Exclusive: Nuclear-battery maker with defense contracts raises $50 million
Zeno Power secured $50 million in its latest funding round. The nuclear-battery maker now plans to roughly double its workforce and do full-scale system demonstrations next year.
Why it matters: Energy is the chokepoint for so many national-security competitions. Persistent surveillance. Artificial intelligence. Troop wellbeing.
"With great power competition rising, the ocean floor, Arctic, and lunar surface are becoming the front lines of global security and economic progress — but they remain energy deserts," CEO Tyler Bernstein told Axios.
Follow the money: The Series B was led by Hanaco Ventures. Other backers include Seraphim, Balerion Space Ventures and Vanderbilt University.
The company's inked contracts with the U.S. Defense Department and NASA totaling tens of millions of dollars.
How it works: Zeno's batteries convert the decay of radioactive material into thermal and electrical power.
It showcased a prototype at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
It also locked in a strontium-90 fuel supply from the Energy Department. Applications range from subsurface operations on Earth to satellites in space.
The intrigue: John Richardson, a former chief of U.S. naval operations, joined Zeno's board of directors.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
2 hours ago
- Axios
Scoop: Democrats vow to boycott popular D.C. restaurants
Dozens of House and Senate Democrats have signed a pledge to boycott some of Washington, D.C.'s hottest restaurants over labor disputes, Axios has learned. Why it matters: The list includes Le Diplomate and posh downtown venues that are popular spots for Democratic fundraisers, giving lawmakers a rare opportunity to throw around some serious weight on behalf of a union. Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas), the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told Axios: "We can have big policy debates, but we also have to show the American people some concrete examples." "If a bunch of workers are organizing across multiple restaurants here in D.C., it will get attention. Absolutely," Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) told Axios. Driving the news: More than 50 House and Senate Democrats have signed onto Unite Here Local 25's pledge to avoid six of D.C.'s buzziest restaurants. In addition to Le Diplomate, they include Osteria Mozza and The Occidental, all owned by prolific East Coast restaurateur and Democratic donor Stephen Starr. There's also Rasika, Modena and Bombay Club — classics of the power dining scene in Washington, founded by chef Ashok Bajaj of Knightsbridge Restaurant Group. Between the lines: Political groups and candidates have spent thousands of dollars at those spots over the past year, federal campaign records show. Former President Obama and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos made headlines when they dined at Osteria Mozza in January. Then-President Biden was a repeat customer at Le Diplomate during his presidency. State of play: Unite Here Local 25 says the boycott is necessary because "workers have endured months of union busting." Both restaurant groups deny those claims and accuse the union of being heavyhanded. Unite Here is continuing its organizing at all six establishments, though there are currently no unionization elections scheduled. "Workers are calling for D.C. customers to boycott these restaurants, asking the public not to eat, meet or drink at these locations," says a copy of the pledge provided to Axios. Zoom in: Among the signers are some of Democrats' top fundraisers and biggest names, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are also on the list. It isn't just progressives or safe-district Democrats either: Landsman and Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) both signed on despite being moderates in competitive seats, as did Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) What they're saying: "With these restaurants that are frequented so much by members of Congress, our boycott of fundraisers and visiting could have a real impact — could really help these workers," said Casar. He added: "This is our opportunity when we're here in Washington, D.C. to not just go vote in the Capitol but actually go out in the community and make a difference." Landsman said his advice to the restaurants is to "avoid the negative publicity, and sit down with them." "We can say that all members on the list are personally boycotting," Benjy Cannon, a spokesperson for the union, told Axios in a message. "Many of them have been meeting personally with STARR and Knightsbridge workers all year." The other side: "Local 25's call for a boycott is baseless," Starr restaurants said in a statement. "A boycott of any kind can result in lost hours, wages, and tips that hardworking employees rely upon." "It is unfortunate that an organization that claims to want to represent employees would call for an action that would harm them." "We respect our employees wishes," Bajaj said. "How many of these congress members even know themselves that they're signing?" Zoom out: Starr's restaurant group has accused Unite Here Local 25 of overly aggressive tactics. That includes union reps showing up with petitions outside employees' homes, leading one bartender to sign it even though she planned to vote against a union, as Eater reported in February. Francisco López, a Le Diplomate server of five years, told Axios some employees are holding counter protests to the union.
