logo
Superconductors are poised to solve the economic alarm story of our age

Superconductors are poised to solve the economic alarm story of our age

Telegraph30-04-2025

Humans are ever prone to Malthusian scares. The economic alarm story of our mid-2020s is exponential growth in power demand for AI and data centres, threatening to blow apart the world's energy system.
This fear has a broad hold on the energy elites, government planners and the global media. Some embrace it with fervour. This year's CERAWeek energy summit in Houston was a celebration of AI, the godsend that would keep the fossil fuel industry in rude good health for decades to come.
It ignores the radical breakthroughs under way in advanced superconductors, which have no electrical resistance and therefore dissipate almost no energy as the current goes round and round in a closed loop.
I suspect that superconductors will be the next Nasdaq darling once markets grasp the colossal (and benign) implications for the world economy.
Right now, exploding power demand for AI does indeed look terrifying. Data centres consume 26pc of total electricity in Virginia, the spillover effect of the US military complex.
They are breaking the grid in greater Atlanta, where power demand for processing has surged 12-fold since 2022. Data centres are overwhelming the Austin-Dallas corridor of Texas, ground zero in the global race for AI supremacy.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that the US economy will consume more electricity for data processing than for steel, cement, aluminium, chemicals and all energy-intensive manufacturing put together by 2030.
The rest of the world lags but data centres nevertheless soak up 21pc of Ireland's power. Britain's booming hub around Slough, Berkshire – Europe's largest – needs so much electricity that it is already clashing with Labour's housebuilding plans and its 2030 clean power target.
National Grid expects commercial power demand for British data centres to rise six-fold over the next decade.
But technology never stands still.
Tokamak Energy, in Britain's 'superconducting valley' near Oxford, is already moving the needle with high-temperature superconducting magnets that operate at 20 kelvins (minus 253C), a spin-off from its world-leading work on nuclear fusion.
These are made from ribbons of rare-earth barium copper oxide that are one to three microns thick. They superconduct at high enough temperatures (a relative term) to slash the cost of cryogenic cooling.
'It's absolutely transformational,' said Warrick Matthews, the Tokamak chief executive.
'We don't have losses from copper resistance or heat so it reduces energy use by 17pc in a data centre. We're in talks with several companies already.'
These super magnets can be used for all kinds of industries, from hybrid electric aircraft to the operation of wind turbines.
'Each nacelle on a 15-megawatt wind turbine has three to four tons of rare-earth magnets. Our magic tape can replace 99pc of those rare earths, reducing our reliance on supply from China,' he said.
Further in the future – but close enough to call into question the intoxicating forecasts of the world's gas drillers – is an entire redesign of the way data centres are built.
In crude terms, if you soak semiconductor chips in liquid helium at minus 269C and keep them cold, you may be able to stack them a hundred layers high in a 3D structure – impossible now because copper wires overheat. This could slash power use by orders of magnitude.
The global nanotechnology institute IMEC is developing a system that does exactly this. 'We think we can start building it for real in five years,' said Anna Herr, the scientific director.
'It could raise energy efficiency by a hundred times, and that covers the whole system, including the cost of cooling.'
Prof Herr said we may be looking at a future where data centres are no bigger than a fridge or even a shoebox, so small that they can be built wherever you need them.
Moore's law of semiconductor progress is that the number of transistors on a chip doubles every two years or so.
Superconducting transcends this ever harder task of miniaturisation, offering a way to do it with standard 28 nanometre chips that are relatively cheap.
Cooling helium to minus 269C costs money but it pays for itself once computing speed reaches the threshold of 10 petaflops, or one quadrillion 'floating-point operations' per second.
It is not easy science but the basic idea is that superconducting enables ultra-short pulses. 'We lose 70,000 times less energy with each pulse than conventional computing,' Prof Herr told me.
The world is now in an awkward phase. The computing demands of AI are doubling every six months. Average data centres consumed eight kilowatts per rack in 2022. Nvidia's latest GB200 chip needs nearer 120 kilowatts for training models such as ChatGPT.
This risks an immediate crunch for the global electricity system before the solution is ready.
The IEA says the US accounts for 45pc of global data centre demand, and China 25pc, making the AI revolution very fossil fuel-heavy. It threatens to smash the Paris and Glasgow accords on CO2 emissions and set off a renewed gas and coal boom.
American utilities plan a torrid expansion of gas-fired plants, despite a five-year waiting list for new turbines.
Gas is no longer just a 'bridge fuel' on the way to decarbonised power, said Freeport LNG's Michael Smith at CERAWeek. 'It's the base-load fuel necessary for us to create the electrons for AI.'
This sort of thinking lies behind moves by Shell, BP and others to drop the 'green stuff' and bet their corporate futures on a global gas boom lasting deep into the mid-century.
Donald Trump aims to go further as an ideological end in itself, to the point of forcing the closure of wind farms already far into development.
He has signed an executive order to 'turbocharge coal mining' and aims to double total power output, waving pollution curbs on toxic chemicals such as mercury and arsenic for good measure.
'We're ending Joe Biden's war on beautiful, clean coal once and for all. All those plants that have been closed are going to be opened,' he said.
The IEA says data centres worldwide consumed 415 terawatt hours (TWh) of power last year, or 1.5pc of global electricity output. That will double to 1,000TWh by the end of the decade. It could double again by 2035 under its 'lift-off' scenario.
So, yes, we have a big problem, but it is not as big as urban legend would have it. The IEA spells out in its 300-page report how AI itself will lead to a quantum leap in energy technology and savings, greatly mitigating the effect.
Few believe that China's DeepSeek-R1 matched American AI rivals on maths, coding and reasoning with just a quarter of the power. But its inference model probably uses 40pc less electricity than GPT models. That alone has large implications.
Chris Wright, the US energy secretary, says America and the world are going to need a vast expansion of fossil fuel-fired power to drive the AI revolution. 'Since the demand for intelligence is unlimited, so will be the demand for energy,' he said.
Actually, it won't. He is committing the sin of false extrapolation. The greater probability is that AI coupled with superconductors will in the end slash energy demand.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Britain enters a new nuclear age
Britain enters a new nuclear age

