Safety at battery storage facilities, immigrants, the Holocaust

Weighing energy with safety, savings

Humans coexist with flammable infrastructure all around us: vehicles, gas stations, electric lines, power plants, our own homes [“Renewables can help solve power crisis,” Opinion, Sept. 2]. These catch fire from time to time, but we obviously rely on them, nevertheless. Evolving safety standards, regulation and, finally, firefighters, make it possible to live with some risk of fire. We need to apply the same risk-benefit analysis to battery storage.

Long Islanders will benefit from Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) installations by breathing cleaner air, paying less for electricity, and slowing the climate crisis. Coupled with wind and solar energy, battery storage supports affordable electricity and allows for retiring old polluting power plants. It also slows the greenhouse gas emissions that cause our increasingly terrible heat waves and wildfires, droughts, storms, and floods.

There were no injuries from the three BESS fires that occurred in New York in 2023, which broke out in installations built to outdated safety standards. Analyzing the causes led to the tougher safety standards and improved technology which New York now requires of all BESS installations.

Air pollution and climate impacts are long-term, deadly threats to Long Islanders and much more serious risks than the isolated BESS fires that have grabbed headlines and frightened people.

— Jane Fasullo, Brookhaven

My neighbors and I reside less than half a mile from the proposed battery facility in Hauppauge. This project would place one of the largest battery installations on Long Island directly in our backyards. Our community is concerned.

Lithium battery facilities in other towns, including upstate Warwick and Surprise, Arizona, have caught fire, forcing evacuations and requiring local fire departments to respond. If such an incident occurred here, the families living closest to the site would be the first in harm’s way.

Beyond the immediate safety threat, this project jeopardizes our property values and casts uncertainty over the Hauppauge Industrial Park, an important economic center.

— Gail Panaro, Hauppauge

While belief in solar energy seems to fall along political lines, here are the actual savings at my home based upon 8½ years of using solar panels. My system has generated 118 megawatt-hours of electricity, cutting my utility costs by roughly $26,000 to $30,000. That’s not a theory, a tax credit, or a talking point — it’s cash I didn’t have to send to the power company. Call it what you want — I call it keeping my money.

— Anthony Vernola, Centerport

Immigrants want the same things we all do

A reader expresses dismay at the loss of U.S. compassion for the migrants tending our fields [“Fond childhood memories remain,” Musings, Sept. 8]. Many in government and the media have vilified these hardworking humans because of the violent actions of just a few, and some Americans unjustly regard them all as undesirables.

Most of today’s immigrants are escaping gang violence, extreme poverty, natural disasters, and the ravages of war. I’ve always believed that most people, wherever they come from, want the same things out of life — a safe place to live, food on the table, access to an education, and a job to support their families.

Although most would agree with deporting violent criminals, there aren’t nearly enough to meet the deportation goals of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, so they are instead deporting kind, honest, hardworking people who are contributing to our society. Crops are rotting in fields because the migrants who pick them are either arrested or fear being arrested.

If we believe in the Golden Rule, to treat others the way we would want to be treated, and to help those less fortunate than ourselves, we should welcome those who hold our country in such esteem that they want to live here and contribute to our society.

— Carol Raab, Wading River

Learn about horrors to prevent repeats

A statement I made in an article was questioned by a reader [“Beware of those who revise history,” Letters, Sept. 17]. In the article “NYS unveils new Holocaust curriculum amid rise in prejudice” News, Sept. 9], I explained the goal of Holocaust education should be to “engage students in research, in discussion, examining data, trying to reach conclusions about the past and present.”

The questions for students to research and discuss is not whether the Holocaust happened — it happened — but why it happened, why other 20th century genocides happened, and whether the Nazi attempt to annihilate European Jewry represents a singularity in world history or had common elements with other genocides.

The reason for the New York State Holocaust resource package with material for students to examine is that simply telling students about the Holocaust is not good educational practice and has not effectively challenged Holocaust denial.

— Alan Singer, Glendale

The writer is director of secondary education, social studies and teaching learning technology at Hofstra University.