Esco battery project sparks fury from residents
A utility-scale project in Eden Valley has residents up in arms and fighting back as they worry about threats of fire, toxins, noise and more
ESCONDIDO — Once an equestrian facility is now the site of a massive battle between residents and Big Energy.
Phyllis Laderman and Andrew McSparron have lived in Eden Valley for 40 and 43 years, respectively. Now, their homes in unincorporated San Diego County are in jeopardy of sharing a property line with a massive battery energy storage system known as the Seguro Battery Energy Storage System.
The two said they first heard about the proposal for the 1,280-megawatt-per-hour facility about two years ago. Now, hundreds of other residents, along with the Escondido City Council, are fighting back against AES’ proposal to construct 216 containers to store the batteries on 22.55 acres on Country Club Drive.
The City Council adopted a resolution Wednesday, 4-1 with Councilwoman Consuelo Martinez voting no, calling for regulations on battery storage systems and urging the San Diego County Board of Supervisors to adopt regulations for those facilities.
“It’s not a bad business, it’s the wrong area,” Councilman Mike Morasco said. “If you go to the one house that will be surrounded on three sides … by a 12-foot wall with blatant disregard to that individual’s property values, their life, anything because it just happens to be where they want to put it.”
The Board of Supervisors directed county staff during its July 17 meeting to develop standards, regulations and a moratorium regarding battery storage facilities, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune. Supervisor Jim Desmond, whose district covers Elfin Forest, said battery storage projects should avoid residential areas, schools, hospitals, daycare centers and senior facilities.
Laderman, though, said the former property owner of the site moved two years ago and then heard rumblings of a proposal to store batteries. Over the next several weeks it was revealed a proposal was in the works by AES to construct a utility-scale battery storage facility, which shares the property line with at least seven homes.
“It’s been a big ramp up and we’re a quiet residential area,” she added. “We started learning about how really dangerous there are. We’re already in a high-fire risk area. The fact once these fire starts, they emit toxic fumes. There going to put up a 12-foot wall all around and it will look like a prison.”
McSparron said five of his neighbors can only access their property by driving through the battery facility. If there is a thermal runaway fire, residents won’t be able to escape, he said.
But sharing a property line and access are just two of the concerns for residents.
Risk and the threat of fires caused by thermal runaway, along with toxic fumes pouring into the area and the potential of a fire turning into a wildland blaze top the list for those living in Eden Valley.
As residents began pouring over documents and researching, they connected with Joe Rowley, the former vice president of project development with Sempra U.S. Gas & Power, a non-utility subsidiary of the parent company, Sempra Energy. He said his career covered projects with natural gas, wind, solar and batteries and noted he developed the Escondido Research and Technology Center and the Palomar Energy Project.
Rowley and JP Therberge, chair of the Harmony Grove and Elfin Forest Town Council, created a website, Stop Seguro, to break down the complexities of battery storage.
Rowley’s industry knowledge has given residents a boost and he said he shares the same safety and fire concerns as those living in Eden Valley. Even though he doesn’t live near the site, Rowley said he is baffled at the site selection as residential areas for a project of this scale are inappropriate and a threat to public safety.
Laderman, McSparron and Rowley said the request is simple: move the project to a non-residential area. They said they aren’t against battery storage facilities, but utility-scale projects must be constructed with a land use of industrial or utility, not adjacent to homes.
“When I heard about this project and I heard about this project, and having done siting studies for San Diego County for large-scale batteries, I thought where is that site because it never came up on my radar,” Rowley explained. “When I found out where it was, I realized, wow, these developers don’t know what they are doing. This is just incredibly poor site selection. It reflects no discipline. Even though it doesn’t affect me, but from a professional standpoint I find it offensive and something that gives the industry a bad name.”
The project
AES is a global energy firm and its Seguro proposal would be the second largest in California and one of the biggest in the world, Rowley said.
They are proposing the 320-megawatt lithium-ion battery storage with 1,280MWh of capacity. The facility would interconnect with SDG&E’s Escondido switch yard and provide up to four hours of storage, according to AES.