New European

time25 minutes ago

  • New European

Britain enters a new nuclear age

Alongside an ambitious plan to build up to 12 new attack submarines, and to create jobs in six new ammunition factories, one of the most striking commitments is to enter discussions with the USA aimed at 'enhanced participation in Nato's nuclear mission'. This innocuous sounding sentence represents a big change in nuclear posture. Make no mistake: today's Strategic Defence Review marks the start of British rearmament. Not only does it signal the UK's commitment to increase defence spending to 3% of GDP, but to a type of spending designed to enhance the UK's strategic clout in the world. At present, only Belgium, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands host US-owned tactical nuclear bombs, with their aircraft designed to be 'dual capable' of delivering such bombs on target. The UK, which lacks tactical nuclear weapons, could now volunteer to do likewise, but would need to buy a different variant of the F-35 combat aircraft than the one that is flown from the Royal Navy's carriers. That would be a major change in nuclear policy – because the British deterrent has, since the 1990s, been strategic-only. As I've argued here before, we need a wider range of options because Putin is now making regular threats to use nukes against Nato, and tactical nukes against Ukraine – so it makes sense to place more of Nato's collective nuclear armoury closer to the front line, and distributed among a larger number of allies. Over and above deterring Russian aggression, almost everything Labour has announced today looks designed to achieve three things: to boost Britain's influence among its allies, to deliver high skilled jobs to places where they are scarce, and to get ahead of the game in the military technologies of the future. These don't only include drones – though the spectacular Ukrainian strike on Russia's strategic bomber fleet on Sunday shows that we've hardly even begun to understand their power. The technological arms race is now focused on niche areas of science – like nanotech, materials and quantum computing – and Labour, to its credit, has understood that it in any conflict with Russia it is the science labs of Oxbridge, Imperial and Edinburgh, not the 'playing fields of Eton', that might be decisive. Suggested Reading We must take a nuclear leap into the unknown Paul Mason For the armed forces, often bound by tradition and prone to inter-service rivalry, making the SDR work will be a challenge. Because in every domain of warfare – land, air, sea, space and cyberspace – they face the same problem: they are running decades-old kit designed for an era when Britain could choose which wars it fights, while at the same time moving to a completely new, digitally enabled way of fighting, in which technological change never stops. In this context, faced with a Russia that has turned itself into a war economy, and itself learned to innovate rapidly – deterrence comes down to showing Putin that our own industry, science and digital technology base could crank itself up to speed, and indeed surpass what Russia itself could achieve. For me, the most basic task of the SDR was to assess the scale of the Russian threat and offer the electorate an honest proposal of how to meet it – within our means. Though it might sound simple to achieve, it was not achieved at any point during 14 years of Conservative government, above all after 2020, when Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings declared a 'tilt' of security priorities towards Asia, while systematically underfunding the ministry of defence. Labour reversed that stance, declaring from day one that its priority is: 'Nato First'. The SDR places maritime warfare as the highest priority and designates the Atlantic and the Arctic as the UK's prime areas of interest. There's been a row today over the precise form of words Keir Starmer is using – describing the 3% target in the 2030s as an ambition. I think it's clear that Labour means to find the money to achieve that – but it stands way outside the term of UK fiscal forecasting, and no chancellor would allow it to be stated as a firm commitment outside of a budget statement. The real question with the SDR is: do the capabilities match the threats? The answer is: only if you believe Russia can be deterred through Nato remaining cohesive and the UK leading