Moss Landing Power Plant

In 1949, Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) began construction on the Moss Landing Power Plant. Five natural gas and oil powered steam units were built during the 1950s. Commercial generation started in 1950 with a capacity of 613 MW.

In 1964, the construction of two additional units began (6 and 7), with two new {{convert|500|ft|m|adj=on}} stacks. These two units had a capacity of 750 MW each for a total of 1500 MW, with {{convert|180|ft|m}} tall boilers. They employed a newer technology using supercritical steam at {{convert|3600|psi|MPa|abbr=on}}.

In 1995, the original five units were retired, and in 1997 PG&E let the permits lapse for these units.{{cite web|url= http://www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases/mosslanding/documents/2000-06-08_MOSS_FSA_PART_03.PDF |title= Final Staff Assessment- Moss Landing Power Plant Project|publisher= California Energy Commission|date= June 2000|accessdate= May 28, 2018|archive-date= February 16, 2017|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170216191159/http://www.energy.ca.gov/sitingcases//mosslanding/documents/2000-06-08_MOSS_FSA_PART_03.PDF |url-status= live}}

As part of the Deregulation of Utilities in California, PG&E sold the plant to Duke Energy (DENA) in 1998. To comply with more restrictive pollution regulations, units 6 and 7 were upgraded in 1998 with a selective catalytic reduction unit and digital control systems.

Starting in 2000, the eight {{convert|225|ft|m|adj=on}} stacks and 19 fuel oil storage tanks were removed, and two new units were built on the former site. The new units 1 and 2 were brought online in 2002. They are combined cycle units, 50% more efficient than the other units, because they use two turbines: first, a pair of 170 MW gas turbines, then a 190 MW steam turbine, for a total of 530 MW each. When completed in 2002, the plant was the largest power plant in California by capacity, at 2560 MW.{{cite web |author= |date=November 16, 2000 |title=Duke Energy Breaks Ground on Moss Landing Modernization Project |url=http://www.duke-energy.com/news/releases/2000/Nov/2000111601.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040702092945/https://www.duke-energy.com/news/releases/2000/Nov/2000111601.html |archive-date=July 2, 2004 |publisher=Duke Energy}}

In 2006, having invested over half a billion dollars in upgraded capacity, efficiency and emission control, Duke Energy sold the plant to LS Power Equity Partners.{{cite news |title= Duke Energy Completes Sale of Wholesale Generation Assets to LS Power |work= press release |date= May 4, 2006 |url= http://www.duke-energy.com/news/releases/2006/May/2006050402.asp |accessdate= February 16, 2011 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20110927165843/https://www.duke-energy.com/news/releases/2006/May/2006050402.asp|archive-date = September 27, 2011}}{{cite news |title= LS Power Closes Deal for Duke Assets |work= press release |date= May 4, 2006 |url= https://www.lspower.com/ls-power-closes-deal-duke-assets/ |accessdate= May 28, 2018 |archive-date= August 31, 2024 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20240831220611/https://www.lspower.com/ls-power-closes-deal-duke-assets/ |url-status= live }} Dynegy purchased the plant in April 2007 along with other assets of LS partners.{{cite news |title= Dynegy Announces Completion of LS Power Transaction |work= press release |date= April 2, 2007 |url= https://www.lspower.com/dynegy-announces-completion-ls-power-transaction/ |accessdate= May 28, 2018 |archive-date= May 29, 2018 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180529130129/https://www.lspower.com/dynegy-announces-completion-ls-power-transaction/ |url-status= live }}

In 2015, a transmission tower collapsed at the power plant, causing a major Monterey County area power outage.{{cite web |last1=Melendez |first1=Claudia |title=Update: Power trickling back on across Monterey Peninsula |url=https://www.montereyherald.com/2015/10/18/update-power-trickling-back-on-across-monterey-peninsula/ |website=Monterey Herald |date=18 October 2015 |access-date=February 6, 2021 |archive-date=August 8, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220808015326/https://www.montereyherald.com/2015/10/18/update-power-trickling-back-on-across-monterey-peninsula/ |url-status=live }}

On December 31, 2016, Dynegy retired supercritical steam units 6 and 7 as they were no longer economically competitive. Dynegy continued to maintain the permit on these units.{{cite web |url=http://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/local_news/moss-landing-power-plant-s-tall-twin-towers-are-off/article_24bce5de-f955-11e6-9868-23cae92cfb42.html |title=Moss Landing power plant's tall twin towers are off, but permits remain |author= |date=February 23, 2017 |website=Monterey County Weekly |access-date=May 28, 2018 |archive-date=July 10, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180710210926/http://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/local_news/moss-landing-power-plant-s-tall-twin-towers-are-off/article_24bce5de-f955-11e6-9868-23cae92cfb42.html |url-status=live }}

