Government officials announce $20 million plan that may redefine energy production: 'Secure the … energy of the future while supporting jobs today'
In a bid to attract private-sector funding for clean energy, the UK government has made a £20 million (about $26.6 million USD) commitment to establish Starmaker One, the world's first government-affiliated private fusion investment fund.
In January of this year, the British government announced a record £410 million ($545.6 million USD) investment in its Plan for Change, a fusion energy research and development strategy to help the country become a clean energy superpower.
Now, in hopes of bolstering these efforts, it's seeking private sector capital to accelerate the commercialization of fusion energy tech with this limited partnership, where the government is a cornerstone investor, as Interesting Engineering reported.
The promise of fusion as a source of nearly limitless energy is growing as projects across the globe race to try to solve the enormous complexity involved in harnessing it.
Fusion reactors work by heating Earth-abundant and hydrogen-rich deuterium and tritium fuels to temperatures hotter than the core of the sun.
This creates a superheated plasma, and through methods including magnetic confinement, researchers hope to sustain an environment in which two nuclei can fuse to form a single heavier nucleus, giving off energy in the process.
Fusion is an environmentally friendly energy-generating process and doesn't release carbon dioxide or any other planet-warming gases through its operation.
Global leaders believe that fusion is one of the key solutions for future energy security, but as IE explained, private UK firms working on developing the technology have had limited access to capital in order to scale up their work.
The UK government believes that a British private investment fund like Starmaker One can help these new fusion start-ups grow their businesses and begin to commercialize at scale, as a press release detailed.
Not only would the success of any of these projects help add a new renewable energy resource to the grid, complementing solar and wind investments, but it would also help support the job economy.
Will America someday get all its energy from renewable sources?
Yes — very soon
Yes — by 2050
Yes — by 2070
Probably never
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
The funding boost would allow these companies to train employees in key areas such as physics, engineering, and chemistry, creating new jobs in the renewable energy sector.
Additionally, the government believes it would support fusion-adjacent technologies like magnetics, industrial AI, robotics, transportation, and energy storage.
"This investment is our Plan for Change in action — we are backing British pioneers to secure the clean energy of the future while supporting jobs today, from scientists and welders to engineers and construction managers," as energy minister Kerry McCarthy stated in a press release.
McCarthy added, "As countries around the world recognize the huge potential of fusion, breakthroughs in this technology are happening thick and fast, and we want to keep the UK at the forefront of the global race by helping projects to innovate and grow here, in turn driving economic growth."
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Hegseth says Nato allies ‘very close' to raising defence spending target to 5%
The US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, said Nato allies were 'very close, almost near consensus' to an agreement to significantly raise targets for defence spending to 5% of GDP in the next decade. The Trump administration official indicated he expected the increased target to be agreed at a summit in The Hague later this month – and confirmed that the headline figure was to be split into two parts. 'This alliance, in a matter of weeks, will be committing to 5%: 3.5% in hard military and 1.5% in infrastructure and defence-related activities. That combination constitutes a real commitment,' he said. Hegseth was speaking at a press conference at Nato headquarters in Brussels after the morning session of an all-day meeting of defence ministers from the 32-country transatlantic military alliance. 'I'm very encouraged by what we heard in there,' Hegseth told reporters. 'Countries in there are well exceeding 2% and we think very close, almost near consensus, on a 5% commitment to Nato.' Nato's current target level for military spending, agreed at a summit in Cardiff in 2014, is 2% of GDP, but Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that European allies and Canada do not spend enough compared with the US. In an attempt to avoid Trump wrecking the first Nato summit of his second term, the alliance's new secretary general, Mark Rutte, proposed a 3.5% plus 1.5% target, though there is some ambiguity about the target date. Initial reports suggested that Rutte wanted allies to hit the target from 2032, though earlier this week British sources suggested the date could be 2035. Sweden's defence minister said he would like to see the target hit by 2030. Only Poland currently exceeds the 3.5% target for hard military spending at 4.32%, according to Nato figures, while the US defence budget, the largest in the alliance, amounts to 3.4% of GDP, at $967bn (£711bn). The UK spends 2.33% of GDP on its military, but has pledged to increase that to 2.5% by 2027 and to 3% some time in the next parliament. Earlier this week the prime minister, Keir Starmer, declined to set a firm date for the UK achieving 3% as he unveiled a strategic defence review. Related: Why is defence such a hard sell? The same reason Starmer is struggling in the polls | Martin Kettle Rutte will visit London on Monday to meet Starmer before the summit. Downing Street said the prime minister and the secretary general would 'talk about how we ensure all allies step up their defence spending now in order to respond to the threats that we face now'. Germany's defence minister, Boris Pistorius, said Berlin would need up to 60,000 additional troops to meet new Nato targets for weapons and personnel. 