Renovations started on another existing building on the Wardenclyffe property that will eventually house the new Eugene Sayan Visitor Center, according to a recent newsletter. Construction is expected to be completed by early summer 2026, and the center will be open on Fridays and Saturdays. As announced back in 2023, the visitor center project was funded by donations from Softheon CEO Eugene Sayan, the Ludwick Foundation, National Grid, Suffolk County, New York State Economic Development and others.

“At its heart, Tesla Science Center is dedicated to preserving Nikola Tesla’s past, present and future legacy,” interim executive director Douglas Borge said in a release. “This visitor center will help us live that mission every day. It is one step on the journey, and we are so grateful to everyone who has made it possible.”

The new center will have 2,200 square feet of indoor space and outdoor areas, and will provide opportunities for expanded programming, including historical tours and docent training that follow Smithsonian standards. Also, it will help the growth of STEAM programs — science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics — for community schools, libraries and events. 

There will also be an exhibition and preservation space for archives and artifacts, which will be the center’s first. Administrative offices will be there to try to reduce operating costs and direct more resources to programs and further restoration. Above all, it will act as a consistent place for members and visitors to connect with Nikola Tesla’s story. 

In spring 2023, the nonprofit foundation that runs the science center began work on a $20 million project to preserve Tesla’s last remaining laboratory and redevelop the 16-acre property into a world-class science center. The foundation had then raised $14 million toward the $20 million goal — including $1 million from Elon Musk, who named his company after the inventor — when the project got underway. The site was also added to the U.S. National Historic Register in 2018.

The post Tesla Science Center breaks ground on visitor center appeared first on Riverhead News Review.

Rumors crescendoed from whispers to blasts on social media as time went on without an answer to the big question. While the Science Center claimed to be committed to transparency, a Nov. 30 Facebook post offered no news on the cause, only word that an emergency restoration fund campaign had been launched and gushes of thanks to the hundred or so firefighters and EMTs who responded to the blaze.

Although it was a near-disaster for the organization, which has been working to transform the last standing laboratory of famed scientist and inventor Nikola Tesla into a museum and science center, good news came of it: The building still stands.

Marc Alessi, executive director of Tesla Science Center, said at the post- fire press conference that a rough estimate of $3 million now needs to be raised for repairs — in addition to the $6 million the organization was short on pre-fire projects, for a total of $9 million. He quipped that any Tesla buff would understand why those particular numbers were notable. (Google “Tesla 3-6-9 theory.”)

Besides the historic buildings not being reduced to rubble, the organization is using the fire to rally the troops. Word has spread far and wide, and well wishes have arrived on social media from as far as Australia. At the press conference, politicians from every level of government pledged support for the rebuild. With the fire-damaged areas closed to the public, the organization went ahead with its annual holiday tree lighting on Dec. 6.

The enthusiasm and positivity shown by the community in the aftermath of the fire “warmed our hearts and illuminated the Tesla Science Center with a spirit that is truly unbreakable,” said a Facebook post after the tree lighting. But comments on said post reveal that longtime supporters are growing disillusioned with the organization to which they’ve devoted their time and money for years.

The fire occurred Nov. 21 and, to date, no statement about its cause has been made. In a Dec. 15 tele- phone interview, Mr. Alessi said the organization is still awaiting the report from the Brookhaven fire marshal and Suffolk County detectives. “We’re not allowed to disturb the site until insurance companies do their investigations, which should be done soon,” Mr. Alessi said. He said the roof will be rebuilt from scratch, as the steel girders that support it were deemed damaged beyond repair by the fire. The brick walls will need to be treated with polyurethane to stanch damage done by the water used to put out the fire.

Mr. Alessi said that although the fire set the organization back with work on the laboratory, they are mak- ing progress on other projects on the property, where a house is being renovated into a visitor center. Mr. Alessi said that they removed a slab of concrete and are waiting for Brookhaven Town building permits to begin renovations. He said it will have a small exhibit space and classroom on the first floor and office space upstairs. “We will finally be able to welcome people onto the property,” he said, adding that it will just be an appetizer for what the lab will be when completed. The visitor center is due to open in late 2024.

Supporters of the Science Center also have a new way to join the mission to rebuild: Bricks for Nik. According to a Facebook post, an initiative launched mid-December offers personalized paving bricks in three sizes that will eventually be used to construct an 1,800-square-foot patio adjacent to the visitor center.

