Corporate Cronyism: How the US will become a Global Disaster Hub

The Moss Landing Lithium Plant Fire

The Moss Landing lithium battery plant fire on January 16, 2025, at Vistra Energy's facility in Monterey, California, should be a wake-up call for not only the energy storage industry, but for every industrial plant. As we have seen with the wildfires that destroyed Pacific Palisades and Altadena earlier this month, climate change is exacerbating previous environmental precautions and there is no promise of their effectiveness in an era where environmental conditions are shifting faster than policy adaptations.

The intensification of wildfires, for example, fueled by prolonged droughts and erratic weather patterns, exposes the inadequacy of outdated regulatory frameworks designed for a climate that is simply, just weird. Without a fundamental rethinking of mitigation strategies, disaster response, and infrastructure resilience, communities will continue to bear the consequences of a system unprepared for the accelerating realities of climate change.

The Moss Landing incident destroyed most of a 300-MW battery array and led to the evacuation of approximately 1,500 residents due to concerns over toxic smoke emissions. This event underscores the critical need for enhanced safety protocols, rigorous monitoring systems, and comprehensive emergency response plans in large-scale battery storage facilities. As the adoption of lithium-ion batteries becomes more widespread in the pursuit of renewable energy solutions, it is imperative to address these safety challenges proactively.

The fire forced 1,200 to 1,500 evacuations over concerns about toxic smoke and hydrogen fluoride emissions. Investigators suspect a fire suppression failure, raising concerns about safety at large-scale battery storage sites, especially as this was not the first incident at Moss Landing. The fire underscores the urgent need for stronger safety measures as lithium battery storage expands in the shift to renewable energy.

Regulatory Capture and Corporate Cronyism

Per capita, it should be no surprise that the United States remains the largest consumer of goods and resources and plays an outsized role in driving global extraction, production, and environmental degradation. While China has surpassed the United States as the largest consumer overall, we have to bear in mind that China’s population is ~1.4 billion, while the United States is ~340 million.

In principle, if we consume the most, we should bear the greatest risk—environmentally, socially, and economically. However, this is not how the global system is structured. Instead, risk is externalized, displaced onto other nations, particularly in the Global South, where environmental regulations are often weaker, labor protections are lower, and corporate accountability is diluted by international supply chains. So that being the case, how should we then come to understand that half of the perhaps worst industrial disasters in the last ten years have occurred in the United States? What does that say about our regulatory accountability and infrastructure, and what does that mean in the context of Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency headed by Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla, the largest consumer of lithium batteries in the automotive industry?

When President Trump outlined his second term by withdrawing from the Paris Agreement; cut government spending from the Green New Deal—the largest climate investment in U.S. history; lifted hydrocarbon extraction restrictions; and embraced outdated slogans like “drill baby drill” into his imperialist doctrine, what does that signal to the world about our efficacy as a nation? Is corporate cronyism still an ethical quandary, or did we leave that buried in the rubble of our so-called liberal democracy?

Rather than asserting sovereignty or economic pragmatism, these moves broadcast a retreat into a petro-imperial nostalgia, one that clings to the spoils of resource hegemony at the expense of ecological and economic stability. If there was ever a moment to bury the neoliberal fantasy of free markets correcting themselves, it is now—because climate catastrophe is not a market externality, and the world has stopped waiting for the U.S. to wake up.

Some recent examples

Subjectively measured by human and environmental health, this is a list of arguably the five largest industrial chemical and industrial disasters from the past 10 years. Each of these disasters highlights the persistent risks of industrial chemical storage and transport—often worsened by poor regulations, negligence, and inadequate disaster preparedness, and if we include the Moss Landing lithium fire, the U.S. harbors half of this global list

1. Beirut Port Explosion (Lebanon, 2020)

• Cause: 2,750 tons of ammonium nitrate improperly stored in a warehouse exploded.

• Impact: Over 218 deaths, 7,000 injuries, and 300,000 displaced people. The explosion caused toxic air pollution and released hazardous chemicals into the Mediterranean Sea.

2. West Fertilizer Company Explosion (West Texas, 2013)

• Cause: Combustion of ammonium nitrate at a fertilizer plant.

• Impact: 15 deaths, 260+ injuries, and destruction of a school, nursing home, and nearby homes..

3. Tianjin Chemical Blasts (China, 2015)

• Cause: A storage facility containing hazardous chemicals, including sodium cyanide, exploded.

• Impact: 173 deaths, widespread toxic contamination of air, soil, and water. High levels of cyanide and heavy metals polluted nearby communities and water sources.

