PGIQ Rating v2 (reliability-adjusted) · as of June 2026
4

🇬🇧 Great Britain

Possible, but expect friction, and the path is improving Minor flags found
Tier 4 Constrained · Composite 41/100, #72 of 79 markets (fundamentals 44 minus a reliability dock) · Outlook Positive · High confidence · how we score

London is a world-tier hub, but a new connection faces historic waits up to 15 years and prohibitive cost (the TMO4+ reform exists because entry stalled). Unlike Northern Virginia, the gate has genuinely stalled new entry, so no up-override; improving as the reform reorders the queue.

Source on the connection-wait figures above: GB connection reform, NESO
See live grid data →
One market,
four reads
BuildTier 4Siting ratingSellGrade BOfftakePlanRisingLoad pressureMonitorSoundGrid strength
The same market, four decisions. Open any lens to see this market ranked against the rest.
Time to energize · file to power
~48 mo
File a large load today, powered ~2030. Typical range 41 to 55 months, measured.
Application window & Gate 2 offer 12mo · Connection design & agreement 12mo · Network reinforcement 12mo · Construction & energization 12mo
End-to-end wait for a large new load, from a complete application being accepted to full firm energization of the nominated MW. Earlier milestones (initial, phased, temporary or conditional energization) are reported separately. A typical case, not a firm quote. · Source: NESO connections reform · Compare markets →
The same market, read four ways

Great Britain is a moderate market to sell power into

Grade B (Moderate)
Offtake score 72/100
Demand 67, build feasibility 38, combined into the score. For a seller: where buyers already pay, how tight supply is, and how feasible new build is here.
Price to beat
A 100 MW load on our standard case pays about $138/MWh delivered here. A competitive supply offer works against that level.
Forward capacity (firm supply promised for future years) price
£27.10 per kW-year (2029/30 (T-4)); forward cost pressure Low.
Queue depth (generation and storage)
About 283 GW in the interconnection queue (the line to connect to the grid), typical wait 48 months.
For new supply
NESO's first-ready-first-connected reform is issuing Gate 2 offers against a roughly 96 GW queue, so a ready generation project can now advance.
Regulatory momentum
Mixed, improving. NESO's TMO4+ reform is issuing Gate 2 offers and reordering a roughly 96 GW queue toward first-ready-first-connected, targeting historic waits of up to 15 years.
Beyond the grid
Land and water permitting is contested even as access improves: ministers have approved hyperscale sites on green belt land, but a 90 MW Buckinghamshire approval was quashed in 2026 after the government admitted a serious error over power and water concerns, and data centres have now been folded into the centralised NSIP planning regime.
Scheduled to change
H2 2026: Next NESO connections application window opens (NESO connections reform).
See it on the Offtake Grade →

Great Britain: little room at system level, rising demand pressure

Little room 33/100
System-level room, not local capacity
Local capacity at the point of connectionOperator publishes itsubstation (Bulk Supply Point and Primary) · National Grid Electricity Distribution, plus the other five GB DNOs

NGED publishes demand headroom at Bulk Supply Point and Primary substations for both the existing connected position and the future contracted position, so a candidate site can be checked against a named substation before any application. Equivalent datasets exist for the other GB distribution operators.

How to check for your site: Identify the Bulk Supply Point and Primary substation for the candidate site and read its demand headroom, then confirm with the DNO, since contracted position moves.

Source: Network Opportunity and Development Map, National Grid Electricity Distribution. An operator publishing capacity is not the same as us having checked your bus.
Two reads for a grid planner: how much room the system as a whole looks to have (Little room), and how hard demand is already pushing (Rising). The first is a market-level estimate from connection ease, forward adequacy and reliability margin. It is not local deliverability. Local capacity for this market IS addressed below, from an operator publication. Confirm local capacity with the utility before relying on it.
Generation and storage queue
283 GW requested; about 135.8 GW likely to reach operation after historical withdrawal. The gap is speculative pipeline. This counts generation and storage seeking to connect, not load.
Demand growth
Fast load growth in our read, the pull on your system.
Future firm supply
Future firm supply: adequacy flagged for a large new load.
Load Pipeline Reality → Where demand is hungry → Connection friction →

