Latest news with #NeilArmstrong
Yahoo
a day ago
- General
- Yahoo
Don't miss the half-lit first quarter moon rise tonight: Here's what to look for
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The half-lit disk of the first quarter moon will grace the night sky on Monday (June 2), presenting a wealth of lunar features to explore before Earth's natural satellite sets below the horizon in the early morning hours. The moon hits its first quarter phase at 11:41 p.m. EDT on June 2 (0341 GMT on June 3) for viewers in New York, who will find its semi-shadowed disk high above the southwestern horizon immediately after sunset, according to stargazing website At this time, the moon is positioned at a 90-degree angle away from the sun in the sky, having travelled a quarter of the way around our planet since its new moon phase on May 26. Viewing the moon through a pair of 10x50 binoculars will reveal a myriad of craters and broken terrain features peppering the line separating the dayside and night side of the lunar surface, known as the terminator. The magnifying power of a 6-inch telescope (or greater) will grant an even closer view of the moon's more prominent features, such as the Albategnius walled plain, located close to the terminator just below the lunar equator. Countless shadowed craters line the terminator all the way down to the moon's southern pole, while the 54-mile-wide (87 km) Aristotles Crater and smaller Eudoxus Crater form a tempting target on the border of Mare Frigoris to the north. The dark expanses of Mare Serenitatis (Latin for Sea of Serenity) and Mare Tranquillitatis (Sea of Tranquility) can also be seen scarring the moon's surface, easily visible to the naked eye. The 'lunar seas' formed billions of years ago when masses of molten lava flooded impact basins excavated by devastating asteroid strikes. TOP TELESCOPE PICK: Want to see the shadowed craters and lunar seas for yourself? The Celestron NexStar 4SE is ideal for beginners wanting quality, reliable and quick views of celestial objects. For a more in-depth look at our Celestron NexStar 4SE review. Mare Tranquillitatis' southern shore was the site of the historic Apollo 11 moon landing, where astronauts Neil Armstrong and Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin took humanity's first steps on another world as pilot Michael Collins looked on from lunar orbit in July 1969. Mars can be found to the moon's lower right after sunset on June 2, with the bright star Regulus of the constellation Leo positioned directly between the two solar system bodies. The following week will see the waxing gibbous moon grow ever larger ahead of its full 'Strawberry Moon' phase on June 11, named for the brief U.S. strawberry-picking season with which it happens to coincide. Editor's Note: If you would like to share your astrophotography with readers, then please send your photo(s), comments, and your name and location to spacephotos@
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Can the US create high-tech manufacturing jobs?
It is hard to imagine exactly how we will know who won the AI arms race. We would need a global consensus about what AI that supersedes human-level intelligence (commonly referred to as artificial general intelligence) looks like, a benchmark that is much harder to pin down than a picture of Neil Armstrong on the moon. Whatever the case, industry and government officials at the SelectUSA Investment Summit agreed: the US wants, needs, to be first. A crucial part of winning the AI race in the US involves creating a high-tech manufacturing industry that will build the thousands of chips and data centres needed to power this technology. The creation of such an industry is aligned with one of the Trump administration's main goals: bringing manufacturing jobs back to the US. However, delegates at the SelectUSA Investment Summit made it clear that this was not an easy task and that the lack of a trained labour force is one of the main obstacles they face. How will the US address its skilled labour shortfall in order to power its AI ambitions? Since 1997, 'the US lost around five million manufacturing jobs', US Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer told an audience at the summit. 'Nearly 100,000 factories closed, and we experienced one of the largest drops in manufacturing employment in history.' However, that was all about to change, Chavez said. 'From manufacturing to mining and technology to transportation, our industries are coming back to life because President Trump has sent a clear message: America is open for business.' Much of President Trump's tariff regime, despite the actual consequences it has had so far, has been justified through this goal. Manufacturing jobs left the US when the world embraced globalisation, and the president argues that high tariffs will force companies to build locally, and therefore bring those jobs back to the US. For this, he has received support from unlikely allies such as United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain and the Brotherhood of Teamsters (one of the US' biggest unions). At SelectUSA, state governors from both parties and industry leaders also made it clear that they supported increasing manufacturing with AI integration at its core. Siemens CEO Barbara Humpton said the technological advances in manufacturing reflected an "AI industrial revolution". "There are still old notions of what manufacturing looks like. That it is hot and hard and dirty work, but it is cutting-edge technology," Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer said about her