Every decision carries some degree of uncertainty and risk. What differs is how much risk people are willing to accept.
That question played out Tuesday at a La Plata County commissioners hearing on whether to adopt new regulations for battery energy storage systems or extend the county’s temporary moratorium.
Ahead of the hearing, the county received 135 written public comments, and roughly 30 residents spoke at the meeting.
While there appeared to be broad agreement on the basic facts about battery energy storage systems technology, the interpretations of those facts – particularly over the acceptable level of risk – varied widely.
Commissioners voted to extend the moratorium until Jan. 20 to allow more time to discuss and potentially redraft certain parts of the proposed regulations.
Battery energy storage systems function as large, rechargeable batteries that store electricity generated on the grid for use during periods of high demand or low generation. The technology is often used to improve the reliability of renewable energy sources such as solar and wind.
Commissioners issued a six-month moratorium on most battery energy storage systems installations to give county staff time to develop rules for the installation and management of BESS facilities.
Newsletter signup
To receive daily or breaking news alerts, visit www.durangoherald.com/newsletter-signup/
For La Plata Electric Association, battery storage is a key part of its long-term strategy to diversify its power sources and increase reliance on renewable energy.
The co-op recently received grant funding for its first battery energy storage systems installation and has been one of the strongest advocates for the technology, working closely with county staff during development of the proposed regulations.
The issue, however, has divided residents. Many expressed unease about the potential risks associated with lithium-ion battery storage, including fires, toxic runoff and fumes, and whether local fire districts have the capacity to respond to emergencies.
County staff said the largest risk posed by large-scale battery energy storage systems is thermal runaway – an uncontrolled rise in battery temperature that can result in fire or explosion.
“The risk component is really what the fire districts focus on,” said Randy Black, fire chief for the Durango Fire Protection District.
LPEA representatives said rapid advances in battery technology have significantly reduced that risk.
“As technology evolves, battery technology has advanced rapidly and people say it’s gotten safer,” said Dominic May, LPEA’s energy management supervisor. “It’s hard to emphasize how profound that really is. The pace has been much more like cellphones than solar panels.”
Proponents argued the systems are a necessary investment to improve grid reliability, lower long-term energy costs and reduce reliance on fossil fuels that contribute to climate change.
Some speakers urged commissioners to adopt the regulations as they were, but LPEA asked for an extension of the moratorium to consider changing the proposed set backs – the required distance between battery systems and homes, schools, property lines or sensitive areas.
County staff initially proposed setback distances based on national fire safety standards but the planning commission later expanded those setbacks to align with oil and gas standards.
It drew criticism from multiple sides. Commissioners, LPEA officials and several community members said the larger distances were excessive, could significantly limit viable sites for battery energy storage systems facilities, and were not well-aligned with national fire or electrical codes typically applied to battery storage systems.
“I am not comfortable using oil and gas setbacks – that’s not appropriate. I think it’s onerous,” Commissioner Marsha Porter-Norton said.
LPEA CEO Chris Hansen urged commissioners to adopt less restrictive setbacks proposed by the utility, arguing the planning commission’s recommendations were overly restrictive.
Staff explained that reciprocal setbacks in oil and gas regulations were based on the hazardous emissions that all oil and gas sites produce, even when running up to standard. They said that does not apply to battery energy storage systems facilities, as they produce no emissions when functioning correctly.
jbowman@durangoherald.com