In February 2017 Dynegy announced that it may close Moss Landing, due to market conditions resulting from a glut of wholesale electricity capacity in California making it difficult to operate profitably.{{clarify|date=May 2019|reason=California has the highest US continental retail prices, see File:Electricity_price_map_of_the_United_States_2013.jpeg}} By 2018, California had 7,000 MW of surplus generating capacity, but a similar amount (mostly ocean cooled) would be retired by 2021.{{cite web |title=PG&E Must Solicit Energy Storage and DERs to Replace 3 Existing Gas Plants |url=https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/pge-must-solicit-energy-storage-ders-to-replace-three-existing-gas-plants |first=Julian|last=Spector |work=Greentech Media |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20200902133926/https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/pge-must-solicit-energy-storage-ders-to-replace-three-existing-gas-plants |archivedate=2020-09-02 |date=2018-01-15 |url-status=live |quote=The California ISO has about 7,000 megawatts of surplus capacity [in 2018]. ... about 7,000 megawatts of older plants are already set to retire by 2021 due to a regulation on plants that use ocean water for cooling. }} The glut in electricity capacity is partially a result of policies which guarantee utilities like PG&E (a regulated monopoly) a return on investment for building new power plants, even when they are not needed. Independent power producers like Dynegy, on the other hand, did not have a guaranteed return on their investment.{{cite news | url=http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-capacity/ | title=Californians are paying billions for power they don't need | last1=Penn | first1=Ivan | last2=Menezes | first2=Ryan | newspaper=Los Angeles Times | date=2017-02-05 | accessdate=2017-12-30 | archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20170222061936/http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-fi-electricity-capacity/ | archive-date=2017-02-22 | url-status=live | quote=California has a big – and growing – glut of power, an investigation by the Los Angeles Times has found. The state's power plants are on track to be able to produce at least 21% more electricity than it needs by 2020, based on official estimates. And that doesn't even count the soaring production of electricity by rooftop solar panels that has added to the surplus.{{br}}Utilities are typically guaranteed a rate of return of about 10.5% for the cost of each new plant regardless of need. This creates a major incentive to keep construction going: Utilities can make more money building new plants than by buying and reselling readily available electricity from existing plants run by competitors. }} Power production had dropped considerably, reducing taxes paid to Monterey County.{{cite web |last1=Cortez |first1=Felix |title=Tesla battery power plant approved in Moss Landing |url=https://www.ksbw.com/article/tesla-battery-power-plant-approved-in-moss-landing/31124086 |website=KSBW |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20200725012019/https://www.ksbw.com/article/tesla-battery-power-plant-approved-in-moss-landing/31124086 |archivedate=25 July 2020 |language=en |date=27 February 2020 |quote='It's huge for the area and as you know the power plant has been gradually shutting down and they producing about one-tenth of the power they used to produce in the past and that hurts us from a tax standpoint', said Monterey County Supervisor John Phillips. |url-status=live}}

On April 9, 2018 Vistra Corp merged with Dynegy Inc, and thus also acquired the Moss Landing Power Plant.[https://hub.vistracorp.com/vistra-energy-completes-merger-with-dynegy/ Vistra Energy Completes Merger with Dynegy] Vistracorp. By Eric Padilla. April 9, 2018. Accessed Jan. 17, 2025. Vistra opted not to close the Moss Landing plant, but instead to expand it.[https://www.pv-magazine.com/2022/02/02/vistra-to-expand-what-was-already-the-worlds-largest-energy-storage-facility/ Vistra to expand what was already the world’s largest energy storage facility] PV Magazine. By Anne Fischer. Feb. 2, 2022. Accessed Jan. 17, 2025. In 2021 Vistra began to refer to its Moss Landing power plant facility as the "Vistra Moss Landing Energy Storage Facility".[https://investor.vistracorp.com/2021-08-19-Vistra-Completes-Expansion-of-Battery-Energy-Storage-System-at-its-Flagship-California-Facility Vistra Completes Expansion of Battery Energy Storage System ...] VistraCorp. August 19, 2021. Retrieved January 19, 2025.

The plant has power lines that connect it to Path 15, and interconnections like Path 26 and Path 66 that allow power to flow to far-away regions. The plant is also connected to local loads and the San Jose region by transmission lines.

Both the supercritical units and the combined cycle units use once-through cooling. The supercritical units have a cooling requirement of {{convert|600000|USgal|m3}} per minute, and the combined cycle units a requirement of {{convert|250000|USgal|m3}}.

Units 6 and 7 used supercritical steam. These units were retired at the end of 2016. At the end of their life, units 6 and 7 were typically operated as peaking units when demand for electricity was highest. In 2016, the last year of operation, they only operated approximately 3% of the time.