an enhancement of continent-wide nuclear deterrence. If it cannot, then 3, 4 or even 5% won't be enough. In 1939, after seven years of rearmament, Britain's defence budget was 9% of GDP – and once war broke out it rose above 50%. Today's focus on the big stuff – submarines, which are the capital ships of the 21st century, and a £15bn upgrade to nuclear warheads – reflects Starmer's determination for this country to avoid any impression that it wants to be 'Little Britain'. With a cash-strapped treasury, it is a decision to spend on what's strategic, and rely on allies for that which is not. There is even the promise, thinking long term, to specify within this parliament a replacement for the Dreadnought submarines, currently being built at Barrow: and they don't even go out of service until 2050. I would like to have seen more spending and faster – above all because defence industrial investment is one of the surest ways to boost growth and social cohesion in communities that have seen too little of it. But until Labour can win the argument with the British people that they need to pay more tax, and tolerate more borrowing to fund defence, progress is going to be incremental. That, in turn, will depend on the outcome of Ukraine's peace negotiations with Russia. If they fail – and that looks likely – people may wake up to the fact that the prospect of endless war on our doorstep requires a change of attitude to defence. In that sense, the SDR was the start, not the end, of something.

Disabled staff face 'pervasive' abuse as poll shows offensive jokes and bullying
Disabled staff face 'pervasive' abuse as poll shows offensive jokes and bullying

Daily Mirror

time33 minutes ago

  • Daily Mirror

Disabled staff face 'pervasive' abuse as poll shows offensive jokes and bullying

The Trades Union Congress (TUC) said disabled people are facing 'pervasive' mistreatment at work, including being the butt of offensive jokes and subjected to intrusive questioning Nearly four in ten (39%) disabled workers have experienced bullying, discrimination and harassment at work, grim polling shows today(TUE). The Trades Union Congress (TUC) warned disabled people are facing 'pervasive' mistreatment at work. This includes being the butt of offensive jokes or 'banter' and being subjected to intrusive questioning about their disability. Of those who had faced mistreatment at work, more than one in ten (15%) left their job and employer altogether. Another three in ten (28%) said that it made them want to leave their job but they were unable to due to financial or other reasons. Some 42% said the most recent incident had a negative impact on their mental health, while one in five (20%) had to take time off. According to the poll, commissioned by the TUC, some 15% of those who have been mistreated faced intrusive or offensive questioning about their disability. Some 14% have been made to feel uncomfortable at work due to their disability, including through stereotypes or assumptions about their disability, or had seen or heard offensive jokes or "banter" about disabled people. And 12% said that they had experienced bullying, including sustained patterns of intimidating or abusive behaviour, clearly linked to their disability. The TUC said Labour's Employment Rights Bill will introduce key protections for disabled workers to help tackle this 'shockingly high' mistreatment. The legislation, currently passing through the House of Lords, includes a clause requiring employers to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment of staff by third parties, such as customers and patients. Recent TUC polling shows that protecting workers from harassment is one of the most popular policies in the Bill – with almost eight in ten UK voters (78%) supporting it. The TUC has criticised the Tories and Reform UK, who it said 'have both mischaracterised the government's plans to protect workers from third-party harassment as an end to pub banter'. TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: 'No one should face bullying, harassment or discrimination at work. But the number of disabled workers reporting that this is their everyday experience is shockingly high. It's time to stamp out this pervasive mistreatment. Disabled workers deserve dignity and respect at work like every other worker does.' ::: Opinium surveyed 1,000 disabled workers online between January 22 and February 4.

