 |
|
|
|||||
The Trump administrations widespread cancellation and freezing of clean energy funding is also hitting essential work to improve the nations power grid. That includes investments in grid modernization, energy storage, and efforts to protect communities from outages during extreme weather and cyberattacks. Ending these projects leaves Americans vulnerable to more frequent and longer-lasting power outages. The Department of Energy has defended the cancellations, saying that the projects did not adequately advance the nations energy needs, were not economically viable and would not provide a positive return on investment of taxpayer dollars. Yet before any funds are actually released through these programs, each grant must pass evaluations based on the departments standards. Those include rigorous assessments of technical merits, potential risks, and cost-benefit analysesall designed to ensure alignment with national energy priorities and responsible stewardship of public funds. I am an associate professor studying sustainability, with over 15 years of experience in energy systems reliability and resilience. In the past, I also served as a Department of Energy program manager focused on grid resilience. I know that many of these canceled grants were foundational investments in the science and infrastructure necessary to keep the lights on, especially when the grid is under stress. The dollar-value estimates vary, and some of the money has already been spent. A list of canceled projects maintained by energy analysis company Yardsale totals about US$5 billion. An Oct. 2, 2025, announcement from the department touts $7.5 billion in cuts to 321 awards across 223 projects. Additional documents leaked to Politico reportedly identified additional awards under review. Some media reports suggest the full value of at-risk commitments may reach $24 billiona figure that has not been publicly confirmed or refuted by the Trump administration. These were not speculative ventures. And some of them were competitively awarded projects that the department funded specifically to enhance grid efficiency, reliability and resilience. window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var e=document.querySelectorAll("iframe");for(var t in a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var r,i=0;r=e[i];i++)if(r.contentWindow===a.source){var d=a.data["datawrapper-height"][t]+"px";r.style.height=d}}}); Grid improvement funding For years, the federal government has been criticized for investing too little in the nations electricity grid. The long-term planningand spendingrequired to ensure the grid reliably serves the public often falls victim to short-term political cycles and shifting priorities across both parties. But these recent cuts come amid increasingly frequent extreme weather, increased cybersecurity threats to the systems that keep the lights on, and aging grid equipment that is nearing the end of its life. These projects sought to make the grid more reliable so it can withstand storms, hackers, accidents, and other problems. National laboratories In addition to those project cancellations, President Donald Trumps proposed budget for 2026 contains deep cuts to the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, a primary funding source for several national laboratories, including the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, which may face widespread layoffs. Among other work, these labs conduct fundamental grid-related research like developing and testing ways to send more electricity over existing power lines, creating computational models to simulate how the U.S. grid responds to extreme weather or cyberattacks, and analyzing real-time operational data to identify vulnerabilities and enhance reliability. These efforts are necessary to design, operate, and manage the grid, and to figure out how best to integrate new technologies. Grid resilience and modernization Some of the projects that have lost funding sought to upgrade grid management including improved sensing of real-time voltage and frequency changes in the electricity sent to homes and businesses. That program, the Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships Program, also funded efforts to automate grid operations, allowing faster response to outages or changes in output from power plants. It also supported developing microgridslocalized systems that can operate independently during outages. The canceled projects in that program, estimated to total $7246 million, were in 24 states. For example, a $19.5 million project in the Upper Midwest would have installed smart sensors and software to detect overloaded power lines or equipment failures, helping people respond faster to outages and prevent blackouts. A $50 million project in California would have boosted the capacity of existing subtransmission lines, improving power stability and grid flexibility by installing a smart substation, without needing new transmission corridors. Microgrid projects in New York, New Mexico, and Hawaii would have kept essential services running during disasters, cyberattacks and planned power outages. Another canceled project included $11 million to help utilities in 12 states use electric school buses as backup batteries, delivering power during emergencies and peak demand, like on hot summer days. Several transmission projects were also canceled, including a $464 million effort in the Midwest to coordinate multiple grid connections from new generation sites. Long-duration energy storage The grid must meet demand at all times, even when wind and solar generation is low or when extreme weather downs power lines. A key element of that stability involves storing massive amounts of electricity for when its needed. One canceled project would have spent $70 million turning retired coal plants in Minnesota and Colorado into buildings holding iron-air batteries capable of powering several thousand homes for as many as four days. Rural and remote energy systems Another terminated program sought to help people who live in rural or remote places, who are often served by just one or two power lines rather than a grid that can reroute power around an interruption. A $30 million small-scale bioenergy project would have helped three rural California communities convert forest and agricultural waste into electricity. Not all of the terminated initiatives were explicitly designed for resilience. Some would have strengthened grid stability as a byproduct of their main goals. The rollback of $1.2 billion in hydrogen hub investments, for