The generation process for units 6 and 7 starts with natural gas injected at one end of the boiler to be burned. Primary water is injected at the other end of the boiler to receive the heat produced. The gas simply comes from a natural gas pipeline, and combustion products go up the stack and into the atmosphere. Water has a much more complicated path, and consists of two distinct systems: coolant water and primary (steam-generating) water. Cooling water is pumped out of the Monterey Bay or the nearby Elkhorn Slough. Then it is purified, used to cool down the water coming from the turbines, and discharged into the ocean. Steam for the turbines is created from the primary water flow, which is preheated before entering the boiler. From the boiler, the superheated steam is directed into a first turbine working at high pressure, then into a low pressure turbine. The turbines drive the generators.

Combustion products drive the gas turbines directly. First, air is drawn from the air intake to the compressor (driven by the turbine axle), then it is burned with natural gas in the combustion chamber. The hot combustion gasses then go through the actual turbine (driving the axle). From a thermodynamic standpoint, this is the standard Brayton cycle. Because the gas turbine does not transfer energy from the combustion process to the turbine via steam, it avoids the cost, energy loss and environmental impact of the primary water cycle.

At the output of the gas turbines, some of the remaining energy (heat) in the exhaust gas is recovered through a heat exchanger and transferred to water that feeds a steam turbine, similar to units 6 and 7.

On a smaller scale than the supercritical units, units 1 and 2 are also more flexible, with a start-up time of only an hour, against 24 hours for units 6 and 7.

Utilities in California are required by a 2013 law to provide significant battery storage by 2024.{{cite press release |date=July 29, 2020 |title=PG&E, Tesla Break Ground on Landmark Battery Energy Storage System |website=PG&E |url=https://www.pge.com/en_US/about-pge/media-newsroom/news-details.page?pageID=60e06c0a-7bd5-406c-9d91-d2a08e234a17&ts=1678902013523 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230315174200/https://www.pge.com/en_US/about-pge/media-newsroom/news-details.page?pageID=60e06c0a-7bd5-406c-9d91-d2a08e234a17&ts=1678902013523 |archive-date=2023-03-15 |access-date=2021-02-06}} The Moss Landing Power Plant site has since been chosen as California's primary location to provide battery based energy storage in order to better utilize renewable energy sources such as solar and wind on a grid-wide commercial scale. On June 29, 2018 Vistra Corp announced that it planned on building at the Moss Landing Power Station site, what became the world's largest commercial electric battery energy storage site.

{{expand section|where the funding for the project came from? |date=February 2025}}

On June 29, 2018, Vistra Energy{{cite news|url=https://www.vistraenergy.com/vistra-dynegy-merger/ |title=Vistra / Dynegy Merger – Vistra Energy|work=Vistra Energy|access-date=2018-07-03|language=en-US|archive-date=July 3, 2018|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180703133702/https://www.vistraenergy.com/vistra-dynegy-merger/ |url-status=live}} announced that it will develop a 300 MW / 1,200 MWh energy storage system to be located at Moss Landing, using the existing turbine building and existing interconnection from units 6 and 7, connecting to the 500 kV grid.{{cite web |title=Monterey County – File #: PC 19-019, PLN180394. Exhibit B – Discussion draft |url=https://monterey.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3894861&GUID=819E9513-255B-4131-AEEF-3A2DF9ABC131 |website=monterey.legistar.com |publisher=Monterey County |page=5 |date=2019-03-20 |access-date=October 20, 2020 |archive-date=October 21, 2020 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20201021060259/https://monterey.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3894861&GUID=819E9513-255B-4131-AEEF-3A2DF9ABC131 |url-status=live }} Vistra Energy expected the energy storage system to begin commercial operation by the end of 2020, pending receipt of approval from California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). This would be the largest lithium-ion battery energy storage system in the world.{{cite web|url=https://investor.vistraenergy.com/investor-relations/news/press-release-details/2018/Vistra-Energy-to-Develop-300-Megawatt-Battery-Storage-Project-in-California/default.aspx |title=Vistra Energy to Develop 300-Megawatt Battery Storage Project in California|website=investor.vistraenergy.com|language=en-US |access-date=2018-07-03|archive-date=July 3, 2018|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180703133719/https://investor.vistraenergy.com/investor-relations/news/press-release-details/2018/Vistra-Energy-to-Develop-300-Megawatt-Battery-Storage-Project-in-California/default.aspx |url-status=live}} The project began construction in December 2019,{{cite web|last=Hering|first=Garrett|date=2020-04-17|title=Despite COVID-19, 300-MW Calif. battery array expected online in 2020|url= https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/despite-covid-19-300-mw-calif-battery-array-expected-online-in-2020-58085826 |access-date=2020-07-24|website=www.spglobal.com|language=en-us|quote=|archive-date=July 25, 2020|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200725000053/https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/despite-covid-19-300-mw-calif-battery-array-expected-online-in-2020-58085826 |url-status=live}} and Phase 1 began operating at the end of 2020.{{cite web |last1=Colthorpe |first1=Andy |title=At 300 MW / 1,200 MWh, the world's largest battery storage system so far is up and running |url=https://www.energy-storage.news/news/at-300mw-1200mwh-the-worlds-largest-battery-storage-system-so-far-is-up-and |website=Energy Storage News |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210128153847/https://www.energy-storage.news/news/at-300mw-1200mwh-the-worlds-largest-battery-storage-system-so-far-is-up-and |archive-date=28 January 2021 |language=en |date=7 January 2021 |url-status=live}} It is made of LG JH4 cells in TR1300 racks in two storeys in the old turbine hall.{{cite web |last1=Colthorpe |first1=Andy |title=Manufacturer reveals involvement in world's biggest battery energy storage system so far |url=https://www.energy-storage.news/news/manufacturer-reveals-involvement-in-worlds-biggest-battery-energy-storage-s |website=Energy Storage News |language=en |date=17 June 2021 |access-date=June 18, 2021 |archive-date=June 19, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210619183607/https://www.energy-storage.news/news/manufacturer-reveals-involvement-in-worlds-biggest-battery-energy-storage-s |url-status=live }}

