GE Aerospace and Magellan Aerospace have signed a memorandum of understanding to establish maintenance, repair, and overhaul capabilities in Canada for the F414-GE-39E engine that powers Saab’s JAS 39 Gripen E fighter.

The agreement, announced on July 22, would move forward only if the Canadian government selects the Gripen E for the Royal Canadian Air Force’s fighter fleet.

Under the proposed arrangement, GE Aerospace would train Magellan personnel and license the company as Canada’s domestic center of excellence for F414 engine sustainment. The work would be carried out at Magellan’s facility in Mississauga, Ontario.

Domestic engine support

“Today’s MOU signing builds on a six-decade relationship between GE Aerospace and Magellan that spans both military and commercial engines and will ensure the Royal Canadian Air Force has access to engine sustainment services in country to ensure readiness of the F414 engines,” said Paul Ferraro, Vice President of Defense Engines & Services at GE Aerospace.

The companies said the capability would support aircraft readiness, engine availability, and long-term fleet performance while giving Canada more control over fighter maintenance.

The proposed center would also extend Magellan’s role in military engine support by developing specialized infrastructure, technical expertise, and a skilled workforce within the country.

If implemented, the project would fit with Canada’s push to strengthen its domestic defense industrial base and retain more high-value aerospace work at home.

Sovereign aerospace capability

“This MOU reflects our shared intent to build enduring sovereign aerospace capabilities in Canada,” said Haydn Martin, Magellan’s Vice President in Business Development, Marketing, and Contracts.

“Should the Saab JAS 39 Gripen E aircraft be selected, Magellan Aerospace will be ready to provide world-class engine maintenance, repair and overhaul services that enhance operational readiness for the Royal Canadian Air Force while maintaining highly skilled Canadian jobs, developing advanced technical expertise, and strengthening Canada’s long-term defence industrial capacity,” he said.

For the Royal Canadian Air Force, having an in-country engine sustainment option could reduce dependence on foreign maintenance networks and improve access to repair capacity during periods of higher operational demand.

The planned capability would also support the development and retention of personnel trained to work on fighter propulsion systems.

F414 engine track record

The Gripen E uses the F414-GE-39E, part of GE Aerospace’s F414 engine family. According to GE Aerospace, the F414 has accumulated more than five million flight hours, while more than 1,600 engines have been delivered to eight nations.

The engine features a six-module architecture intended to simplify maintenance and allow components to be replaced or interchanged.

GE Aerospace also says the F414 operates without scheduled overhauls, relying instead on on-condition maintenance designed to maximize engine availability and reduce life-cycle costs.

The engine is built to provide rapid throttle response and unrestricted performance.

However, the Canadian sustainment plan remains tied to Ottawa’s fighter procurement decision. The proposed Mississauga operation would proceed only if Canada chooses the Gripen E, making the MOU both an industrial commitment and a potential element of Saab’s bid for Canada’s future air combat requirements.

Air defense used to revolve around one basic problem: stopping enemy aircraft and missiles before they reached their targets. The rapid spread of drones has complicated that equation.

Cheap one-way attack drones, small reconnaissance UAVs, and larger strike platforms can now threaten military bases, infrastructure, and frontline units without requiring an adversary to risk an expensive crewed aircraft.

Traditional surface-to-air missiles, or SAMs, remain among the most powerful tools available for defending airspace. But using costly missiles against inexpensive drones can create an unfavorable exchange.

That has pushed militaries toward another option: drone interceptors designed specifically to hunt and destroy hostile UAVs. Here is how the two approaches compare across six key areas.

Cost per interception

The biggest difference is economics.

Modern surface-to-air missiles can be extremely expensive because they require sophisticated seekers, propulsion systems, guidance electronics, and warheads capable of destroying fast and highly maneuverable targets.

That makes sense when the incoming threat is a fighter jet, helicopter, or cruise missile. The calculation changes when the target is a relatively inexpensive drone.

Drone interceptors can potentially offer a lower-cost response. Many are built around simpler airframes, compact sensors, and reusable or comparatively inexpensive components. Some destroy targets by collision, while others carry small warheads or other defeat mechanisms.

The objective is simple: avoid spending a high-value interceptor on a low-value threat whenever possible.

Speed and target types

Surface-to-air missiles maintain a major advantage when speed matters.

SAM systems are designed to engage targets traveling at high subsonic, supersonic, and, in some cases, even greater speeds. That makes them suitable for threats such as combat aircraft and cruise missiles, depending on the system.

