What Is Queued to Connect in Wisconsin?

What is queued to connect in Wisconsin? The sealed answer from our June 11, 2026 snapshot: 233 projects requesting 27.1 GW of grid capacity, with Solar accounting for 51.9% of all filings. That Solar majority is the distinctive feature of Wisconsin's queue. Across the full covered dataset, Solar leads nationally at 39.0% — but Wisconsin's 51.9% puts Solar in an outright majority, not merely a plurality.

Before any other reading: a queue position is a request to connect, NOT a built, approved, or financed project. Wisconsin's queue shows 47.6% of its historical filings as withdrawn — 111 of 233 projects. The remaining 122 are still-in-queue. Not one appears as operational in this snapshot, which reflects the reporting characteristics of Wisconsin's primary ISO (MISO), not the state's actual installed capacity.

This report covers 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. This is a census of the published queues, not of every project on every grid in the country.

Key Findings

• 233 projects hold 27.1 GW in Wisconsin's interconnection queue, according to the sealed snapshot

• Solar commands 51.9% of Wisconsin's filed projects — a share that puts Solar in a majority, not just a plurality

• 121 Solar projects total 14,016 MW, the single largest technology block by both count and capacity

• 47.6% of projects — 111 — have withdrawn; 122 remain still-in-queue

• The median project size is 125 MW, notably below the national median of 150 MW

• The largest single project is North Madison 345/138 kV at 1,203 MW

Wisconsin's queue spans 27,117 MW of requested capacity.

51.9% of Wisconsin's projects are Solar — an outright majority.

The median project in Wisconsin's queue is 125 MW.

Solar in Wisconsin's Queue

What a Solar Interconnection Filing Covers

A Solar filing in the MISO queue represents a developer's formal request to study how a photovoltaic generation facility would connect to the existing transmission system. The filing triggers a series of engineering studies — first an interconnection feasibility study, then system impact studies — that determine how much the developer must pay to upgrade the grid to accommodate the project's output.

Many Solar projects are utility-scale arrays in the dozens to several hundred megawatt range, typically sited on agricultural land in areas with favorable insolation and proximity to existing 345 kV or 138 kV transmission lines. Wisconsin's 14,016 MW from 121 Solar projects implies a median Solar project size well above the state's 125 MW overall median, suggesting a mix of smaller distributed Solar filings bringing down the aggregate median while larger utility-scale projects carry the bulk of the capacity.

Battery Storage as Solar's Partner

54 Battery Storage projects in Wisconsin hold 3,492 MW. This is a common co-filing pattern: developers submit a Solar project and a Battery Storage project at the same or adjacent interconnection points, letting them optimize dispatch across both technologies under one queue application. The 3,492 MW of Battery Storage in Wisconsin's queue exists partly because Solar developers find Storage a cost-effective pairing for managing generation variability.

Wind: Third by Count, Second by Capacity

42 Wind projects carry 6,706 MW — third by count but second by capacity, ahead of Battery Storage. Individual Wind projects are typically large (multi-hundred MW utility farms), so 42 projects producing 6,706 MW reflects the size distribution of utility wind development. Wind's per-project capacity well exceeds Solar's per-project capacity in this queue.

Natural Gas and Hybrid Filings

8 Natural Gas projects hold 2,375 MW, and 8 Hybrid projects hold 529 MW. Natural Gas in a queue dominated by renewables often represents peaker plants or combined-heat-and-power facilities seeking to fill dispatch gaps. Hybrid typically denotes a combined Solar-plus-Storage or Wind-plus-Storage project filed as a single application.

Wisconsin's Full Fuel Breakdown

Solar's 51.9% project share in Wisconsin stands above the national Solar rate of 39.0%. Among MISO states, Solar dominance at this level is consistent with states that lack exceptional wind resources but have flat terrain and moderate-to-good solar irradiance for utility-scale development.

Wisconsin's Queue at a Glance

The 0 operational count does not mean Wisconsin has no operational renewable capacity. MISO's queue feed, as the spec notes, groups status into withdrawn, operational (explicitly in-service or commercial operation), still-in-queue, and unknown. Projects that cleared the queue years ago and are now operating may have been dropped from MISO's published listing — Some ISOs drop withdrawn projects from their feed entirely applies to operational exits as well in some feed implementations.

How Wisconsin Sits Among MISO Neighbors

Wisconsin at 233 projects and 27.1 GW sits near Iowa (228 projects, 20.3 GW) in scale. Its 47.6% withdrawal rate is in the same band as Minnesota (56.3%) and Iowa (49.6%) — consistent with MISO's 56.2% system-wide withdrawal rate being the central tendency.

