Fire in two battery containers at Cirencester Hybrid Solar Farm, Gloucestershire

In March 2025, in the mid afternoon, a fire was reported at the Cirencester Hybrid Solar Farm, a hybrid site on Witpit Lane, Preston, near Cirencester, Gloucestershire, United Kingdom, operated by Gridserve, combining ground mounted solar generation with a co-located lithium-ion battery energy storage system. Fire and rescue crews attended with appliances from local stations, supported by further appliances from neighbouring services, with more than 40 firefighters in attendance in total, using high volume pumps and specialist equipment. The fire was described as an electrical installation fire involving two shipping container sized battery enclosures. Crews prevented the fire from spreading to a third container. Thick black smoke was visible from surrounding areas and residents were advised to keep windows and doors closed because of smoke from burning battery materials and plastic casings. Nearby roads were closed during the response. A stop message was recorded at about 22:00 local time. A reporter visiting the following day observed that the solar arrays appeared unaffected. The cause was under investigation at the time of reporting.

Public statements attributed to Gridserve, the site operator, and the fire service at the time characterised the incident as an electrical installation fire affecting battery storage containers, with the investigation ongoing. No cause had been confirmed in the material reviewed. The following are general risk categories recognised in industry commentary for co-located solar and storage sites, not findings about this site: (1) thermal runaway in lithium-ion cells, where a single overheated cell can initiate a propagating event; (2) degraded or underperforming thermal management; (3) electrical faults, arc flash and short circuit risk at converter and AC interface equipment, which is concentrated where solar and storage conversion plant share a site; (4) the extent of separation and compartmentalisation between battery enclosures; (5) detection and suppression response at unmanned rural sites with extended emergency service travel times.

1. Co-located solar and storage sites combine two distinct fire risk profiles, battery thermal risk and photovoltaic electrical risk, so fire safety design should be assessed for the site as a whole rather than as separate provisions for each technology.
2. Physical separation between battery enclosures, and between battery enclosures and generation infrastructure, is a design stage decision that shapes how far a single enclosure event can spread; separation distances should be reviewed against current guidance at design and at any site expansion.
3. Incidents of this type can require a large multi-appliance response over several hours, so water supply, access routes and hardstanding for high volume pumping should be confirmed with the local fire and rescue service before energisation.
4. Smoke from burning battery materials and plastic casings is a public health concern, so shelter in place or evacuation arrangements, including how residents are advised, should be agreed with local emergency planners in advance rather than improvised on the day.
5. Site specific response plans should describe the configuration of the site, including enclosure layout, isolation points and stored energy, and should be shared and rehearsed with attending crews.
6. Where a site is unmanned and remote, detection and alarm arrangements should be specified on the assumption of an extended interval between alarm and first attendance, and remote monitoring should give responders usable information on which enclosures are involved.

cotswoldjournal.co.uk/news/25057370.latest-fire-cirencester-hybrid-solar-farm