Drone interceptors generally operate against slower targets. They are particularly suited to small UAVs whose flight speeds and maneuverability allow another drone to pursue them.

Against a fast jet or missile, however, most interceptor drones would struggle to match the speed and engagement envelope of a dedicated SAM.

Range and coverage

SAM systems are built to defend large areas.

Long-range batteries can monitor and engage threats tens or even hundreds of kilometers away, depending on the weapon. This allows defenders to create layered protective bubbles around cities, bases, and strategic infrastructure.

Drone interceptors usually operate over much smaller areas. They may be launched once radars, electro-optical sensors, or other systems detect an incoming UAV.

Their shorter range makes them better suited to local defense rather than wide-area airspace control.

Ammunition and sustainability

Another important difference is how quickly each system can be replenished. A missile launcher carries a limited number of ready-to-fire interceptors. Once those missiles are used, the system must be reloaded, creating potential vulnerability during large or sustained attacks.

Drone interceptors could offer greater flexibility if they can be manufactured cheaply and stored in larger numbers.

That becomes particularly important during swarm attacks, where dozens of drones may arrive within a short period. The challenge is ensuring that interceptor drones can launch, coordinate, identify targets, and engage quickly enough to deal with multiple threats.

Guidance and autonomy

Surface-to-air missiles rely on highly mature guidance systems.

Depending on the weapon, they may use radar guidance, infrared seekers, command guidance, or combinations of several methods. Drone interceptors increasingly depend on autonomy.

Computer vision, artificial intelligence, onboard navigation, and target recognition can allow an interceptor to pursue another drone with limited human involvement.

That could make them useful against large numbers of small targets, but it also places significant importance on reliable detection, identification, communications, and autonomous decision-making.

Complementary weapons, not replacements

Drone interceptors are unlikely to make surface-to-air missiles obsolete. Instead, they are becoming another layer in increasingly complex air-defense networks.

SAMs remain essential when the threat is fast, long-range, heavily armed, or capable of operating at high altitude. Drone interceptors can fill the gap at the lower end of the threat spectrum, particularly against inexpensive UAVs that may not justify the use of an advanced missile.

The future of air defense will therefore probably not come down to choosing between missiles and interceptor drones. It will depend on using the right weapon against the right target.

As aerial threats become cheaper, more numerous, and more diverse, the most effective defenses will likely combine long-range missiles, guns, electronic warfare, directed-energy systems, and interceptor drones into a layered network capable of responding without exhausting its most expensive weapons.

The US Army and Air Force have signed 10-year Intergovernmental Support Agreements with Arizona State University to expand energy services across military installations in the continental United States.

Signed on July 7, the agreements allow installations to request support for utility monitoring, energy assessments, data integration, resilience planning, and workforce development.

The arrangement is intended to help bases strengthen energy resilience, improve infrastructure management, and prepare for operational disruptions.

Expanding access to energy expertise

Under the agreements, Army and Air Force installations can seek a broad range of technical services from Arizona State University.

These include utility metering and billing analysis, energy and water assessments, building automation, distribution network modernization, on-site generation, microgrid development, independent project reviews, energy readiness exercises, and workforce training.

“Intergovernmental Support Agreements give installations an important mechanism to access support services that can improve readiness and resilience,” said Jordan Gillis, assistant secretary of the Army for installations, energy and environment.

“This effort reflects the Army’s continued focus on strengthening infrastructure, improving efficiency and supporting mission requirements across our installations,” he continued.

The US Army said the partnership can also help installations better understand existing utility systems and identify where modernization or efficiency improvements are needed.

Managing aging utility systems

A major focus of the Army agreement is the condition and performance of utility infrastructure at military installations.

“Through this agreement, Arizona State University will provide the monitoring, analysis and technical support needed to help Army installations better understand and manage aging utility systems,” said David Dentino, deputy assistant secretary of the Army for installations, housing and partnerships.

“This partnership is about improving readiness, increasing resilience, reducing costs and ensuring our installations have the reliable infrastructure needed to support the mission,” he continued.

For the Air Force, the agreement similarly creates a route for installations to obtain services linked to infrastructure, energy efficiency, and mission assurance.

“National security requires energy and water surety,” said Nancy J. Balkus, deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force for infrastructure, energy and environment.

“Every one of our installations is not just a base; it is a power projection platform to assure lethality whenever called upon. Without energy and water security, our missions cannot test, launch, sustain or succeed,” he said.

Supporting long-term installation resilience

Intergovernmental Support Agreements allow military installations to obtain support services from eligible state and local government entities.

