Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Energy Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident questions natural‑gas component of proposed college microgrid; county staff says DPU, controller approval required
Summary
A resident asked county leaders whether the proposed microgrid at the college campus would rely on burning natural gas and what share would be solar; county staff said the energy services agreement contemplates both solar and cogeneration (natural gas), battery storage in a later phase, and that the agreement requires Division of Public Utilities and controller's office approval.
A member of the public pressed commissioners and county staff for details about an energy services agreement (agenda item 397) between the county and an energy developer to build a microgrid on the college campus intended to serve the Community Innovation and Opportunity (CIO) project.
"When you say cogen, you mean burning fossil fuels?" resident Charlie Pratavville asked during the public comment period, challenging the use of the word "sustainable" if the project relies on natural gas. Pratavville asked where the microgrid would be located, what would power it and what percentage would come from solar versus gas.
County staff answered that the agreement contemplates a mixed approach that includes solar and natural‑gas cogeneration to ensure reliable power for campus operations and the CIO project. Staff said a battery storage system to capture solar energy is planned as a later phase; the initial implementation would rely on both cogen and solar, and the time frames and availability of utility (PSE&G) delivery shaped earlier planning choices. "The agreement itself needs to be approved by DPU and also by the controller's office," staff said when outlining necessary approvals.
Pratavville argued the board should delay approval until the county can specify the solar share. "Respectfully, I think the board should hold off on approving this if we don't know what percentage is going to be solar," he said. County staff acknowledged that a precise percentage was not provided during the discussion and offered to supply more details through the approval process.
The exchange recorded no formal vote on the energy services agreement during the public comment segment. The county did not provide a solar/gas percentage at the meeting; staff said the project began from a letter of intent and that alternatives — including PSE&G service or onsite cogen — had been evaluated during planning.
Next steps identified by staff included completing required regulatory approvals and controller review; the public comment indicated community interest in clarifying fuel mix and future phases such as battery storage before final approvals.
