SBU visa revocations demand official action, not platitudes

As a proud Stony Brook University alumnus (M.S. 2005), I was deeply troubled by the recent report detailing the revocation of student visas for 11 international students at SBU. No explanation or evidence has been provided to justify these revocations. This lack of transparency leaves us to assume that these revocations — along with the roughly 1,500 others reported at over 250 institutions nationwide — are either arbitrary or motivated by an unconstitutional intent to suppress free speech. (Visiting students are entitled to the same free speech protections as U.S. citizens.) While the federal government does have the authority to revoke visas, exercising that power arbitrarily constitutes a clear abuse of power.

Some may disregard the educational value of a diverse student body or the fact that smart international students elevate academic standards in the classroom. But even skeptics should recognize that international students pay higher tuition than domestic students, effectively subsidizing SBU’s operating budget. Considering that SBU, Brookhaven National Lab and Cold Spring Harbor Lab are leading Long Island employers with globally diverse workforces, even pragmatic business leaders should be concerned. A climate of fear could prompt many of the approximately 3,800 international students at SBU to transfer, and discourage future applicants altogether.

Vague affirmations by university officials are welcome, but appear toothless. SBU is a public institution of New York State. What actions will the state take to protect its residents and universities from federal overreach? Has the university president sought support from the governor, or the New York Civil Liberties Union? Will SBU provide legal representation to the students or join wider lawsuits to contest these revocations in federal court? If not, why? And if this situation escalates, will university police intervene to prevent warrantless ICE arrests, or will they stand aside as masked, unidentified agents in unmarked vans seize students on campus?

Blame for all this must be placed squarely on Rep. Nick LaLota (R-NY1) and his fellow House Republicans. As majority members of a co-equal branch of government, they have failed in their constitutional duty to perform oversight. Their role is to ensure the executive branch faithfully enforces laws enacted by Congress — not to stand idle as policy is dictated by executive fiat. While LaLota may disregard the voices of his Democratic constituents, perhaps his Republican supporters and donors can impress upon him the long-term consequences of his inaction.

John Hover

East Setauket

Solar and wind power will not fulfill energy needs

In his letter of April 10 [The realty of renewable energy on Long Island] Peter Gollon recommended a document entitled “Long Island Solar Roadmap,” which is basically a sales brochure for solar panels. It would be a simple matter, we are told, to install 10 to 15 million solar panels on various locations, including flat roofs, carports, industrial land and brownfields.

The largest source, however, 49%, will be from offshore windmills. In addition, there will also be a network of lithium-ion battery installations, which will be charged when the solar arrays and windmills are generating power in excess of the user demands. Then, when the sunlight and offshore winds are absent or diminished, the required power will be provided from the energy stored in the batteries.

The problem with this scenario is that, for a given amount of solar, wind and battery installations, the required power can be guaranteed for only a limited period of time, if the sun and wind do not cooperate. In this unfortunate situation, a total blackout will occur, and it will not end until adequate sunlight and wind levels have returned.

With the technology of today, we have systems that use “fossil fuels” (oil and gas), nuclear fission and solar/wind technology. Of these, only solar/wind systems are likely to experience blackouts caused by a lack of fuel. For a known solar/wind/battery design, and known sunlight and wind profiles, based on recorded meteorological records, it should be possible to generate computer simulation software to calculate the probability of a blackout for given periods of time, such as 3 days, 4 days, 5 days, etc. Possibly Peter Gollon and his colleagues have already done this. If so, it would be most helpful for them to share their results with us. I am sure they are not simply trying to get as many solar panels and windmills as they can, and hope to get lucky.

In an interesting related development, Microsoft is in the process of reactivating the Three Mile Island nuclear energy plant in Pennsylvania, with a capacity of 800 MW, for the purpose of powering their upcoming artificial intelligence computers. Here on Long Island, in Shoreham, we have the sleeping Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant, and it has a capacity of 820 MW. If we activate the Shoreham facility, and build two or three modern copies of it, we can have all of the power we could ever use, with zero carbon emissions, no possibility of a blackout, no thermal runaway and plenty of extra power for Connecticut and New York City during times when their sun and wind resources are in short supply. What is wrong with that?

George Altemose

Setauket

WRITE TO US … AND KEEP IT LOCAL 

We welcome your letters, especially those responding to our local coverage, replying to other letter writers’ comments and speaking mainly to local themes. Letters should be no longer than 400 words and may be edited for length, libel, style, good taste and uncivil language. They will also be published on our website. We do not publish anonymous letters. Please include an address and phone number for confirmation. Email letters to: [email protected] or mail them to TBR News Media, P.O. Box 707, Setauket, NY 11733