The uproar over the Moss Landing Vistra battery plant meltdown that started Jan. 16 has only intensified, as many Santa Cruz County and North Monterey County residents seem to have been caught unaware of the size of the facility and the dangers it poses to a community when fires engulf the lithium iron batteries, which have occurred too frequently over the past several years.

The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors will hear from local residents today that many, justifiably, want a South County battery storage project rejected.

The Seahawk Energy Storage project, as detailed in proposed development plans submitted to the county in December, would have 160 containers full of battery storage modules capable of delivering 200 megawatts of energy to the electrical grid. That’s enough to meet the power demand of 200,000 homes for four hours.

The containers themselves will take up about 10 acres, but the footprint increases to 14 acres when factoring in local setback requirements, according to the project developer. By comparison, Vistra’s Moss Landing operation had a 750 megawatt capacity before the fire there.

Unlike Vistra’s plant, batteries in the South County project, says the developer, would be housed within sealed, steel containers outfitted with heat monitoring and fire suppression systems consistent with new state regulations that emerged in recent years. The batteries also will utilize lithium phosphate chemistry, which the developer says are more stable and resistant to fire compared to the nickel-manganese-cobalt material widely used elsewhere. Vistra also says better safety measures are being put in place to prevent future fires at the Moss Landing plant.

Battery storage has become integral, say proponents, to meeting California’s ambitious climate goals.

With a petition going around late last week that already had collected 2,800 signatures calling for the county to stop the Minto Road project, 4th District Santa Cruz County Supervisor Felipe Hernandez, who represents much of South County, put out a statement that said safety plans and “a thorough environmental impact review” will be essential before the project could be approved.

As part of the consideration today (Jan. 28), Dave Reid, director of the county’s Office of Response, Recovery and Resilience, is set to share a report on what is known about the Moss Landing Vistra fire. The fire burned uninhibited for five days, raising concerns about hazardous materials, chief among them hydrogen fluoride gas, which is a product of scorched lithium batteries. Federal Environmental Protection Agency officials have said toxic gas levels post-Moss Landing fire have not risen above minimum health standards.

Still, we’re heartened that local electeds have heeded the call for further investigation of the Moss Landing fire.

“What we have now are rather haphazard regulations on this relatively new industry ... I understand this industry is essential for a sustainable future, … but we just can’t keep going ahead without the proper regulations,” Monterey County Supervisor Glenn Church said last week.

Church said testing of water and soil in the areas that surround the plant will be happening soon through independent operations, spearheaded by state and Monterey County environmental health teams.

At the same press conference, state Assemblymember Dawn Addis, who represents the coastline from Santa Cruz Harbor to San Luis Obispo, said she sent a letter to the California Public Utilities Commission requesting an independent investigation into the cause of the fire, which is Vistra’s third since 2019. The letter was signed by Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, state Sen. John Laird and supported by Gov. Gavin Newsom, said Addis.

Addis has also introduced Assembly Bill 303 that would enhance local control when it comes to placement of battery storage facilities. The bill also would keep battery storage facilities away from environmentally sensitive areas and would set up minimum setback distances from schools and health care facilities.

Addis and Church have both asked that the Moss Landing plant remain offline pending further investigative review.

That’s a good place to start. Battery storage may indeed be critical for meeting energy needs as we wean off fossil fuel dependence, but not at the cost of endangering the health of people living near facilities. Supervisors should delay approval of the Minto Road project until fully satisfied through thorough investigations that regulations, safety standards and location meet public health and safety standards.

The Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors review of battery storage projects will be on the agenda for the meeting starting at 9 a.m. today (January 28), at 701 Ocean St. Room 525, Santa Cruz.