Grid Risk Annex BETA

Sound
Manageable with normal diligence · grid strength 59/100
A cited, dated grid-risk read on Great Britain for a capital provider, the banks and private-credit lenders, infrastructure funds and insurers holding or underwriting a power or data-centre exposure here. Drop it into a credit memo and watch each factor over the life of the exposure.
Read it against your asset. For a load asset (Buy), weight connection access and energization timing. For a generation or offtake asset (Sell), weight offtake demand, curtailment (when a plant is told to stop feeding the grid) and cost realisation. For a grid or transmission asset (Move), weight load-pipeline reality and buildout risk.
Rating and track record
PGIQ Tier 4 Constrained, outlook Positive, High confidence. Scored on a public, dated, falsifiable record you can cite in a credit memo.
Delivery reliability
Minor flags found in the bulk and local outage record we reviewed.
Future firm supply
Future firm supply: adequacy flagged.
Cost certainty
Recurring cost about $138/MWh (band $118 to $168) for the standard 100 MW case, basis triangulated. Excludes connection capital.
Regulatory / stroke-of-pen
Mixed, improving. NESO's TMO4+ reform is issuing Gate 2 offers and reordering a roughly 96 GW queue toward first-ready-first-connected, targeting historic waits of up to 15 years.
Execution risk
283 GW in the generation and storage queue, about 52% historically withdrawn, the risk the project or load actually energizes on time.
Ongoing monitor
Track this market's rating actions and the Global Power Index as a covenant-style monitor over the life of the exposure.
Monitoring plan
Covenant-style triggers to watch over the life of the exposure: a change in the PGIQ rating or outlook; a dated regulatory move (stroke-of-pen risk); a capacity-auction or cost-band shift; a forward firm-supply adequacy warning; and a rise in queue drop-out or connection friction. Track them on this market page and the Global Power Index, or as Analyst Desk alerts.
Sources: GB connection reform, NESO · Leigh Day · The Register
This is a directional grid-risk screen, not a credit rating, and not investment, engineering or procurement advice.
The formatted, cited Grid Risk Annex export is an Analyst Desk feature.See the Grid Exposure Monitor →

Regulatory momentum

The regulatory and permitting environment is increasingly the binding variable for a new large load.
Mixed↑ improving

Why: NESO's TMO4+ reform is issuing Gate 2 offers and reordering a roughly 96 GW queue toward first-ready-first-connected, targeting historic waits of up to 15 years.

What would change the read: Firm pre-2030 connection offers materialising at scale for new large loads.

For new supply: NESO's first-ready-first-connected reform is issuing Gate 2 offers against a roughly 96 GW queue, so a ready generation project can now advance.

Beyond the grid: Land and water permitting is contested even as access improves: ministers have approved hyperscale sites on green belt land, but a 90 MW Buckinghamshire approval was quashed in 2026 after the government admitted a serious error over power and water concerns, and data centres have now been folded into the centralised NSIP planning regime. Leigh Day The Register

The five pillars behind the tier

A
A
C
M
C
The pillar signature: Access, Availability, Cost, Momentum, Carbon, taller is stronger. The same shape repeats across every market so peers compare at a glance.
Access30%38

Severe access: historic waits up to 15 years; the TMO4+ 'first ready, first connected' reform (live 2025) is reordering a ~96 GW queue.

Availability25%45

Tight availability on a constrained system.

Cost25%20

Very high power cost (~$100+).

Momentum15%82

World-tier momentum (London FLAP-D), but entry is gated.

Carbon5%78

Cleaner grid (~155 g), wind-heavy (~30% of generation).

Default weights, which lean toward cost and access rather than carbon: Access 30 · Availability 25 · Cost 25 · Momentum 15 · Carbon 5. Momentum reflects the data-center build already underway, not just stated intentions.
Seller view: Read these the other way: momentum is your customer pipeline, cost is your revenue ceiling, and access is how hard it is to build and sell here, not only to connect.