For the Army and Air Force, the new ASU agreements provide a framework through which bases can request energy-related expertise without creating separate arrangements for every service.

The broader goal is to improve the reliability of installation infrastructure while giving military facilities more options for monitoring, planning, training, and resilience projects.

By covering services ranging from metering and automation to microgrids and energy readiness exercises, the agreements give installations access to tools that can support infrastructure modernization and long-term operational preparedness.

The initiative also aligns with wider efforts to ensure military installations can continue meeting mission requirements as energy systems, infrastructure demands, and operating environments evolve.

MIT researchers have developed a new framework that could help energy planners decide where to build renewable energy projects as climate change puts growing pressure on power grids.

The study combines fine-scale meteorology with detailed simulations of energy infrastructure. Researchers found that where new energy projects are built could significantly affect whether future power systems can meet demand reliably.

The team applied the framework to decarbonized energy systems in New England and Texas. Their analysis found that systems designed around historic climate conditions could experience up to a fivefold increase in energy shortfalls by 2050.

By incorporating future climate conditions into energy planning, however, the researchers found that both regions could improve grid resilience at little or no additional cost.

“As we mitigate climate change with renewables, we can also adapt to climate change by using future weather projections in our power system planning, and the extra costs of that adaptation are, at least in this study, not much,” said senior author Michael Howland, an MIT professor.

Climate change adds new risks to power grids

Electricity systems are already changing rapidly as demand rises from trends such as artificial intelligence and transportation electrification, while falling costs drive greater adoption of wind and solar power.

But renewable generation and electricity demand are both affected by weather, creating new challenges as climate conditions change.

“This study explores the joint, simultaneous impacts on multiple components of the energy system, similar to compound events studied in climate science,” Howland explained.

“An extreme weather event can impact wind and solar generation and electricity demand all at the same time. Our hypothesis is that’s likely to be the biggest impact we’ll see from climate change on energy systems,” he added.

The study found that climate change could increase energy failures by as much as 500% by 2050 if future climate conditions are not considered when siting and designing energy infrastructure.

Where wind and solar are built matters

The researchers found that locations best suited for renewable projects under future climate conditions can differ meaningfully from those identified using historic weather data.

“We are telling people where you put your wind and solar matters a lot for your ability to deliver energy when you need it,” Qiu explained.

“We need to think more about the when and where of adding renewables rather than only focusing on adding overall capacity,” he added.

In New England, climate-related disruptions increased the need for solar capacity and transmission lines close to major demand centers.

In Texas, risks were primarily driven by transmission constraints. Climate-informed designs prioritized wind farms in West Texas to better align renewable generation with future demand patterns.

Researchers seek faster planning tools

The current framework relies on expensive, high-resolution models, making it impractical for grid operators to use routinely today.

The researchers hope to develop faster models that could make climate-informed planning easier to apply.

“This study shows the opportunity and the need,” Howland says. “There are risks to not adapting our system, but if we do adapt our system, there could be big opportunities that are not costly.”

The study was published in Natural Energy.

The United States is facing nine major supply chain challenges that could delay the rehabilitation of its hydropower infrastructure, according to a new report from the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR).

The report has examined the difficulties hydropower operators encounter when upgrading or replacing large power transformers (LPTs).

These custom-built devices raise the voltage of electricity generated by hydropower turbines, allowing it to travel efficiently across long-distance transmission networks.

Their importance extends beyond hydropower, as more than 90% of the electricity consumed in the United States passes through high-voltage transformers at some stage.

Transformer deliveries can take five years

One of the most serious challenges identified in the report is the time required to procure new transformers.

A typical LPT rated at 100 megavolt-amperes takes approximately 2.5 to three years to acquire. Lead times for extra-high-voltage units can extend to five years because only a limited number of facilities worldwide can manufacture them.

Transformer prices sharply increased by approximately 80% in 2025 compared with 2021 levels, according to the report. A single unit can now cost as much as $10 million.

These pressures come as demand rises across the power sector. Although domestic manufacturing and assembly capacity has expanded in recent years, the report found that it has not grown quickly enough to meet current requirements.

US manufacturers also depend heavily on international suppliers. Approximately 80% of the raw materials used in domestic LPT production, including grain-oriented electrical steel and refined copper, are imported.

Changing trade conditions could further increase the baseline costs of copper and steel, adding uncertainty to transformer procurement.

Remote dams create transportation problems

Delivering an LPT to a hydropower facility presents another layer of difficulty. Many dams are located in isolated regions surrounded by rugged terrain, making them considerably harder to reach than conventional power facilities.