example, undermines projects that would have paired industrial decarbonization with large-scale energy storage to balance renewable power. Similarly, several canceled industrial modernization projects, such as hybrid electric furnaces and low-carbon cement plants, were structured to manage power demand and integrate clean energy, to improve grid stability and flexibility. The reliability paradox The administration has said that these cuts will save money. In practice, however, they shift spending from prevention of extended outages to recovery from them. Without advances in technology and equipment, grid operators face more frequent outages, longer restoration times, and rising maintenance costs. Without investment in systems that can withstand storms or hackers, taxpayers and ratepayers will ultimately bear the costs of repairing the damage. Some of the projects now on hold were intended to allow hospitals, schools and emergency centers to reduce blackout risks and speed power restoration. These are essential reliability and public safety functions, not partisan initiatives. Canceling programs to improve the grid leaves utilities and their customers dependent on emergency stopgapsdiesel generators, rolling blackouts, and reactive maintenanceinstead of forward-looking solutions. Roshanak (Roshi) Nateghi is an associate professor of sustainability at Georgetown University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
A momentous week in the technology sector made it clear there is no sign the boom in building artificial intelligence infrastructure is slowing despite the bubble talk. Nvidia, whose processors are the AI revolution’s backbone, became the first company to surpass $5 trillion in market value. Microsoft and OpenAI inked a deal enhancing the ChatGPT maker’s fundraising ability and OpenAI promptly started laying groundwork for an initial public offering that could value the company at $1 trillion. Amazon said it would cut 14,000 corporate jobs, just days before its cloud unit posted its strongest growth in nearly three years. These developments, along with numerous earnings calls and interviews with executives, make clear that AI has cemented itself as the single biggest catalyst for global corporate investment and the engine of the market rally, even as some question the sustainability of both. Spending without ending Soaring revenue at Microsoft, Alphabet, and other technology giants was expected. But more than 100 non-tech global companies noted data centers on quarterly calls this week, including Honeywell, turbine maker GE Vernova, and heavy equipment maker Caterpillar. Sales in Caterpillar’s division that supplies data centers jumped 31% in its most recent quarter. “We’re definitely really excited about the prime power opportunity with data centers,” CEO Joseph Creed said this week. The AI supply chain now spans power, industrials and cooling technology, and investors are looking at the entire ecosystem rather than just core tech,” said Ayako Yoshioka, portfolio manager at Wealth Enhancement Group. Goldman Sachs estimates global AI-related infrastructure spending could reach $3 trillion to $4 trillion by 2030. Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and Alphabet are expected to spend roughly $350 billion combined this year. AI investment is propping up global trade, with about 60% of U.S. data-center capex spent on imported IT equipment, according to Oxford Economics, much of it semiconductors from Taiwan, South Korea and Vietnam. At least two dozen companies representing more than $21 trillion in combined market value reported quarterly earnings or spoke with Reuters about AI in recent days. Many, including Procter & Gamble and Boliden, noted that the hoped-for productivity gains, though uneven, are beginning to show. “We strongly believe the future contribution of artificial intelligence within R&D, within developing innovation, will steadily increase,” Schindler CEO Paolo Compagna told Reuters, though he said AI’s impact is yet to be seen. The Swiss lift and escalator maker raised its annual margin forecast last week. Year-over-year revenue growth in the U.S. tech sector is up more than 15%, outpacing all other sectors, according to LSEG data. Apple said it was significantly increasing AI investment and Amazon projected capital spending of $125 billion in 2025. Worries about overvaluation Since ChatGPTs debut in 2022, global equity values have climbed 46%, or $46 trillion. One-third of that gain has come from AI-linked companies, according to Bespoke Investment Group. Analysts warn of a quickening replacement cycle for servers, accelerators and chips as each new generation delivers exponential performance gains. The useful life of AI chips is shrinking to five years or less, forcing companies to write down assets faster and replace them sooner,” said UBS semiconductor analyst Tim Arcuri. The surge in AI-related spending has widened the gap between investment and returns, with a Reuters analysis showing that sales-to-capex ratios at major tech firms have fallen sharply as outlays on chips and data centers grow faster than revenue. Capital expenditures represent a larger chunk of cash generated by operating activities for some companies, causing some investor concern. If progress hasnt been made toward monetization within three years, the market will start asking hard questions,” said Sumali Sanyal, senior portfolio manager at investment firm Xponance. Microsoft reported a record $35 billion in capex in its most recent quarter and projected higher spending, prompting Bernstein analyst Mark Moerdler to ask whether the company was spending into a bubble. Microsoft Chief Financial Officer Amy Hood responded that AI-related demand still outpaces Microsoft’s spending. “I thought we were going to catch up. We are not,” she said. Some companies are financing AI projects with debt. Oracles $18 billion bond sale last month was one of the largest ever for a tech company, and it looks set to be surpassed by an up to $30 billion bond sale from Meta Platforms. News of its largest ever bond sale knocked Meta’s shares down 11% on Thursday. Still, many economists say the AI cycle is far from exhausted. Goldman estimates AI investment is currently less than 1% of U.S. GDP, far below peaks of 2% to 5% seen during the electricity and dot-com booms. We are in the early innings and the pace of AI innovation is the fastest we have seen in decades, said Nick Evans, portfolio manager at Polar Capital Technology Trust. Akash Sriram, Sriparna Roy, Sneha SK, Puyaan Singh, Jessica DiNapoli, and Bernadette Hogg
