{"id":424502,"date":"2026-02-03T17:01:25","date_gmt":"2026-02-03T16:01:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=424502"},"modified":"2026-02-03T17:01:28","modified_gmt":"2026-02-03T16:01:28","slug":"utility-scale-lithium-based-energy-storage-systems","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=424502","title":{"rendered":"Utility Scale Lithium Based Energy Storage Systems"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Richard Ellenbogen<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"A<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

This post was put together by Roger Caiazza to describe a recently completed white paper by Richard Ellenbogen M.E.E. titled\u00a0The Intrinsic Danger of Siting Utility Scale Lithium Based Energy Storage Systems In Densely Populated Areas<\/a>.\u00a0 Ellenbogen and I collaborated on an\u00a0article<\/a>\u00a0about the potential impacts of a fire like the Moss Battery Plant fire if it were to occur in New York City.\u00a0 This report finds that the local conditions at the proposed large Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) facility at 220 Rabro Drive, Hauppauge, NY would magnify the impacts of a BESS fire in Nassau and Suffolk counties.\u00a0 The following two sections are lightly edited direct quotes from the report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Executive Summary<\/strong><\/h6>\n\n\n\n

This report was written at the request of the Hauppauge Fire Department because of their concerns about a proposed large Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) facility at 111 Rabro Drive. This would be located within 3500 feet of an elementary school, a much less than ideal siting for such a volatile and potentially dangerous facility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research on that issue revealed, in addition, that the proposed location is close to streams and has a high-water table. In a location with these characteristics, a lithium-ion battery fire, of the type that frequently has occurred at BESS facilities, could produce long-term, catastrophic environmental damage. This is in addition to the more immediate, very serious threat to people and structures at the school and in nearby neighborhoods from heat and toxic gases in the event of a fire. The body of this report explains these threats in detail and also provides background that shows why the occurrence of fire at a BESS facility, like the one proposed, presents such a high level of risk. The readers should be aware in reading this report, that the author received no compensation or payment in kind for the research and writing, but willingly invested the hundreds of hours of work required for its preparation strictly as a result of his great concern for the Hauppauge community, Nassau and Suffolk Counties, the downstate region, and the State of New York in general, inspired by the high level of threat and risk arising from the proposed BESS facility. The report is designed to be read on a network connected device and is arranged with hyperlinks providing backup documentation for each issue should readers wish to learn more about the statements made within.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/a>Introduction<\/strong><\/strong><\/h6>\n\n\n\n

Utility scale electrical energy storage has been a recognized need in the New York Metropolitan Area for over sixty years. For example, Con Ed first proposed the Storm<\/a> King Mountain Pumped Storage<\/a> facility in the early 1960\u2019s to address this. However, that facility was never built because of potentially negative environmental impacts and community opposition. However, the need for energy storage has not gone away and has recently been exacerbated by a growing trend toward electrification to reduce carbon emissions, along with several years of state energy policies that have left the New York state critically short of electric generation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) recently released their 2025 \u2013<\/a> 2034 Reliability Study<\/a> that determined that electric generation capacity margins could go below zero as early as 2027 with the risk increasing even more each year through 2034. Figure 1 from page 10 of that document clearly shows the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This crisis has resulted from state policies, many associated with New York\u2019s Climate Leadership & Community Protection Act (CLCPA), that have blocked the construction or retooling of new gas generation plants for the past seven years, while simultaneously closing a 2-Gigawatt nuclear plant without having a viable operating alternative to replace the lost energy. As a result, NY State officials are moving hastily to find solutions to bridge the gaps. Among these hasty measures, the consequences of which do not seem to have been carefully thought out, is the proposed development and addition to its electrical grid of a number of lithium-ion-battery-based electrical energy storage facilities. To expedite this process, these officials have been attempting to override local zoning laws and their own Department of Environmental Conservation, via the six-year-old Office of Renewable Energy Siting (ORES).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of these hastily conceived and poorly thought through BESS facilities is proposed for Long Island, within the town of Islip, in Suffolk County. This siting of an intrinsically dangerous BESS facility, in such a densely populated and environmentally sensitive area, having a high-water table and close proximity to many streams and the ocean, would seem to defy logic. This is especially true given the very recent catastrophic history of a similar BESS siting at Moss Landing, near Monterey Bay in California.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Graph
Figure 1
Plausible Range of Statewide System Generation Margins 2025 \u2013 2034. Source: NYISO 11\/2025<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Whatever help a BESS facility in Islip might promise for the NY state electrical grid is certainly offset by the risks of such a move and the likelihood of accidents with long-term very negative consequences that would impact millions of people and large geographic areas of the state and its waters. These risks follow from three categories of intrinsic dangerous characteristics of lithium-ion batteries and the large number of them housed within a BESS facility. These categories of risks are as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n