AES Battery Energy Storage System, solar discussion dominates commissioner meeting
Residents spoke to the county commissioners about the AES Crossvine Solar Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) during Monday’s regular meeting, and County Commissioner Chad Blessinger took some time to address questions and concerns about the system before leaving early for another commitment.
Commissioner Blessinger’s statement
With the AES Crossvine Solar Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) on the agenda for discussion in Monday’s regular meeting, Dubois County Commissioner Chad Blessinger, who had to leave early for another commitment, took a moment to address some community concerns and questions.
Blessinger started by addressing the call from some residents to revoke the project’s permit due to alleged scope changes. He stated he found no evidence that the project is operating outside permitted parameters.
“The project is staying within the original site boundary. The overall footprint actually has been reduced,” Blessinger said during the detailed presentation. “They’re following the site plan closely and following all the permitted setbacks.”
The project maintains its approved capacity of 85 megawatts for both solar generation and battery storage, though it will utilize 92 operational battery units. Blessinger explained he was told that these units operate at reduced capacity to extend battery life and maintain consistent, reliable power flow.
“They only utilize them at a lower amount, and that increases the life of those batteries,” he said. “They’ll be storing lesser capacity as that strengthens battery life and it helps keep the flow consistent and reliable.”
Safety concerns dominated much of Blessinger’s statement, particularly regarding battery storage systems and their potential for thermal runaway. He cited data from the Energy Information Administration and Electric Power Research Institute showing a failure rate of approximately 0.32 percent for such systems.
At the end of the meeting, during public comments, resident Dave Duncan stated that the figure can be misleading because it was based on total solar generation rather than on actual battery storage installations.
Blessinger explained that the Indiana Department of Homeland Security serves as the primary regulatory authority for utility-scale battery energy storage systems under House Enrolled Act 1173, enacted in 2026. This law adopted the National Fire Protection Association safety standards and requires final safety inspections before projects become operational.
Regarding AES resubmitting documentation to Homeland Security, Blessinger said it was due to a supplier change for the batteries — Tesla batteries to Fluence batteries, a modification that required regulatory notification.
Blessinger confirmed that the project is bonded with approximately $3.5 million secured to protect county assets, including roads, during construction. The highway department verified that road-use agreements are being followed and that bonds are properly maintained.
However, ongoing issues with contractor compliance continue to generate complaints. Blessinger acknowledged that while the main company makes “good faith efforts” to manage contractors, problems persist.
“I contacted my guy there again and I said we’re still getting complaints on this. He said that that’s unacceptable,” Blessinger said while admitting he didn’t know how AES was going to address the issue.
The project timeline remains on schedule, with commercial operation expected by June 2027, according to a semiannual progress report filed with the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission.
Several residents have requested copies of the National Fire Protection Association standards governing the project. County officials have requested these documents from the solar company and plan to make them available to commissioners and the public once received.
During public comment, a representative for EDP Renewables, which is developing the Duff Solar project, stated that she had emailed those documents to the county attorney but would send them to the commissioners directly.
Blessinger reiterated that Dubois County lacks zoning authority over the project site, limiting local regulatory control. However, if zoning were implemented in the future, it could apply to similar commercial projects.
The county did explore potential revenue opportunities under Indiana Senate Enrolled Act 390, which, in theory, provides incentive funds of one dollar per megawatt to certified communities. However, while the law creates eligibility for such funds, no money has been allocated to the program, Blessinger reported.
“They basically created something saying there’s an incentive and then they didn’t fund it so that there are no incentive funds available,” He noted.
Addressing criticism about the county’s approval process and any alleged secrecy, Blessinger emphasized that solar projects have been discussed in public meetings for approximately four years, with each discussion appearing on meeting agendas and all decisions made in public sessions. (They have also been covered by local media, including this publication) Both the county commission and council have maintained regular opportunities for public comment throughout the process.
Regarding calls to revoke previously approved permits, officials explained that such action requires specific cause and cannot be taken arbitrarily against legally compliant projects.
“These companies have paid out millions of dollars in lease payments, regulatory activity, planning, construction. And it’s for elitely allowable project. And the county does not have the authority to just tell them to stop unless we have cause,” Blessinger explained.
Public concerns
Resident Korinne Whitehead was on the agenda to address the commissioner about the BESS.
“It’s not a matter of if something’s going to go wrong, it’s a matter of when it’s going to go wrong,” Whitehead said during the meeting.
Whitehead, a science teacher, says the region’s humid subtropical climate creates moisture on metal surfaces, which could destabilize the lithium-ion battery systems.
She also referenced AES stockholder statements from 2022 and 26 March 2026 that acknowledged the dangers of lithium-ion batteries. Later in the meeting, Holly Gogel read a portion of the stockholder statement that addressed the inherent risks of lawsuits arising from batteries that catch fire and damage nearby properties.
Whitehead’s concerns are the project’s proximity to the Town of Holland, the Southwest Dubois County School Corporation schools and Huntingburg Regional Airport.
According to Whitehead, her son is taking aviation courses at the Huntingburg Regional Airport and stated that, at times, solar panels can cause glare, making it difficult to see. She also spoke about the potential for electromagnetic radiation to cause radar interference and communication issues between aircraft and the control tower.
Whitehead also said that the proximity of the BESS to Short Creek could carry toxic chemicals downstream during flooding.
In the end, Whitehead said residents aren’t opposed to solar energy itself but object to what she calls “industrialized infrastructure” in an inappropriate location. She asked the commissioners to consider the impact on the entire county.
“We are asking for your help as elected officials,” Whitehead said to the commissioners. “We need your leadership, we need your help in making this company realize that this is the wrong land, it’s incompatible. It’s just not the right place to be putting this.”
She urged officials to revoke or reconsider construction permits for both the solar and battery storage components of the project.
During public comment, residents continued to push commissioners to stop the installation of the BESS. Dave Duncan told them the statute gives the county authority to regulate the installation.
The commissioners took no action on the issue.
During public comment, Trena Roudebush with EDP Renewables stated that the Federal Aviation Administration has approval authority for the panels located near airports. She also noted that the reflectivity of solar panels is less than that of a body of water, and there have been no known instances of solar panels causing radar interference or communications issues.
A resident also questioned how the project would be taxed. According to Roudebush, the state had changed property tax laws regarding these installations. While agricultural land is assessed at about $2,000 per acre, solar is now assessed at a higher rate, averaging about $8,000 per acre, according to Roudebush. The panels and infrastructure are also taxed.
