An Arizona battery project didn’t stumble on technology—it stumbled in the hearing room. Here’s how BESS developers can actually win permits in 2025.
Most large-scale battery projects in the US don’t fail because of technology. They fail in meeting rooms like the one in Pinal County, Arizona.
In November 2025, county planners unanimously refused to recommend a land use change for Nadara’s proposed 200MW hybrid battery energy storage system (BESS) and 150MW solar project. On paper, it ticked every green technology box: solar-plus-storage, LFP batteries, reuse of a former military range, grid support for a fast-growing state.
Yet it stalled anyway.
This matters because grid-scale batteries are now central to clean energy, smart grids, and decarbonisation—but the permitting and community engagement bottleneck is becoming as serious as interconnection queues. If you’re a developer, utility, investor, or public official trying to move green technology from slide decks to dirt-moving, this Arizona case is a textbook example of what to do—and what not to do.
In this post, I’ll break down what happened with Nadara’s Silver Reef Energy project, why Pinal County’s commission pushed back, and what actually works when you’re trying to get large battery projects approved in 2025 and beyond.
What Really Happened in Pinal County
The core issue wasn’t whether Arizona needs clean energy or whether BESS is part of the green technology future. The issue was local trust, perceived risk, and developer readiness.
The project in plain terms
Nadara’s US arm proposed the Silver Reef Energy project:
- ~150MW solar PV
- 200MW BESS (lithium iron phosphate, or LFP)
- Sited on ~801 acres of unincorporated land ~6.5 miles southwest of Casa Grande
- Former World War II target bombing range, previously through federal and environmental review
- Planned interconnection to APS via the Santa Rosa – Tat Momoli 230kV transmission line
- Land use change requested: from very low-density residential to green energy production
On the surface, it’s a strong example of green technology in action: repurposing disturbed land, supporting a cleaner grid, and pairing solar with storage to provide firm capacity and grid services.
Where it went sideways
Two local bodies lined up against the land use amendment:
- The Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) strongly recommended denial
- The Planning & Zoning (P&Z) Commission then voted 8–0 to recommend denial as well
Their concerns weren’t exotic:
- Environmental impacts
- Water usage
- Proximity to existing or potential residences
- And especially: fire safety and emergency response for the BESS
Nadara’s senior development manager tried to reassure officials by highlighting the industry’s shift from NMC to LFP batteries, noting that high-profile fires—like Moss Landing and Escondido—have involved NMC chemistries. She said she didn’t know of any documented LFP fires.
The turning point? When commissioners pressed for detailed fire safety and emergency response information, she essentially said: “I’m not the right person to answer that; we’d need a fire industry expert.”
One commissioner nailed the dynamic:
“You’re in front of us today to promote this project, you need to come prepared.”
From there, an 8–0 denial recommendation was inevitable.
The technology wasn’t on trial. The developer’s preparedness and credibility were.
Why Battery Projects Are Facing Stronger Local Resistance
Battery projects across North America are running into similar headwinds. The pattern is repeating in Arizona, Indiana, New York, Virginia, and beyond.
The drivers are pretty clear.
1. Public memory is shaped by a handful of fires
Over the last five years, grid-scale BESS fires—especially NMC systems—have made headlines. Even if those events are rare compared to the hundreds of operating systems, residents and local officials remember smoke on the horizon, not the millions of safe operating hours.
This means any new BESS project starts with a trust deficit, especially near homes or farms. Chemistry distinctions (LFP vs NMC) help, but only if they’re explained clearly and backed by third-party standards, testing, and incident data.
2. Fire departments are asked to manage novel risks
Local fire services are a big part of the permitting story now. They worry about:
- Toxic gases
- Explosions or cascading failures
- Lack of training or specialised equipment
- Who pays for upgrades and training
Telling a planning commission that “if one of these bad boys catches fire, you let it burn” without a detailed, written plan is a great way to lose a vote.
3. Land use politics are tightening
Green technology projects increasingly compete with:
- Low-density residential expansion
- Agriculture
- Industrial development
In Pinal County, the land was zoned for very low-density residential. Supporting a change to “green energy production” means each commissioner has to justify that decision to neighbours, on social media, and at the grocery store.
If they don’t have rock-solid talking points on safety, water, and visual impact, many simply won’t stick their necks out—no matter how strong the climate or grid reliability case is.
LFP vs NMC: Safety Facts You Must Bring to the Room
If you’re developing or approving BESS projects, you can’t hand-wave battery chemistry. You need simple, accurate, quotable explanations.
The short answer
- NMC (nickel manganese cobalt) batteries: higher energy density, widely used in older BESS and EVs; higher risk of thermal runaway and more intense fires.
- LFP (lithium iron phosphate) batteries: lower energy density, longer cycle life, lower cost per cycle, and significantly lower thermal runaway risk.
That safety profile is exactly why most new grid-scale BESS in 2024–2025 use LFP.
How to explain LFP safety to non-experts
Here’s language that actually works in public hearings:
- “LFP batteries operate at a more stable chemical state than NMC. They’re much less likely to enter thermal runaway, and if a cell fails it typically releases less heat and gas.”
