Rideau Lakes council’s decision to defer a draft policy underscores unanswered questions about process, public input, and long-term planning
OPINION — The debate over battery energy storage systems in Rideau Lakes is not really about batteries.
It is about how the township plans for complex, long-term infrastructure decisions in a way that protects residents, gives council room to manoeuvre, and avoids being boxed in by fear, speculation, or rushed timelines.
Council’s decision to defer a draft Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) policy to the Planning Advisory Committee buys time, but it also exposes a gap that has yet to be filled. Rideau Lakes is still grappling with the basic question of what conditions, if any, would make a project like this acceptable.
The draft policy brought forward by staff is procedural in nature. It does not approve projects, designate sites, or commit council to saying yes. Instead, it establishes expectations for pre-consultation, technical studies, liability, insurance, mitigation measures, and potential community benefits before an application reaches council. In effect, it raises the bar and slows the process down.
That approach appealed to some councillors, particularly in light of the township’s previous experience with a battery storage proposal that arrived without much context and under tight timelines last fall.
Others questioned whether the policy goes far enough to protect neighbouring land uses, while some worried it could discourage proponents altogether.
Those tensions are not theoretical. Just down the road in Edwardno sburgh-Cardinal, construction is underway on the Skyview 2 battery energy storage project, a large-scale facility tied into existing transmission infrastructure and developed in partnership with an Indigenous community. In that case, discussions have focused on concrete local benefits, including industrial-scale property tax revenue, negotiated agreements related to emergency services and infrastructure, and long-term revenue stability without corresponding demand for municipal services such as water or sewer.
The contrast matters. Edwardsburgh-Cardinal entered the discussion with clearer expectations about what it wanted in return for hosting major energy infrastructure. Rideau Lakes is still debating the rules of engagement.
Battery energy storage is grid infrastructure. It is planned by provincial agencies based on demand and transmission capacity, not municipal boundaries. In some communities, these projects have generated predictable revenue and negotiated community benefits.
The technology itself is not the deciding factor. The terms under which it is introduced are.
During the Rideau Lakes debate, suggestions were made about deferring the issue further through a ballot question. That approach risks oversimplifying a highly technical planning decision before residents have access to clear, neutral information. Ballots reduce complex land use, safety, and infrastructure questions to a yes or no choice, without the context needed to make an informed decision.
More fundamentally, relying on a ballot to resolve uncertainty shifts responsibility rather than resolving it. Decisions about land use policy, zoning, and community benefit frameworks are the work councils are elected to do, informed by expert input and public consultation, not deferred to a future council through a single question on an election ballot.
The challenge for Rideau Lakes is not choosing between embracing or rejecting battery storage outright. It is defining, in advance, what would constitute a responsible proposal, where such infrastructure could reasonably be located, and what tangible benefits residents should expect in return.
Before decisions are locked in through policy, zoning, or ballot questions, council has an opportunity to reset the discussion. Public meetings focused on factual information, not hypotheticals, could help determine whether battery storage has any place in Rideau Lakes, and under what conditions.
Keep connected to your community—Read the latest Rideau Lakes news.
Thank you Laurie for this clear overview. It helped clarify some of the issues in my mind. I am particularly happy to see “brought forward by staff.” A viewpoint not seen in some of the Facebook discussion.
I would like to see both staff and councillors meeting with their Edwardsburgh-Cardinal counterparts. A report from Staff based on that educational process would also be appreiciated.
Mr. Carney has asked that, in this time of tension, we build resilience faster. He has committed the federal government to clarifying and standardizing codes and has asked the provinces and the municipalities to do the same. Perhaps we could join in. Adopt the bylaws that seem to have worked so well for our neighbours and also help get things moving.