Bus powers could help TikTok-famous villages deal with problem parking
Bus powers could help TikTok-famous villages deal with problem parking

Glasgow Times

time34 minutes ago

  • Glasgow Times

Bus powers could help TikTok-famous villages deal with problem parking

Jon Pearce praised the Government for proposing a suite of new powers which councils can use to run their own bus routes and prevent companies from pulling 'socially necessary' services. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said the Bus Services (No. 2) Bill, which secured a second reading on Monday, would 'streamline' the franchising process when authorities bid to set up London-style networks, and would better secure 'lifeline routes' elsewhere. 'In part thanks to a TikTok craze to photograph sunset and sunrise over Mam Tor, communities where I live in High Peak have been plagued by illegal parking,' Labour's Mr Pearce told the Commons. The 517 metre-high hill in Derbyshire has become popular on social media, with several videos filmed at the landmark racking up more than 100,000 likes on TikTok. Mr Pearce continued: 'I'm co-ordinating a response to these issues with local stakeholders like the Peak park, police and councils, and a key tranche of what we need to do is deliver better bus services that are integrated with local train services. 'This Bill will transfer powers away from Westminster and empower local communities to take decisions necessary for our commuters to get to work, our students to get to college, our vulnerable to access the healthcare they need, and our honeypot villages to manage tourism sustainably.' Gritting crews were unable to reach a Peak District road near the hill earlier this year after more than 200 cars were double parked on it, according to Derbyshire County Council, and Mr Pearce previously wrote to authorities, when he warned that emergency services had been obstructed. The Bill would give councils the power to set up franchised bus networks to regulate routes, timetables, fares and vehicle standards, without the need for ministers' permission. Ms Alexander said the Government is 'fixing the broken' franchising process and told MPs: 'Proposed schemes need to jump through a myriad of hoops and they still require my consent to proceed, which is odd to say the least. 'The idea that I understand more what passengers in Leicestershire or Cornwall need than their local leaders is for the birds. In December, we opened up franchising to every local authority and now through this Bill we will further streamline the process making it simpler for franchise schemes to be granted and assessed.' Ms Alexander said the franchising model 'won't work everywhere', and added: 'That's why this Bill also strengthens enhanced partnerships and removes the ideological ban on establishing new local authority bus companies. 'Furthermore, by giving local authorities the power to design and pay bus operator grants in their areas, this Bill gives greater protections for socially necessary local services – securing those lifeline routes that keep communities connected.' Pressed about funding to local authorities for the £3 bus fare cap, Ms Alexander said: 'There is a spending review under way but I can confirm that I fully appreciate the importance of an affordable and accessible bus route.' Ms Alexander also said the Government will 'press pause' on so-called floating bus stops 'perceived to be poorly designed', amid concerns over accessibility issues and potential hazards for visually impaired people and others. Liberal Democrat transport spokesman Paul Kohler said the Bill 'rightly lifts the outdated, ideologically driven ban on municipally owned bus companies, empowering local authorities who wish to use it, rather than infantilising them' and added that 'it is not and must not become a one-size-fits-all approach'. He added: 'Empowering local authorities in law is one thing. Enabling them in practice is quite another. 'Whilst this Bill hands councils a set of keys to a new bus network, it doesn't ensure there's fuel in the tank.' Conservative shadow transport secretary Gareth Bacon earlier said improvements for passengers 'simply won't happen' without more Treasury money. He said: 'The Bill does not prioritise passengers and there is nothing in it that guarantees an improvement in service standards. 'The truth is that this Bill appears to be driven by political nostalgia. It is in many ways a thinly veiled attempt to recreate the municipal model of the pre-1986 era without fully considering the financial and operational realities of today.' The Bill will undergo further scrutiny in the Commons at a later date.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store