New report outlines potential for permanent California ‘resilience centers’ for solar and storage

Power outages are on the rise across the country as climate change increases wildfires, heatwaves and extreme weather events. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the state of California recently established funding to help communities create “resilience centers” that rely on solar-plus-battery systems to provide emergency power to residents.

New study in the journal Risk assessment found that strategically placing resilience centers across California could generate up to 8 GW of solar energy and reduce the state’s carbon dioxide emissions by 5 million metric tons per year.

Located in community facilities such as schools, community centers, libraries, and places of worship, resiliency centers provide residents with power for critical services such as phone charging, cool air, and medical equipment. Because resiliency centers are permanent (compared to emergency relocation centers), they can provide year-round services to address the vulnerabilities of at-risk and disadvantaged populations.

“Demand for resiliency centers remains high,” said senior scientist Patrick Murphy, noting that California’s Strategic Growth Council awarded 11 grants for resiliency centers in February 2024, “but more than 100 communities have applied for funding.”

In their analysis, Murphy and his colleagues from the PSE Healthy Energy (PSE) group identified nearly 20,000 potential locations for solar- and battery-powered resiliency centers. They determined the optimal system design for day-to-day operation of these sites and calculated the additional power and equipment needed during various power outage scenarios. Their analysis integrated sociodemographic data to help officials focus potential policy and funding priorities on regions where solar- and battery-powered resiliency centers are difficult or expensive to implement and where populations need them most.

The study found, among other things, that:

• The Northern California coast faces significant resilience challenges during wet and snowy winters, while the Imperial Valley in Southern California struggles with summer heat that outweighs rooftop solar energy.
• Regions and seasons where energy demand is greater than the potential for solar energy harvesting will pose challenges, requiring more sites or larger roof areas to provide resilient energy for the centers.
• If grid power is available and critical services are needed, such as clean, cool air for emergency shelters, the capacity of potential resilience centers is estimated at 15.8 million people (about 40% of California’s population). While this suggests a large capacity, whether it is available to the most vulnerable populations requires further study.
• Solar and battery power for everyday operations is often affordable and does not require additional financial outlays, especially where sunlight and utility rates are favorable.
• Utility rates affect a community’s ability to adopt solar and battery systems. In places where there is plenty of sunlight and utility rates are high, switching to solar and battery power more than pays off (because high rates lead to greater savings from renewable energy). Regions with lower utility costs, while likely more affordable on a day-to-day basis, make solar more difficult to justify economically.
• The total cost of implementing solar + battery for everyday use is more than paid for by the saved utility costs. However, more upfront capital is needed to meet the resilience needs (mainly for increased battery storage).

“Hubs provide services year-round, not just during disasters,” Murphy said. “So they can also help build community adaptive capacity — before disasters strike.”

A news article from the Risk Analysis Society