New Yorkers revolt against ‘toxic' new neighborhood battery storage facilities as backlash grows to green energy law
It's the new not-in-my-backyard rage – and the latest blow to New York's green energy agenda.
New Yorkers are lining up in opposition to dozens of new lithium-ion battery storage facilities planned across the Big Apple and beyond, over fears they could spark toxic infernos in residential neighborhoods.
Queens Councilman Robert Holden said he doesn't want his neighborhood to turn into a potential 'mini-Chernobyl' — a reference to the nuclear power plant disaster in Ukraine on April 26, 1986 that released a mass amount of radioactive material and forced the evacuation of more than 100,000 residents.
'Why are we putting our children in a dangerous situation?' lifelong Middle Village and stay-at-home mom, Graceann Faulkner, 50, told The Post at one recent protest of a proposed NineDot Energy battery warehouse.
The site, which is now vacant at 64-30 69th Place, stands next to a daycare and preschool (Books & Rattles, Inc.), the Juniper Valley Animal Hospital and also lies across the street from PS 128.
Faulkner said she would pull her fifth grade daughter, Christina, out of PS 128, if plans for the battery storage facility power ahead.
NineDot Energy spokesperson Karen Alter, when contacted by The Post, said the Brooklyn-based firm had not made a 'final decision on moving forward.'
In a copy of emails with community officials obtained by The Post, NineDot rep Sam Brill defended the safety of such battery sites, including a NineDot battery facility in the Bronx, that for years has 'safely operated' 40 feet from a public school.
'FDNY wouldn't let us build these if they weren't safe,' Brill said.
The standoff is an increasingly common sight in the five boroughs with locals complaining potential blazes would be difficult to put out, as battery storage explosions in California have shown.
California's Public Utilities Commission recently tightened up safety rules for these facilities following fires that spewed toxic smoke.
The batteries store energy, primarily from emerging solar and wind power, to help New York meet targets under the much-criticized Climate Act of 2019 approved by then-Gov Andrew Cuomo — now a mayoral candidate.
Under the plan, New York must reduce greenhouse gas emissions 40% by 2030 and have 100% zero-emission electricity by 2040. Rules require New York to generate 9,000 megawatts of offshore wind energy by 2035, 6,000 megawatts of solar energy by 2025 and build 3,000 megawatts of energy storage by 2030.
'Energy storage will help achieve the aggressive Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act goal of getting 70% of New York's electricity from renewable sources by 2030,' NYS Energy and Research and Development Authority [NYSERDA] said.
But the targets are unachievable, even clean energy advocates admit.
The Public Service Commission — mostly staffed by commissioners appointed by Gov. Kathy Hochul — has authority to locate battery energy storage facilities with a capacity of at least 80 megawatts.
But officials in New York City and other localities have the authority to approve or reject battery storage facilities with lower capacity under 80MW — which represents most projects, according to the PSC.
There are 74 existing battery storage facilities in the city — 18 each in Brooklyn and Manhattan, 16 in Queens, and 11 in The Bronx and Staten Island, according to the NYSERDA website.
Statewide, there are 6,304 such projects.
Republican mayoral candidate Curtis Sliwa said the rage against the battery storage warehouses is a sleeping giant issue that could propel him to victory in the race for City Hall, likening it to opposition to borough-based jails and migrant shelters.
'They're putting them up in residential areas.The rage from residents … is palpable,' Sliwa said during a Post editorial board interview.
Whether the facilities could sway the mayoral race, plans for new warehouses is riling locals.
'They just found a cheap available land, but our lives are not cheap…..our own children are not cheap,' Brooklyn Assemblyman Michael Novakhov said after he spearheaded an April 6 rally against the installation of a lithium-ion station at 2481 McDonald Ave. in Gravesend.
There's also stiff opposition to numerous battery storage sites in Staten Island.
One such facility is located on Nelson Avenue between a gas station and a home, said island Borough President Vito Fossella, who is eying a lawsuit to block the projects.
'Battery storage facilities should not be located next to people's homes or gas stations,' Fossella said.
He said the pressure to comply with the Climate Act is putting health and safety at risk.
'It's clearly a rush job,' Fossella said. 'We're not crying wolf. This is a hazard waiting to happen.'