state, traditionally the home of US auto manufacturing. There are various objectives at play. There is the political goal of bringing back manufacturing and the industry goal of making these processes more efficient through AI integration. Underpinning both of these is the need to develop a high-tech manufacturing sector that can sustain it all. Developing sensitive technology independently from China seems to be a national security issue everyone can get behind. Since 2020, the US has attracted more than $540bn in semiconductor supply chain investments. The CHIPS and Science Act, passed in 2022, has been a major factor for domestic and foreign companies giving grants, subsidies and other incentives to develop the sector. The CHIPS Act is the first major piece of industrial policy the US has passed since the 1950s. It is a notable effort in a country that is not accustomed to long-term planning. However, it means that the US is catching up with other countries that have spent decades developing a workforce with the necessary skills. Taiwanese companies such as TSMC have been a major source of investment since the passing of the CHIPS Act; the company says its total investment in the US will reach $165bn (T$4.93trn). Even with this policy, however, the US may not necessarily have been an economically logical place for it to build semiconductors. The security guarantee that the US provides for Taiwan also played a role in attracting companies that might have otherwise produced more locally. 'I am not sure that purely on the economics, the US would be a very good bet, even with incentives for building leading-edge fab custody, mostly because of the workforce. We just don't have a tradition of this highly consequential workforce that you really need for the most advanced chip manufacturing,' W. Patrick Wilson, vice-president of government relations at Taiwanese chip company MediaTek, told Investment Monitor. 'We always understood that another component of it was deepening the US-Taiwan partnership.' Whatever the confluence of factors that has led to vast investment in the semiconductor industry, it has meant that foreign companies are now taking on the challenge of building the necessary workforce. The Semiconductor Industry Association predicts a deficit of 67,000 workers within the country's semiconductor industry by 2030. According to GlobalData Strategic Intelligence principal analyst Isabel Al-Dhahir, this gap "is likely to affect not just domestic chip production but also adjacent industries such as data centre construction, potentially resulting in delays and escalating costs'. At the SelectUSA summit, the need for the US to upskill workers was widely acknowledged by both economic development organisations and businesses with major investments in the US. One official who is part of the Tech Hubs Programme, highlighted that in her city, they "put industry in the room first" and asked them "what are your needs for your workforce today? What are they tomorrow?" These conversations happen before they contact technical colleges to work together to develop curricula. Representatives from US and Taiwanese semiconductor companies also expressed frustrations about the skilled labour shortage, particularly as the rise of automation changes the qualifications workers need. 'The area that we really focus on for workforce development is that mid tier. Ours will be the most advanced silicon wafer facility in the world, which means that we are implementing a lot of automation. So, we will have fewer operators. Operators typically have a high school-dependent education, but we will need more technicians with that community college, two-year degree,' said Brent Omhdal, executive vice-president for government affairs at Taiwanese chip company GlobalWafers. While companies are betting that educational initiatives led by private-public partnerships will create this workforce in the long run, their time horizons do not always conform to the speed the industry wants to move at. TSMC, which announced in March that it would invest an extra $100bn to build five more fabs in the US, has already dealt with the consequences of this asymmetry. As of January 2025, half of the 2,200 workers at TSMC's Arizona plant had been brought in from Taiwan. The company realised they could not stay within budget and train a local workforce with the necessary skills on time. This caused pushback from unions, who were promised the plant would create jobs for local workers. The example underscores the difficulties of supercharging the development of an industry without a readily available workforce to match it. Barry Broome, Greater Sacramento Economic Council CEO, says he witnessed 'the destruction of the economic base of the Midwest', while working in Ohio and Michigan earlier in his career. The problem was not free trade agreements like NAFTA, he argues, it was that 'there wasn't an effort to increase US competitiveness'. When Investment Monitor asked whether the simultaneous push to reshore jobs while integrating AI and automation will bring back as many jobs as some people expect, Broome said: 'It won't.' 'I think it will bring back a lot of jobs. I mean, the fact of the matter is, we need a nationwide movement to upskill people, because you are not going to make a living wage unless you are technically skilled,' Broome noted. Increased automation, while it might contribute to the growth of the industry and lower costs, would also undermine the goal of job creation. 'Trump's goals are reshoring and increasing employment in the manufacturing industry," Beatriz Valle, senior technology analyst at GlobalData, tells Investment Monitor. "Trump is cultivating ties with many Big Tech CEOs whose main goal is to grow automation and robotics, which, in some cases, may replace types of manual work, and there is a clear contradiction between these two goals." Wider economic questions also underpin the development of this workforce. Will companies invest more in automation to counteract higher operating costs in the US? What does that mean, in the long term, for the number of jobs that will be created? And, more importantly, will the US be able to pursue all these goals with enough speed to win the global AI race? "Can the US create high-tech manufacturing jobs?" was originally created and published by Investment Monitor, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