Phase 2 adding a further 100 MW / 400 MWh was completed in August 2021, bringing total capacity to 400 MW / 1,600 MWh.{{cite web |last1=Colthorpe |first1=Andy |title=Expansion complete at world's biggest battery storage system in California |url=https://www.energy-storage.news/expansion-complete-at-worlds-biggest-battery-storage-system-in-california/ |website=Energy Storage News |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210821015827/https://www.energy-storage.news/expansion-complete-at-worlds-biggest-battery-storage-system-in-california/ |archive-date=21 August 2021 |date=20 August 2021 |url-status=live}}{{youTube|X-GRaLW8Di8 |Vistra provides first look at Moss Landing energy storage facility}}

In 2023, construction of Phase 3 (113,000 modules in 122 special containers in open air){{cite web |title=Best Project, Energy/Industrial: Moss Landing Phase III {{!}} Engineering News-Record |url=https://www.enr.com/articles/59401-best-project-energy-industrial-moss-landing-phase-iii |website=www.enr.com |publisher=Engineering News-Record |language=en |date=15 October 2024}} with another 350 MW / 1,400 MWh was underway to bring total capacity to 750 MW / 3,000 MWh,{{cite web |last1=Colthorpe |first1=Andy |title=Vistra's 350 MW Moss Landing expansion coming online this summer in California |url=https://www.energy-storage.news/vistras-350mw-moss-landing-expansion-coming-online-this-summer-in-california/ |website=Energy Storage News |date=10 May 2023 |access-date=May 10, 2023 |archive-date=August 31, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240831220509/https://www.energy-storage.news/vistras-350mw-moss-landing-expansion-coming-online-this-summer-in-california/ |url-status=live }} and commissioned in August 2023.{{cite web |last1=Colthorpe |first1=Andy |title=Moss Landing: World's biggest battery storage project is now 3 GWh capacity |url=https://www.energy-storage.news/moss-landing-worlds-biggest-battery-storage-project-is-now-3gwh-capacity/ |website=Energy-Storage.News |date=2 August 2023 |access-date=August 2, 2023 |archive-date=August 2, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230802232259/https://www.energy-storage.news/moss-landing-worlds-biggest-battery-storage-project-is-now-3gwh-capacity/ |url-status=live }}

An expansion to 1,500 MW / 6,000 MWh (also connecting to the 500 kV grid) was approved in August 2020, but the company stated it would only implement the expansion if market conditions were advantageous.{{cite web |title=Vistra approved to build a grid battery bigger than all utility-scale battery storage in the US combined |url=https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2020/08/13/vistra-approved-to-build-a-grid-battery-bigger-than-all-utility-scale-storage-in-the-us-combined/ |website=pv magazine USA |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20200904011816/https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2020/08/13/vistra-approved-to-build-a-grid-battery-bigger-than-all-utility-scale-storage-in-the-us-combined/ |archivedate=2020-09-04 |date=13 August 2020 |url-status=live}}{{cite web |publisher=Monterey County |title=Dynegy Moss Landing LLC (Vistra Energy) / IS_PLN190253 |url=https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020050309/2 |website=ceqanet.opr.ca.gov |page=9 |language=en-us |date=2020-05-15 |quote=transform the voltage between the 34.5 kV power conversion systems and the 500 kV transmission systems. The substations would contain the 500 kV transformer control house and associated breakers, switches, and miscellaneous equipment necessary to tap into existing 500 kV line. |access-date=October 20, 2020 |archive-date=September 18, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200918232641/https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2020050309/2 |url-status=live }}