State officials insisted the battery storage sites are safe.
The city's energy storage regulations crafted by the FDNY and Buildings Department 'are widely regarded as among the strongest in the country' and have been adopted for statewide projects by the governor's Inter-Agency Fire Safety Working Group, a NYSERDA spokesperson said.
The working group has issued recommendations that 'prioritize the safety of all New Yorkers and reaffirm New York's commitment to the safe deployment of energy storage—positioning New York as a national leader in battery energy storage safety,' the NYSERDA rep added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Will Trump's policies kill Massachusetts' life sciences leadership?
Advertisement Although the industry is centered in eastern Massachusetts, there's a statewide benefit from all the tax dollars those businesses and workers pay. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up In all, Massachusetts organizations — including universities, research institutes, and hospitals — received $3.5 billion in funding from the National Institutes of Health. Massachusetts-headquartered companies raised $3.26 billion in venture capital funding. Among all drugs in the development pipeline in the United States, 15 percent were being made by companies headquartered in Massachusetts. But actions taken by President Trump and his administration — cutting funding for scientific research and universities, flirting with tariffs, fanning skepticism about vaccines — threaten to devastate the ecosystem. Today, the industry is at a precipice, and uncertainty abounds. Some companies are already feeling the pinch of terminated federal grants, while others are anxious about what might come. Taken together, Trump's policies could force some companies and scientists to take their money, talents, and products overseas. Advertisement Christopher Locher, CEO of Lowell-based Versatope Therapeutics, which develops a platform to deliver vaccines and therapeutics, said he worries the Greater Boston life sciences ecosystem is 'being flushed down the toilet.' For example, Trump is Trump's funding cuts are already having a large impact on some local companies. Part of the problem is the Trump administration isn't only cutting funding, but it's picking which technologies to fund — in some cases apparently based on politics more than science. Take flu vaccines. The Trump administration recently announced a $500 million campaign to fund the development of a universal flu vaccine, which doesn't require annual updates, using technology being worked on But simultaneously, he cut funding for other work on a universal flu vaccine. Versatope Therapeutics got $14 million in NIH funding and spent five years developing a universal flu vaccine. It had approval from the US Food and Drug Administration to begin clinical trials when Trump terminated the contract's remaining $8 million, with the reason given being 'convenience,' Locher said. Trump also Advertisement Company executives say decisions by Trump officials to disinvest in vaccine-related technology — and concerns about whether government will approve new technology — means it's nearly impossible to find private investment funding to replace lost federal dollars. 'We're faced with bankruptcy in the very near future,' Locher said. Ironically, given Trump's stated commitment to bringing businesses back to the United States, one potential option Locher is eyeing is opening a subsidiary abroad. Conducting clinical trials would be cheaper in another country, whether in Europe, Australia, or China, Locher said, and some countries are offering financial incentives to American companies to relocate. Companies also face a potential workforce brain drain. There have been MassBio officials said China has less rigorous — but faster — safety and research protocols than the US. Australia allows a faster timeline for clinical trials. If regulatory approval of medicines is held up because the FDA is understaffed, companies may seek European regulatory approval instead. The loss of talent to foreign countries will be compounded if the pipeline of local university graduates dries up. One draw for life sciences companies to Boston/Cambridge is the presence of elite schools like Harvard and MIT, with their potential for faculty collaboration and skilled graduates. Advertisement Trump is trying to Chip Clark, CEO at Vibrant Biomedicines in Cambridge, said cuts to university research funding both 'shrink the pipeline of great ideas' that form the basis for many biotech startups and translate to fewer available scientists. Clark said the administration's policies 'seem like a deliberate attempt to try to cede scientific leadership to Europe and Japan and Korea and China. ... They will be delighted to capitalize on our talent, technology, and investment capital to make their robust biotech sectors grow and ultimately compete successfully against the US industry,' he said. Don Ingber, founding director of the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering at Harvard University, said he has postdocs with US visas applying for jobs in Europe, and others who were accepted to work at Harvard but are going elsewhere. 'The fact that places like Harvard and MIT and American universities are magnets for the best and brightest from around the world is what's driven our technology economy and certainly the Boston/Cambridge ecosystem,' Ingber said. 'With this uncertainty, I fear we'll lose a generation.' Ingber, who was forced to stop work on two government-funded projects on drugs designed to prevent injury from radiation exposure, compared administration policies to 'eating seed corn' needed to grow crops. Advertisement Trump's vendetta will undermine one of the most vibrant state economies in the country and set back American science by years. And it's not just eastern Massachusetts that will pay a price; the entire country will. As Ingber noted, it might take years to see the impact of medicines or technologies that aren't developed because of these shortsighted cuts. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
