Andrew Early and Ben Echeverria of EPC Burns & McDonnell continue their list of tips for navigating the choppy waters of battery storage project delivery.
This exclusive feature article is based on an entry first posted on the Burns & McDonnell corporate blog by Andy Early. Today, the authors run through numbers 6-10; for 1-5, read yesterday’s instalment.
6. Clarify your use case
There are a surprising variety of battery storage facilities, meaning that use cases can also be widely varied. As a result, many different technology options are available. It’s imperative to have a clear understanding of the operational goals, risk tolerance and site conditions.
What are the operational constraints or safety requirements? Will there be a defined goal for return on investment? Are there any high-risk exposures or sensitive receptors nearby? How will the facility be operated and maintained? The answers to these and other questions will drive the selection of technologies.
Enjoy 12 months of exclusive analysis
- Regular insight and analysis of the industry’s biggest developments
- In-depth interviews with the industry’s leading figures
- Annual digital subscription to the PV Tech Power journal
- Discounts on Solar Media’s portfolio of events, in-person and virtual
Or continue reading this article for free
There are many nuances to each technology choice, as well as how each scales up. Understanding the long-term demands and expected performance of the BESS facility is a critical step. With that many variables, the owner or developer faces added complexity.
For example, energy density is a big consideration if the project is on a relatively tight site. The project budget and schedule must account for site parameters along with many other variables that may impact ROI.
Inverter technology is one of the biggest variables for many projects. A number of big names in the OEM space are introducing AC solutions, thus avoiding the need for a DC box with each one paired with an inverter. Still, there are use cases in which the DC solution is preferred because of the ability to install more power per-square-foot than would typically be possible with the AC pathway.
Whether the choice is AC or DC, the use case will dictate a whole menu of options.
7. Start design with permitting in mind
Coordinating permitting and engineering is prudent to avoid rework, change orders and schedule delays. Both functions go hand-in-hand, and managing both processes at the same time is a prudent approach. Some design input is needed to start the permitting process, and design must have progressed sufficiently to avoid snags in permit applications.
If all permitting implications are thought through in conjunction with the design and bid processes, a lot of issues can be avoided. Don’t take the risk of having permits pulled that require a whole different type of fire alarm system that wasn’t accounted for earlier in design.
8. Don’t assume your next project will be the same as your last
BESS projects are unlike traditional power projects. Not only can local requirements from the authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) significantly impact the project, but other site-specific inputs like topography, geotechnical parameters, utility interconnection requirements, and local community considerations may also come into play.
The industry is moving at such a rapid pace that no two projects are built the same. While it feels like industry standards are getting closer with respect to how projects will be built, the future is not certain, particularly as more projects are built outside of optimal site locations. Every site will be different, and moving targets are becoming commonplace.
9. Know your safety-critical components
Many OEMs are convinced they have the secret sauce with superior products that are safer and more efficient than those of competitors. These design details are considered proprietary and closely held with little transparency. This can make it a challenge to execute designs in such a way that can be scaled up to large BESS facilities.
Internal wiring diagrams and component-level data must be shared to verify code compliance and integrate safety, reliability and compliance for the product as well as the project as a whole. This transparency issue will be a focus in the 2026 edition of NFPA 855, but until that update is published, the owner and EPC contractor will need to keep the pressure on equipment manufacturers to share the wiring diagrams and component-level data needed to integrate systems at the site level.
Many OEMs hold important and/or safety-related details close to the chest due to concerns over leaks of proprietary product information. It’s well known that intellectual property (IP) protection is nonexistent in some Asian countries, so theft of proprietary product data often is a reality.
That mentality has percolated into the industry, resulting in a reluctance to share important scope splits and takeoffs for shared systems that get scaled up for a project. Not having detailed knowledge makes it difficult for either the owner or the EPC firm to execute design and convey the pedigree of those systems.
AHJs are not going to accept a statement that they can’t see what’s inside a building. They will not be satisfied looking at a fire alarm diagram and being told to simply trust that the system was installed in such a way that it meets the code. Inspectors will want to visually verify systems, so transparency takes precedence over intellectual property concerns with life safety systems.
10. Integrate early with the EPC contractor
Hiring an EPC contractor before choosing the technology can make all the difference. Reputable EPC contractors have experience with a wide variety of technologies and integration approaches that can help owners make the right choices to meet the demands of a particular project. It’s often a track record of both good and bad experiences, allowing owners to benefit from lessons learned by others in this young industry.
It’s important to understand what is brought to a project by a truly integrated EPC partner, versus those that sub out each package. With so many moving parts and pieces, the true benefit of EPC is in the integration of all disciplines. The best case is involving an EPC contractor prior to development of a technology short list.
It is unfortunate that developers have sometimes inflicted damage to their own projects based on faulty assumptions that have blown budgets or destroyed schedules.
Early integration with an EPC contractor can optimise the project for success and performance in a collaborative environment that explores the pros and cons of various technology pathways, leading to development of project scopes, schedules and budgets that meet expectations of all stakeholders.
Key to success
As BESS technology evolves, the outlook is bright for the overall market. Despite recent rollbacks affecting many renewable categories, energy storage, along with geothermal, nuclear and hydro, are not facing the same obstacles. Those sources retain full tax credit eligibility for construction projects until year-end 2033, before facing gradual rollbacks of 75% in 2034, 50% in 2035 and 0% thereafter.
Though some headwinds still are possible — given China’s dominance of the lithium market as well as potential future trade uncertainty — developers, IPPs and utilities can expect continued efficiency and optimal performance from their next project.
Paying attention to the 10 key fundamentals of effective project execution is a recipe for success.
About the Authors
Andrew Early, PE, is a preconstruction manager for energy storage projects at Burns & McDonnell. He specialises in BESS project definition and preliminary engineering with an emphasis on consulting with manufacturers and clients for codes and standards compliance pertaining to NFPA 855, UL 9540 and UL 9540A.
Ben Echeverria leads energy storage regulations and compliance efforts at Burns & McDonnell. He has worked in the power generation market for most of his career, focusing on electrical controls and instrumentation for fire protection and life safety. He actively participates in the codes and standards consensus boards specific to energy storage at grid scale.