Reliability overlay

Reliability adjustment: the five-pillar score of 44 is reduced to 41, a deduction of 3 points, reflecting the delivery-reliability and firm-supply risks flagged below. Reliability is reported as five separate layers, never as one combined label, because they answer different questions and a strong answer on one does not cover a gap in another: what has actually failed on the bulk system, what a forward assessment expects of firm supply, how the local network performs, what your contract actually promises, and what your site is designed to ride through. Any one of them can cap the tier.

Historical bulk-system performance: Minor flags found

Transmission-level Energy Not Supplied was 359 MWh in 2024/25 against a regulated incentive neutral point of 147 MWh, so the operator missed its reliability target by roughly 2.4 times on the measure Ofgem actually holds it to. Average network availability was 99.9998%. For a large load the target miss is the signal: bulk supply is highly available but the trend on the regulated measure moved the wrong way.

What this means: A large new load faces occasional exposure here. Monitor conditions and keep a contingency plan.

measured · National Grid Electricity Transmission RIIO-T2 reliability performance

Historical utility-territory delivery performance: No reliability flags found

Average customer interruption (SAIDI) of 39.71 minutes per year in 2024/25, excluding major event days as filed.

measured · Ofgem RIIO-ED2 2024/25 summary

Role not yet declared. We have not recorded whether this is one operator’s filing or an average across several, so read it as context until we do. Ofgem all-DNO average across the fourteen GB licence areas. It is a territory-wide history and is silent on: performance at a specific substation or feeder; transmission-level service, which is a different product from distribution service; the industrial or large-load customer class specifically; N-1 or other redundancy architecture at the supplying substation; contractual curtailment rights the utility may hold over the load; power quality and momentary interruptions, which this metric excludes by construction; on-site UPS, storage or generation; forward adequacy: it is a record of what happened, not a forecast.

Forward resource adequacy (assessed): Adequacy flagged

Winter margins are wind-dependent and have been tight in the past, though the 2025/26 base-case margin of 6.1 GW (about 10%) is the strongest since 2019/20, helped by storage, gas availability and the Greenlink interconnector.

What this means: A large new load faces occasional exposure here. Monitor conditions and keep a contingency plan.

assessed · NESO winter 2025/26 margins

Contractual service terms: firm terms under retroactive reform

Connection terms for large demand are mid-reform and the reform is explicitly retroactive: a second round of queue reordering will change existing connection offers, and distribution-level demand connections are in scope this time. Government is separately consulting on whether very large users such as data centres should be required to provide a mandatory minimum level of demand flexibility, letting the operator curtail them at times of system stress. Treat a GB connection offer as firm today but revisable, and price the possibility of a curtailment obligation you did not choose.

What the service contract promises, as distinct from how the system has performed · Spring 2026 update on Demand Connection Reform for data centres and large energy users (CMS, Mar 2026)

Designed site resilience: not applicable at market level

Utility feeds, UPS, storage, on-site generation, islanding, black start and the residual energy you still expect to lose are properties of a specific site design, not of a market. This layer only exists once there is a site, and we never assert it for you.

Confidence: Med-High. Each input is labelled as measured, modelled, or drawn from a specific event, and is framed as a risk to a prospective large new load, not as a verdict on any utility or grid operator. Forward adequacy is an assessment of what is expected, not a measurement of what has happened; it is a forecast and is labelled as one.
Seller view: Tight forward capacity is scarcity that firm generation and storage get paid for; an adequacy flag is a demand signal for new supply, not only a risk to a load.

Supply relief outlook

Will the power crunch ease before your load energizes? This nets the demand racing for capacity against the new supply likely to arrive and the old supply leaving. A cross-side read, using the same data a seller sees the other way.
Easing
Demand pressure
Fast load growth competing for the same capacity.
New supply in motion
About 135.8 GW of the generation and storage queue is likely to reach operation after historical withdrawal.
Can new supply arrive
NESO's first-ready-first-connected reform is issuing Gate 2 offers against a roughly 96 GW queue, so a ready generation project can now advance.
Future firm supply
Future firm supply: adequacy flagged.

What this means: The supply crunch looks likely to ease for a new load energizing here in the coming years.

