Why the EU needs to go hard on quantum computing software
In the near future, the quantum computer holds the power to impact sectors from defence, to health care, chemicals and more with hardware already more and more accessible.
But cracking the physical infrastructure is one thing. Cracking on with the software is another entirely.
Experts, investors, and policymakers are increasingly paying attention to the code locked inside quantum computers – technology that could one day break cryptographic algorithms rapidly and upend the world's digital systems as we know them.
Though an array of developers across Europe work on hardware, the EU needs to shift focus to software development, says quantum engineer and researcher Olivier Ezratty.
"If Europe overlooks the strategic importance of quantum software development, it risks falling behind in the global race," he said, adding that the European Commission's current quantum strategy is focusing too heavily on hardware.
What is quantum, and why should we be good at it?
While classic computers use millions of electrons to process information as binary bits – either 0 or 1 – quantum computers use single particles like atoms or photons as quantum bits, or so-called qubits, which can exist in multiple states at once.
This may sound abstract, but is a fundamental difference. In practice, it means quantum computers can solve some problems far more efficiently than conventional computers – some requests that might take a conventional computer years could be solved within minutes or hours with a quantum computer.
Across the EU, multiple companies are developing hardware at every level of the tech stack: Germany's Toptica provides cutting-edge photonic lasers , while Finland's Bluefors is a leading supplier of dilution refrigerators – essential for cooling quantum systems close to absolute zero, a critical requirement for quantum computing. Denmark's Sparrow Quantum produces photonic chips , and French startup Alice & Bob has demonstrated its ability to develop error-resistant quantum computing.
In addition to that, Finland's IQM is famous for its pioneering of quantum computers. French cloud providers OVHcloud and Scaleway have linked several quantum startups emulators to their platforms, which allows users to develop quantum software at a much lower price point. The cloud operators are expected to offer access to real quantum computers soon.
But for Ezratty, these private initiatives are not enough to spur European quantum development and make it competitive globally.
In short: European companies are developing all you need for your quantum hardware – from chips to cables to cloud access – but the crucially needed software development that is a must to get a quantum computer off the ground is falling short.
Across the pond, US tech giant IBM offers an open source software kit, Qiskit, designed to help developers learn quantum programming. Through this, IBM is not only building a talent pool familiar with their tools but fostering early ecosystem integration.
Others such as QC Ware (US), Riverlane (UK), Classiq (Israel), and Horizon Quantum (Singapore) are developing their own software tools, too.
For now, Europeans have done a good job in financing quantum startups. However, this trajectory might eventually come to an end, especially when one looks at funding beyond Europe's borders.
For now, the majority of the bloc's quantum tech investments come from public funds, 51% to be exact, according to a 2024 McKinsey study. In comparison to just 2% in the US and 10% in the UK.
In addition to that, unlocking private investment proves historically difficult for companies in the EU: Between 2001 and 2023, the UK attracted 1.36x more private funding into quantum tech than the EU as a whole, for example.
The European Commission has acknowledged a financing gap, too. "[P]rivate investment is becoming the key differentiator between success and failure," the Commission's quantum strategy, published last month, reads.
Some EU quantum startups managed to raise significant amounts, though. IQM has pulled in a total of €200 million, Pasqal and Alice & Bob have raised €140 million and €130 million respectively.
But looking at funding rounds across the Atlantic, the European rounds are dwarfed in comparison. US-based QuEra closed a $230 million funding round in February, for example, while Maryland, US-based IonQ pulled in $360 million.
"For companies that are now at the growth stage, the EU lacks specialised venture capital funds that can act as lead investors in later stages funding rounds," Olivier Tonneau, founder of Quantonation, a French early stage quantum investment fund, told Euractiv.