3 hours ago
South Dakota is on track to spend $2 billion on prisons in the next decade
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. -- Two years after approving a tough-on-crime sentencing law, South Dakota is scrambling to deal with the price tag for that legislation: Housing thousands of additional inmates could require up to $2 billion to build new prisons in the next decade. That's a lot of money for a state with one of the lowest populations in the U.S., but a consultant said it's needed to keep pace with an anticipated 34% surge of new inmates in the next decade as a result of South Dakota's tough criminal justice laws. And while officials are grumbling about the cost, they don't seem concerned with the laws that are driving the need even as national crime rates are dropping. 'Crime has been falling everywhere in the country, with historic drops in crime in the last year or two,' said Bob Libal, senior campaign strategist at the criminal justice nonprofit The Sentencing Project. 'It's a particularly unusual time to be investing $2 billion in prisons.' Some Democratic-led states have worked to close prisons and enact changes to lower inmate populations, but that's a tough sell in Republican-majority states such as South Dakota that believe in a tough-on-crime approach, even if that leads to more inmates. For now, state lawmakers have set aside a $600 million fund to replace the overcrowded 144-year-old South Dakota State Penitentiary in Sioux Falls, making it one of the most expensive taxpayer-funded projects in South Dakota history. But South Dakota will likely need more prisons. Phoenix-based Arrington Watkins Architects, which the state hired as a consultant, has said South Dakota will need 3,300 additional beds in coming years, bringing the cost to $2 billion. Driving up costs is the need for facilities with different security levels to accommodate the inmate population. Concerns about South Dakota's prisons first arose four years ago, when the state was flush with COVID-19 relief funds. Lawmakers wanted to replace the penitentiary, but they couldn't agree on where to put the prison and how big it should be. A task force of state lawmakers assembled by Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden is expected to decide that in a plan for prison facilities this July. Many lawmakers have questioned the proposed cost, but few have called for criminal justice changes that would make such a large prison unnecessary. 'One thing I'm trying to do as the chairman of this task force is keep us very focused on our mission,' said Lieutenant Gov. Tony Venhuizen. 'There are people who want to talk about policies in the prisons or the administration or the criminal justice system more broadly, and that would be a much larger project than the fairly narrow scope that we have.' South Dakota's incarceration rate of 370 per 100,000 people is an outlier in the Upper Midwest. Neighbors Minnesota and North Dakota have rates of under 250 per 100,000 people, according to the Sentencing Project, a criminal justice advocacy nonprofit. Nearly half of South Dakota's projected inmate population growth can be attributed to a law approved in 2023 that requires some violent offenders to serve the full-length of their sentences before parole, according to a report by Arrington Watkins. When South Dakota inmates are paroled, about 40% are ordered to return to prison, the majority of those due to technical violations such as failing a drug test or missing a meeting with a parole officer. Those returning inmates made up nearly half of prison admissions in 2024. Sioux Falls criminal justice attorney Ryan Kolbeck blamed the high number of parolees returning in part on the lack of services in prison for people with drug addictions. 'People are being sent to the penitentiary but there's no programs there for them. There's no way it's going to help them become better people,' he said. 'Essentially we're going to put them out there and house them for a little bit, leave them on parole and expect them to do well.' South Dakota also has the second-greatest disparity of Native Americans in its prisons. While Native Americans make up one-tenth of South Dakota's population, they make up 35% of those in state prisons, according to Prison Policy Initiative, a nonprofit public policy group. Though legislators in the state capital, Pierre, have been talking about prison overcrowding for years, they're reluctant to dial back on tough-on-crime laws. For example, it took repeated efforts over six years before South Dakota reduced a controlled substance ingestion law to a misdemeanor from a felony for the first offense, aligning with all other states. 'It was a huge, Herculean task to get ingestion to be a misdemeanor,' Kolbeck said. Former penitentiary warden Darin Young said the state needs to upgrade its prisons, but he also thinks it should spend up to $300 million on addiction and mental illness treatment. 'Until we fix the reasons why people come to prison and address that issue, the numbers are not going to stop,' he said. Without policy changes, the new prisons are sure to fill up, criminal justice experts agreed. 'We might be good for a few years, now that we've got more capacity, but in a couple years it'll be full again,' Kolbeck said. 'Under our policies, you're going to reach capacity again soon.'
