Below is an email sent by UK SOLAR ALLIANCE to all campaign groups concerned about BESS.
It is unfortunate to see the new year begin with another inevitable large-scale lithium-ion battery fire, with the Moss Landing incident (USA) serving as a stark reminder of their wide-reaching impacts. These incidents involve not just fires and explosions but also toxic emissions into the air, soil, and waterways, along with the risk of long-term environmental pollution. Furthermore, they underscore the broader issue of inadequate safety regulations.
Li-BESS not only have fire and explosion risks, but the nature of the uncontrollable thermal runaway events means that highly toxic emissions are released over prolonged periods of time to air/ground/water. These emissions, as well as fire fighting activity (use of huge volumes of water, which then also becomes contaminated and needs to be contained), could result in long term environmental damage. This has has been described in a number of academic publications (see attached example), and we are seeing it ‘live’ following the most recent Moss Landing Li-BESS fire in January this year where early analyses have noted unusually high levels of heavy metals in the surrounding area and the risks to wildlife, water supplies, soils, crops etc. The fire at Moss Landing has since re-ignited…more than 6 weeks after the incident began. Evacuation zones of ca. 3 miles were put in place.
In recent months, more academic and industry experts have called for a pause in large-scale lithium-ion BESS (Battery Energy Storage System) deployment until sufficient government safety regulations are established. Some US cities have already imposed moratoriums on Li-BESS installations following a series of incidents. While batteries are acknowledged as essential for supporting renewables, this does not mean they should be deployed without proper safety measures or in unsuitable locations.
Leading lithium-ion battery manufacturer DNV has stated that at least one failure in a Li-BESS is expected over the lifetime of a project. Expecting zero failures is unrealistic. Their goal is to ensure such failures “fail safely,” but current technology does not yet achieve this.
The UK Solar Alliance are asking for us all to share the following:
a) Share the excellent short briefing note by Professor Dobson, supported by other academic experts, with your MPs, mayor, councillors, planning officers, and town and parish councils. The note highlights the lack of adequate safety regulations for Li-BESS, including the absence of guidelines for their safe siting. A pause in deployment is necessary until these issues are addressed.
b) Share the following publicly available papers with the same individuals and more broadly with your communities, local nature groups, and other relevant stakeholders:
- Three papers published in the Fire Technology journal (authored by Professors Dobson and Edwards)
- The paper on firewater contamination, published in the Batteries journal
- The ResearchGate paper by Dr Fordham on Hazardous Substances Consent
The issues around the “toxic mixture” of known risks, lack of adequate safety regulation, rapid deployment of Li-BESS and the fact that no government department appears to be accepting responsibility for the safety of the public living close to these, have been raised by a number of MPs over the years. Please do ask your MPs to support the most recent Early Day Motion by Charlotte Cane outlining this problem.
UK Parliament – Safety regulations for large-scale battery storage facilities: https://edm.parliament.uk/ea
Notes:
- Please also note that large scale Li-BESS almost certainly require Hazardous Substances Consent (HSC). The applicant should apply for this to the Hazardous Substances Authority – usually a local planning authority – who can grant or refuse it. Do question your planning officers and councillors about their procedures for HSC for Li-BESS applications. Many local authorities are unaware, and some incorrectly accept the applicant’s stance that HSC is not required for li-BESS.
- The Moss Landing incident has raised concerns about toxicity to crops and soils (see link 3 below).
The following quotes from a senior official involved in the Moss Landing response are deeply concerning. Are MPs and councillors considering which site might be next? Will they have to explain to their communities why Li-BESS installations were allowed near homes despite known risks and hazards?
It seems our communities are being treated as test cases, left to see if the “state-of-the-art” safety systems claimed by developers actually protect them. Moss Landing had state-of-the-art, “accredited” safety systems (upgraded after previous failures), yet these were easily overwhelmed. Even though the BESS units were housed in a concrete building, this did little to contain the fire and toxic emissions. Approximately 2,000 people within a 5 km radius were evacuated, with shelter-in-place orders extending even further. Such incidents illustrate the ferocity of these fires.
Thank you so much for your help. If you have any questions or comments, please contact UK Solar Alliance
MOSS LANDING, California, USA
The number of Li-BESS failures and the resultant impact on the surrounding environment over the past few years seems to have got them questioning the absence of adequate safety regulation and the inability of the BESS industry to make these safe. https://localnewsmatters.org/2025/01/21/moss-landing-battery-blaze-officials-call-for-independent-investigation-of-lithium-ion-fire/
One senior official is quoted in the article as saying:
District 2 Supervisor, Glenn Church, said in a statement he has deep concerns about the effects of fire on nearby residents’ health and on the environment. Church said that both he and State Assembly member Dawn Addis, want the facility to stay offline until safety measures are implemented to prevent another fire.
“In all honesty, I do not know if those guarantees are possible,” Church said. “With this being the fourth fire incident in a little over five years in Moss Landing, it is obvious that this technology is ahead of both government’s ability to regulate it and private industry’s ability to control it.”
They also went on to express their deep concern that:
“the lack of a proven system to extinguish the fires highly alarming. We simply cannot have a fire incident every year or two and expect that to be normal.”
“Our EPA says they don’t know what they’re looking for???” What? Isn’t that their job? To test for what’s there for our safety?
Follow the Moss Landing Battery Plant Environmental Disaster Community Group Facebook Page
Follow the Moss Landing Battery Fire Lawsuit Info Facebook Page
Follow the Moss Landing Power Plant/Vistra Fire Symptoms Facebook Page