Category:
E-Commerce
The day after the jewelry heist at the Louvre in Paris, officials from across Washington’s world-famous museums were already talking, assessing and planning how to bolster their own security.“We went over a review of the incident,” said Doug Beaver, security specialist at the National Museum of Women in the Arts, who said he participated in Zoom talks with nearby institutions including the Smithsonian and the National Gallery of Art. “Then we developed a game plan on that second day out, and started putting things in place on Days 3, 4 and 5.”Similar conversations are happening at museums across the globe, as those tasked with securing art ask: “Could that happen here?” One California museum knows the answer is yespolice are investigating the theft of more than 1,000 items just before the Louvre heist.At the same time, many were acknowledging the inherent, even painful tension in their task: Museums are meant to help people engage with artnot to distance them from it.“The biggest thing in museums is the visitor experience,” Beaver said. “We want visitors to come back. We don’t want them to feel as though they’re in a fortress or a restrictive environment.”It’s an issue many are grappling withmost of all, of course, the Louvre, whose director, Laurence des Cars, has acknowledged “a terrible failure” of security measures.It was crystallized in a letter of support for the Louvre and its beleaguered leader, from 57 museums across the globe. “Museums are places of transmission and wonder,” said the letter, which appeared in Le Monde. “Museums are not strongholds nor are they secret vaults.” It said the very essence of museums “lies in their openness and accessibility.” Aging security systems A number of museums declined to comment on the Louvre heist when contacted by The Associated Press, to avoid not only discussing security but also criticizing the Louvre at a sensitive time.French police have acknowledged major security gaps: Paris Police Chief Patrice Faure told Senate lawmakers Wednesday that aging systems had left the museum weakened.François Chatillon, France’s chief architect of historical monuments, noted nonetheless that many museums, especially in Europe, are in historic buildings that were not constructed with the goal of securing art. The Louvre, after all, was a royal palacea medieval one at that.“Faced with the intrusion of criminals, we must find solutions, but not in a hasty manner,” Chatillon told Le Monde. “We’re not going to put armored doors and windows everywhere because there was this burglary.”The architect added that demands on museums come from many places. “Security, conservation, adaptation to climate changethey are all legitimate.” Prioritizing protection Even within security, there are competing priorities, noted attorney Nicholas O’Donnell, an expert in global art law and editor of the Art Law Report, a blog on legal issues in the museum and arts communities.“You’re always fighting the last war in security,” said O’Donnell. For example, he noted museums have lately been focusing security measures on “the very frequent and regrettable trend of people attacking the art itself to draw attention to themselves.”O’Donnell also noted that the initial response of Louvre security guards was to protect visitors from possible violence. “That’s an appropriate first priority, because you don’t know who these people are.”But perhaps the greatest battle, O’Donnell said, is to find a balance between security and enjoyment.“You want people interacting with the art,” he said. “Look at the ‘Mona Lisa’ right around the corner (from the jewels). It’s not a terribly satisfying experience anymore. You can’t get very close to it, the glass . . . reflects back at you, and you can barely see it.”O’Donnell says he’s certain that museums everywhere are reevaluating security, fearing copycat crimes. Indeed, the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, which oversees Berlin’s state museums and was hit hard by a brazen robbery in 2017, said it was using the Louvre heist “as an opportunity to review the security architecture of our institutions.” It called for international cooperation, and investments in technology and personnel. Creating a balance Beaver, in Washington, predicts the Paris heist will spur museums to implement new measures. One area that he’s focused on, and has discussed with other museums, is managing the access of construction teams, which he says has often been loose. The Louvre thieves dressed as workers, in bright yellow vests.It’s all about creating a “necessary balance” between security and accessibility, Beaver says. “Our goal isn’t to eliminate risk, it’s to really manage it intelligently.”Soon after he took the security post in 2014, Beaver said that he refashioned the museum’s security and notably added a weapons detection system. He also limited what visitors could carry in, banning bottles of liquid.He said, though, that the reaction from visitors had been mixedsome wanting more security, and others feeling it was too restrictive.Robert Carotenuto, who worked in security for about 15 years at New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art running the command center, says museums have become increasingly diligent at screening visitors, as they try to thwart protesters. But that approach alone doesn’t resolve risks on the perimeterthe Paris thieves were able to park their truck right outside the museum.“If you’re just going to focus on one risk, like protesters . . . your security system is going to have a lapse somewhere,” he said. “You can stop the protesters . . . but then you’re not going to pay attention to people who are phony workers breaking into the side of your building.” The magic of museums Patrick Bringley also worked at the Met, as a security guard from 2008 to 2019 an experience that led to a book and an off-Broadway show, “All the Beauty in the World.”“Museums are wonderful because they are accessible,” he said. “They’re these places that will put things that are thousands of years old and incomprehensibly beautiful in front of visitorssometimes even without a pane of glass. That’s really special.”The tragedy of the Louvre heist, Bringley said, is that such events make it harder for museums to display all their beauty in a welcoming way.“Art should be inviting,” Bringley said. “But when people break that public trust, the Louvre is going to have to step up their procedures, and it will just become a little less magical in the museum.” R.J. Rico and Jocelyn Noveck, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||