Utilities in California are required by a 2013 law to provide significant battery storage by 2024. Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) asked the CPUC to approve four energy storage projects located adjacent to the Moss Landing plant, including another large lithium-ion battery storage system of 182.5 MW / 730 MWh ("Elkhorn", located between the old turbine hall and Elkhorn Slough) to be provided by Tesla and owned and operated by PG&E, connecting to the regional 115 kV grid.{{cite web|url=https://www.pge.com/tariffs/assets/pdf/adviceletter/ELEC_5322-E.pdf |title=Advice Letter 5322-E from PG&E to CPUC|access-date=July 3, 2018|archive-date=July 3, 2018|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180703133555/https://www.pge.com/tariffs/assets/pdf/adviceletter/ELEC_5322-E.pdf |url-status=live}}{{cite news|url=https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/07/california-utility-looks-to-add-gigawatt-hours-of-battery-storage-before-2020/ |title=Tesla strikes another mammoth energy storage deal in California|work=Ars Technica|access-date=2018-07-03|language=en-us|archive-date=July 3, 2018|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20180703112155/https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/07/california-utility-looks-to-add-gigawatt-hours-of-battery-storage-before-2020/ |url-status=live}}{{cite web |title=Monterey County – File #: PC 20-013, PLN180371. Exhibit B – Discussion draft |url=https://monterey.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4337466&GUID=931A2A55-60C1-435B-A99A-3D161019D3EB |website=monterey.legistar.com |pages=2–4 |date=2020-02-14 |quote=The BESS project will have the capacity to dispatch up to 730 megawatt hours (MWh) of energy to the electrical grid at a maximum rate of 182.5 MW for up to 4 hours during periods of high demand. The purpose of the Elkhorn Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) Project (project) is to enable PG&E to provide reliable and flexible power to the electrical system at and around PG&E’s Moss Landing Substation, which serves the South Bay-Moss Landing local sub-area, spanning Silicon Valley to the central coast. |access-date=October 20, 2020 |archive-date=October 21, 2020 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20201021035557/https://monterey.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=4337466&GUID=931A2A55-60C1-435B-A99A-3D161019D3EB |url-status=live }}

The Elkhorn Battery Facility was designed to improve energy reliability and to allow for more renewable energy sources to be used at the Moss Landing site by increasing electricity storage available in California.{{cite web|last=Katz|first=Cheryl |date=December 15, 2020|title=In Boost for Renewables, Grid-Scale Battery Storage Is on the Rise|url=https://e360.yale.edu/features/in-boost-for-renewables-grid-scale-battery-storage-is-on-the-rise |access-date=2021-02-06|website=Yale E360|language=en-US|archive-date=February 6, 2021|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210206221040/https://e360.yale.edu/features/in-boost-for-renewables-grid-scale-battery-storage-is-on-the-rise |url-status=live}} The project aimed to save costs by reducing PG&E's reliance on peaker power plants that come online during periods of increased demand.{{cite web |url=https://www.engadget.com/2019-07-29-tesla-megapack.html |title=Tesla's Megapack is a battery built for the electrical grid |website=Engadget |date=29 July 2019 |language=en |access-date=2020-04-15 |archive-date=October 10, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211010231213/https://www.engadget.com/2019-07-29-tesla-megapack.html |url-status=live }} The facility was to deploy 256 Tesla Mega packs to meet its energy storage needs.[https://insideevs.com/news/590551/pge-moss-landing-elkhorn-battery/ PG&E Commissions Its Moss Landing Elkhorn Battery: 256 Tesla Megapacks] Inside EV’s. By Mark Kane. Jun 07, 2022. Accessed Jan. 18, 2025.

On July 3, 2019, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the County of Monterey Resource Management Agency published a Mitigated Negative Declaration, detailing actions that must be taken to mitigate potential environmental impacts of the project. The report concluded that the project would have a "Less than Significant Impact" on the environment, assuming the correct mitigating actions were taken. Specifically, it was found that mitigating actions{{clarify|date=February 2021}} were required to minimize the environmental impact of the project on "biological resources" such as wildlife habitat, and on "cultural resources", especially culturally-significant archaeological sites at the proposed location of the Megapack deployment.{{cite web |url=https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2019079016/2/Attachment/cFUVBH |title=MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION |last= |first= |date= |website=County of Monterey |access-date= |archive-date=July 18, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220718131913/https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2019079016/2/Attachment/cFUVBH |url-status=live }}

