Whirlwind Energy Storage and Caulternich Farm have failed in a second attempt to create a large battery storage facility just outside Beauly following dozens of objections from locals. Among those against the plan were Lord Lovat’s estate and Highland-based writer Kapka Kassabova who both said the siting of the 36 energy storage modules in an agricultural field between Kilmorack and Broallan was totally inappropriate. The proposed battery storage scheme was rejected back in 2022 and was brought back with a reduced footprint – eight per cent smaller – and more landscaping but that failed to appease the 43 objectors...The motion acknowledged that national planning policy encourages battery farms but this “industrial development” would have a “significant detrimental effect on landscape and visual impact” in “a rural setting on open agricultural land”.

The Long Island town of North Hempstead, in New York state, has joined the list of US localities to ban BESS. The town board brought in a 12-month ban from Dec. 3, 2024 despite the authority, in Nassau County, not having received any applications for BESS development. The minutes of the meeting, during which board members voted six to one in favor of the BESS moratorium, stated, “The town board finds that in order to ensure...public health, safety, and welfare, a thorough examination of the risks of these facilities must be ascertained prior to the submission of any applications requesting approval for this use. “The town board finds it imperative that the town undertake a thorough examination of these systems to identify any possible threats to public health, safety, and welfare as well as evaluate the potential for environmental degradation.”

An application to build a massive 500-megawatt battery energy storage system (BESS) near a small rural town has been rejected by Rockhampton Regional Council after it attracted more than 300 submissions against it. The proposed BESS, if constructed at Bouldercombe by ACEnergy, would be the largest battery storage system in the region. However, several councillors at Tuesday’s meeting raised concerns across a number of issues, with the threat of fire being one of the key points.

Plans for a battery energy storage system (BESS) in Yorkshire have been squashed owing to significant concerns from the local council. At a council meeting on 5 December, the Murton Parish Council denied planning permission for the 100MW Murton Way BESS proposed by Net Zero Fourteen Limited. Councillors cited several reasons for refusing the project. The development would have featured 104 battery units spread over the 3.4-hectare site and 14 transformers connected to the nearby Osbaldwick substation. Among the reasons for refusing planning permission for the project are concerns over fire safety, as the site could only have one narrow access track in and out, which could easily become blocked in the event of a fire. As such, Murton Parish Council called the proposed Fire Strategy Plan “inadequate”.

Plans for a Battery Energy Storage System near Lincoln have been turned down due to fire concerns. Councillors warned there could be ‘huge issues’ at a neighbouring oil plant if a fire ever broke out. The 53MW storage system (known as a BESS) would have put 16 shipping container-sized batteries on land off Barfields Lane in Reepham. The applicant Fiskerton BESS says neither Lincolnshire Fire & Rescue nor the neighbouring businesses have raised concerns. But West Lindsey District Council’s planning committee felt the new technology’s safety was difficult to guarantee, and said a fire could be catastrophic. A meeting on Wednesday (December 4) voted down the application after visiting the site in person.

Planning permission has been refused for the development of a controversial battery storage facility in Ballyshannon. The plans for a grid services facility at Tully and Raheen, Ballyshannon were strongly opposed by locals. “Having regard to the limited capacity of the local road serving the site and details of the information submitted to date,” cited the council in the decision conveyed to Shoremane Limited. The local authority said it had regard particularly for the proposed use of private space to the front of the existing dwellings as passing bays without third party consent; the proposed use of the existing carriageway as passing bays without appropriate widening or strengthening measures; and an absence of constricted passing bays of a scale required to facilitate HGV movements from the N3 junction to the site entrance.

North Ayrshire councillors have rejected plans for two 150m wind turbines at Ardeer because of the development site's proximity to houses in Stevenston. The wind farm - which was originally planned to host three giant turbines - would help to power the nearby Berry bpi plant and planning officers had recommended the application by the Farm Energy Company be approved with conditions. But there were objections from nearby explosives plant Chemring, as well as Prestwick Airport and air traffic control chiefs, who warned it could affect radar on planes passing overhead. And the recommended approval was finally overturned after councillors warned about the impact on nearby houses, both visually and from potential noise.

More than two dozen large-scale battery energy storage projects have been quietly proposed across Connecticut, and are at various stages of development, as they await state approvals and seek funding sources. The growth of battery storage projects hasn’t been without some setbacks. The Siting Council recently rejected 4.9-MW and 4-MW projects in New London and Waterford proposed by Hanwha Q Cells America Inc. On Nov. 7, the council denied both projects because they included battery storage units that were within 300 feet of commercial buildings.

With over two hundred objections being raised with the local authority, a majority of councillors on the planning committee voted to reject the proposal to build a 40MW battery energy storage facility at a site on greenbelt agricultural land. The application, for the ‘temporary’ installation, with the site to be returned to its previous condition after 40 years, was found to be in contravention of the National Planning Framework 4 Policy. One of the major factors in the council’s decision was concerns over the fire risk posed by lithium ion batteries that would be used at the site. They also raised concerns over the environmental benefit of the site, saying the energy is “not necessarily from renewable sources”.

The Ansonia Planning & Zoning Commission rejected a site plan proposed for a solar farm on Hill Street, citing a lack of relevant zoning regulations. Ecos Energy, operating under the name Vineyard Sky Farms Corporation, proposed a 0.99-megawatt facility to be located at 135 Hill St. The address is next to 31 Benz St., where the company is in the process of constructing another, separate solar farm. Both addresses are in the residentially zoned Hilltop neighborhood, where some residents – and members of Mayor David Cassetti’s administration – have voiced opposition to the solar projects. Ecos owns the land at the two addresses. In the meeting, commission members said the city’s regulations only lay out rules for accessory solar arrays – that is, solar panels that aren’t the property’s main use. The neighboring Benz Street farm has a house on the property, but the proposed Hill Street farm does not.