The Fight

Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Spotlight

How a Tiny Community Blocked Battery Storage in Over Half of Los Angeles County

Much of California’s biggest county is now off limits to energy storage.

•
Wildfire and battery storage.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Library of Congress

Residents of a tiny unincorporated community outside of Los Angeles have trounced a giant battery project in court — and in the process seem to have blocked energy storage projects in more than half of L.A. County, the biggest county in California.

A band of frustrated homeowners and businesses have for years aggressively fought a Hecate battery storage project proposed in Acton, California, a rural unincorporated community of about 7,000 residents, miles east of the L.A. metro area. As I wrote in my first feature for The Fight over a year ago, this effort was largely motivated by concerns about Acton as a high wildfire risk area. Residents worried that in the event of a large fire, a major battery installation would make an already difficult emergency response situation more dangerous. Acton leaders expressly opposed the project in deliberations before L.A. County planning officials, arguing that BESS facilities in general were not allowed under the existing zoning code in unincorporated areas.

On the other side, county officials maintained that the code was silent on battery storage as such, but said that in their view, these projects were comparable to distribution infrastructure from a land use perspective, and therefore would be allowable under the code.

Last week, the residents of Acton won, getting the courts to toss out the county’s 2021 memorandum allowing battery storage facilities in unincorporated areas – which make up more than 65% of L.A. County.

Judge Curtis Kin wrote in his October 14 ruling that “such expansive use of the interpretation runs contrary to the Zoning Code itself,” and that the “exclusion” of permission for battery storage in the code means it isn’t allowed, plain and simple.

“Consequently, respondents and real parties’ reliance on the existence of other interpretive memos and guidance by the [Planning] Director is beside the point,” Kin stated. “There is no dispute the Director has the authority to issue memos and interpretations for Zoning code provisions subject to interpretation, but, as discussed above, such authority cannot be used in such a way as to violate the provisions of the Zoning Code.”

The court also declared the Hecate project approval void and ordered the company to seek permits under the California Environmental Quality Act if it still wants to build. This will halt the project’s development for the foreseeable future. Alene Taber, the attorney representing Acton residents, told me she has received no indication from Hecate’s legal team about whether they will appeal the ruling.

Hecate declined to comment on the outcome.

Taber’s perspective is unique as a self-described “rural rights” attorney who largely represents unincorporated communities with various legal disputes. She told me this ruling demonstrates a serious risk regulators face in moving too fast for a host community, especially given rising opposition to battery storage in California. Since the Moss Landing fire, opposition to storage projects has escalated rapidly across the state – despite profound tech differences between more modern designs proposed today and the antiquated system that burned up in that incident.

I asked Taber if she thought California enacting a new law last week to beef up battery fire safety oversight could stem the tide of concerns about battery storage. In response, she railed against a separate statute giving energy companies – including battery developers – the ability to work around town ordinances and moratoria targeting their industry.

“Even though the county didn’t consider the community input — which it should’ve — the county process at least still allowed for communities to appeal the project. And they’re also at least supposed to consider what the local zoning code said,” Taber told me. “Local communities are now sidelined all together. They’re saying they don’t care what the concerns are. Where’s the consideration for how these projects are now being sited in high fire zones?”

I was unable to reach Los Angeles County officials before press time for The Fight, but it’s worth noting that, amid the battle over Hecate’s approval, L.A. County planning officials began preparing to update their renewable energy ordinance to include battery storage development regulation – an indication they may need new methods to site and build more battery storage. There’s no timeline for when those changes will take place.

Yellow

This article is exclusively
for Heatmap Plus subscribers.

Go deeper inside the politics, projects, and personalities
shaping the energy transition.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Spotlight

Offshore Wind’s Existential Crisis at Climate Week

Can the industry ever recover?

•
A wind turbine and Chris Wright.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images, Luke Liu

American offshore wind’s existential crisis was laid bare at this year’s Climate Week.

California and New York officials gathered on Tuesday at the New York Bar Association in Manhattan to tell attendees of the annual climate action mega-event about their efforts to hold the Trump administration to account. After Trump regulators upended wind projects off the East Coast and struck buyout trades with energy developers to ditch ocean wind leases, both states filed fresh legal action against the administration, targeting what they said were egregious abuses of taxpayer dollars that canceled once-promising projects that would’ve given gigawatts of power to grids expecting energy demand to spike.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Hotspots

Another Solar Company Trying Gas-Powered Data Center on Federal Lands

And more of the week’s top news around project development.

•
The United States.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

1. Ada County, Idaho – Trump’s push for more data centers on federal lands is causing a lot more ruckus and catching another solar company in the cross-fire.

  • Last week, D.C. news outlet The Washington Sun first reported that a subsidiary of solar developer Arevia Power submitted a right-of-way application for a data center project on federal lands in Idaho, a fact the Bureau of Land Management confirmed in a statement to me Thursday. The project is currently in a preliminary phase of permitting and a public notice can be expected this year, a Bureau of Land Management representative told me.
  • Until the initiation of any National Environmental Policy Act review, information on the data center is scarcely available on public websites. So here’s what BLM told me about it in a statement: the data center project will be 4 million square feet and include a 3,226-acre parcel of federal land. An additional 514 acres will be needed for a 10.6-mile “electrical load line corridor.” The data center complex will include a substation, stepdown electrical yards, a water connection, and a 450-megawatt on-site natural gas-fired power facility. The project is expected to use upwards of 600 megawatts though, which explains the potential load lines.
  • The Sun story also claimed the Arevia project will connect to a “sprawling utility-scale” solar project. BLM has previously said the data center is in some way “linked” to an Arevia solar farm proposed on federal lands north of Twin Falls, Idaho.
  • Arevia Power did not respond to a request for comment on the project nor the reported inclusion of gas generation along with solar, which I could not find discussed on their website. This is not the first time I’ve seen reports of this kind of activity from a solar developer. On August 3, I reported that solar developer Clearway canceled a proposal submitted to the Bureau of Land Management to transform a solar application into a data center and gas project – after we made the existence of the proposal public.
  • On Thursday I spoke with Heather Tied-Nelson, acting communications lead for the Bureau of Land Management Idaho field office, briefly over the phone about the project. “It’s all so very early in the process. We’re working with the company to try to finalize their plan of development and probably publish a notice of intent to begin the planning process later this fall or winter,” Tied-Nelson told me. Then I asked whether the data center was tied to Arevia’s solar efforts and if this was another solar farm-for-data center application swap kind of situation. She replied: “I can’t speak to that.”

2. Carbon County, Wyoming – Tell me if you’ve heard this one before: The Trump administration just delayed a large fossil-free power project after criticism from a powerful Republican senator. But this time, it’s hydropower.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow
Q&A

Pro-Renewables Super PAC Paying ‘Close Attention’ to Tom Tiffany

A conversation with Tom Matzzie of the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition

•
The Q&A subject.
Heatmap Illustration

This week’s Q&A is with Tom Matzzie, chair of the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition – a pro-renewables Super PAC fighting lawmakers of both sides of the aisle who spurn the sector. The Super PAC won quite a few victories during the primary season, successfully boosting challengers to hardline conservatives in the U.S. that fought for cuts to the Inflation Reduction Act and are no longer going to serve in the Lower Chamber. Matzzie, also CEO of solar firm CleanChoice Energy, is intent the sector must go on offense to win more public bipartisan support and survive the Trump 2.0 era.

I chatted with Matzzie to hear how he’s looking at the general election season. The conversation revealed to me they want the renewables industry to be seen as politically lethal. And they’re paying close attention to the Wisconsin gubernatorial race.

Keep reading...Show less
Yellow