The project was subsequently opened to public submissions on its environmental impact. California Unions for Reliable Energy argued that the County of Monterey failed to meet the standards of the California Environmental Quality Act when performing its environmental assessment. This same union group, with the same legal representation, used similar arguments against the California Flats solar project in order for organized labor to get concessions from the developer.{{cite web|url=http://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/local_news/moss-landing-mega-battery-project-faces-environmental-challenge-from-union-group/article_e1202278-d4e9-11e9-b133-f70dab557be0.html |title=Moss Landing mega battery project faces environmental challenge from union group.|last=Shalev|first=Asaf |website=Monterey County Weekly|date=12 September 2019|language=en|access-date=2020-04-05|quote=The same union group, represented by the same law firm, offered a similar critique a few years ago when the county was considering California Flats solar project in South County. The threat of a lawsuit allowed organized labor to get concessions from the developer.|archive-date=October 19, 2021|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20211019034609/https://www.montereycountyweekly.com/news/local_news/moss-landing-mega-battery-project-faces-environmental-challenge-from-union-group/article_e1202278-d4e9-11e9-b133-f70dab557be0.html |url-status=live}}

In February 2020, the Monterey County Planning Commission unanimously approved the project, which was initially scheduled to start construction in late March and be complete by 2021.{{cite web |title=Elkhorn Battery Storage Facility – Mitigated Negative Declaration |url=https://files.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/252916-2/attachment/cFUVBHWibQn3_v8ftWmvzuzHh6VmXSw2dEyjl_mbtKXtVQ6dRXrrX15nLYCLZUf_-SrEvpUR8xMo35Ap0 |publisher=Monterey County |page=7 |date=2019-07-02 |quote=Construction for the project is anticipated to begin in late 2019 and early 2020, with closing-out activities continuing through summer 2021. |access-date=October 20, 2020 |archive-date=October 21, 2020 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20201021022657/https://files.ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/252916-2/attachment/cFUVBHWibQn3_v8ftWmvzuzHh6VmXSw2dEyjl_mbtKXtVQ6dRXrrX15nLYCLZUf_-SrEvpUR8xMo35Ap0 |url-status=live }} The COVID-19 pandemic in California and subsequent stay-at-home order delayed the project.{{cite web|last=Hering|first=Garrett |date=2020-03-26|title=US battery storage boom hits COVID-19 roadblock as project delays mount|url=https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/us-battery-storage-boom-hits-covid-19-roadblock-as-project-delays-mount-57740943 |access-date=2020-07-24|website=www.spglobal.com|language=en-us|quote=Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s 182.5-MW Tesla Moss Landing Battery Energy Storage Project (Elkhorn), for instance, a marquee project planned near the shores of California's Monterey Bay, was on track to start construction in late March. That will not happen now as Pacific Gas and Electric, or PG&E, has postponed groundbreaking "until after the stay-at-home order is lifted", according to Paul Doherty, a spokesperson for the utility.|archive-date=July 25, 2020|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20200725063240/https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/us-battery-storage-boom-hits-covid-19-roadblock-as-project-delays-mount-57740943 |url-status=live}} Construction with the Tesla Megapacks began in July 2020.{{cite web |title=PG&E, Tesla begin construction on one of the world's largest batteries |url=https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2020/07/29/pge-tesla-begin-construction-on-the-worlds-largest-battery-for-now/ |website=pv magazine USA |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20200928110419/https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2020/07/29/pge-tesla-begin-construction-on-the-worlds-largest-battery-for-now/ |archivedate=2020-09-28 |date=29 July 2020 |url-status=live}}{{cite web |title=PG&E commissions 182.5 MW / 730 MWh Tesla BESS at Moss Landing |url=https://www.energy-storage.news/pge-commissions-182-5mw-730mwh-tesla-bess-at-moss-landing/ |website=Energy Storage News |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20220524181036/https://www.energy-storage.news/pge-commissions-182-5mw-730mwh-tesla-bess-at-moss-landing/ |archive-date=24 May 2022 |date=19 April 2022 |url-status=live}}

The PG&E Elkhorn Battery Facility was commissioned and went online on June 7, 2022.{{cite web |last1=Kenny |first1=Tess |title=PG&E ushers in landmark Tesla battery energy storage system at Moss Landing |url=https://www.siliconvalley.com/2022/06/07/pge-ushers-in-landmark-battery-energy-storage-system-at-moss-landing/ |website=Silicon Valley |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20220607120514/https://www.siliconvalley.com/2022/06/07/pge-ushers-in-landmark-battery-energy-storage-system-at-moss-landing/ |archive-date=7 June 2022 |date=7 June 2022 |url-status=live}}

