City Of Yes Intiative Means City Of No Accountability, Common Sense For Staten island Communities: Asm. Sam Pirozzolo Weighs In

City of Yes Is City of No Accountability, No Common Sense For Staten Island

Asm. Sam Pirozzolo Weighs In On City Of Yes Initiative Recently Passed By City Council: The City Of Yes initiative will make it easier to install battery charging stations in public areas with less oversight, community input, and accountability. 

Aleady, Staten Island is bearing a greater share of the responsibility for battery sites (BESS), with more of them in somewhat rural areas than in some of the other boroughs.  In addition to other issues regarding their efficiency, the most pressing issue, especially for Staten Islanders, is their safety, or lack thereof.  

These battery sites are subject to the possibility of going on fire when high winds blow particulates into the units, causing them to catch fire.  This happened in Warsaw, New York, to TWO charging stations during the same storm.

An additional concern is that there will be very little actual tangible benefit, both overall and to the people of Staten Island.  Acoding to Asm. Pirozzolo, the City may want to use these battery sites to sell the electricity they are storing to other municipalities and townships, at a profit, at times when they may have a higher need for electricity, such as in the event of a blackout.  The electricity might even be sold to Staten Island residents at a higher cost in the event of a local blackout.  This is unclear from their plan, but has been mentioned as a possibility. 

Something else that is missing is tangible benefits.  Will there actually be any power plants, whether coal-fired or powered by oil, that will close as a result of the BESS sites being installed in our neighborhoods?  New York City’s plan does not mention this, so the presumption would be no.  

Realistically speaking, this is a contentious issue for Staten Islanders.  Asm. Pirozzolo, as one of his first acts in office, was to help stop a BESS site that was planned in a church parking lot that was very close to two other schools and in a residential neighborhood.  Due to the removal of zoning restrictions related to the initiative, it is likely to be more difficult for the community to defeat plans for future sites in their neighborhoods.  

Staten Islanders will be assuming all of the risk that these battery storage sites come with.  According to the City, the battery sites are safe, and the fire department has told them so.  However, this is a facetious argument.  The storage sites are UL listed, which means that their electronic components, and only those components, are safe and will not catch fire.  This does not apply to the Lithium-ion battery material itself.  

As many people have seen, Li-ion batteries are quite dangerous.  Charging cell phones, hoverboards, and, more recently, electric bikes, have been responsible for causing many fires in homes, hotels, on airplanes(lin to your=tube vid star bag on fuire}, and other places.  This is an inherent risk to Lithium containing batteries.  

Advertisement

As we have now learned, lithium is highly flammable, particularly the form used in batteries both large and small.  However, the most dangerous part isn’t that they are flammable.  The issue is that once a fire starts in one of these batteries, or any lithium battery, it cannot be put out easily.  

For a small charger fire, or even an electric bike explosion, this is not a major issue.  One can eventually pour enough water on it to put out the fire.  

But wth a large battery, such as those at these sites, copious amounts of water are needed, and in most cases, they are just allowed to burn themselves out.  In the meantime, they can cause other things around them to catch on fire.  And if they do use water to put them out, and the area is outdoors with a way for the water to get into the ground, the lithium that is now in the water is harmful to the environment.  It can cause lasting damage to the ecosystem and to any groundwater that is nearby.  

If you think this risk is overblown, there have some reports of fires caused by these battery sites, including this article by the LA TImes( article link), and this story by FEMA (http://fema.gov/fr/case-study/emerging-hazards-battery-energy-storage-system-fires).  This is why Asm. Pirozzolo and colleagues have introduced legislation in the Assembly to change requirements for installation of the BESS sites to address some of the safety issues.  

One of the other complaints that Asm. Pirozzolo raised is that the electricity provided by the BESS sites involves a lack of clarity from the manufacturers, including how long one of the sites could power all or a portion of the Island.  If the city plans to sell the stored electricity to other locations in the event of a power outage, would there be a benefit to Staten Island hosting these sites in their community? 

Safety Questions Have Not Been Answered 

With regard to safety of these battery systems, the city has maintained that they are safe.  However, as Asm. Pirozzolo pointed out, thier safety is only applicable with regard to their UL listing, which means primarily that their electronics will not themselves catch on fire.  However, there have been cases where BESS sites themselves have caught on fire due to debris blowing into them during high winds (enter link here and above).  

The safety information provided by FDNY with regard to these sites (link to pdf here) also mentions that there should be a water supply installed where the sites are.  In the event that there is no water supply, this requirement is waived, but it points to the issues the assemblymember also raised during our conversation.  

This is his consistent argument, and forms that background basis for the bill that was introduced in the State Assembly regarding this particular issue.  These sites have real safety concerns, followed by environmental concerns, that we discussed.  

Is There An Evacuation Plan For These Sites?

Regarding the fires that occurred in Warwick, New York (insert link here), what is to stop the same thing from happening to any one of the storage facilities planned for Staten Island?  Those sites went on fire due to debris blowing into the batteries, catching fire.  Once on fire, they are a serious challenge to put out.  It requires copious amounts of water, and in many cases, they have to simply burn themselves out.  

Keep in mind that, similarly to the recent toxic train derailments, these fires contain hazardous chemicals,  They release these chemicals into the air as they burn.  When the fire department pours water onto them, these chemicals are then released into the ground, where they can contaminate the local environment, and they can also cause groundwater contamination due to their toxicity.  

When it comes to the placement of these sites, particalry such as in the case of the planned site that was withdrawn due to community pressure, what is the evacuation plan?  

These toxins can be spread for quite a distance, and it would be unhealthy for residents to remain in the areas around these sites if they do go on fire.  An evacuation plan should be required for all proposed sites, and the plan should be shared with the community so that they can be prepared in the event of a fire.  It is also unclear how dangerous they really are, since this is an emerging and somewhat new technology.  

Neither of these concerns have been addressed in the new City of Yes initiative.  Instead, they have been brushed aside, and the initiative taking away power from the community has passed the City Council. 

While Asm. Pirozzolo agrees that there are environmental issues that solar power could possibly address, the current solutions and technologies are simply not safe, and there is no guarantee that they will do much to help with the current environmental issues.  

According to Asm. Pirozzolo, it is unclear how much energy would be generated and stored by these sites, and whether such sites would contribute to reducing the need for oil or coal to generate our power.    

These projects would be what is known as “as of right” projects, which means that if they comply with all zoning regulations, they can be constructed without any further input.  The City of Yes initiative makes it easier for these sites to be constructed, and may be a way to get around the recent community pushback related to other proposed sites.  

While Asm. Pirozzolo is in favor of using new technology to help the environment and possibly address pollution and climate change, he believes these uses should be based on common sense and accountability.  The government should be accountable to the people they serve, and they should address all safety concerns that must be addressed.  Brushing them aside is not going to be useful in the long term, since if they go on fire, then  it is too late.  

Banner Image: Solar power. Image Credit – Zbynek Burival