For Bill HB895 Mr Chairman and members of the committtee, I am Will Stewart, a degreed electro-mechanical engineer focused on energy with a additional degree in computer science with an emphasis on scientific computing 1. One thing missing from the legislation is language requiring an energy model balancing energy generation, storage, demand on an hourly basis, utilizing 10 or more years of solar and wind data. The model must utilize a freely available tool such as MIT's Macro. The model and all data inputs, configurations, and algorithms of every kind must be provided to SCC and organizations capable of evaluating the model and model outputs. The model and data inputs must be executed annually with updated data. See https://energy.mit.edu/research/macro/ for more information on Macro. 2. On a related matter, Storage capacity co-located with solar and/or wind allows for the steady transmission of power over transmission lines. If batteries are at other locations, especially distant ones such as data centers, there will be very high power (4 to 5 times the average demand) transmission requirements as the RPS approaches and passes the 75% clean energy level to transmit power from solar farms during their midday peak to distant consumers, creating an extremely expensive transmission upgrades above and beyond transmission upgrades for new data centers. The energy model noted in the first comment would confirm this affordability risk.

Comments by Sky Kincaid in Support of HB895 I'm writing to support the HB895 bill, which focuses energy storage, for several reasons: 1. This bill increases the minimum energy storage requirements for our electrical grid. Having energy storage makes the grid more reliable and flexible by making use of excess energy generated during the day. 2. Currently, utilities focus on expensive and polluting fossil fuel plants. This bill creates incentives for electric utilities to consider Virginian's needs. 3. PJM has done a bad job at adding renewable energy to the grid and this bill directs the Department of Energy to address PJM's shortcomings. I think this bill is very important for addressing our needs in Virginia.

Comments by Martin Erb in Support of HB895 HB895 establishes minimum energy storage requirements for Virginia’s electrical grid over the next 25 years. There are many good reasons to pass this bill into law. My support is rooted in the fact that ample efficient energy storage is a prerequisite for the many technologies being developed and deployed around the globe that enable lower energy costs by modernizing the load and provider switching functions using the existing energy transport grid (PJM’s responsibility) AND the sub-station and distribution networks (operated by Dominion and Appalachian Power) as well. This will reduce BOTH rate payers and energy producers’ OpEx AND CapEx. Dominion’s planning group has already begun running energy storage demonstration projects critical to: • Catch up to meet the VCEA milestones, • Leverage RGGI+, • Continue to meet projected peak load, AND • Prepare for a performance-based service future: Electricity as a Service.

Please refer to my attachment

Please support this bill. Battery storage goes hand in hand with renewable energy sources. Solar is safe, solar on agriculture land allows the land to also be grazed by sheep or used to grow hay or used to grow pollinator plants for commercial honey production or even low growing high value perennial crops like strawberries and low bush blueberries. Modern batteries are safe. This bill will give localities expertise to fall back on in terms of reliable standards for locating energy storage projects. Most localities have appropriate areas like industrial parks for these projects. Or on site with a solar project or electrical substations. Renewables are modern reliable technology. And battery projects are also modern reliable technology. Please support this bill to provide needed guidance to localities and clear up the misinformation about battery storage

I oppose any and all bills that would advance solar projects. Any solar project has significant potential consequences but those with battery storage are even more likely to cause serious issues. Battery fires are almost impossible to stop and control. Solar projects as a whole do long term significant damage to the land where they are located leaving the land sterile and unusable long after the 35 year life span of the project. Ground water ( well water) contamination is a very serious and real possibility.

BESS siting is a land use decision. Land use decisions should be made at the local not the state level. Local Boards of Supervisors are better equipped to decide where BESS is located in their County as they are familiar with the natural environment and the fire dangers and risk relative to the local environment when considering BESS projects. The projects should not be forced upon localities. They should be placed in areas that are not dangerous to people, timberland, and agriculture. In most cases locals believe that if they are approved BESS should be located in Industrial areas not agricultural.