'We are stepping up to our responsibility as Europe's largest economy,' the minister said on Thursday. Germany, which currently spends 2.12% of GDP on defence, had been singled out by Trump as a laggard in spending, though until Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Berlin had been reluctant to be a leader in European military spending, partly due to the memories of the militarism of the second world war.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Donald Trump to meet Xi Jinping in China after ‘very good' call on trade
Donald Trump said he had accepted an invitation to meet Xi Jinping in China after a phone conversation on trade was held between the leaders of the world's two largest economies. In a post on Truth Social, the US president said the 'very good' call lasted about 90 minutes and the conversation was 'almost entirely focused on trade'. He wrote: 'The call lasted approximately one and a half hours, and resulted in a very positive conclusion for both Countries. There should no longer be any questions respecting the complexity of Rare Earth products. Our respective teams will be meeting shortly at a location to be determined … During the conversation, President Xi graciously invited the First Lady and me to visit China, and I reciprocated.' Trump added that teams from the US and China would meet soon at a location to be determined. The Chinese foreign ministry said Trump initiated the call, which was only the second time this year the two leaders had spoken one to one. They previously spoke in January, before Trump's inauguration. The discussion followed posts on social media by Trump that praised the Chinese leader but also suggested it was difficult to reach a deal with him. Related: Trump's 50% tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum come into effect Trade negotiations between the US and China stalled shortly after an agreement between the countries on 12 May to reduce 145% import tariffs on China imposed by Washington, and Beijing's 125% tariffs on US imports in a tit-for-tat exchange. The agreement allowed for a reduction in tariffs during a 90-day moratorium before talks to resolve differences, especially over the export of Chinese rare earth metals, which are crucial to making electric cars and mobile phones. The US treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, the commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, and the US trade representative, Jamieson Greer, will represent the US side in negotiations. Trump is under pressure to resolve the dispute with China after a series of weak economic figures that showed a sharp slowdown in US growth and a reluctance among private companies to hire staff. Large US businesses have also complained about the high cost of purchasing vital goods made in China. The Chinese government said in a statement published by the state-run Xinhua news agency: 'Xi Jinping welcomed Trump's visit to China again, and Trump expressed his sincere gratitude.' However, it added: 'The US side should take a realistic view of the progress made and withdraw the negative measures imposed on China.' China's decision in April to suspend exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets has disrupted supplies needed by carmakers, computer chip manufacturers and military contractors around the world. Trump has long pushed for a call or a meeting with Xi, but China has rejected the proposal as out of keeping with its traditional approach based on hammering out agreement details before the leaders talk.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Russia is at war with Britain and US is no longer a reliable ally, UK adviser says
Russia is at war with Britain, the US is no longer a reliable ally and the UK has to respond by becoming more cohesive and more resilient, according to one of the three authors of the strategic defence review. Fiona Hill, from County Durham, became the White House's chief Russia adviser during Donald Trump's first term and contributed to the British government's strategy. She made the remarks in an interview with the Guardian. 'We're in pretty big trouble,' Hill said, describing the UK's geopolitical situation as caught between 'the rock' of Vladimir Putin's Russia and 'the hard place' of Donald Trump's increasingly unpredictable US. Hill, 59, is perhaps the best known of the reviewers appointed by Labour, alongside Lord Robertson, a former Nato secretary general, and the retired general Sir Richard Barrons. She said she was happy to take on the role because it was 'such a major pivot point in global affairs'. She remains a dual national after living in the US for more than 30 years. 