Residents of the North Shore School District gathered at North Shore High School on Nov. 13 to voice their concerns about the proposed Oyster Shore Energy Storage facility, a lithium battery storage project spearheaded by Jupiter Power. The meeting, organized by local civic leaders, highlighted widespread community apprehensions about safety, environmental impact, and transparency.
The facility, slated for the corner of Glen Head Road, Glenwood Road, and Shore Road at the site of a former Mobil Oil Company, is intended to store renewable energy to help meet federal clean energy goals. However, critics questioned the project’s safety, particularly the risks posed by lithium battery fires. The project is currently under an extended six-month moratorium by the Town of Oyster Bay while elected officials and community members learn more about its potential risks and rewards.
A key issue raised at the meeting was the lack of effective firefighting techniques for lithium battery fires, which can emit toxic fumes and require mass evacuations.
“If a fire starts, it can’t be put out with water,” George Pombar, president of the Glen Head-Glenwood Civic Association, said. “Residents within a mile radius—including schools and homes—would have to evacuate, and there’s no way to predict how long that could last.”
According to Pombar, local and county fire officials expressed similar concerns in prior meetings. Nassau County’s fire marshals and the newly appointed fire commissioner
acknowledged the challenge of managing lithium battery fires but have yet to develop solutions. Jupiter Power representatives, when pressed on the issue, assured that firefighting advancements would be in place before the project’s completion.
“That answer is unacceptable,” Pombar continued. “We’re being asked to take a gamble on safety.”
The project’s potential tax benefits were also scrutinized. Currently, the property generates $320,000 in annual taxes through the Mobil Oil Company. Residents fear Jupiter Power will negotiate for a reduced tax burden, undercutting any financial benefit for the community.
Additionally, some expressed skepticism about the project’s environmental merit.
“I happen to be a supporter of green energy, I think it’s got a place and a time,” said Cecilia McCann, a Glenwood Landing resident and mechanical engineer. “I think it’s got the potential to be a good thing, but I do believe very strongly that we shouldn’t be rushing ahead. We have to do this methodically.”
Civic leaders detailed the scale of the proposed project, which includes laying heavy cables up to 10 feet underground.
“This isn’t a small operation,” Pombar said. “It’s a multi-year endeavor that could disrupt daily life, impact property values, and create safety hazards for years.”
Efforts to delay the project have gained traction. A six-month moratorium on permits for the facility, originally enacted in April, was extended to April 2025 following lobbying from civic groups. However, community leaders stressed that more action is needed.
“We’ve met with local mayors, legislators, and county officials,” McCann said. “While many express support, we need concrete steps to protect residents, including extending the moratorium further and requiring more thorough environmental and safety reviews.”
Petition and outreach efforts have also grown, with residents encouraged to sign up for civic updates and donate to support legal and technical expertise. The group is seeking attorneys and certified engineers to assist in challenging the project.
Residents expressed frustration over limited outreach from Jupiter Power. Attendees asserted that notifications about the project were only sent to households within 500 feet of the site, a legally required minimum but one that critics argue excludes many who would be affected.
Meetings organized by Jupiter Power have also been criticized for their structure. Several attendees reported feeling segregated into small groups, limiting opportunities for collective discussion.
“It seemed designed to stop us from learning from one another and asking tough questions,” said Christine Panzeca, a Glen Head resident who has been an outspoken opponent of the project.
Civic leaders encouraged residents to stay engaged. A petition is circulating to push for additional moratoriums and stricter regulations. Meanwhile, discussions with officials in nearby Sea Cliff, Glen Cove, and other neighboring areas are ongoing, as the project could have regional implications if alternative sites are pursued.
“This is a fight we didn’t ask for,” Pombar said. “But it’s one we’ll continue for the sake of our community’s safety and future.”
Residents plan to hold another community meeting in early 2025 for an update on the moratorium and share progress in their advocacy.
