Sliwa urges pause on lithium-ion battery storage sites near homes

A Republican candidate for New York City mayor has laid out a safety-first framework for siting industrial lithium-ion battery storage facilities, arguing that neighborhoods should not be treated as testing grounds for green-energy infrastructure. Curtis Sliwa used an op-ed to press for a pause on large facilities placed near schools, day cares, senior centers and tightly packed residential blocks, and he called for new guardrails to ensure that any project meets stringent safety standards before it proceeds. The proposals come as City Council discussions intensify around zoning changes intended to accelerate energy storage deployment in the name of carbon neutrality, a policy push Sliwa says has ramped up the exposure of outer-borough communities to risk without adequate local control. The candidate’s plan also emphasizes a greater role for firefighters and independent experts in approving sites, a theme that centers safety and transparency in the ongoing debate over how to balance cleaner energy with public health and quality of life.

The op-ed highlights neighborhoods in Queens, Brooklyn and Staten Island as focal points for concern. It points to a proposed battery site in Middle Village at 64-30 69th Place, directly across from a public school and near a day-care facility. Other sites cited include a plan in Marine Park along Flatbush Avenue and multiple locations on Staten Island, with residents arguing that the burden of these facilities is being disproportionately placed on outer boroughs. The piece contends that, while the fire department has framed the technology as manageable, residents fear a mismatch between assurances of safety and the real risk of thermal runaway, plume spread and other environmental impacts. In presenting these cases, the author argues that the city’s current siting approach, fostered by recent zoning changes, effectively speeds approvals without sufficient neighborhood input or formal risk assessments.

To build the case for action, the piece references a pattern of incidents outside New York that it says demonstrates the potential consequences of large-scale lithium-ion storage. It notes that in Moss Landing, California, the world’s largest battery facility burned in January, triggering evacuations and prompting authorities to allow the fire to burn before control was possible. It also mentions an explosion at a storage site in Arizona that injured firefighters, a prolonged coolant-leak incident in Australia, and multiple trailer fires in Upstate New York that led authorities to urge shelter-in-place. The argument is that these events are not merely isolated but reflect the inherent hazards of the technology when failures occur, underscoring the need for cautious siting, robust containment and thorough response planning.

Beyond safety anecdotes, the piece places the current debate within a broader policy arc. It traces the roots of the siting challenge to the City Council’s 2023 City of Yes for Carbon Neutrality initiative, which expanded zoning allowances to encourage energy storage and streamline approvals. A subsequent, wider City of Yes effort in 2024 is portrayed as accelerating the development pipeline, arguing that the same push that fans the city’s environmental goals also accelerates the exposure of neighborhoods to risks, particularly in the outer boroughs. The author contends that this approach creates a two-tier dynamic in which some communities bear a disproportionate share of the burden while others benefit from cleaner power, a situation labeled as inequitable rather than equitable.

Central to the plan are five policy pillars, framed as concrete steps the next mayor should take. First, a hard pause on sites near people, with clear distance thresholds around schools, day-care centers, senior centers and dense residential blocks, and a commitment to enforce those lines strictly. Second, a firefighter veto mechanism that would require site-specific sign-offs from the FDNY and independent experts after evaluating thermal runaway risk, plume modeling, water runoff, ventilation and cleanup plans. This would give the professionals who respond to emergencies real authority to reject a project if it fails to meet safety criteria. Third, a return to genuine community control for larger installations through formal special-permit processes and public hearings, ending what the piece characterizes as a rubber-stamp approach created under the prior administration. Fourth, a fairness standard aimed at distributing infrastructure more evenly across boroughs, with strict caps and balanced siting rules to prevent stacking of sites on a few blocks. Fifth, a call for state partnership: Albany should study upstate bans and moratoria to inform statewide protections, applying lessons learned from Moss Landing and other incidents to strengthen setbacks, plume buffers and emergency-response requirements.

The author closes by underscoring practical outcomes: residents want reliable power and clean air, but they also demand common sense and enforceable safety protections. The message is that City Hall should fix the excesses of the prior approach, not accelerate them, and that the neighborhoods that built the city deserve a voice in decisions that affect their daily lives. Curtis Sliwa is identified as the Republican candidate for mayor of New York City, and his plan is framed as a framework for a safety-first, community-centered approach to energy storage siting.