According to AES, the Escondido project consists of 320MW of storage and 1,280MWh of capacity. The original proposal called for 400MW of storage and 1,600MWh of capacity and was scaled back due to stakeholder and community feedback, according to the website.
The project estimates it will store enough electricity to power 240,000 homes for four hours. Additionally, the project features metal storage containers housing racks of battery storage with insulation and monitoring and management systems.
There will be few employees onsite as most of it will be operated remotely, according to county records.
An AES spokesperson told CBS 8 the company wants to be a good neighbor.
“We’ve already instituted a series of changes to the project, we’ve reduced the project size, we’ve increased setbacks, we’ve made improvements to existing access to help in the event of a wildfire,” the spokesperson told CBS 8. “It will be interesting to see what actually gets, you know, put on paper and finalized. The discussion, I think, was very different than what the original resolution had said.”
Miles Himmel, the communications director for Supervisor Jim Desmond, said the project is currently still going through the public permitting process. AES estimates the construction starting in 2025 with operations commencing in late 2026.
AES also estimates more than $11 million in local tax revenue and 450 jobs during construction, and nearly $6 million in local tax revenue including $3.6 million benefiting schools per year.
Other features include battery storage containers. Those containers would be 11 feet high by nine feet wide by 40 feet long, according to the draft environmental impact report. There would also be an integrated heat, smoke, gas and fire detection system.
According to the county, construction would take between 12 to 18 months, and the operational lifespan of the project is estimated at 35 years. Decommissioning would take about 12 months and once completed, the use of the land would return to a use consistent with the County of San Diego zoning ordinance, according to the county.
Safety, fire concerns
Arguably the biggest concerns for many are the potential of a fire and the hazardous material emitted from a failure. Residents have pointed to several major battery storage fires and the health and environmental impacts of those incidents.
On May 15, the Gateway Energy Storage facility in Otay Mesa caught fire and took 17 days to extinguish, Rowley said. Toxic fumes poured out of the blaze into neighborhoods and forcing a nearby prison to consider evacuating prisoners, but ultimately, they sheltered in place.
As for the Seguro project, the Escondido Creek Conservancy and the Palomar Health Board of Directors have also opposed the proposal as the project is less than one mile away. The Escondido Creek Conservancy sent a letter to the county expressing concerns over the protected habitat it manages, wildfires and risking public health. The Palomar Health board, meanwhile, has denied access to AES for an easement on its property.
Resident April Bevins-Cooper said she and the group researched the potential health and safety impacts. Also, the land floods, which causes another safety issue, she said.
Bevins-Cooper, along with Councilman Christian Garcia, said another potential impact is homeowners insurance. They said adding such a facility could jeopardize those residents’ ability to keep their insurance, especially as the state is going through a massive withdrawal of insurance companies and homeowners being dropped.
“Originally when it was proposed, it was much larger,” Bevins-Cooper added. “It doesn’t seem to mesh with our type of area very well. There has been 100% opposition from every person in our community. Hundreds of homeowners have banded together to oppose this. We have never thought it was OK once we saw the actual information. Every company has had fires and the technology they are proposing is too new.”
Rowley said battery storage is a relatively new concept, is in its infancy, lacks regulations and the risk of failure puts residents in harm’s way. Additionally, this project has thousands of tons of modular cells and is five times larger than the Otay Mesa site.
In other terms, the scale of the Seguro project is equivalent to 95,000 Tesla Powerwalls, Rowley said. Due to the heat produced by the batteries, 435 HAVC units are needed to keep the containers cool.
Laderman and McSparron said the noise from air conditioning will run all day and intrude on their quiet lifestyles. They said plans also include a 12-foot wall and lights throughout the property.
“If you look at the Electric Power Research Institute data on failures … on average, fleetwide and worldwide, if you look at that failure rate and apply it to Seguro, the Seguro project would have a failure about every four years,” Rowley added. “When I say failure, I’m talking about a thermal runaway fire.”
Correction: An earlier version of this story said AES did not comment by deadline. The company responded and will be featured in a story next week.