4. Ohio Train Derailment (USA, 2023)

• Cause: A Norfolk Southern train carrying hazardous chemicals derailed in East Palestine, releasing vinyl chloride and other toxic gases.

• Impact: Immediate evacuations, toxic air and water contamination, and long-term cancer risks from dioxins and PFAS. Many residents reported health symptoms, and wildlife & aquatic life suffered massive die-offs.

5. Chemtool Fire (USA, 2021)

• Cause: An explosion at a lubricant and grease manufacturing plant in Illinois, releasing toxic PFAS and heavy metals.

• Impact: Mass evacuations, hazardous air pollution, and long-term groundwater contamination. Residents reported respiratory and neurological effects.

Shouldn’t this mean that the U.S. should take on greater regulatory responsibility? In theory, yes. If consumption dictates accountability, then U.S. regulatory frameworks should not only govern domestic industries but extend across supply chains—ensuring that environmental and labor standards apply where materials are sourced and goods are produced. However, the reality is different. Corporate interests prioritize cost-cutting and efficiency over precautionary regulations, and free trade agreements often limit the ability of producer nations to enforce stricter environmental protections.

The paradox is that while wealthier nations benefit from high consumption, they also shield themselves from the worst consequences. Even in the face of climate change, industrial accidents, and toxic exposures, the U.S. has more resources to mitigate harm—access to cleaner water, better medical care, and financial tools to rebuild. Meanwhile, communities in resource-rich but economically vulnerable nations suffer in ways that are often invisible to the consumers driving demand.

If there is to be any justice in this system, accountability must be redefined. The U.S. and other major consumer economies should not only implement stronger regulations at home but should also demand higher safety, labor, and environmental standards from corporations operating abroad. Otherwise, the cycle of externalized risk will continue—where the benefits of consumption are centralized, but the costs are exported on those least equipped to bear them. In other words, to make regulations effective, “tax the rich, stupid!”

The Lingering Toxicity of Lithium Fires: Health Impacts and Environmental Risks

When a lithium battery plant burns, it does not merely combust; it transforms into an industrial volcano, spewing forth an array of toxic metals, corrosive gases, and carcinogenic particulates that settle into the air, water, and soil. Unlike ordinary fires, which often subside with suppression efforts, a lithium fire’s impact is insidious, extending far beyond the moment of ignition. It infiltrates the body, the environment, and the very systems that sustain life. In an era that celebrates lithium as the linchpin of a renewable energy revolution, its unintended consequences demand scrutiny. The health implications of lithium fires are not a distant possibility but an unfolding crisis that must be understood, mitigated, and prevented.

The combustion of lithium-ion cells expels an intricate and deadly mixture of heavy metals, toxic chemicals, and fine particulates that persist in the environment and bioaccumulate in living organisms. Cobalt, nickel, and manganese—critical components of lithium batteries—become airborne toxins, each with a distinct capacity to damage neurological, respiratory, and cardiovascular systems. The presence of lead and cadmium, often introduced during manufacturing, turns the smoke into an even deadlier cocktail, seeping into bones and organs, disrupting hormonal functions, and inducing long-term carcinogenic effects.

The danger is not merely in what burns but in how it burns. Lithium fires do not behave like conventional fires; they burn hotter, faster, and with a self-sustaining chemical reaction that makes suppression challenging. Unlike organic fuels, which require oxygen, lithium fires produce their own oxidizing agents, allowing them to persist even in environments where traditional fires would be snuffed out. As lithium compounds react with atmospheric moisture, they release hydrofluoric acid, an exceptionally corrosive agent that penetrates human tissue, dissolving bones, attacking nerve endings, and disrupting cellular functions with little external indication of damage until it is too late.

Immediate Health Impacts: The First Wave of Toxicity

Inhalation is the primary and most immediate vector of harm during a lithium fire. Those exposed to the thick, metallic-laden smoke often experience acute respiratory distress, characterized by inflammation of the lungs, difficulty breathing, and persistent coughing. The fine particulates—many of them smaller than 2.5 microns—penetrate deep into lung tissue, impairing oxygen exchange and exacerbating pre-existing conditions such as asthma, chronic bronchitis, and cardiovascular disease.

The danger of a lithium fire does not dissipate with the last ember. The release of heavy metals and toxic compounds ensures a lingering legacy that embeds itself in the ecosystem and, consequently, in human bodies. Lead and cadmium, once airborne, settle into the soil and water supply, where they leach into crops and accumulate in fish and livestock. The bioaccumulation of these metals means that even those far removed from the site of the fire are at risk.