In September 2021 Phase 1 was shut down after a high temperature safety incident (no fire) caused by a leak in a liquid cooling hose, while Phase 2 kept operating.{{cite web |last1=Colthorpe |first1=Andy |title=Investigation begins into overheating incident at world's biggest battery storage facility |url=https://www.energy-storage.news/investigation-begins-into-overheating-incident-at-worlds-biggest-battery-storage-facility/ |website=Energy Storage News |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210909124559/https://www.energy-storage.news/investigation-begins-into-overheating-incident-at-worlds-biggest-battery-storage-facility/ |archive-date=9 September 2021 |date=8 September 2021 |url-status=live}}

In February 2022 another high temperature safety incident (no fire) occurred at the Vistra site. During this event Phases 1 and 2 went offline.{{cite web |title=World's biggest lithium battery storage facility now completely offline after weekend incident |url=https://www.energy-storage.news/worlds-biggest-lithium-battery-storage-facility-now-completely-offline-after-weekend-incident/ |website=Energy Storage News |date=16 February 2022 |access-date=February 16, 2022 |archive-date=February 16, 2022 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20220216095759/https://www.energy-storage.news/worlds-biggest-lithium-battery-storage-facility-now-completely-offline-after-weekend-incident/ |url-status=live }} By July, 2022 most of the facility was back in operation.{{cite web |title=World's biggest battery storage system comes back online after months of shutdown |url=https://www.energy-storage.news/worlds-biggest-battery-storage-system-comes-back-online-after-months-of-shutdown/ |website=Energy Storage News |date=18 July 2022 |access-date=July 18, 2022 |archive-date=July 14, 2022 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20220714120817/https://www.energy-storage.news/worlds-biggest-battery-storage-system-comes-back-online-after-months-of-shutdown/ |url-status=live }}

At 3 pm on Thursday, January 16, 2025, a fire broke out in the Phase 1 building (300 MW / 1,200 MWh), the portion of the site managed by Vistra Corp. Battery systems (made of lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxides) ignited in the concrete hall, releasing large flames, reaching the fire's first peak between 8 and 10 pm. The building's fire suppression system failed to quench the fire, but the fire was contained within the area of the concrete building. The enclosed facility was inside the building, a condition that may have contributed to spread of the fire, as opposed to the majority of batteries which are located outside in separate moduels, where fire spread is more difficult and easier to mitigate.{{cite web |last1=Maisch |first1=Marija |date=28 January 2025 |title=Incidents similar to Moss Landing battery fire are unlikely but stricter regulations proposed |url=https://www.ess-news.com/2025/01/28/incidents-similar-to-moss-landing-battery-fire-are-unlikely-but-stricter-regulations-proposed/ |website=PV Magazine}} Local authorities initiated the evacuation of 1,200 residents.{{cite web |url=https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/environment/article298713008.html |title=Fire erupts at Vistra's Moss Landing battery plant ...|date=17 January 2025 |quote=Preliminary air quality reports found that the blaze did not release a toxic chemical called hydrogen fluoride, Mendoza said, but the Fire Department did not share if other chemicals were released by the fire. }}

As per lithium battery fire protocols, firefighters did not try to extinguish the blaze, but let it burn. These fires usually release toxic gasses and burn very hot.{{ r | NS_20205-01-17 }} Local authorities expressed concerns regarding the release of hydrogen fluoride and other hazardous materials, however none were found. During the two days of the fire wind velocities were low, allowing the smoke plume to rise high into the atmosphere before much dispersion had occurred.{{cite web |title=Residents ordered to evacuate after fire breaks out at a power plant in Central California |url=https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/residents-ordered-to-evacuate-after-fire-breaks-out-at-a-power-plant-in-central-california/ar-AA1xlKWV |access-date=2025-01-17 |website=www.msn.com}}{{cite web |title=Huge fire at Moss Landing battery plant spurs evacuations, road closures, sends out plumes of toxic smoke |url=https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/01/16/moss-landing-power-plant-fire-evacuations-road-closures/ |date=16 January 2025}}{{cite web |date=2025-01-17 |title=Fire at one of the world's largest battery plants in California forces evacuations |url=https://apnews.com/article/battery-storage-plant-fire-california-moss-landing-7c561fed096f410ddecfb04722a8b1f8 |access-date=2025-01-17 |website=Associated Press |language=en}}{{cite web |last1=Maisch |first1=Marija |title=Fire at California's Moss Landing battery plant triggers evacuation |url=https://www.ess-news.com/2025/01/17/fire-at-californias-moss-landing-battery-plant-triggers-evacuation/ |website=Energy Storage |date=17 January 2025}} By Friday morning the fire appeared to have largely gone out, however by early Friday afternoon the fires had increased in intensity once again. Later in the day the flames subsided. Air samples taken at ground level measured no hydrogen fluoride pollution. Around 80% of this battery section had burned.{{cite web |title=Massive Moss Landing battery "still smoking" as authorities probe cause of devastating fire |url=https://reneweconomy.com.au/massive-moss-landing-battery-still-smoking-as-authorities-probe-cause-of-devastating-fire/ |website=RenewEconomy |language=en-AU |date=20 January 2025 }}