The Age
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- The Age
This astronaut says space is not the lonely place we see in science fiction
Chris Hadfield was nine when Neil Armstrong took his one small step for (a) man. Watching the astronauts from his small town in southern Ontario, he decided what to do with the rest of his life. But where many starry-eyed youngsters harbour similarly grandiose ambitions, little Chris got to work. 'I started making decisions when I was nine years old to try and turn myself into an adult that could do those things. I learned to swim. I thought about what food I ate. I made sure I kept my body in shape. I joined the Air Cadets so they would teach me how to fly. I studied so I could go to university.' There were significant obstacles along the way, not least the fact that Canada didn't have a space program. But Hadfield emphasises that he didn't hope to become an astronaut. ''I want to' or 'I dream to,' that's not nearly enough. You have to decide to. I dream of winning an Olympic gold medal, but obviously I haven't decided to because I never really worked at it. I'm not going to win an Olympic gold medal unless they give one for laziness and procrastination.' He's speaking from his cottage on an island not 200 metres from where he made the decision that would define the course of his life. Yes, he might have spent 165 days in space and travelled all over the world in the most literal sense, but these days he has returned to the place where it all began. Not that he doesn't travel. He's about to tour Australia with a new live show in which he recalls his adventures in space, answers audience questions and performs music live. In 2013 Hadfield became the friendly face of off-earth travel when his cover of David Bowie's Space Oddity – performed onboard the International Space Station – became a viral hit the world over. The novelty of the music video doesn't reflect his serious accomplishments, however. He was the first Canadian commander of the ISS, and notched up a total of 14 hours and 50 minutes of extravehicular activity (that's spacewalking to us earthbound types). He retired in 2013 but has maintained an active role as a writer, speaker and adviser. The young Hadfield decided to become a space traveller, but the 65-year-old today notes that he never made the achievement of that goal a measure of self-worth or success. 'I thought, there's a lot of forces beyond my control. Most of them. But I'm going to work really hard on the ones I can control. If I do my part right, and I get some luck, then I will have a chance of flying in space ... I got to fly in space three times. If I hadn't flown in space, I never would have thought of myself as a failure or as somehow cheated. It just helped me make all of the little decisions on a daily basis as to what to do next. ' That meant following in the footsteps of his heroes. Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin and Mike Collins were all engineers, so he earned an engineering degree. They were pilots, so he became one too, and then he climbed the ranks to fighter pilot and test pilot. 'Neil and Mike and Buzz were all test pilots. That's like a PhD in flying. I could have been a test pilot for the rest of my life.' Hadfield speaks with the confidence and conviction you'd expect of someone who possesses the right stuff to make it to space. During his first spacewalk, a visor malfunction temporarily blinded him. Most of us would probably panic if things went wrong 400 kilometres above the Earth with just a few centimetres of plastic between you and the void. It's hard to imagine Hadfield losing his cool. TAKE 7: THE ANSWERS ACCORDING TO CHRIS HADFIELD Worst habit? Not knowing the difference between work and play. Greatest fear? The untimely death of my children or grandchildren. The line that stayed with you? When I did my third space flight, my dad said: 'Trust yourself. You've done the work. You're going to have to make decisions without being able to ask anybody else, that have life or death consequences. But you're not doing it frivolously. You've built yourself the capability and right to do those things, so trust yourself.' Biggest regret? I don't live a life of regret. I spend life looking forwards, and I try and forgive myself and other people as often as I can. Favourite book? Carrying the Fire, by Mike Collins. He was the guy who orbited the moon while Neil and Buzz walked on the surface. The artwork/song you wish was yours? Almost every song I hear. Especially the simple ones, right? It's like, 'How come I didn't write that?' If you could time travel, where would you choose to go? If I could truly time travel, I would be a frequent flyer. I don't want to just go live somewhere else. But I would love to go back to some of the great significant moments in history. Wouldn't it be great to spend a day at the Colosseum in Rome? Just put on the toga, and somehow materialise and go to an event for the day, and then come back to 2025. 