Energy storage |
Indoor BESS: a bad idea that should go away
Moss Landing Vistra site map (source: Vistra) Moss 300 16 Jan fire, day 1 (source: County of Monterey)
Those in the clean-energy industry will be familiar with the 16 January fire at the Moss Landing battery energy storage system (BESS) in Monterey County, California, where at least 80% of a 300 MW, 1.2 GWh battery system was destroyed. The nickel-manganese-cobalt (NMC) lithium-ion batteries (supplied by LG Energy Solution) were installed indoors in a former turbine hall and commissioned in December 2020. The cause of the event is not yet known, but it is clear that the integrated sprinkler system was ineffective. Indeed, at least one of the two previous battery overheating incidents at the same site was caused by accidental sprinkler operation. Fortunately, there were no injuries, air quality in the area remained at non-hazardous levels, and there was no contamination of drinking water. It appears that the sheer volume of battery energy involved has resulted in increases in heavy metals in the nearby environmentally sensitive Elkhorn Slough area, although soil sampling is ongoing and results need to be compared with baseline levels. This event comes on the heels of the May 2024 Otay Mesa 50 MWh battery building fire in the San Diego area, where Cal Fire estimates that 8 million gallons of water were pumped through the building’s sprinkler system and by fire trucks over the 11-day period of the event. Water was a little more successful in the May 2023 East Hampton, New York event, where smoke was emitted from the building, but there was no major fire. Even so, the sprinklers were left running for 30 hours to ensure the event was controlled, ruining the entire 48 MWh battery. In contrast, the September 2022 Tesla Megapack fire at the PG&E-owned Elkhorn BESS adjacent to the Moss Landing site was confined to just one of the 256 enclosures. The fire burned out quickly and the facility was back in operation three months later, after an investigation, corrective actions, and extensive tests were performed.
The Elkhorn incident represents the latest thinking about how BESS facilities should be designed and how battery fires should be handled. Using outdoor enclosures limits the amount of battery energy involved in a fire — much of the industry is standardising around 5 MWh in a 20-foot container; less than one half of one percent of the Moss Landing building. Recognising that explosion constitutes a greater hazard to first responders than fire, system designers are prioritising explosion prevention over fire suppression. Allowing a battery fire to consume itself eliminates stranded energy and the possibility of reignition. Firefighters use defensive measures only as needed to protect adjacent equipment, which avoids the possibility of contaminated run-off.
Moss 300 fire, day 2 (source: County of Monterey) 10 | March 2025|
www.modernpowersystems.com
Part of the problem with indoor systems is that safety studies are largely based on fire and explosion testing to UL9540A, which is written
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47