3 hours ago
Italians vote on citizenship and job protections amid low awareness and turnout concerns
ROME -- Italians vote over two days starting Sunday on referendums that would make it easier for children born in Italy to foreigners to obtain citizenship, and on providing more job protections. But apparent low public awareness risks rendering the vote invalid if turnout is not high enough. Campaigners for the change in the citizenship law say it will help second-generation Italians born in the country to non- European Union parents better integrate into a culture they already see as theirs. Italian singer Ghali, who was born in Milan to Tunisian parents, urged people to vote in an online post, noting that the referendum risks failure if at least 50% plus one of eligible voters don't turn out. 'I was born here, I always lived here, but I only received citizenship at the age of 18,'' Ghali said, urging a yes vote to reduce the residency requirement from 10 to five years. The new rules, if passed, could affect about 2.5 million foreign nationals who still struggle to be recognized as citizens. The measures were proposed by Italy's main union and left-wing opposition parties. Premier Giorgia Meloni has said she would show up at the polls but not cast a ballot — an action widely criticized by the left as antidemocratic, since it will not help reach the necessary threshold to make the vote valid. 'While some members of her ruling coalition have openly called for abstention, Meloni has opted for a more subtle approach,' said analyst Wolfango Piccoli of the Teneo consultancy based in London. 'It's yet another example of her trademark fence-sitting.'' Supporters say this reform would bring Italy's citizenship law in line with many other European countries, promoting greater social integration for long-term residents. It would also allow faster access to civil and political rights, such as the right to vote, eligibility for public employment and freedom of movement within the EU. 'The real drama is that neither people who will vote 'yes' nor those who intend to vote 'no' or abstain have an idea of what (an) ordeal children born from foreigners have to face in this country to obtain a residence permit,' said Selam Tesfaye, an activist and campaigner with the Milan-based human rights group 'Il Cantiere.' 'Foreigners are also victims of blackmail, as they can't speak up against poor working conditions, exploitation and discrimination, due to the precariousness of the permit of stay,' she added. Activists and opposition parties also denounced the lack of public debate on the measures, accusing the governing center-right coalition of trying to dampen interest in sensitive issues that directly impact immigrants and workers. In May, Italy's AGCOM communications authority lodged a complaint against RAI state television and other broadcasters for a lack of adequate and balanced coverage. 'This referendum is really about dignity and the right to belong, which is key for many people who were born here and spent most of their adult life contributing to Italian society. For them, a lack of citizenship is like an invisible wall,' said Michelle Ngonmo, a cultural entrepreneur and advocate for diversity in the fashion industry, who has lived most of her life in Italy after moving as a child from Cameroon. 'You are good enough to work and pay taxes, but not to be fully recognized as Italian. This becomes a handicap for young generations, particularly in the creative field, creating frustration, exclusion and a big waste of potential,' she said. The four other referendums aim to roll back labor reforms, making it harder to fire some workers and increase compensation for those laid off by small businesses, reversing a previous law passed by a center-left government a decade ago. One of the questions on the ballot also addresses the urgent issue of security at work, restoring joint liability to both contractors and subcontractors for workplace injuries. Opinion polls published in mid-May showed that only 46% of Italians were aware of the issues driving the referendums. Turnout projections were even weaker for a vote scheduled for the first weekend of Italy's school holidays, at around 35% of around 50 million electors, well below the required quorum. 'Many believe that the referendum institution should be reviewed in light of the high levels of abstention (that) emerged in recent elections and the turnout threshold should be lowered," said Lorenzo Pregliasco, political analyst and pollster at YouTrend. Some analysts note however that the center-left opposition could claim a victory even if the referendum fails on condition that the turnout surpasses the 12.3 million voters who backed the winning center-right coalition in the 2022 general election.