'Panic is like extreme fear. There's a hyena in front of you with its jaws open? You need to get adrenaline into your veins, and you need to run faster than you've ever run in your life. I try to avoid that ever happening. In my life as a fighter pilot and test pilot there were all kinds of hyenas with their jaws open, figuratively. All kinds of dangers that reared their head instantaneously, but most of them are foreseeable. I'm going to use the quiet times to prepare myself so that I don't have to be afraid, and I sure don't want to panic.' That mindset is something that astronauts share. 'You choose people that have quite a large skill set, but also the right mentality and the right sense of humility and purposefulness. The filter that chooses astronauts tends to spit out the same type of person, no matter what country they're from. There's a great commonality when you get together as a group of astronauts.' It's reassuring to hear that the pettiness of politics is mostly confined to our planet. When you're travelling at 28,000km/h with people from all over the world, it brings you up to speed on what we have in common. 'You're over Ukraine, and you can look down at the worst of human behaviour, of violence and death and murder sanctioned at the national scale. But 10 minutes later, you're over farmers' fields ... You come around the world, and it puts things into perspective for you, that there are wicked things happening, but the vast majority of what's happening is just people living their lives. And they want the same things, no matter what country they're in.' Our earthly laws don't even apply in space. The ISS follows the International Crew Code of Conduct, designed to ensure that the squabbles and resentments of nations don't make it past the airlock. 'I think there's a real beauty in that. It's not just technical exploration or scientific experiment. It's also a geopolitical experiment.' It's an experiment that Hadfield thinks will only grow in importance as more nations launch their own space programs and private corporations do the same. 'As we start settling on the moon, whose laws will apply? Will we take the International Crew Code of Conduct and make that the law of the land? Or will we import a little China and a little America and a little India and just transplant that onto the moon?' It's apparent that Hadfield doesn't have much time for the 'incredibly stupid stuff' that can take place on Earth. But his time among the stars also reminded him that 'we're incredibly imperfect, yet we've still carved the Venus de Milo and built Angkor Wat and we revere Uluru. We built a space station where we've been working peacefully for 25 years.' There's an irony to the song that first brought Hadfield into many of our lives. Where Bowie lamented that 'planet Earth is blue, and there's nothing I can do,' Hadfield says that floating in a tin-can is the antithesis of a bummer. Loading 'The biggest misconception is that people think it's lonely. It's often a metaphor for loneliness. If you watch movies like First Man or Ad Astra, those movies are so sad and grim, and everybody's glum. Or the series that Sean Penn was in, The First, everybody's just so unhappy,' he says. 'But it's completely the opposite. It's magnificent. You're weightless. You have a superpower. You can fly. It's the coolest. And the whole world is pouring by out your window.'
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - From moonshots to megawatts: Fusion's Cold War moment
When Neil Armstrong stepped onto the lunar surface in 1969, he declared it a 'giant leap for mankind.' This iconic moment, captured on grainy television screens worldwide, was not merely a triumph of human ingenuity but the result of intense geopolitical competition between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The rivalry, fueled by the existential anxieties of the Cold War, paradoxically propelled humanity forward. Today, we stand on the threshold of another transformative milestone — achieving practical nuclear fusion. And once again, competition, particularly among the U.S., China and Europe, may prove critical. Idealists often advocate global cooperation, envisioning pooled resources and collective progress. However, historical realities suggest that competitive pressure often yields faster, more substantial results. The sluggish progress of ITER, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, a collaboration of 35 nations including the U.S., China, Russia and several European countries, illustrates the inherent inefficiencies in sprawling multinational cooperation. Initially proposed in 1985, ITER's schedule has repeatedly slipped, with first plasma now anticipated no sooner than 2034. Development setbacks, bureaucratic inertia, conflicting national interests, inconsistent funding, and prolonged negotiations have significantly hindered progress. Contrast ITER's delays with the rapid advances of private and national fusion efforts. In the U.S., ventures such as Commonwealth Fusion Systems, driven by academic ingenuity and substantial private investments, have reached critical milestones. Commonwealth recently demonstrated a groundbreaking high-temperature superconducting magnet, a crucial advancement toward viable fusion energy. Today, more than 50 private startups globally have attracted more than $8 billion in investment, all racing to be