On the evening of January 17, 2025, the fire diminished to a point where Monterey County officials allowed evacuated individuals to return to their homes.[https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/17/us/evacuation-fire-power-plant-monterey-county/index.html#:~:text=A%20fire%20broke%20out%20at,California%2C%20Thursday%2C%20officials%20said.&text=An%20evacuation%20order%20has%20been,Thursday%20night%2C%20officials%20said%20Friday. Evacuation order lifted after fire breaks out at battery storage facility in Central California] CNN. By Hanna Park et. al. January 17, 2025. Accessed January 17, 2025. On January 22, Monterey County opened the last road in the vicinity.[https://www.countyofmonterey.gov/government/departments-i-z/public-works-facilities-parks/public-works/road-closures-information Monterey County – Road Traffic Advisories, Closures & Information] County Roads Division. Jan. 22, 2025. Accessed Jan. 22, 2025. Some local authorities restricted battery projects due to the incident.{{cite web |last1=Rayner |first1=Tristan |title=Moss Landing fire leads to emergency regulations |url=https://www.ess-news.com/2025/02/07/moss-landing-fire-leads-to-emergency-regulations/ |website=Energy Storage |date=7 February 2025}}

In February, the fire reignited.{{cite web | url=https://lookout.co/moss-landing-battery-plant-fire-reignites-but-is-under-control-fire-chief-says/ | title=Moss Landing battery plant fire reignites, but is under control, fire chief says | date=February 20, 2025 }}

{{asof|March 2025}}, most of the damaged batteries have been disconnected, and cleanup may take more than a year.{{cite web |last1=Harris |first1=Kyarra |title=Moss Landing Battery Plant fire cleanup process estimated to take more than a year |url=https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2025/03/14/moss-landing-battery-plant-fire-clean-up-process-estimated-to-take-more-than-a-year/ |website=East Bay Times |date=14 March 2025}} The cause of the fire remains undetermined, and California adopted changes in its battery fire rules.{{cite web |last1=Gerke |first1=Paul |title=Following Moss Landing fire, California sets new fire safety standards for battery energy storage facilities |url=https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/energy-storage/battery/following-moss-landing-fire-california-sets-new-fire-safety-standards-for-battery-energy-storage-facilities/?related=post_cards |website=Factor This™ |date=18 March 2025}}

On September 20, 2022 a fire occurred at the Elkhorn Battery Facility (which facility is owned and operated by PG&E.) A Tesla Megapack had caught fire. Safety controls immediately disconnected the facility from the California power grid. PG&E customers were ultimately not affected by the shut-down. No injuries were reported as having resulted from the mishap. Approximately three months later, on December 30, 2022 the Elkhorn Battery Facility was placed back online.[https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/20/tesla-megapack-battery-caught-fire-at-pge-substation-in-california.html Tesla Megapack battery caught fire at PG&E substation in California] CNBC. By Lora Kolodny. September 20, 2022. Accessed Jan. 18, 2025.[https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/SupDoc/A2302018/5828/502981831.pdf Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Application for compliance review ... for the period January 1 through December 31, 2022] (See page 3-24.) PG&E. January 3, 2023. Accessed Jan. 18, 2025.{{cite web | url=https://www.pgecurrents.com/articles/3832-pg-e-shares-findings-september-2022-moss-landing-megapack-incident | title=PG&E Shares Findings of September 2022 Moss Landing Megapack Incident | access-date=January 25, 2024 | archive-date=January 25, 2024 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240125201006/https://www.pgecurrents.com/articles/3832-pg-e-shares-findings-september-2022-moss-landing-megapack-incident | url-status=dead }}{{cite web|url=https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/pges-recording-breaking-battery-proposal-wins-loses |title=PG&E's Record-Breaking Battery Proposal Wins Approval From Regulators|date=2018-11-08|first=Julian|last=Spector |work=Greentech Media|quote=four projects, totaling 567.5 megawatts / 2,270 megawatt-hours ... includes ... 182.5-megawatt / 730-megawatt-hour Tesla system that PG&E would own at a substation nearby. |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20200810001603/https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/pges-recording-breaking-battery-proposal-wins-loses |archivedate=2020-08-10 |url-status=live}}

{{Commons category|Moss Landing Power Plant}}

• Energy in California
• List of power stations in California
• List of energy storage projects

{{clear}}

{{reflist}}

{{Generating stations in California|state=autocollapse}}

Category:Natural gas-fired power stations in California

Category:Buildings and structures in Monterey County, California

Category:Monterey Bay

Category:Energy infrastructure completed in 1949

Category:1949 establishments in California

Category:Vistra Corp