INNOGY RENEWABLES UK LIMITED
Customer named in the DNOs' registers
In NGED's August 2026, SSEN's September 2026, SPEN's September 2026 and ENWL's September 2026 editions
The registers spell this customer’s name more than one way: “INNOGY RENEWABLES UK LIMITED” (7 sites), “Innogy Renewables Uk Ltd” (2 sites) and “Innogy renewables uk limited” (1 site).
Capacity by DNO
Capacity by technology
| Technology | Sites | Capacity | Connected | Accepted to connect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wind | 8 | 147 MW | 87 MW | 60 MW |
| Hydro and marine | 2 | 5.7 MW | 5.7 MW | – |
Each site is grouped by its first energy source, as the register names it.
Sites
Each site under this name in the DNOs' latest editions, the largest first.
Site, company and substation names are shown as they appear in the registers, including capitalisation.
| Site | DNO | Grid supply point | Technology | Status | MW |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brechfa forest west wind farm | NGED | Swansea North Grid | Wind | Connected | 57.4 |
| Alwens Forest | SPEN | St Asaph | Wind | Accepted to connect | 32.5 |
| Alwens Forest extension | SPEN | St Asaph | Wind | Accepted to connect | 26.9 |
| HELLRIGG WIND FARM | ENWL | HARKER ENWL SGTS 1 2 3A 4 / HUTTON GSP GROUP | Wind | Connected | 10 |
| HAMELDON HILL WIND FARM 1 | ENWL | PADIHAM GSP | Wind | Connected | 6 |
| HAMELDON HILL WIND FARM 2 | ENWL | PADIHAM GSP | Wind | Connected | 6 |
| HAMELDON HILL WIND FARM | ENWL | PADIHAM GSP | Wind | Connected | 4.5 |
| GENERATING STATION | SSEN | ALNESS | Hydro and marine | Connected | 3.8 |
| CORRIEGARTH HYDRO GEN AUX | SSEN | INVERNESS | Wind | Connected | 3.23 |
| GRUDIE HYDRO | SSEN | GRUDIE BRIDGE | Hydro and marine | Connected | 1.9 |
Grid supply points
Each grid supply point its sites are at, with the capacity of its own sites there.
| Grid supply point | DNO | Sites | Connected | Accepted to connect |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| St Asaph | SPEN | 2 | – | 59.4 MW |
| Swansea North Grid | NGED | 1 | 57.4 MW | – |
| PADIHAM GSP | ENWL | 3 | 16.5 MW | – |
| HARKER ENWL SGTS 1 2 3A 4 / HUTTON GSP GROUP | ENWL | 1 | 10 MW | – |
| ALNESS | SSEN | 1 | 3.8 MW | – |
| INVERNESS | SSEN | 1 | 3.2 MW | – |
| GRUDIE BRIDGE | SSEN | 1 | 1.9 MW | – |
What changed recently
Changes to its sites found in both of two consecutive monthly editions of their DNO's register, the latest first.
NGED: QueueWatch holds one edition of its register so far, the August 2026 edition, so there is nothing to compare yet.
SSEN, August 2026 edition to September 2026 edition, for this customer's sites: 3 sites matched. Every August site and every September site had a match in the other edition.
SPEN, August 2026 edition to September 2026 edition, for this customer's sites: 2 sites matched. Every August site and every September site had a match in the other edition.
ENWL, May 2026 edition to September 2026 edition, for this customer's sites: 4 sites matched. Every May site and every September site had a match in the other edition.
No change to the status, capacity, technology or customer of its sites in the editions QueueWatch holds.
Price what a delay would do to your project
QueueWatch reports what changed in the DNOs' published connection registers. It doesn't tell you what to do about it. That's what QueueQuant is for.
Give QueueQuant a site and it compares every way you could power it, on the grid or off it: waiting for the firm date, taking a non-firm offer, building a private wire or going off-grid, across every combination of contracted capacity, generation and battery. That’s millions of possible plans, each tested against thousands of possible futures for delay, curtailment and price. It returns the one plan that holds up best, even when that plan is not to build.
Get the plan that holds up best for your site, and where that answer flips.
What you get from QueueQuant
- The route to power that wins
- How to size every asset on the site
- The level of delay or curtailment at which that answer flips
- Whether the project is worth building at all
- How bad the worst outcomes get, at the risk level you choose