Concerns have been raised over fire safety arrangements at a proposed new battery storage site in Scotland, after it was revealed that the local fire service did not have the right equipment to deal with a fire there.
Battery energy storage system. Credit: Alamy Stock.
Local residents and councillors in Cockenzie have raised objections to the plans for an electricity generating station and storage facility – known as a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) – which would house 140 lithium-ion battery containers, according to the East Lothian Courier. The new facility would be based at a former power station site, partly on the former coal store and partly on agricultural land.
At a meeting of the East Lothian planning committee in early June, councillors were told that the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service had not been consulted by the Scottish Government and was not considered a statutory consultee.
The council leader, councillor Norman Hampshire, said he was surprised that there was no need to consult with the fire service. He told the committee that during a separate meeting with the fire service, he asked if there was a fire in one of these units would they be able to deal with it. “They indicated to us that there were pieces of equipment that they would require to put cooling material onto the batteries, but they did not have that within the fire service in this area,” he said.
In response, Jamie Scott, the agent for the applicant Cockenzie Storage Ltd, told the committee that emergency plans were in place in the event of a fire. “There are active measures for detecting [fire] in the facility and if there is any detection, measures can be taken to address it,” he said.
“This is an extremely well established and tested system. As a fail-safe, in the event something did go wrong and the measures in place did not work, there is an emergency plan in place and the site has been designed in a manner conducive to allowing fire and rescue services access.
“There is an active water supply on site. There is a robust plan in place to prevent fire and a plan in place should it happen.”
The committee agreed to raise their concerns over the lack of consultation with emergency services and over fire safety generally with the Scottish Government.
The council received 11 written representations, all of which objected to the development. Concerns included the potential impact on the health of nearby residents from noise or other impact of this technology; proximity to a primary school, medical centre, local businesses, residential housing and a play park; and the potential impact of a major emergency due to fire or explosion.
