New US Regulations Require: Solar Power Plants To Withstand Earthquakes, Hurricanes And Other Natural Disasters!

On 11 October, the Solar Energy Industries Association of America (SEIA) slammed a proposed rule change that would see solar PV projects in the US classified as high risk, pushing up development costs and curbing the positive impact of the Inflation Reduction Act.

The US International Code Council will today begin voting on rule S76-22, which would require solar plants to be able to withstand earthquakes, hurricanes and other natural disasters.

A SEIA spokesperson told PV Tech, "This change will result in a dramatic increase in construction costs and will require more steel and higher quality grade solar modules than are commercially available."

The rule change, issued by FEMA, will raise the structural risk category for most large PV, storage and wind projects to Category 4, the same as hospitals, fire stations and police stations.

Currently, about 95% of large PV plants in the US are designed and approved in Category 1, the lowest risk category, PV Tech has learned.SEIA says the proposals are "poorly defined and technically infeasible."

Abigail Ross Hopper, CEO and president of SEIA, wrote: "Under the current style, Rule S76-22 would cause construction costs to skyrocket, forcing the elimination of dozens of gigawatts of clean energy projects that support thousands of jobs and on which the U.S. is relying to boost grid resilience."

Indeed, boosting grid resilience is the purpose of the proposed changes. Proponents of the law change argue that proposing standards for structural calculations for projects will make the grid more reliable, reduce outages and improve building recovery, which is becoming increasingly important in the US. The US has recently experienced an increasing number of power outages. But SEIA says the regulations do little to support grid reliability.

A spokesperson for the trade body said: "FEMA's goal is reliability, and to do so would be a step backwards by reducing reliability. It would be easy for FEMA to impose the most stringent engineering standards, but in the real market, those standards would eliminate independent power producers and cut solar development, leading to a decline in reliability."

"The process is a complete mess, with no opportunity for public participation." SEIA urged solar stakeholders to oppose the proposals and sign the letter of opposition.

Hopper said, "In practice, this regulatory change would make most solar and storage projects too expensive to build, which would weaken the grid and stop clean energy development in its tracks, all without any benefit to reliable electric service."