Inox Green Energy Services files FY26 sustainability report with risk disclosures
- Filed FY26 BRSR highlighting neutralization of legacy financial liabilities
- Total energy consumption dropped to 20,830 units from 75,698 in prior year
- GHG emissions reduced to 1,550 metric tonnes CO2 equivalent
- Related-party sales accounted for 25.09% of total turnover
- Plans to diversify supplier base to reduce dependency on parent company

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
Inox Green Energy Services Limited has submitted its Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report (BRSR) for FY26 to the stock exchanges. The filing, dated September 3, 2026, provides a standalone disclosure of the company’s environmental, social, and governance metrics alongside material risk assessments.
Operational Risks and Mitigation
The company identified several key risks in its operations. It highlighted a dependency on Inox Wind, its parent entity, for critical spare parts such as gearboxes and blades. To address this structural risk, management plans to qualify alternate suppliers through its engineering and quality departments.
Regarding financial stability, the report notes that legacy exposures from its transferred EPC business have been neutralized. All contingent liabilities have been cleared, and redeemable preference shares were converted into equity. This eliminates the risk of unexpected redemption calls on cash.
| Risk Category | Mitigation Strategy |
|---|---|
| Financial Inability | Cleared contingent liabilities; converted preference shares to equity |
| Geopolitical Risk | Developed in-house repair capabilities; reduced external supplier dependency |
| Liquidated Damages | Implemented three cycles of preventive maintenance annually; root cause analysis |
| Weather Events | Proactive turbine shutdowns during severe conditions; force majeure clauses |
Environmental Metrics
Total energy consumption for FY26 stood at 20,830 units, comprising 823 units of electricity and 20,007 units of fuel. This compares to 75,698 units in the previous year. Greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1 and Scope 2) totaled 1,550 metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent, down from 5,453 metric tonnes in FY25.
Water withdrawal was recorded at 4,225 kilolitres, entirely from groundwater sources. Total waste generated decreased to 29.68 metric tonnes from 60 metric tonnes in the prior year, with 25.17 metric tonnes recovered through recycling or sales.
What the Numbers Show
The divergence between energy intensity and total consumption warrants attention. While total energy consumption fell significantly from 75,698 to 20,830 units, the energy intensity per crore rupee of turnover rose from 0.270 to 0.740. This suggests that revenue growth outpaced the reduction in absolute energy usage, or that the remaining energy mix is more intensive relative to the current turnover base.
Social Governance
The company reported a workforce of 357 permanent employees and 213 workers as of the end of FY26. There were no fatalities among employees, though one worker fatality was recorded. The Lost Time Injury Frequency Rate (LTIFR) for employees was 0.806 per million person-hours worked.
Related-party transactions accounted for 16.15% of purchases and 25.09% of sales in FY26. Loans and advances to related parties constituted 100% of the total loans and advances given by the entity.
Historical Stock Returns for Inox Green Energy Services
| 1 Day | 5 Days | 1 Month | 6 Months | 1 Year | 5 Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +4.12% | -1.99% | +0.66% | +5.40% | +12.78% | 0.0% |
How long is the timeline for Inox Green Energy to fully qualify alternate suppliers for gearboxes and blades, and what impact might this transition have on operational costs?
Given the rise in energy intensity per crore rupee of turnover despite lower absolute consumption, what specific efficiency measures will the company implement to decouple energy usage from revenue growth?
With 100% of loans and advances directed to related parties, what safeguards are in place to ensure these transactions remain at arm's length and do not pose liquidity risks to the subsidiary?


































