HomeMy WebLinkAboutNicola_Robinson_Letter too late to include at August 17th Planning committee presentation_Attachment1_202208188/17/2022.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS regarding BESS in
Renton. Presentation by city planner: August 17th 2022. Presentation made to ‘The Planning
Commission.’
Presentation tonight August 17th 2022, detailing issues around BESS installations, including;
regulations, current BESS technology, land use and documented history of safety issues and risks.
Related History: BUFFLEHEAD ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM: Pre-application March 2022.
Current moratorium 1060 on any processes involving BESS in Renton.
Dear Commission members.
Thank you for all your hard work, the results of which benefit us all.
You have been involved in understanding the technology, land use issues, risks and current
standards in place.
Most current standards are from 2019. As you know, since that time the technology has been
riddled with problems, fires, overheating, explosions and failed software monitoring,
documentation regarding all of these have been sent for your review over the past few months.
The years since 2019 have shown the technology to be problematic, and so it would follow that the
security measures in place are going to also be problematic and fail, because they are attempting to
stabilize a technology that is flawed.
Safety standards currently in place, have failed – in some cases resulting in injury to multiple
individuals. They are only as good as the technology they are designed for.
The following are some resources that detail current standards, some from 2019, and others from
2017.
https://www.ieee-pes.org/technical-activities/trending-technologies/battery-energy-storage-system-
regulations
This presentation attempts to shortly summarize those changes as of October 2019
The proliferation of mostly Li-ion battery energy storage systems (BESS) and the incidence of fires
in such BESS around the world has driven large changes in the battery sections of the Fire Codes in
North America and elsewhere, including a brand new Code (NFPA 855).
The BESS, and associated equipment, shall be provided in self-contained National Electrical
Manufacturers Association (NEMA) enclosure(s) rated for the site conditions.
Also required compliance with NFPA 70
1.1 Codes, Standards, and Regulations
1. Fire suppression system and observe guidelines from the National Electrical Code (NEC) 2017 and
the International Association of Firefighters.
i. All work must follow current National Electrical Code requirements:
o NFPA 855, “Standard for the Installation of Stationary Energy Storage Systems”
ii. Battery cell:
o UL 1642 “Standard for Lithium Batteries”
iii. Battery module:
o UL 1973 “Batteries for Use in Light Electric Rail Applications and Stationary Applications”
iv. Battery system:
o UL 9540 “Energy Storage Systems and Equipment”
o UL 9540A “Test Method for Evaluating Thermal Runaway Fire Propagation in Battery
Energy Storage Systems”
v. Grid interconnection standards, as applicable to the project as a whole:
o Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 1547
o UL 1741, “Standard for Static Inverters and Charge, Converters, Controllers and
Interconnection System Equipment for Use with Distributed Energy Resources”
o UL 62109‐1 “Safety of power converters for use in photovoltaic power systems – Part 1:
General requirements”
vi. Other codes and standards that will apply include:
o UN 38.3 “Certification for Lithium Batteries” (Transportation)
o American National Standards Institute (ANSI) C12.1 (electricity metering)
o American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)‐7 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and
Other Structures
o IEEE 2030.2, Guide for the Interoperability of Energy Storage Systems Integrated with the
Electric Power Infrastructure
vii. (Alternative International Electrotechnical Commission [IEC] standards where applicable:
o IEC 62619
o IEC 63056
o IEC 62933‐5‐2)
https://www.pnnl.gov/energy‐storage
PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY is involved in research into BESS. According to the
presentation from the City Planner tonight, August 17th, updates and results from this organization are
PENDING.
BESS don’t provide endless amounts of energy, generally up to 4 hours – depending on the demand.
I would like to make a couple of comments, one is in response to Commission member Kevin’s thoughtful
idea, about the possibility of locating a BESS somewhere along high voltage lines. The way that BESS
function, requires that they are in close proximity to a sub‐station, ideally 100ft, or, as close as possible.
Many/most grid‐sized BESS are in remote locations, and adjacent to a sub‐station, specially built for that
purpose, to transmit the energy from the BESS along high voltage infrastructure.
In response to commission member Dana’s interesting comment regarding the possibility of homeowners
having their own battery storage. If this would be rebated, or subsidized in some way, it would be a good
idea; otherwise it may be too costly for most people?
Keeping in mind that Renton isn’t and doesn’t experience any energy shortfall, of course that may change
in the future.
It is Bellevue that has a documented shortfall in its energy supply, stated in PSE EIS document in 2014. I
have sent the link to this document from PSE in prior letters to your members. Bellevue isn’t pursuing
installing a BESS within its boundaries, because they state in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, (a link to
this documentation I have made available to you previously), that they only have land in the downtown
core for redevelopment.
Bellevue had a new Richards Creek sub‐station built, located below the increased capacity, high capacity
voltage lines. But I am not aware of any permitting requests for a BESS in Bellevue. Instead, I wonder if they
imagined it would be easier, less costly, and less demanding on their council, planning department and
planning commission, by trying to make us, here in Renton the solution to their shortfall.
The energy stored here, it was planned (PSE EIS 2014, would be transferred to the Richards Creek sub‐
station in Bellevue via the Talbot Hill sub‐station in Renton. Bellevue’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan states
there are areas in downtown that are available for redevelopment, but not for a BESS, apparently?
I understand energy needs are going to increase once fossil fuel sources are decreased, possibly
everywhere, in time.
The comments I made above, about which city has been experiencing the energy shortfall, is not made out
of malice, or any negative feelings, they are based on facts.
I do however believe it to be unfair and unconscionable of a large and affluent city, to, it seems, try and
take advantage of, and bully people living in a smaller community of affordable homes, in a mostly lower
income area in Renton, into being responsible for Bellevue’s energy needs?
Thank you again for your time and all that you do for our city.
Nicola Robinson