the first to commercialize fusion. China, too, has aggressively advanced its fusion ambitions. Chinese researchers working on the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak, popularly known as the 'artificial sun,' recently maintained plasma at over 120 million degrees Celsius for more than 400 seconds, a remarkable achievement that brings fusion significantly closer to practical application. These achievements make clear that when the stakes are high, competitive dynamics accelerate progress in ways international collaborations often cannot. Europe, often perceived as a collaborative partner in ITER, is now asserting itself as a formidable competitor in the fusion arena. The European Union has long supported fusion research through such initiatives as EUROfusion, which coordinates research across numerous European laboratories. Facilities such as the Joint European Torus in the UK and the Wendelstein 7-X stellarator in Germany have achieved significant milestones, demonstrating Europe's commitment to advancing fusion technology. Moreover, European startups such as Marvel Fusion in Germany have attracted substantial investments to develop innovative fusion approaches, signaling a shift towards a more competitive stance in the global fusion race. The historical parallels are instructive. The Cold War-era space race between the U.S. and the Soviet Union resulted in unprecedented technological achievements. Beyond landing astronauts on the moon, this competition spurred developments in microelectronics, telecommunications, materials science and computing. The intense desire to outperform a geopolitical rival drove nations to push technological limits, delivering widespread benefits continuously. Could NASA have achieved the moon landing sooner had it been obligated to negotiate every decision with multiple international partners? The answer is unequivocally no. Multilateral consensus-building, however well-intentioned, tends to slow decision-making and dilute ambition. This lesson applies directly to the fusion race. With the accelerating impacts of climate change and global energy demands expected to rise by nearly 50 percent by 2050, fusion energy's promise — clean, abundant, and nearly limitless energy — is urgently needed. Fusion has the potential to decarbonize global energy grids, diminish geopolitical tensions over fossil fuels, and provide stable energy to developing nations. Of course, competition is not without critics. Some argue it leads to duplication, secrecy, or geopolitical tension. Yet history and current fusion progress show competition can sharpen focus, streamline resources, and accelerate timelines where cooperation might stall. Indeed, competition among the U.S., China and Europe is about more than mere technological superiority; it shapes geopolitical alliances, influences global economic dynamics, and may redefine leadership in the 21st century. Just as the U.S. emerged from the space race as a global technological and economic powerhouse, the victor in fusion development will likely dictate future standards for global energy and technology governance. Fusion technology inherently offers widespread humanitarian benefits. Even if initial successes are regionally concentrated, these breakthroughs will inevitably diffuse globally due to their immense economic and environmental advantages. Like space-derived innovations such as satellite technology and computing, fusion's benefits will become universally accessible. Climate negotiations at COP28 underscore the difficulties inherent in international cooperation. Achieving even minimal consensus on reducing fossil fuel production (The 'transition away from fossil fuels' agreement) was politically contentious and largely ineffective, delivering superficial agreements that catered more to geopolitical power dynamics than to any meaningful climate solutions. Such bureaucratic delays and diluted outcomes illustrate why humanity cannot afford to rely solely on multilateral cooperation. Ultimately, the fusion race is not merely a geopolitical contest; it is a vital competition for human survival and global prosperity. While competition may not always be harmonious or efficient, neither was the space race. Yet, the space race advanced humanity dramatically. Allowing the fusion race to unfold unhindered may again deliver swift, transformative solutions at a time when humanity urgently needs them. Our planet and our future depend on embracing this competitive drive. Oded Gour-Lavie is CEO and co-founder of nT-Tao, a compact fusion power company based in Israel. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
6 days ago
- Science
- The Hill
From moonshots to megawatts: Fusion's Cold War moment
When Neil Armstrong stepped onto the lunar surface in 1969, he declared it a 'giant leap for mankind.' This iconic moment, captured on grainy television screens worldwide, was not merely a triumph of human ingenuity but the result of intense geopolitical competition between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The rivalry, fueled by the existential anxieties of the Cold War, paradoxically propelled humanity forward. Today, we stand on the threshold of another transformative milestone — achieving practical nuclear fusion. And once again, competition, particularly among the U.S., China and Europe, may prove critical. Idealists often advocate global cooperation, envisioning pooled resources and collective progress. However, historical realities suggest that competitive pressure often yields faster, more substantial results. The sluggish progress of