With 43 days left in the emergency fire restoration campaign on Indiegogo, more than $56,500 has been pledged by 394 backers. Another unclaimed perk — available for $50,000, the highest donation possible — gets you a two-year stint on the group’s advisory council and a lifetime Science Center membership. The majority of backers, 262 of them, have opted to donate $25 for a digital thank-you letter, expected to be mailed in February.

ORIGINAL REPORTING BY ANGELA COLANGELO

The post Year in Review 2023: Arson ruled out as cause of Tesla Center fire appeared first on Riverhead News Review.

A key element was Suffolk County and New York State determined, after an extensive study, that a successful evacuation would be impossible in the event of a major nuclear power plant accident at Shoreham, the first nuclear plant built here.

Suffolk and state governments refused to draw up and agree to implement a federally-required evacuation plan. The Shoreham plant was scuttled.

But now the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is in the midst of radically altering its regulations for the new line of nuclear power plants the nuclear industry is seeking to develop, what it calls “advanced” nuclear power plants.

Two weeks ago, Dr. Edwin Lyman, director of Nuclear Power Safety with the Union of Concerned Scientists, gave a presentation he titled: “Guinea Pig Nation: How the NRC’s new licensing rules could turn communities into test beds for risky, experimental nuclear plants.”

The information he presented has received no major media coverage, which is par for the nuclear course. This is why I named my first book on nuclear power “Cover Up: What You Are Not Supposed to Know About Nuclear Power.”

Lyman, who has a doctorate in physics, knows nuclear technology intimately. He joined the Union of Concerned Scientists in 2003. Previously he was president of the Nuclear Control Institute. He was a postdoctoral research associate at Princeton’s Center for Energy and Environmental Studies. He co-authored the book “Fukushima: The Story of a Nuclear Disaster.”

Lyman explains that the nuclear industry wants nuclear safety standards significantly weakened because the “advanced” nuclear plants are “much more expensive” than existing plants. And they would be more costly to operate than using energy alternatives such as wind and solar. So, the NRC is “accepting on faith” the industry claim that the “advanced” nuclear power plants are “going to be safer and wants to adjust its regulations accordingly, to make them less stringent.”

It’s a demonstration of one of the alternatives that’s been applied as the acronym for the NRC — Nuclear Rubberstamp Commission.

Already, in a decision in July, the NRC moved to allow nuclear power plants to be built in thickly populated areas. For a half-century, the NRC sought to have the plants sited in areas of “low population density” because of the catastrophic accident threat.

The lone NRC vote against the change came from Commissioner Jeffery Baran, who declared: “Multiple, independent layers of protection against potential radiological exposure are necessary because we do not have perfect knowledge of new reactor technologies and their unique potential accident scenarios.”

Under the new policy, noted Baran, a “reactor could be sited within a town of 25,000 people and right next to a large city. For reactor designs that have not been deployed before and do not have operating experience, that approach may be insufficiently protective of public health and safety.”

That is just one of the many reductions proposed in safety standards. The list of them in Lyman’s presentation before the Chicago-based Nuclear Energy Information Service, under the categories of “Cutting corners on safety and security to cut costs” and “what the nuclear industry wants,” included, in addition to the already altered siting criteria:

• Allowing nuclear power plants to have a “small containment — or no physical containment at all.”

• “No offsite emergency planning requirements.”

• “Fewer or even zero operators.”

• Letting the plants have “fewer inspections and weaker enforcement.”

• “Fewer back-up safety systems.”

• “Zero” armed security personnel to try to protect an advanced nuclear power plant from terrorists. Lyman commented: “I could go on and on.”

His presentation included a slide saying the “NRC is not currently” accepting comments on its plan for changes in its regulations for “advanced” reactors. But, it said, “the public is always free to weigh in” on NRC actions and recommended people attend any public meetings held on the issue.

Does this mean that in the future there might be a resurfaced push for nuclear power in Suffolk County?

The closest nuclear power plants to Shelter Island that the Long Island Lighting Company applied to the NRC to build in the 1970s were four plants it sought to construct in Jamesport — 20 air miles northwest of Shelter Island.

The post Suffolk Closeup: New push for Long Island nuclear plants appeared first on Riverhead News Review.