Hartford Business Journal

22 HARTFORDBUSINESS.COM | NOVEMBER 25 2024 FOCUS | CLEAN ENERGY "I see it far less as a zero-carbon play or an environmental play, and far more as simply: how do we keep our costs down?" Hoffman said. "If I can 'home grow' my electricity such that it's cheaper than what I have to pay Eversource or United Illuminating, why wouldn't I do that as a business?" The growth of battery storage projects hasn't been without some setbacks. The Siting Council recently rejected 4.9-MW and 4-MW projects in New London and Waterford proposed by Hanwha Q Cells America Inc. On Nov. 7, the council denied both proj- ects because they included battery storage units that were within 300 feet of commercial buildings. The International Association of Fire Chiefs guidance says that people should maintain a safe distance of at least 300 feet from battery storage units, according to the council's decision. Another project — Key Capture's proposed battery farm in Granby — faces local opposition. Residents there raised concerns about the risks of a fire or explosion. A Key Capture official told the Hartford Business Journal in January that its "technology goes through much more rigorous safety testing and protocols than batteries used in consumer electronics, but the operation is similar." Projects approved by the Siting Council usually bypass local zoning authorities. DEEP procurement Currently, none of the projects that have been approved by the Siting Council, or are pending before it, are part of DEEP's 400-MW procurement, which drew 15 separate proposals. Projects selected through the DEEP procurement process will be able to sell electricity to utilities at pre-determined rates, rather than at market rates. Also, they can receive payments based on whether the system meets performance metrics. Funding for the procurements will come from electric utilities, through funds collected from ratepayers. It's unclear when the state will begin to award contracts, but proposed projects include a joint venture between East Granby-based Kinsley Energy Systems and Michaud Law Group of Middletown. They've proposed two grid-scale battery energy storage projects, including one at 434 Killingly Road in Pomfret, the site of an unused sandpit beside a transmission line. The second is on 39.2 acres of vacant land on Boyden Street in Waterbury. Kinsley Energy redacted the proposed megawatt capacity of the projects from its publicly available proposal. Key Capture is planning a total of eight energy battery storage projects in Connecticut, including the three that have already received Siting Council approval, along with three larger projects submitted under DEEP's procurement. They are an 80-MW facility on 25 acres of vacant land on Rutty Ferry Road in Haddam; a 45-MW facility on 4 acres of vacant property at 253 Park Road in Putnam; and a 190-MW facility at 30 Tariffville Road in Bloomfield. Another renewable energy company, Ormat Nevada Inc., has proposed a 100-MW project, called Silk City Energy Storage, in an undis- closed Hartford location, as part of the procurement. Other projects by various developers have been proposed in Middlebury, Enfield, Stafford Springs, Watertown, Canton and South Windsor, among other locales. Projects selected through DEEP's procurement will need to apply for permits from the state Siting Council as well. Israeli company Sunflower Sustainable Investments Ltd. has proposed building a 325-MW battery farm (outlined above), known as the Windham Energy Center, on a 20-acre lot at 189 Lake Road in Killingly. After awarding $48.4M in benefits, PURA temporarily suspended energy storage incentives program By Andrew Larson alarson@hartfordbusiness.com C onnecticut's Energy Storage Solutions (ESS) program is one of two state initiatives that provide incentives to developers of battery energy storage facilities. The other program, a 400-MW procurement through the state Department of Energy and Envi- ronmental Protection, has not yet approved any projects. But the ESS program, geared toward small-scale commercial and residential projects, has been so popular that the state had to temporarily suspend it. The ESS program is overseen by the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) and administered by the Connecticut Green Bank. It has awarded $48.4 million in incentives since it began two years ago, to roughly 72 battery energy storage projects with capacity totaling 148.9 MW, according to the Green Bank. The program offers both upfront and performance-based incentives to contractors and owners of battery energy systems. The upfront incentives include direct payments to the contractor or system owner, after the system is installed and confirmed to be operational, said Edward Kranich, senior manager of incentive programs for the Green Bank. The annual performance-based incentive is based on how much average power a battery contributes to the grid during peak seasons. So far, the ESS program, which is funded by ratepayers, has approved about 150 MW of commercial energy storage capacity, with another 280 MW of capacity left to award. The projects have received an average of $671,825 in funding, or about $125 per kilowatt-hour of electricity, Kranich said. However, PURA in June directed the Green Bank to temporarily suspend new enrollments after program administrators approved projects totaling 113.9 MW, exceeding a 100-MW cap. The program is expected to resume in December, but with a reduced upfront incentive. "We actually haven't been approving any commercial projects since June, but we have some applications in the queue," Kranich said. "Those will be approved at the new rates in December." Edward Kranich Energy Storage Continued from page 21

• Cover