National Grid and REV Renewables end plan to build battery storage facility in town of Long Lake
By Chloe Bennett
Plans for a battery energy storage facility in Raquette Lake have been scrapped, according to a representative of National Grid. The move came after public pushback against the project about environmental concerns and safety fears.
“Following extensive community engagement, the companies agreed that there were challenges in the planned location for the battery energy storage system,” Jared Paventi, communications manager for National Grid, said.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
The project, meant to address outages in the area, would have installed 12 tractor-sized trailers on Antlers Road in the hamlet. The estimated cost of the project would be around $50 million.
Paventi said the developers believe the projects are safe and critical to a future of renewable energy, which is reflected in initial findings from an inter-agency report on several New York facilities released in December.
“It’s a critical piece of our clean energy future in New York,” he said. “It just doesn’t work in this case.”
In August 2023, the town of Long Lake voted to place a moratorium on processing permits for battery storage facilities after community members protested the project. The pause was set to expire a year later.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
William Acker, director of the New York Battery and Energy Storage Technology Consortium, also noted the facilities’ role in the local and global energy transition.
“Although the developer of the proposed Raquette Lake battery project has opted not to move forward with the project, energy storage remains a vital clean energy technology for ensuring grid reliability and resilience, especially in remote locations such as the Adirondacks,” he said in an email.
Melissa Wilde, who owns property on Raquette Lake, said she was relieved that the microgrid planning ceased.
“Good public policy is needed now more than ever as we fight climate change,” she said in an email. “The state of New York and the Adirondack Park Agency should recognize the need for community engagement and better siting criteria for energy projects; criteria that recognize the park’s unique environmental, social and economic characteristics and the advantages and challenges those create.”
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
No set plans to address the outages in the area have been made, though National Grid plans to construct a new substation to improve reliability, Paventi said. That work is set to start in warmer weather.
National Grid is holding off on starting new renewable energy projects until after the final inter-agency report is released, he said.
“Based on the draft report, I can say that we had a lot of things that exceeded the standards of the draft report,” Paventi said. “But I think that in terms of where we’re going to proceed with future projects, we are going to wait until we have the final report so that way we can ensure we are completely compliant with everything that the workgroup has brought forth.”
When asked if a renewable energy project was on the table to address outages around Raquette Lake, Paventi said none were planned.
The Adirondack Explorer thanks its advertising partners. Become one of them.
This story will be updated as more information becomes available.
Thanks to the Raquette Lakers and others who made this bold proposal, and thereby forced many of us to learn more about the workings of solar power and batteries.
This project is to improve reliability of the grid, Raquette is at the end of the line. This battery bank can instantly inject electricity to avoid outages and brown outs.
People who oppose this are doing so based on emotion and not engineering.
It is very simple, supply and demand have to equal. As the load on the grid increases, Government pushing for all electric, electric car charging etc. The power has to come from somewhere.
The grid is just that, many interconnecting points EXCEPT Raquette Lake, at the end of the line, only so much energy can pass on the single feed from the south.
If people are OK with rolling blackouts then there is no reason to upgrade the infrastructure.
25 years, retired NYPA engineer.
I hear your point of one grid inter-tie, but adding a second inter-tie would be a better plan than a $50 million in batteries. Batteries are just storage and we need more power generation. Specifically we need grid connections in the ADK. I live at the last pole on my street, and my power rarely goes down. It’s the grid connections and overall NY needs more scaleable power generation. That is why steam and natural gas turbines were used, they could scale up the power output to carry the load as it modulates throughout the day. NY is closing those plants and attempting to generate all the power with solar and wind. For the cost of the investment to go all solar and wind, we could have built a few nuclear power plants with scaleable output for peak loads.
This is just too much common sense Chris.
Having the battery farm in the middle of a pine forest, on a very narrow, rural road; in a town with a small volunteer department; with poor evacuation options; and is 75 miles from the nearest medical facility; is a foolhardy idea.
Needs Medical Center First then maybe Battery Farm – Up to the Residents !
Sounds sensible to be concerned about this placement of the battery “farm” .. they are trying to place one here in another risky location. The $ speaks so loudly it cools the heart toward those at risk. Sadly, the god of money corrupts those who have vowed to protect their fellow citizens.
Absolutely agree. Downstate we regularly have small, singular e-bike batteries fail. When they fail, they create flash fires that consume buildings in a matter of seconds. This often results in many injuries and some deaths. A cascade flash fire in a battery farm is beyond anything the large, well-equipped fire departments we have down here are willing to tackle. I have personally spoken to the fire chiefs of two local fire departments, and they both said that they would immediately evacuate the surrounding areas, and “let the fire burn.”. They would not attempt to contain or put such a fire out. I am relieved to hear that the Raquette Lake battery project has been scrapped. Such a high flashpoint fire would most likely spread to all the wooded areas in moments, setting off a catastrophe of epic proportions.
What’s the risk? It has a built in fire suppression system. If it burns then it burns. Not much different than all those thousands of open pit camp fires.
Good to hear. Definitely not needed in that area. It’s a very small town.
But you are all ok with huge electric car batteries? Makes no sense.
Great news for the people of this community. This is a total waste of money and resources. There is nothing wrong with reliable natural gas and oil and wood . It’s just as green as any other energy and even more reliable. I hope this opened some peoples eyes and minds to the downside and limitations of so called renewables.
Think about all those smog making cars in the 60s and 70s. Where would our air quality be today if the ICE exhaust was not cleaned up. Now we have to deal with the natural CO2 process of burning hydrocarbons. (Oil &gas&coil) , just because we can’t see this gas don’t mean it’s not there. Can we risk being wrong about climate change? What kind of life are we leaving for our great grandchildren?
Hoover dam powers Las Vegas, your water can be converted other ways to supply energy. Why not check out other options? Batteries are lethal to the environment.
Sp Raquette Lakers don’t want it in their back yard. Can you point to anyone in the North Country that does? Certainly not me. Clean burning natural gas and hydro power are the two best options for this area. In 20 years, what will those thousands of acres of ugly solar panels look like when they are no longer operable?
Good outcome. I was going to write to the Explorer anyway after reading the article. But after seeing this good news, I will just comment on the “It’s debatable” article here.
Mr. Viscelli is right about the minimal energy storage, poor cold weather performance and fire risk of these installations. Also to be considered: placing an enormous load of toxic metals in the Adirondacks; and the fact that key metals for the project, such as Cobalt are mined by slave labor, and enrich our geopolitical enemies. Beyond even that, this project should have been costed based on life cycle cost, as are other energy projects. What is the projected life? What is the decommissioning cost? Issues like these are the reasons why 95% of grid scale energy storage in the world is hydroelectric pumped storage.
Mr. Acker makes an entirely false statement (I think we used to call these “lies”) when he says that to address family energy costs, we must reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is prima facie false. It’s the quixotic and unnecessary effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that is bankrupting local families. Further, the effort is having zero effect while China builds 200 new coal fired plants. To help local families, we should be rapidly building additional, reliable base load generation (natgas and nuclear) and upgrading the grid with additional tie ins and proper maintenance of existing lines.
Glad to see this project scrapped before it does more harm to a local community.
Tom DuBois
Keene