Ontario’s rejection of a 3.2GWh BESS project shows that local politics now decide which green technology gets built. Here’s how developers can win communities over.
Why a Single Municipal Vote Matters for Green Technology
A 400MW/3.2GWh long-duration battery project in Shuniah, Ontario, just hit a wall. Council voted against issuing a Municipal Support Resolution (MSR), effectively blocking the project from competing in the province’s Long-Term 2 (LT2) energy storage RFP.
One vote, one small municipality, and 3.2GWh of potential clean grid flexibility disappears from the near-term pipeline.
This matters because green technology isn’t only about better batteries, smarter software, or more efficient inverters. It’s about social licence, local politics, and timing. If you work in clean energy, grid-scale storage, or climate-focused infrastructure, the Shuniah decision is a case study in what can go wrong when local engagement, procurement timelines, and project design fall out of sync.
Below, I’ll break down what happened, why municipal support has become a hidden gatekeeper in green technology projects, and what developers can do differently—especially as AI and data-driven tools start reshaping how we plan and present energy storage to communities.
What Happened in Shuniah: The Short Version
The Shuniah council’s decision is simple on paper: they declined to provide a Municipal Support Resolution for a proposed 400MW/3.2GWh long-duration energy storage (LDES) project from PowerBank (formerly SolarBank). Without that MSR, the project can’t realistically compete in Ontario’s LT2 RFP, where the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) is seeking more energy storage capacity.
Here’s the core dynamic:
- Project: 400MW / 3.2GWh long-duration battery energy storage system (BESS)
- Location: Municipality of Shuniah, Ontario
- Developer: PowerBank Corporation (IPP, previously SolarBank)
- Procurement window: LT2 RFP submissions due 18 December 2025
- Key requirement: Municipal Support Resolution (formal council support)
- Outcome: Council voted no, so the project is effectively sidelined
Shuniah isn’t the first North American locality to push back on big batteries. Michigan’s Oshtemo Township recently placed a one-year moratorium on BESS approvals. Some Arizona projects have been scrutinised after past battery fires. Communities everywhere are catching up with what these facilities are, and they’re not rubber-stamping them.
The reality? Local support is now one of the most critical risk factors for utility-scale storage. If you ignore it, your IRR model doesn’t matter.
Why Municipal Support Is Now a Hard Gate for BESS Projects
Municipal Support Resolutions used to feel like a formality. Today, they’re closer to a filter: only projects that show credible community, safety, and environmental answers make it through.
Why procurement rules give municipalities so much power
In Ontario’s LT2 and similar capacity RFPs elsewhere:
- The system operator wants de-risked projects.
- That means fewer land-use fights, fewer appeals, and fewer permitting surprises.
- So they reward or require proof of local acceptance—usually via resolutions, zoning approvals, or letters of support.
If you’re running a green technology business, you need to treat municipal politics as part of the technical stack, not an afterthought.
Typical reasons councils hesitate on BESS projects:
- Safety concerns: fear of fires, explosions, toxic gases
- Land use and aesthetics: visual impact, noise, traffic
- Trust deficit: developers showing up late with polished slides but thin local relationships
- Timeline pressure: councils being asked to decide quickly because of RFP deadlines
Shuniah likely saw a massive project, an urgent timeline, and a community still wrapping its head around what a 3.2GWh battery facility looks and feels like next door. When that happens, “no” is the safest vote.
The Deeper Issue: Community Engagement Is Lagging Behind Technology
Most companies get this wrong: they assume local engagement means a single open house and a mailer. That approach might have flown for small rooftop solar. It doesn’t fly for a hundreds-of-megawatts storage facility.
What communities actually want to know
When you strip away the noise, residents are asking very rational questions:
- What happens if this thing catches fire at 2am in January?
- Can our volunteer fire department handle it?
- How loud is it? How bright is it?
- What does this do to my property value?
- What do we get in return besides "helping the grid" somewhere else?
If those questions don’t get clear, locally specific, and honest answers, support dies quickly. Generic safety decks and high-level ESG commitments are not enough.
Where AI and data can actually help
Here’s where green technology and AI intersect in a useful way:
- Predictive risk modelling: Use AI-driven fire and thermal modelling to produce location-specific worst-case and mitigation scenarios.
- Visual impact simulations: Generate realistic day/night renderings and sound maps of the facility from actual neighbourhood vantage points.
- Custom FAQ generation: Train models on prior community questions and project documentation to pre-empt 80–90% of concerns with tailored, jargon-free answers.
