Developers have been branded “reckless” as they push for the Scottish Government to approve battery storage plans at Countesswells after they were thrown out by Aberdeen City Council.
Flexion Energy UK Storage’s application for the proposed 40MW facility would have seen 48 lithium-ion batteries installed within 12 shipping-container-sized cabinets.
However, the plan was refused by councillors back in September as they believed the industrial site would be “out of place” on land just off Countesswells Road.
Meanwhile, the plan faced opposition from bosses at Robert Gordon’s College as the development would have been created just metres away from its playing fields.
They feared a fire at the battery storage facility could put pupils at risk of “potentially toxic vapour, fumes, or smoke”.
And the fury didn’t stop there as 107 letters of objection were sent to the local authority by outraged residents.
Why is the Cults battery storage site needed?
But, the energy firm argued there was a need for the “vital” battery storage site and claimed the chosen location was the best option.
Currently, the land is used for horse grazing and was selected due to its size and close proximity to the Craigiebuckler substation.
Developers said the proposal meets all national, regional and local planning rules, as well as specific criteria for energy sites such as this.
They added: “The unwarranted refusal is preventing the delivery of infrastructure that is critical to the delivery of renewable energy in the time of a climate crisis.
“Given the significant renewable energy benefits, the appropriateness of the site, and the proposed mitigation measures, the appeal seeks the overturning of the refusal.”
Community councils fight to stop battery storage site
Three community councils have joined forces to combat the appeal.
While they see the need for battery storage sites, they would only support them being installed in “appropriate” locations.
Colin Morsely of Cults, Bieldside and Milltimber Community Council said: “Protection of the environment is important but equally concerning is public safety issues.
“These have been recklessly ignored by the developer who has chosen to disregard evolving government safeguards and regulation.”
He added: “This installation would be far better placed in industrial settings or close to alternative energy generating sites.”
Do you think the battery storage facility should be given the go-ahead? Let us know in our comments section below
‘No concern’ for children’s safety
Meanwhile resident Kirsten Buck described the proposed BESS site as “high risk”.
The mum of two added: “To locate such a facility adjacent to a school playing field, used daily, demonstrates no concern for the safety of our children and young people.
“We have seen catastrophic incidents at these facilities happen in the UK and worldwide.
“As a parent, the potential consequences are terrifying.”
Members of the public have until Friday to submit any comments on the development.
A Holyrood official will then be chosen to take on the review and make a final decision on the fate of the battery storage facility.
Read more:
Conversation