Axios
2 hours ago
- Axios
Trump's incredibly volatile tariff landscape, in one chart
It's hard to overstate how rapidly President Trump has changed the very underpinnings of U.S. trade policy since the start of February. But this chart sums it up. Why it matters: Trump is seeking to reset America's economic relationship with the rest of the world. But he has also introduced a trade policy landscape that changes by the day. Tariffs with major trading partners are not only higher than in decades — they have also become far more volatile. There are two sets of economic risks from this new era of trade policy —one from the direct costs of higher import taxes, the other from the sense that policy could change minute-to-minute. By the numbers: The weighted average tariff — the average import tax paid on an imported good — was 1.6% when Trump first took office in 2017. For all the attention that his first-term tariffs and some Biden-era expansion of them got, that was only up to 2.4% at the start of this year. Now, swings in the average tariff rate that dwarf those changes can occur within a single news cycle, according to calculations by the Yale Budget Lab shared first with Axios. In the last month alone, the weighted average tariff has been as low as 6.9% (after a trade court ruling that Trump overstepped his emergency authority) and as high as 28%, just before a de-escalation with China. Between the lines: Corporate supply managers are used to adapting to changing circumstances, and can plug the details of any tariff regime into their calculations of where to source goods and how to price them. But the sheer unpredictability of this policy environment means it is less a one-time adjustment and more a constantly moving target. What they're saying: " Nobody could argue that what's happened has been smooth or designed in a way for the private sector to kind of gradually adapt to it, right?" Evan Smith, chief executive of supply chain technology company Altana, tells Axios. To adapt, he said, "it's less about trying to price in the exact current tariff schedule into their model or their forecasts, and more trying to be ready for whatever the world has in store." In the meantime, he said, that could mean lots of surges and shortages in the supply of goods for months to come, even if tariff policy stabilizes from here. The bottom line: " Many of these announcements don't last months and some don't even last days," Yale's Natasha Sarin tells Axios.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Nato set to approve new military purchases as part of a defence spending hike
Nato defence ministers are set to approve purchasing targets for stocking up on weapons and military equipment to better defend Europe, the Arctic and the North Atlantic, as part of a US push to ramp up security spending. The 'capability targets' lay out goals for each of the 32 nations to purchase priority equipment such as air defence systems, long-range missiles, artillery, ammunition, drones and 'strategic enablers' such as air-to-air refuelling, heavy air transport and logistics. Each nation's plan is classified, so details are scarce. 'Today we decide on the capability targets. From there, we will assess the gaps we have, not only to be able to defend ourselves today, but also three, five, seven years from now,' Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte said. 'All these investments have to be financed,' he told reporters before chairing the meeting at Nato's Brussels headquarters. US President Donald Trump and his Nato counterparts will meet on June 24-25 to agree to new defence investment goals. US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said that 'to be an alliance, you've got to be more than flags. You got to be more than conferences. You need to keep combat ready capabilities'. Spurred on by their own security concerns, European allies and Canada have already been ramping up military spending, including arms and ammunition purchases, since Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. At the same time, some allies balk at US demands to invest 5% of their gross domestic product in defence – 3.5% on core military spending and 1.5% on the roads, bridges, airfields and sea ports needed to deploy armies more quickly – when they have already struggled to grow their budgets to 2% of GDP. The new targets are assigned by Nato based on a blueprint agreed upon in 2023 – the military organisation's biggest planning shake-up since the Cold War — to defend its territory from an attack by Russia or another major adversary. Under those plans, Nato would aim to have up to 300,000 troops ready to move to its eastern flank within 30 days, although experts suggest the allies would struggle to muster those kinds of numbers. The member countries are assigned roles in defending Nato territory across three major zones – the high north and Atlantic area, a zone north of the Alps, and another in southern Europe. Nato planners believe that the targets must be met within five to 10 years, given the speed at which Russia is building its armed forces now, and which would accelerate were any peace agreement reached to end its war on Ukraine. Some fear Russia might be ready to strike at a Nato country even sooner, especially if Western sanctions are eased and Europe has not prepared. 'Are we going to gather here again and say 'OK, we failed a bit', and then maybe we start learning Russian?' Lithuanian Defence Minister Dovile Sakaliene said. Swedish Defence Minister Pal Jonson also warned that while Russia is bogged down in Ukraine right now, things could quickly change. 'We also know after an armistice or a peace agreement, of course, Russia is going to allocate more forces closer to our vicinity. Therefore, it's extremely important that the alliance use these couple of years now when Russia is still limited by its force posture in and around Ukraine,' Mr Jonson said. If the targets are respected, the member countries will need to spend at least 3% of GDP on defence. Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans said his country calculates in the medium term that 'we should spend 3.5% at least on defence, which in the Netherlands means an additional 16 to 19 billion euro (£13-16 billion) addition to our current budget.' The Netherlands is likely to buy more tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and long-range missile systems, including US-made Patriots that can target aircraft, cruise missiles and shorter-range ballistic missiles.