- Benefit mapping: Quantify local tax revenue, job creation, grid reliability improvements, and emissions reductions for that municipality, not just the province.
Developers who arrive with this level of specificity build trust faster. They show that green technology is not just clean—it’s predictable, understandable, and manageable.
Designing Grid-Scale Storage Projects That Communities Can Say “Yes” To
There’s a better way to approach projects like the Shuniah 3.2GWh BESS. It starts long before an MSR vote and long before an RFP deadline.
1. Shift from “project first” to “place first”
Instead of starting with a technical design and then trying to “fit” it into a municipality, flip it:
- Map land-use sensitivities: distance from homes, schools, hospitals, water sources.
- Identify grid benefits that are local, not only system-wide: reduced local outages, voltage support, backup for critical infrastructure.
- Tailor project scale to local risk tolerance where possible. A large portfolio may be better as multiple smaller assets across several jurisdictions.
AI-powered siting tools can screen thousands of parcels for technical and social suitability, reducing the chance you pitch a high-impact, low-acceptance site.
2. Build a transparent safety case
If I’m on a council, I’m voting no until I’m convinced you’ve taken safety as seriously as your financial model.
A credible safety package for a grid-scale BESS should include:
- Technology choice and why:
lithium iron phosphate,sodium-ion, or other chemistries, and associated risk profiles. - Fire behaviour scenarios using real data, not just vendor assurances.
- Clear roles and responsibilities: who responds first, who pays for specialised training, what equipment is pre-positioned.
- A public incident protocol: how quickly neighbours are notified, where they can get information, and who is accountable.
This is where green technology can shine. Modern battery systems have advanced monitoring, automated isolation, and robust enclosures. But if that’s not communicated in plain language, none of it matters.
3. Make local benefits tangible, not abstract
“Supporting decarbonisation” is nice. “Reducing winter blackout risk for 12,000 local customers” is better. “Funding new equipment for the local fire department and a community energy fund every year” is best.
Practical benefit structures that actually move the needle:
- Host community payments tied to project output
- Long-term property tax contributions modelled against municipal budgets
- Training and equipment for local emergency services
- Internships, apprenticeships, and STEM programs linked to the facility
The more clearly you can show direct, durable value inside the municipality’s boundaries, the easier the MSR conversation becomes.
4. Engage early, iterate often
Developers often wait until the RFP clock is ticking to formally engage councils. By then, the design is usually locked and the room for genuine feedback is tiny.
A better pattern:
- Pre-feasibility outreach: “We’re looking at your area; here’s what we’re thinking; what are your red lines?”
- Co-design sessions: incorporate siting buffers, screening, and access routes based on local input.
- Transparent updates: share key changes, studies, and timelines with both council and residents.
- MSR as a capstone, not a starting gun.
Green technology isn’t just hardware and software. It’s the process you use to bring people along.
What the Shuniah Case Signals for the Next Wave of Energy Storage
The Shuniah vote is a warning shot for anyone assuming that strong grid need plus solid technology equals automatic approval.
Here’s what it signals for the 2025–2030 storage build-out:
- Local politics are now a core project risk, especially for long-duration and very large capacity assets.
- Procurement windows are tight, so missteps on engagement can permanently kill otherwise strong projects.
- Communities are learning fast—they’re comparing notes across states, provinces, and even countries.
For organisations working in green technology and AI-driven energy solutions, this is also an opportunity:
- Use data, modelling, and simulation not just for grid optimisation, but for community understanding.
- Offer municipalities independent, AI-assisted decision tools so they aren’t relying solely on developer claims.
- Treat every project as a template—capture what worked, feed it into your models, and improve your next engagement strategy.
The energy transition won’t be slowed primarily by technology. It’ll be slowed by trust gaps, poor communication, and rushed decisions. Those are all solvable problems—for teams willing to treat community engagement with the same rigour they apply to engineering.
Where to Go From Here
The Shuniah 3.2GWh BESS project might not move ahead under LT2, but it’s far from a dead end for grid-scale storage in Ontario or elsewhere. The lesson isn’t “communities don’t want batteries.” The lesson is communities don’t want to be an afterthought.
If you’re planning large-scale storage or other green technology projects in 2026 and beyond:
- Start your municipal conversations before your RFP strategy.
- Use AI and analytics to make your safety, siting, and benefit cases concrete.
- Treat local concerns as design inputs, not obstacles.
The projects that win the next waves of procurements will be the ones that are technically sound and socially intelligent. The question for every developer now is simple: are you designing for the grid, or are you designing for the grid and the people who live on it?