- “The system is designed with three layers of safety: cell-level design, container-level fire detection and suppression, and site-level controls and setbacks.”
- “This project must comply with NFPA 855 and UL 9540A-tested designs, which are the core safety standards for energy storage systems in North America.”
You should also be ready with specifics:
- Which UL 9540A test results apply to your system
- What UL 9540 listing or certification is in place
- How many similar LFP systems your vendor has deployed and over how many operating hours
If your spokesperson can’t answer those in plain English, you’re not ready for the room.
How to Build a BESS Project That Survives Permitting
Most companies underinvest in permitting strategy and community engagement. They overinvest in engineering and spreadsheets.
There’s a better way to approach this.
1. Treat community engagement as a project stream, not an afterthought
For a 200MW BESS today, you should assume:
- A multi-year development and permitting timeline
- Multiple public meetings, each building on the last
- A need for repeated, consistent answers to the same questions
What works in practice:
- Early, proactive outreach: meet with fire chiefs, local officials, and neighbourhood groups before formal hearings.
- Plain-language materials: one-page explainers on LFP vs NMC, fire response, noise, visual impact, and decommissioning.
- Consistent faces: one or two senior people who show up every time and clearly own the answers.
I’ve found that when residents see the same technical and safety experts returning, listening, and updating plans, objections tend to shift from outright opposition to “conditional yes”. That’s all you need to give commissioners political cover.
2. Bring the safety experts into the room—early
Nadara’s biggest unforced error was not having a fire safety or engineering expert at the P&Z meeting.
For any large BESS project, you should:
- Include a fire protection engineer or BESS safety specialist on the presentation team
- Prepare a site-specific emergency response plan and share it in draft with the local fire department months in advance
- Offer to fund or support training and equipment for responders, and be explicit about it
You want commissioners to be able to say:
“We heard directly from independent fire experts. Our local fire chief has a written plan and agreed training program.”
That shifts the conversation from fear to managed risk.
3. Turn land use into a positive story
Silver Reef actually had a strong narrative: transforming a former restricted military training area into a productive source of renewable energy.
That’s exactly the kind of story green technology should be telling:
- Repurposing brownfields or disturbed land
- Protecting higher-value agricultural or residential areas
- Supporting local tax base without major traffic or school impacts
But to make that stick, you need to:
- Quantify benefits: estimated property tax revenue, construction jobs, and long-term operations roles
- Address visual and noise impacts with concrete mitigation: setbacks, berms, landscaping, and noise limits
- Clarify water usage in real numbers compared to other land uses (e.g., far less than irrigated agriculture)
Again, the reality is often on the project’s side—but only if you bring crisp, credible numbers.
Where AI and Smart Planning Fit Into Green Technology Permitting
Since this post is part of a Green Technology series, let’s talk about how AI and digital tools can actually help you get projects like Silver Reef built.
1. AI for risk modelling and communication
Modern planning teams are starting to use AI to:
- Model worst-case fire and plume scenarios based on system design and weather data
- Optimize site layout for setbacks, access roads, and firebreaks
- Generate clear scenario visualisations for public meetings (e.g., what a container fire looks like from 500m away)
When you bring quantitative, model-based visuals into a hearing, abstract risk becomes concrete—and much more manageable.
2. Smart grid integration and better value propositions
AI-driven energy management systems can:
- Predict load, solar output, and price signals more accurately
- Operate BESS fleets to avoid stress conditions that could trigger failures
- Stack revenues (capacity, ancillary services, arbitrage) to improve project economics
Why does this matter for permitting? Because projects with solid, data-backed revenue stacks are more likely to secure financing, grid commitments, and long-term operations. That stability reassures local officials that the project won’t be abandoned or neglected.
3. Data-driven community engagement
Teams are already using simple analytics to track:
- Which concerns dominate at different stages (safety vs water vs visual)
- How sentiment shifts after specific meetings or design changes
- Which formats work best (small-group workshops vs large hearings)
You don’t need fancy tools to do this—just good note-taking and basic analysis—but AI can help surface patterns and suggest better engagement tactics over time.
What Pinal County Is Signalling to the Storage Industry
The Pinal County P&Z commission’s 8–0 vote isn’t an isolated protest. It’s a signal to the entire battery storage industry:
- Technical safety alone isn’t enough. You need communication, documentation, and third-party validation.
- Developers must come over-prepared. If you can’t answer detailed questions on chemistry, safety codes, emergency response, and land use trade-offs, you’re not ready for prime time.
- Community engagement is now core project work, not PR. It’s as critical as your interconnection study or EPC contract.
Interestingly, the same county is considering a 400MW standalone BESS from another developer, esVolta, with much smoother local support so far—including a unanimous vote from the Town Council of Florence to amend its general plan. Different project, different process, different outcome.
That contrast makes the lesson crystal clear: how you engage is as important as what you build.
If you’re working on green technology projects—whether that’s solar-plus-storage, smart grids, or other clean energy infrastructure—now is the time to upgrade your permitting strategy. Bring your safety experts, your best communicators, and your data to the first meeting, not the last.
The clean energy transition doesn’t just hinge on better batteries and smarter software. It depends on whether communities believe those systems are safe, well planned, and aligned with their future.