Ideas to scale up investment include getting the EU to ease rules for banks, insurers, and pension funds to unlock more quantum scale-up financing – something the Commission has been indirectly considering after prompting from lobbyists
(nl, jp, vib)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euractiv
5 hours ago
- Euractiv
Europeans ponying up to fund US weapons shipments to Ukraine
Germany is the latest European country to pledge money for a NATO-led scheme to keep US weapons flowing to Ukraine, as Europe struggles to deliver enough military hardware and munitions themselves. The European cash flowing to Washington – including Germany's pledge of €500 million on Wednesday to fund a weapons package for Ukraine – is solidifying US President Donald Trump's vision of making Europe pay for American aid to Kyiv, and underscoring how essential American military arsenals and weapons factories remain. 'There is no way around the US industry, as European stocks and the capacity of the defence industry are exhausted in the short term,' one NATO official told Euractiv, adding that 'the need for certain military supplies in Ukraine is immense'. Trump proposed the deal last month, after again complaining that the US has already spent far too much on supporting Ukraine. The Netherlands was the first to put money in, funding a US weapons package worth $500 million. Denmark, Sweden and Norway jointly put in another €500 million shortly afterwards. Under the scheme, known as the Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List (PURL), Kyiv details its greatest weaponry needs to NATO officials. That shopping list is checked with Washington for availability, and then bundled into delivery packages worth $500 for other NATO governments – in Canada and Europe – to finance. That means the alliance is now functioning as 'a kind of transaction account' for military aid, the NATO official said. A new way of support Data gathered by Germany's Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW) already shows an increase in support coming from procurement even before the PURL arrangement got underway, at least partly because European arsenals have now been depleted by previous transfers to Ukraine. 'Unlike earlier in the war, when much of the aid came from donors' existing military stockpiles, Europe is now relying far more on new orders from the defence industry,' Taro Nishikawa, who leads IfW's Ukraine Support Tracker, told Euractiv. With the European defence industry still in its expansion phase, 'the PURL mechanism could potentially help address this challenge,' he said. A new wave of packages is expected to follow in September, according to the NATO official. Finland, the United Kingdom and Canada are among the countries that have shown interest in putting money into the effort. There's no timeline for how long the PURL effort might continue, according to the NATO official: "Its continuation depends on further developments in Ukraine, the political will of all parties involved and the availability of military capabilities on the US side.' (bts)
Euractiv
6 hours ago
- Euractiv
One AI company's battle against Europe's tech roadblocks
Germany's is, in many ways, a company made to win the hearts of EU lawmakers: Relatively young, doing business with established players and, most importantly, developing artificial intelligence. Co-founder Kai Kölsch tells Euractiv the company has been in the AI business since before US giant OpenAI launched its viral AI chatbot ChatGPT in 2022 – back when the technology was still simply called 'machine learning'. Now, like many other players in the AI field, Seedbox re-trains large language models (LLMs) developed by other companies – such as Google's Gemini or Meta's Llama – for its specific uses, for example a chatbot where patients can ask questions about their medication or an AI assistant for real estate appraisals. This is where 38-year-old Kölsch sees Europe's big chance: piggybacking on LLMs, rather than trying to clone them. 'We want to drive the [AI] field forward, take part in developing technology that makes technology more efficient,' he says. The Stuttgart native, still living in Germany's automotive capital, likens the situation to a car that's already on the road. Europe's tech field shouldn't be trying to reinvent the wheel, he suggests, but rather should focus its energy on improving the quality and efficiency of the drive. Of course, there are still bumps in the road for achieving this vision. Good projects for more hardware The first big problem for Europe's AI companies is that they do not have the same access to computing infrastructure as the US giants. Kölsch also says it would be good to have access to more of the coveted specialised chips needed for AI work – either for training or for running models. For Seedbox, there's a potential solution: The EU is currently building one of its AI factories in Stuttgart, designed to link startups and established industry players with the hardware to integrate AI into their offerings. The company is already cooperating with the computing centre where the factory is being set up, which allows it to train an AI model in all 24 official EU languages. But the new specialised chips will extend the possibilities, says Kölsch. And while he welcomes plans for far larger gigafactories also planned in the EU, Kölsch argues that these should be concentrated as tightly as possible to be useful for training new foundational models, in the vein of Google's Gemini or Meta's Llama. The Commission already split up the original 'AI CERN' idea into five separate gigafactories, which governments and companies are now debating to divide up even further. Dial down the rules Kölsch also has his doubts about EU regulation, specifically the AI Act. He'd like to see it delayed because of the effect he reckons it's having on established companies. 'They would rather do nothing than do something wrong,' he says. 