Wisconsin's 27.1 GW from 233 projects gives it a higher per-project average capacity than Minnesota's 22.2 GW from 277 projects. That gap reflects Wind's presence in Wisconsin's mix: 42 Wind projects at 6,706 MW pull the per-project average upward. The MISO interconnection queue report covers Wisconsin's ISO context in full.

Wisconsin's 47.6% withdrawal rate sits below MISO's 56.2% system-wide figure, but well within the band set by neighbors Minnesota (56.3%) and Iowa (49.6%). High withdrawal is the norm across the MISO queue, not a Wisconsin-specific signal.

Methodology and Scope

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

Honesty statement: 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.

Fuel bucketing: Vendor fuel and technology labels differ by ISO and are grouped into Solar, Battery Storage, Wind, Natural Gas, Hybrid and Other by keyword.

Status bucketing: 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.

The grid disclaimer: A queue position is a request to connect, not a built, approved, or financed project. Interconnection queues are aspirational. A large share of projects withdraw before construction. This report makes no forward-looking claims.

How the research desk seals this data:

1. Collect. Each supported ISO queue feed is retrieved daily from its published machine-readable source.

2. Normalize. Records are standardized: fuel labels keyword-bucketed, status labels grouped into the four canonical categories.

3. Seal. A SHA content hash is computed over the normalized dataset and recorded immutably.

4. Aggregate. State- and ISO-level statistics are derived from sealed records and published as display-set values.

This edition covers 5 ISOs and 28 states as of June 11, 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What does "queued" mean in this context — is any Wisconsin project definitely getting built?

A: Queued means a developer has formally applied to study a grid connection. It is a request, not a permit, approval, or construction commitment. The 47.6% historical withdrawal rate in Wisconsin's queue demonstrates that many filings never proceed past the study phase.

Q: Why does Wisconsin show 0 operational projects in the snapshot?

A: MISO's published queue feed includes only projects currently in the study pipeline. Projects that successfully connected to the grid years ago are generally no longer listed. The 0 operational figure is a feed artifact — it reflects what MISO publishes as active entries, not Wisconsin's actual installed capacity.

Q: Why is Solar at 51.9% here when Wind tends to dominate the Midwest narrative?

A: Wind dominates in the western and central plains — Oklahoma, Iowa, Kansas — where wind resources are superior. Wisconsin's topography (lakes, forests, hills) is less favorable for large-scale wind than the open prairies. Solar, meanwhile, can be developed on agricultural land across the state. The queue fuel mix reflects where developers see viable resource sites.

Q: Who pulls the North Madison 345/138 kV project?

A: The name indicates a transmission project — a kV-level interconnection at or near the North Madison substation. Transmission projects can appear in the interconnection queue when they require a new point of injection or withdrawal from the bulk grid. The filing's fuel type and developer are beyond what the display set specifies.

Q: How does a Battery Storage project get counted in an interconnection queue?

A: Standalone battery storage facilities connect to the grid and inject power during discharge cycles, so they require interconnection studies just as generation projects do. MISO treats storage as a resource requiring the same queue process as wind or solar.

Using Wisconsin's Queue Data

Three audiences find Wisconsin's queue data actionable. For the national-level picture across every covered ISO, see the USTA Interconnection Queue Index.

Solar developers considering a new Wisconsin filing can assess queue density by technology. With 121 Solar projects already filed — and 47.6% having withdrawn — the net active Solar pipeline from this queue is roughly the still-in-queue portion of those 121 filings. Developers need to know where congestion risk sits, and queue density by area is a first indicator.

Equipment suppliers and project contractors watching 54 Battery Storage projects at 3,492 MW have a visible pipeline of potential battery procurement conversations in the MISO-Wisconsin footprint. Projects in the still-in-queue category that pass feasibility studies are the near-term buyers.

Utilities and grid planners see Wisconsin's 27.1 GW as a planning input: the queue shows where developers want to inject capacity, which flags which transmission segments and substations may need upgrades in forthcoming MISO studies.

The data itself is most useful when it can be acted on quickly. A project that advances from feasibility study to system impact study in MISO's queue is a signal that a developer has passed a cost hurdle — that is a buyer worth prioritizing. Teams that track Wisconsin's queue manually, pulling MISO's published spreadsheet weekly and diffing against the prior version, can instead let an automated workflow do that work on a daily basis, surfacing only the changes that matter.

US Tech Automations builds workflows that ingest queue data, detect status changes, and route alerts to the relevant team — developers, procurement, or sales — without requiring manual intervention on each MISO update cycle. The solar interconnection queue report details Solar's national queue position.

Set up automated queue monitoring at /platform/agentic-workflows.

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