Reliability metrics

Delivery reliability (measured)

The average customer loses about 39.71 minutes of power per year (2024/25) (reported as Customer Minutes Lost, a SAIDI-equivalent measure). This is the standard regulator outage measure (SAIDI); lower means a more reliable grid.

Source: Ofgem RIIO-ED2 2024/25 summary

Hard, cited measures behind the reliability overlay above: the regulator outage series (SAIDI, measured, published with a lag) and the forward resource-adequacy assessment (a measured forecast). Framed as risk to a prospective large new load, not a verdict on any utility.

Interconnection queue

This is a generation and storage interconnection queue. It shows how congested the interconnection system is for new supply. It does not measure how long a new large load waits, and its withdrawal rate is not a load withdrawal rate. The figures below are this market's own, published by its system operator; they are not part of, and not comparable with, the United States queue totals.

Active queue depth

283 GW

Typical wait

48 months

What builds the 48-month wait

12
12
12
12
Application window & Gate 2 offer12 mo
Connection design & agreement12 mo
Network reinforcement12 mo
Construction & energization12 mo
Typical time to energization48 months
How the typical connection wait breaks down by stage. Stages overlap in practice and vary by project; the split is our estimate anchored to the operator process, and the total is the representative time to energization. Anchored to the operator process (NESO connections reform).

The full queue analysis for this market, which covers the share of projects that give up and leave the queue (the withdrawal rate), how much of the queue is data centers, and the sources, is available through /api/v1/queue/great-britain with a paid key. These are generation and storage queue figures: they show interconnection-system congestion, not a typical large-load connection wait.

Seller view: A deep queue is both your own time-to-revenue and a moat against competing supply; what matters is the effective supply likely to complete after withdrawal, not the headline queue.

Forward cost anchor

Siting a load is a decade-long cost bet, so the forward cost of firm capacity matters more than today's spot price. This is the public capacity-auction clearing price, the market's own forward read, not a paywalled forward curve.

Forward cost pressure

Low

Latest capacity clearing price

£27.10 per kW-year

2029/30 (T-4)

Trend: Falling sharply, from £60 to £65 in the prior two auctions, as connection reform and softer demand ease the market.

Great Britain's four-year-ahead capacity auction cleared at £27.10 per kW-year for 2029/30, less than half the £60 to £65 of the prior two years. The forward cost of firm capacity is falling here, the opposite of PJM.

Source: GB T-4 Capacity Market 2029/30 (Timera Energy). A derived indicator: we publish the public clearing price and our read, never paywalled exchange data.

Seller view: This capacity clearing price is a direct revenue signal for new supply: a rising trend supports the build thesis, a falling one is a warning.

Realized cost band

What a large electricity user pays for power here on one declared case, 100 MW contracted demand, 95% load factor, HV service, per megawatt-hour. Not the wholesale price and not the sticker tariff: energy plus the grid, delivery and other charges that land on the bill. It is a range, because real contracts vary, and it is labelled by how it was built.

Recurring cost, delivered

$118 to $168 per MWh

Midpoint about $138 per MWh

How this band was built

triangulated

From 3 public fragments

What builds the $138 midpoint

$75
$33
$18
Wholesale energy$75
Network charges$33
Policy & levies$18
Capacity market$12
All-in delivered$138 /MWh
How the $138/MWh figure is built up, component by component, for 100 MW contracted demand, 95% load factor, HV service. The split is our estimate; the total is the midpoint of the compiled band (triangulated). Recurring cost only: customer-funded connection capital is a separate one-off and is not included. Britain stacks gas-set wholesale energy, some of Europe's heaviest network and policy costs, and a capacity-market charge, which is why its delivered cost runs well above the continental average. Anchored to published figures (UK electricity price components (IEA Electricity 2026)).

Where the cost lands

$138
Low $118Midpoint $138High $168
A band, not a single price: the cheaper end is a well-structured contract on favourable terms, the higher end a less optimised one. The midpoint is our best central read.
What is in the number: High wholesale energy, plus a capacity-market charge and some of Europe's heaviest network and policy costs.

Britain carries one of the highest large-load bands in the coverage: gas-set wholesale prices, a capacity-market charge, and heavy network and policy costs all stack on top of each other. Delivered cost for a large load routinely runs well above the continental average.