The neurological effects of chronic exposure to lithium fire byproducts are profound. Lead is a well-documented neurotoxin, particularly harmful to children, where even minuscule exposure levels can cause cognitive impairment, developmental delays, and behavioral disorders. Cobalt and nickel, both linked to neurodegenerative diseases, may contribute to conditions such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s when exposure occurs over extended periods. The presence of these metals in drinking water sources exacerbates the crisis, ensuring that contamination is not an isolated event but a generational affliction.

Water Contamination: A Crisis Beneath the Surface

Lithium battery fires do not merely pollute the air; they also threaten groundwater supplies. The deposition of heavy metals and corrosive compounds into surface water bodies initiates a cascade of ecological damage. Runoff from firefighting efforts, particularly when water is used to suppress flames, carries dissolved toxins into aquifers and rivers, where they are taken up by plants, ingested by animals, and concentrated in the food chain.

Cadmium contamination of groundwater is particularly alarming. Once it enters the human body, cadmium mimics essential minerals, integrating into biological processes where it remains for decades, causing kidney damage, skeletal deterioration, and immune suppression. Similarly, arsenic—a common impurity in lithium production—seeps into wells and reservoirs, increasing the risk of cancers and endocrine disruption.

Additionally, what we’ve learned from deep seabed mining is that the ocean, often considered an ultimate repository for industrial runoff, is not spared. Lithium, cobalt, and nickel found naturally in marine sediments, when disturbed, poisons benthic organisms, disrupting food webs. Also, most studies conclude that industrial runoff kills coral reefs, already under threat from climate change, and that the additional stress from metal toxicity, weakens their structures and alters their symbiotic relationships with marine life. The ripple effects of lithium battery fires extend from the depths of the ocean to the highest levels of human society, where the very technologies meant to sustain a green revolution threaten to undermine ecological stability.

Human Exposure Through Agriculture and Diet

Heavy metals introduced into farmland through airborne deposition or irrigation with contaminated water are absorbed by crops, entering the human diet through grains, vegetables, and fruits. The contamination of soil translates directly into food insecurity. Rice is particularly adept at accumulating arsenic and cadmium, posing a severe risk to populations reliant on rice-based diets.

Livestock and fish suffer similar fates. Cows grazing on contaminated grass accumulate lead and nickel in their milk and meat. Fish exposed to high levels of cobalt and manganese exhibit neurological impairments, affecting their ability to evade predators and reproduce. The result is a tainted food system, where the very act of sustenance perpetuates exposure to the lingering toxins of a single fire.

Regulatory and Industrial Blind Spots

Despite the clear and present dangers, regulatory oversight remains inadequate. Fire response protocols for lithium battery incidents often treat them as conventional chemical fires, failing to account for their unique properties and long-term consequences. Moreover, lithium battery production and disposal regulations focus overwhelmingly on efficiency and cost rather than safety and environmental impact.

The rush to electrify transportation and transition away from fossil fuels has created a blind spot in policy discussions. While lithium-ion technology is lauded for its role in reducing carbon emissions, the full spectrum of its environmental and health costs remains obscured. Manufacturers are not held accountable for the toxic legacies their batteries create, and communities affected by lithium fires are left to contend with contamination that could last for generations.

Mitigation and Accountability

Addressing the risks of lithium fires requires a multifaceted approach that extends beyond firefighting tactics. Industrial design must prioritize safer battery chemistries, reducing reliance on the most toxic elements. Emergency response protocols must be updated to reflect the true hazards of lithium combustion, incorporating specialized protective equipment and decontamination procedures.

More importantly, communities must demand accountability from manufacturers and policymakers. Just as environmental justice movements have fought against the unchecked pollution of fossil fuel industries, a parallel movement must emerge to address the consequences of lithium extraction, processing, and combustion. The transition to a renewable energy economy cannot be built on the same extractive and exploitative models that defined the fossil fuel era.

Without immediate action, the specter of lithium fires will not merely haunt industrial zones but will define a new era of environmental and public health crises. The imperative is clear: safety cannot be an afterthought in the pursuit of technological progress. The legacy of lithium must not be measured solely in terms of energy efficiency, but in the preservation of the human and ecological systems it affects.

Elon Musk heading the Department of Government Efficiency while simultaneously being involved in industries like Tesla and SpaceX should be a regulatory red flag raising the most obvious concerns about conflict of interest.