'Doing nothing is the worst thing you can do right now.' The past months have seen several calls to delay European AI rules, with a parallel discussion about whether, and how much, they should be watered down as part of the Commission's ongoing digital simplification drive. While the EU executive was late in delivering key supporting documents for the AI Act – and some detail is still missing – most countries are also delayed in announcing which authorities will be responsible for implementing the Act in their territory, amplifying the legal uncertainty. 'That's where we need really clear signals', Kölsch says. 'Like, you won't be flogged and thrown into jail if you mess up. You just have to start now.' The bloc's data protection law, also often singled out by critics for blocking European companies, is also set to be – at least in part – simplified. Money, money, money But Kölsch highlights one particular issue as central to Europe's problems: 'At the end of the day, the key point is capital,' he tells Euractiv. There is a vast gulf between the sums of money pumped into tech in Europe vs in the US, even though the two economies are broadly comparable in size. Key to this is venture capital for young and innovative tech companies. Such investments are higher risk but also have enormous growth potential. According to numbers from the European Investment Bank, US companies receive six to eight times more venture capital investments than European startups. There are many, often-reported, reasons for the lack of cash. To pick just two: There are rules preventing big institutional investors like pension funds from putting money into venture because of the inherent risks. What's more, the bloc is not a single financial sector, it's 27 small ones, which don't work well enough in funnelling cash to promising start-ups. 'It's absurd that we want to finance Europe and at the same time European pension funds are investing in US bonds', says Andreas Schwarzenbrunner from Speedinvest, an EU venture fund. 'The money is there, Europe is still very rich', he continues – 'it's simply invested in the wrong channels.' Schwarzenbrunner is quick to point out that Europe has made significant progress after realising it missed the boat for thirty years. There is now a working ecosystem for financing young companies. Still, European tech companies face big problems in accessing financing – both for building prototypes and then, once they have proven the tech, for expanding, optimally across the EU. Even if they manage to do so, US Big Tech is lurking with many billions in cash which they will gladly use to snap up (and close down) promising start-ups. Kölsch says that is already being courted by non-European companies like AMD and Nvidia while European ones are failing to keep up with the speed of technical innovation. 'No company in Germany... really understands what we do', he says. 'Who understands us is the Americans.' Talent follows money This connects to another problem that EU and national governments have wrestled with for years: talent. currently has 15 employees and is recruiting a new AI engineer – as are other European companies, with many struggling to find staff. To boost the potential workforce, the EU made 2023 a 'Year of skills', with a strategy on a 'Union of Skills' that aimed for one in three university students to enrol in STEM degrees by 2030 – which are foundational for AI development. 'By offering world-class education and research infrastructure, competitive career prospects, and a supportive regulatory and funding environment, the EU can become a destination of choice for the brightest minds,' the skills strategy reads. But it's hard to compete when Big Tech is dangling eye-watering salaries to reel in AI talent. Top researchers have reportedly been offered first-year pay packages of more than €100 million to join Meta. Meanwhile, the word 'salary' does not appear in the EU's Union of Skills strategy. 'We can't allow ourselves to complain that we can't educate talent,' says Kölsch. 'Talent just goes to where the capital is.' (nl, jp, ow)
Euractiv
2 days ago
- Euractiv
OpenAI wants US-wide AI rules with an eye on Europe's rulebook
The company says it wants federal AI rules to avoid 'a patchwork of state rules' Euractiv is part of the Trust Project Maximilian Henning Euractiv Aug 13, 2025 15:00 2 min. read News Based on facts, either observed and verified directly by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. OpenAI is urging California, a trendsetter in US regulation, to align its AI rules with existing national or international frameworks, including the EU's, to avoid conflicting regulations across the country. The EU passed its AI Act last year and introduced a voluntary Code of Practice for providers of large AI models, a non-binding framework signed by almost all major US and European companies, including OpenAI. In a letter to California Governor Gavin Newsom, OpenAI said the state should treat AI companies as compliant with its own rules if they have signed up to the EU's code, or if they work with the US's federal AI Centre. In the letter, OpenAI's chief lobbyist Christopher Lehane recommended policies 'that avoid duplication and inconsistencies' with those of similar democratic regimes. In a blog post accompanying the letter, the company warned the US must choose between setting clear national standards for AI and 'a patchwork of state rules', adding: 'Imagine how hard it would have been to win the Space Race if California's aerospace and tech industries had been tangled in state-by-state regulations'. At a US Senate hearing in May, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said having 50 different regulatory regimes would be 'quite bad' and warned that adopting the EU's approach to AI regulation would be 'disastrous', instead calling for a 'light touch' federal approach. California, the most populous and wealthiest US state, often seeks to set an example for others through its regulation. But tensions over AI rules between Washington and state capitals have been brewing for some time. At the start of July, the US Senate scrapped a decade-long ban on state-level AI laws from President Donald Trump's broad budget bill. Weeks later, the Trump administration published an AI Action Plan seeking to block federal funding for AI in states with 'burdensome AI regulations'. (de)