This market's band is free here; the ranked cross-market table with every market's precise midpoint is the Analyst Desk. See the ranked view.

Basis: triangulated from public sources, in US dollars per MWh delivered to a large high-load-factor load, excluding refundable taxes. Sources: EU and UK industrial electricity prices (IEA Electricity 2026) · Non-household electricity prices (Eurostat).

Seller view: This delivered price is the level a competitive supply offer must beat, and the revenue ceiling a merchant plant works against here.

Data provenance and freshness

What we hold for this market, field by field. Each tier below is assigned from the evidence actually held for that field, with provenance. A low tier means we looked and it is thin; it is not a verdict on the market.
cost: M3connection: M3reliability: M2carbon: M2regulatory: M2local capacity: M4
Against a Standardized Project Case, the binding field is reliability. That is what a standardized case would turn on here; a readiness result for your own project depends on your own requirements, siting and utility, which this market-level read does not know.
Read against other uses: Discovery and monitoring: M3 · Market comparison: M2 · Project Case with a carbon requirement: M2 · Conditional site diligence: M2.
Depth is not a rating strength, a confidence score or a feasibility conclusion. An aggregate is only ever shown for a named use case, and equals the lowest tier across that use case's required fields. Definitions v1.0. See the full coverage matrix.
How solid the data behind this rating is, on two separate axes plus recency. Source reliability is how measured the numbers are, as opposed to triangulated or modelled. Coverage is how many of the decision-relevant data dimensions (reliability, connection, and cost) are compiled for this market. The two are kept apart because they answer different questions: a market can have strong sources on the little that is covered, or broad coverage that still leans on models. Neither grades the rating itself. The rating is a cited opinion, graded separately and falsifiably by the public track record and baseline measurement plan.

Source reliability

High

3 of 4 data layers measured

Coverage

Full

3 of 3 dimensions: reliability, connection, cost

Last reviewed

June 2026

per-layer vintages below

LayerMethodVintageFreshnessSource
PGIQ Rating opinionopinionJune 2026CurrentPGIQ methodology
Reliabilitymeasured2024/25FreshOfgem RIIO-ED2 2024/25 summary
Forward costmeasured2029/30 (T-4)FreshGB T-4 Capacity Market 2029/30 (Timera Energy)
Interconnection queuemeasuredend-2025 (LBNL 2026)FreshNESO connections reform press release (Dec 2025)
Realized costtriangulated2026FreshEU and UK industrial electricity prices (IEA Electricity 2026)

Freshness reflects each layer's refresh cadence: reliability annual to three-yearly, capacity-auction and queue yearly, tariffs every year or two. The full cross-market freshness dashboard is at /data-quality.

What this market can and cannot answer yet

No market-level read closes a project case on its own, and saying only that would waste the evidence we do hold. Below is what is established, what is open, and what to do next.

What is established

  • Recurring cost band $118 to $168 per MWh, midpoint $138, basis triangulated, against the 100 MW archetype
  • Historical utility-territory delivery performance 39.71 minutes per year (2024/25)
  • Historical bulk-system performance (measured)
  • Forward resource adequacy (assessed)
  • Contractual service terms (reported)
  • Typical interconnection wait about 48 months (generation and storage queue, not a load wait)

What is open

  • Designed site resilience

Who would actually serve you

Not compiled for this market. Identify the serving operator before relying on any figure here, because a market-level read is an average over territories.
Who runs the connection process: National Energy System Operator (system operator), via Connections reform, Gate 2 application. Demand connection terms are mid-reform and the reform reaches existing offers; distribution-level demand is in scope. Where the process starts.

Credible ranges today

  • Cost $118 to $168 per MWh, midpoint $138 (triangulated)
  • Schedule: interconnection queues here run about 48 months for generation and storage; a large load follows a different process and we do not hold its measured distribution

What could disqualify this market

  • Connection-queue reform execution.
  • Very high power cost.