'Russia has hardened as an adversary in ways that we probably hadn't fully anticipated,' Hill said, arguing that Putin saw the Ukraine war as a starting point to Moscow becoming 'a dominant military power in all of Europe'. As part of that long-term effort, Russia was already 'menacing the UK in various different ways,' she said, citing 'the poisonings, assassinations, sabotage operations, all kinds of cyber-attacks and influence operations. The sensors that we see that they're putting down around critical pipelines, efforts to butcher undersea cables.' The conclusion, Hill said, was that 'Russia is at war with us'. The foreign policy expert, a longtime Russia watcher, said she had first made a similar warning in 2015, in a revised version of a book she wrote about the Russian president with Clifford Gaddy, reflecting on the invasion and annexation of Crimea. 'We said Putin had declared war on the west,' she said. At the time, other experts disagreed, but Hill said events since had demonstrated 'he obviously had, and we haven't been paying attention to it'. The Russian leader, she argues, sees the fight in Ukraine as 'part of a proxy war with the United States; that's how he has persuaded China, North Korea and Iran to join in'. Putin believed that Ukraine had already been decoupled from the US relationship, Hill said, because 'Trump really wants to have a separate relationship with Putin to do arms control agreements and also business that will probably enrich their entourages further, though Putin doesn't need any more enrichment'. When it came to defence, however, she said the UK could not rely on the military umbrella of the US as during the cold war and in the generation that followed, at least 'not in the way that we did before'. In her description, the UK 'is having to manage its number one ally', though the challenge is not to overreact because 'you don't want to have a rupture'. This way of thinking appears in the defence review published earlier this week, which says 'the UK's longstanding assumptions about global power balances and structures are no longer certain' – a rare acknowledgment in a British government document of how far and how fast Trumpism is affecting foreign policy certainties. The review team reported to Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves, and the defence secretary, John Healey. Most of Hill's interaction were with Healey, however, and she said she had met the prime minister only once – describing him as 'pretty charming … in a proper and correct way' and as 'having read all the papers'. Hill was not drawn on whether she had advised Starmer or Healey on how to deal with Donald Trump, saying instead: 'The advice I would give is the same I would give in a public setting.' She said simply that the Trump White House 'is not an administration, it is a court' in which a transactional president is driven by his 'own desires and interests, and who listens often to the last person he talks to'. She added that unlike his close circle, Trump had 'a special affinity for the UK' based partly on his own family ties (his mother came from the Hebridean island of Lewis, emigrating to New York aged 18) and an admiration for the royal family, particularly the late queen. 'He talked endlessly about that,' she said. On the other hand, Hill is no fan of the populist right administration in the White House and worries it could come to Britain if 'the same culture wars' are allowed to develop with the encouragement of Republicans from the US. She noted that Reform UK had won a string of council elections last month, including in her native Durham, and that the party's leader, Nigel Farage, wanted to emulate some of the aggressive efforts to restructure government led by Elon Musk's 'department of government efficiency' (Doge) before his falling-out with Trump. 'When Nigel Farage says he wants to do a Doge against the local county council, he should come over here [to the US] and see what kind of impact that has,' she said. 'This is going to be the largest layoffs in US history happening all at once, much bigger than hits to steelworks and coalmines.' Hill's argument is that in a time of profound uncertainty, Britain needs greater internal cohesion if it is to protect itself. 'We can't rely exclusively on anyone any more,' she said, arguing that Britain needed to have 'a different mindset' based as much on traditional defence as on social resilience. Some of that, Hill said, was about a greater recognition of the level of external threat and initiatives for greater integration, by teaching first aid in schools or encouraging more teenagers to join school cadet forces, a recommendation of the defence review. 'What you need to do is get people engaged in all kinds of different ways in support of their communities,' she said. Hill said she saw that deindustrialisation and a rise of inequality in Russia and the US had contributed to the rise in national populism in both countries. Politicians in Britain, or elsewhere, 'have to be much more creative and engage people where they are at' as part of a 'national effort', she said. If this seems far away from a conventional view of defence, that's because it is, though Hill also argues that traditional conceptions of war are changing as technology evolves and with it what makes a potent force. 'People keep saying the British army has the smallest number of troops since the Napoleonic era. Why is the Napoleonic era relevant? Or that we have fewer ships than the time of Charles II. The metrics are all off here,' she said. 'The Ukrainians are fighting with drones. Even though they have no navy, they sank a third of the Russian Black Sea fleet.' Her aim, therefore, is not just to be critical but to propose solutions. Hill recalled that a close family friend, on hearing that she had taken on the defence review, had told her: ''Don't tell us how shite we are, tell us what we can do, how we can fix things.' People understand that we have a problem and that the world has changed.'