ITER, the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, a collaboration of 35 nations including the U.S., China, Russia and several European countries, illustrates the inherent inefficiencies in sprawling multinational cooperation. Initially proposed in 1985, ITER's schedule has repeatedly slipped, with first plasma now anticipated no sooner than 2034. Development setbacks, bureaucratic inertia, conflicting national interests, inconsistent funding, and prolonged negotiations have significantly hindered progress. Contrast ITER's delays with the rapid advances of private and national fusion efforts. In the U.S., ventures such as Commonwealth Fusion Systems, driven by academic ingenuity and substantial private investments, have reached critical milestones. Commonwealth recently demonstrated a groundbreaking high-temperature superconducting magnet, a crucial advancement toward viable fusion energy. Today, more than 50 private startups globally have attracted more than $8 billion in investment, all racing to be the first to commercialize fusion. China, too, has aggressively advanced its fusion ambitions. Chinese researchers working on the Experimental Advanced Superconducting Tokamak, popularly known as the 'artificial sun,' recently maintained plasma at over 120 million degrees Celsius for more than 400 seconds, a remarkable achievement that brings fusion significantly closer to practical application. These achievements make clear that when the stakes are high, competitive dynamics accelerate progress in ways international collaborations often cannot. Europe, often perceived as a collaborative partner in ITER, is now asserting itself as a formidable competitor in the fusion arena. The European Union has long supported fusion research through such initiatives as EUROfusion, which coordinates research across numerous European laboratories. Facilities such as the Joint European Torus in the UK and the Wendelstein 7-X stellarator in Germany have achieved significant milestones, demonstrating Europe's commitment to advancing fusion technology. Moreover, European startups such as Marvel Fusion in Germany have attracted substantial investments to develop innovative fusion approaches, signaling a shift towards a more competitive stance in the global fusion race. The historical parallels are instructive. The Cold War-era space race between the U.S. and the Soviet Union resulted in unprecedented technological achievements. Beyond landing astronauts on the moon, this competition spurred developments in microelectronics, telecommunications, materials science and computing. The intense desire to outperform a geopolitical rival drove nations to push technological limits, delivering widespread benefits continuously. Could NASA have achieved the moon landing sooner had it been obligated to negotiate every decision with multiple international partners? The answer is unequivocally no. Multilateral consensus-building, however well-intentioned, tends to slow decision-making and dilute ambition. This lesson applies directly to the fusion race. With the accelerating impacts of climate change and global energy demands expected to rise by nearly 50 percent by 2050, fusion energy's promise — clean, abundant, and nearly limitless energy — is urgently needed. Fusion has the potential to decarbonize global energy grids, diminish geopolitical tensions over fossil fuels, and provide stable energy to developing nations. Of course, competition is not without critics. Some argue it leads to duplication, secrecy, or geopolitical tension. Yet history and current fusion progress show competition can sharpen focus, streamline resources, and accelerate timelines where cooperation might stall. Indeed, competition among the U.S., China and Europe is about more than mere technological superiority; it shapes geopolitical alliances, influences global economic dynamics, and may redefine leadership in the 21st century. Just as the U.S. emerged from the space race as a global technological and economic powerhouse, the victor in fusion development will likely dictate future standards for global energy and technology governance. Fusion technology inherently offers widespread humanitarian benefits. Even if initial successes are regionally concentrated, these breakthroughs will inevitably diffuse globally due to their immense economic and environmental advantages. Like space-derived innovations such as satellite technology and computing, fusion's benefits will become universally accessible. Climate negotiations at COP28 underscore the difficulties inherent in international cooperation. Achieving even minimal consensus on reducing fossil fuel production (The 'transition away from fossil fuels' agreement) was politically contentious and largely ineffective, delivering superficial agreements that catered more to geopolitical power dynamics than to any meaningful climate solutions. Such bureaucratic delays and diluted outcomes illustrate why humanity cannot afford to rely solely on multilateral cooperation. Ultimately, the fusion race is not merely a geopolitical contest; it is a vital competition for human survival and global prosperity. While competition may not always be harmonious or efficient, neither was the space race. Yet, the space race advanced humanity dramatically. Allowing the fusion race to unfold unhindered may again deliver swift, transformative solutions at a time when humanity urgently needs them. Our planet and our future depend on embracing this competitive drive. Oded Gour-Lavie is CEO and co-founder of nT-Tao, a compact fusion power company based in Israel.