Five questions for the utility or system operator

  1. What is your own territory's SAIDI and SAIFI for the industrial class, on which major-event standard, and what redundancy serves the candidate substation?
  2. What is the available capacity at the bulk supply point and substation that would serve this site, and what would a 100 MW request do to it?
  3. Is firm service available at 100 MW, and what curtailment rights would you retain over us once we are energised?
  4. What are the milestone dates from a complete application to full firm energisation, and which network upgrades would a 100 MW load trigger?
  5. What is the all-in delivered rate for 100 MW at a 95% load factor, including demand, network and rider charges, under the tariff that would actually apply?

Documents that would advance the case

  • The utility's own reliability filing and the substation single-line diagram.
  • The area or substation capacity study, and the current queue position list.
  • The applicable large-load tariff or the draft electric service agreement.
  • The interconnection or system impact study, and a specimen connection offer.
  • The current tariff sheet with all riders, and any large-load contract terms.

Outlook drivers

↑ Upgrade triggers

  • TMO4+ reform materially shortens new-connection timelines.
  • Offshore wind and grid build relieve constraints.

↓ Downgrade triggers

  • Reform underdelivers and waits persist.
  • Cost stays prohibitive.

Scheduled to change

Dated, already-announced events that will affect a large load sited here, in date order. These are published facts with sources, not our forecasts, and they matter most when your energization date is years out.
H2 2026
Next NESO connections application window opens
The route to a Gate 2 offer under the reformed queue; its timing gates when a new large load can enter.
NESO connections reform
2030
First reform-era firm demand connections targeted
NESO estimates about 13 GW of firm demand can connect before 2030, with more between 2030 and 2035.
NESO connections reform

Key risks

Peer comparison

Trades like
Dublin / Amsterdam (world-tier hub, gated)
Ahead
on momentum
Behind
on access and cost

Evidence behind this rating

The real-world events that test our Tier 4 call for Great Britain: 2 support it. Each is dated and cited, so you can check the rating against what is actually happening on the ground.

NESO begins issuing Gate 2 connection offers for pre-2030 projects ✓ Supports the rating
Jun 2026AccessMateriality: med

Under the TMO4+ reform, Gate 2 offers for applications up to 2030 are being issued by end-Jun 2026; NESO estimates ~13 GW of firm demand can connect before 2030, with ~86 GW more in 2030 to 2035.

Source: NESO ↗
TMO4+ connection reform goes live, reordering a ~96 GW queue ✓ Supports the rating
2025AccessMateriality: med

A first-ready, first-connected overhaul targets historic waits of up to 15 years; projects aiming for 2030 should have offers by early 2026.

Source: NESO ↗
Cited, dated developments tagged to the pillar they bear on, and whether they support or challenge the current tier. A material item flags the market for analyst review and may drive a rating action.
🔔 Get alerts for Great Britain
Be notified the moment this market's PGIQ Rating, outlook, or a material development changes. Free while we validate demand.

Rating history

Jun 2026
AffirmedConnection reform is delivering on schedule (Gate 2 offers issuing), supporting the positive outlook, but firm pre-2030 capacity stays scarce. Tier affirmed, outlook unchanged.
Trigger: NESO Gate 2 offers for pre-2030 projects (Jun 2026)
June 2026
New ratingNew rating: Tier 4 Constrained assigned (momentum noted, no up-override).
🔒 The full time series behind Great Britain, how its score, recurring cost, and interconnection queue have moved month by month, is part of the Analyst Desk. The rating actions above are always free.
Every rating action is dated and explained, and the log is only ever added to, never edited. Reviews happen on a regular schedule and whenever a significant event occurs. "Affirmed" means we reviewed a development and the tier held; "Under review" means a significant item is being assessed and the rating could change.

Score history

How Great Britain's reliability-adjusted score and tier have moved, month by month. Part of your Analyst Desk.

Loading history…

How does Great Britain compare to the other 78 markets?

This page is our full read on Great Britain alone, and it is free. To decide where a large load should actually go, you need every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the history and alerts when your shortlist moves. That is the Analyst Desk.

With your Analyst Desk, compare Great Britain against every market side by side, ranked on recurring cost and time-to-connect, with the full history and shortlist alerts.

+ Add to your shortlist Recurring cost, ranked Connection friction, ranked Get the Analyst Desk →