Full cost of ‘explosive’ Walsall battery storage system fight on green belt revealed

The total bill for Walsall taxpayers stands at £81,555.22 which includes legal fees, expenses, costs awarded to the developer and more.

The multi-year battle between Walsall Council and developer Anesco started in 2021 when an application was submitted to build a 3.2 hectare Battery Energy Storage System (BESS).

The site for the proposed development was on green belt land off Chapel Lane in the Great Barr Conservation Area.

The intended lifespan of the ‘temporary’ facility is 40 years, with its primary function to store electricity from the grid during off-peak hours and release it during periods of high demand.

Walsall Council first refused permission for the development, but Anesco appealed the decision to the planning inspector, leading to a public inquiry.

At the event in November 2024, the words ‘explosive’, ‘danger’ and ‘risk to life’ were heard repeatedly by the speakers against the development.

Anesco said the risks associated with the development had been ‘consistently overstated’.

In January 2025, the planning inspector ruled the benefits of the development ‘clearly’ outweigh any harm and overturned the council’s refusal.

Two months later, the council challenged the inspector’s decision at the High Court believing he had made ‘fundamental errors’ in coming to the conclusion.

But in September 2025, the court delivered the final blow by dismissing the challenge on the basis that the inspector’s reasoning ‘was adequate’.

Overall, fighting the proposal at appeal and court cost Walsall taxpayers £59,475.72.

The appeal and court costs awarded to Anesco stands at £22,082.50, bringing the total bill to £81,555.22.

Councillor Adrian Andrew, deputy leader of Walsall Council, said: “It’s disgraceful that the court dismissed the case, but sadly they have the final say.

“I do not believe that the decision to develop a battery storage facility on Chapel Lane is the right decision for our borough.

“Residents have consistently opposed this development, which is, in my opinion, an inappropriate development of greenbelt land.

“We have fought to challenge the decision and protect the land, but unfortunately we were unsuccessful.”