Xcel Energy Asks Colorado Supreme Court to Unlock Stalled Wind Farm Interconnections
A property rights dispute is keeping more than 1 GW of completed Colorado wind capacity off the grid as Xcel presses the state's highest court to intervene.
Xcel Energy's Public Service Co. of Colorado petitioned the state Supreme Court on Wednesday (2026-08-12) to resolve an eminent domain dispute blocking two nearly complete wind farms from connecting to the grid. The two projects — the 603-MW Singing Grass and the 450-MW Cheyenne Ridge II — together represent more than 1 GW of built capacity that cannot yet deliver power.5
The capital sitting idle is substantial. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory data put average installed costs for land-based wind in 2024 at $1.85 million per MW, a figure that predates Trump administration tariff increases on infrastructure inputs.5 At that rate, north of $1.9 billion in completed generation is waiting on a court decision while the underlying property dispute works through Colorado's judicial system.
Both projects are part of a 6.1-GW expansion plan approved by Colorado utility regulators in January 2024. Xcel's petition argues the case raises "an important statewide question" at the intersection of eminent domain law and clean energy interconnection. Whether the justices accept that framing — and move on the utility's preferred schedule — is a separate question the court has not yet answered.5
The character of the dispute matters. Xcel is not fighting a permitting rejection. Regulatory approval is already in hand. The blockage sits at the property rights stage of grid interconnection access, which puts it in a different legal category than most wind project litigation. Eminent domain cases that reach state supreme courts typically take months to resolve, not weeks.5
The federal environment sharpens the pressure. A coalition of 18 states and Washington, D.C., moved in July (2026-07-20) to join an industry lawsuit challenging the Department of Defense's freeze on onshore wind projects. President Trump has stated publicly that his administration would "try and have no windmills built in the United States." With federal permitting routes narrowed, state-level legal pathways carry more weight for developers and utilities trying to meet capacity targets.4
Colorado's case is part of a pattern, though each instance has its own legal texture. In Italy, Montel reported in late June (2026-06-30) that authorities reject close to 50% of onshore wind permit applications. Analysts told Montel that most permits which eventually do get approved are now won through legal action against the assessment system rather than through standard regulatory channels.3
In Scotland, CWP Energy has been pursuing judicial review against the Scottish government since February (2026-02) after ministers blocked its Scoop Hill project — sized at 432 MW with a 200-MW battery — near the Eskdalemuir Seismic Array. The company submitted a separate legal challenge on June 29 (2026-06-29) against the Ministry of Defence over a ban on wind projects in the wider area, calling the original Scottish government decision "unlawful."1,2
These cases differ in the obstacle each developer faces. CWP is contesting permitting decisions by government ministers. Xcel already cleared that hurdle; it is stuck on land access for transmission infrastructure. The implication is that Colorado's timeline, while uncertain, depends on court scheduling rather than a government reconsidering its position.
For Xcel specifically, the schedule risk is concrete. The Singing Grass and Cheyenne Ridge II projects were planned and approved before the current tariff environment. Post-2024 cost increases mean delays that push any renegotiations or remediation work into the present period will cost more to absorb than the original project economics assumed. The utility has not disclosed what contractual or operational penalties, if any, attach to the interconnection delay.5
The Colorado Supreme Court has not indicated whether it will accept the petition. If it declines, Xcel would need to pursue resolution through lower courts, extending the timeline further. A decision to accept quickly would suggest the court views the interconnection question as pressing enough to prioritize. A long queue, or a refusal to take the case, leaves more than 1 GW of completed wind capacity without a clear resolution date and Xcel's 6.1-GW expansion plan short of its foundation.5