queue is less crowded with speculative micro-filings than the solar queue. That is part of why wind's project count of 1,722 is a fraction of solar's 4,145 even though its per-project size is bigger. The depth of a wind queue is therefore a denser signal than the depth of a solar queue: each entry, on average, represents a more deliberate filing, which is one reason wind's 38.8% withdrawal rate stays below solar's 45.1%.

How Wind Status Splits

Status separates intent from anything resembling delivery.

Withdrawn wind entries (668) slightly outnumber those still in queue (611). Notably, wind shows 197 operational entries — far more than solar's 17 or storage's 4 — a sign that the wind buckets include a meaningful base of already-connected projects in some feeds. The 246 unknown entries come from feeds with no published status; do not read them as active. Among wind projects with a known status, 45.3% are withdrawn.

That 197 operational figure is a quirk worth understanding rather than glossing over. Some operator feeds retain projects in the dataset after they reach commercial operation, while others drop them once built. The wind bucket happens to carry more of these retained, already-running entries than the newer solar and storage buckets do — which is consistent with wind being an older, more mature renewable in U.S. markets. It is a reminder that the four status buckets are reading across feeds that do not all behave the same way, and that the cleaner comparison is always withdrawn against still-in-queue.

Withdrawn wind entries total 668, just ahead of the 611 still in the queue.

Where the Wind Sits by Operator

Wind concentrates where the resource is — the wind belt running through MISO and SPP territory.

MISO leads wind with 573 projects, even though Solar is MISO's top overall fuel. SPP is the operator where Wind actually ranks first, at a 35.3% share — the Great Plains wind corridor runs straight through SPP's footprint. The contrast with ERCOT (Battery Storage, 50.1%) and CAISO (Solar, 46.1%) shows wind is a Midwest and Plains story, not a coastal one. The MISO interconnection queue report and the SPP interconnection queue report carry the operator-level detail.

Methodology

Source: Public ISO/RTO interconnection-queue listings, via the US Tech Automations grid-queue clock (sealed daily, content-hashed).

All figures are computed directly from US Tech Automations' sealed daily grid-queue snapshots; nothing is estimated, modeled, or extrapolated. Fuel and status labels are grouped from each ISO's own categories, and the grouping rules appear in the display set.

The grid disclaimer applies throughout: a queue position is a request to connect, not a built, approved, or financed project. A large share of wind projects withdraw before construction, so the 319.2 GW figure is requested capacity, never a build forecast.

Bucketing rules govern the groups. Vendor fuel and technology labels differ by ISO and are grouped into Solar, Battery Storage, Wind, Natural Gas, Hybrid and Other by keyword. Each ISO publishes its own status taxonomy; statuses are grouped into withdrawn, operational (explicitly in-service or commercial operation), still-in-queue, and unknown for feeds that publish no status. Some ISOs drop withdrawn projects from their feed entirely, so a zero-withdrawal operator reflects a feed choice, not a clean queue.

How the clock builds a wind view:

1. Collect each covered ISO/RTO queue feed on the snapshot day, June 11, 2026.

2. Normalize every vendor fuel string into the shared technology buckets so onshore and offshore variants land under Wind.

3. Bucket status, then seal the day's aggregate with a content hash so the figures are frozen and reproducible.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Will the 319.2 GW of queued wind actually get built?
A: No, not all of it. A queue position is a request to connect, not a built, approved, or financed project. Already 38.8% of wind entries are withdrawn, and many that remain will not reach construction. The 319.2 GW is requested capacity, not a supply forecast.

Q: How does wind compare with solar and storage in the queue?
A: Wind is third by capacity at 319.2 GW, behind solar at 515.1 GW and battery storage at 442.0 GW. Its 38.8% withdrawal rate sits between storage at 32.6% and solar at 45.1%.

Q: Why does MISO lead the wind count?
A: MISO posts 573 wind projects, the most of any operator, because its Midwest footprint overlaps the wind belt. SPP is the operator where Wind ranks as the top fuel, at a 35.3% share, reflecting the Great Plains resource.

Q: Why does wind show more operational entries than solar?
A: Wind shows 197 operational entries against solar's 17. The wind buckets include a base of already-connected projects in some feeds, while the solar count skews toward newer, still-pending applications.

Q: How would a supplier use this wind data?
A: A turbine or balance-of-plant supplier can read MISO's 573-project depth and SPP's wind-led mix as where demand concentrates, then weigh the 38.8% withdrawal rate to discount the raw count into a realistic order pipeline.

Put Grid Data to Work

This wind picture fits three readers. Wind developers siting the next request can use MISO's 573-project lead and SPP's wind-first mix to judge regional crowding, weighed against the 38.8% withdrawal rate. EPC contractors and turbine suppliers can read 319.2 GW of requested wind as a demand ceiling and stage inventory toward the Midwest and Plains operators. Utilities and policy researchers can track which wind projects survive the churn against the 1600.7 GW national backdrop.

US Tech Automations builds the monitoring layer: watching queue feeds for status changes, routing each signal to the right desk, and drafting first-touch outreach when a project moves. The same sealed-snapshot discipline runs the permits research at https://permits.ustechautomations.com.

See how agentic workflows automate queue monitoring

Source: US Tech Automations Research — computed from the sealed daily interconnection-queue snapshot, June 11, 2026.