Transformers require specialized vehicles and heavy-duty trailers capable of carrying oversized loads. However, the United States has a limited domestic fleet of such equipment. Transportation routes must also be planned carefully and require special permits.

Permitting and regulatory procedures can produce additional delays, particularly when an operator must remove an existing transformer before installing its replacement.

Federal contracting rules and domestic-content requirements could also create near-term bottlenecks while US production capacity remains limited.

Report could guide domestic investment

The NLR study builds on the US Department of Energy’s broader Hydropower Supply Chain Gap Analysis, which previously identified five gaps affecting the domestic industry.

DOE’s Hydropower and Hydrokinetic Office funded the follow-on study to provide a closer examination of the LPT supply chain. Researchers used feedback from hydropower industry participants to define the nine challenges.

The findings could help shape federal policies, incentives, lending programs, workforce initiatives and investments intended to expand US transformer production.

Strengthening the domestic supply chain will be important for new construction as well as upgrades, refurbishments and relicensing work at existing facilities.

Hydropower currently provides more than 6% of total US electricity generation, making the availability of critical transformers essential to its continued contribution to the grid.

The report is titled as Large Power Transformer Supply Chain Gap Analysis and Domestic Content Strategies for Hydropower Rehabilitation.

Rune Technologies has unveiled TyrSense, a new line of ruggedized sensors designed to help military units track personnel, casualties, and supplies in contested environments where conventional communications may be unavailable.

The hardware marks the company’s first expansion beyond software, extending its TyrOS logistics platform directly to personnel operating at the tactical edge.

The initial TyrSense products use small, durable NFC tags that can be attached to personnel or cargo. When scanned during a handoff, the system records the location and status of the individual or pallet in TyrOS.

Unlike conventional tracking systems, the location is determined by the node where the scan takes place rather than through GPS.

The tags can also operate without an active cloud connection or satellite signal, allowing units to continue recording movements in denied, degraded, intermittent, or low-bandwidth environments.

Once connectivity returns, the collected information can synchronize with TyrOS.

Aim to replace manual military tracking

Military units continue to rely heavily on manual processes to account for personnel and supplies, according to Rune.

Information about available resources is often maintained through whiteboards, paper manifests, and manually compiled reports. These systems can become difficult to maintain when units relocate or lose network connectivity.

TyrSense is initially designed around three military workflows that commonly depend on manual reporting: personnel accountability, medical operations, and cargo tracking.

For personnel, scanning a tag allows units to update an individual’s duty status, reducing the need for the daily manual process of compiling accountability information.

In medical operations, the system can record each transfer of a casualty as the individual moves from the point of injury through successive levels of care.

For logistics, tags attached to pallets can register shipments as they move through different nodes across a military supply network.

Built to operate when battlefield networks fail

Rune has designed the sensors around conditions where military personnel may have limited or no communications access.

Because individual scans can be registered locally at the tactical edge, units can continue collecting information even during network disruptions.

“A tag has to work in a vehicle and with no signal, because that’s where these counts happen,” said Peter Goldsborough, Co-Founder and Chief Technology Officer of Rune Technologies.

“We built TyrSense so the scan registers at the edge and reaches TyrOS the moment a connection is there. The hardware is deliberately simple. The value is what TyrOS does with the data,” he added.

The approach allows TyrOS to receive updated information once connectivity becomes available rather than requiring personnel to maintain continuous access to remote infrastructure.

Rune plans sensors for fuel and water

TyrSense builds on the company’s deployment of TyrOS with operational military units over the past year.

During Balikatan 26 in the Philippines, the software provided tactical commanders with information on food, water, fuel, and personnel supporting thousands of troops across a Joint Task Force, according to the company.

Rune is also the sole logistics provider for the US Marine Corps’ Project Dynamis and is the only application selected by both prime contractor teams participating in the US Army’s Next Generation Command and Control program.

The company now plans to expand the TyrSense hardware portfolio beyond NFC-based tracking.

Russia’s Yasen-class and America’s Virginia-class submarines are among the most advanced nuclear-powered attack submarines in service today.

Both are designed to hunt enemy submarines, strike surface ships, gather intelligence, and launch cruise missiles against land targets. But they reflect very different naval priorities.

The Virginia class is built around numbers, flexibility, and long-term modernization. The Yasen class is built around heavy firepower and strategic intimidation.

In simple terms, the Virginia is a quieter, networked hunter; the Yasen is a heavily armed predator designed to threaten targets at sea and on land.

Two submarines, two naval doctrines

The Virginia class was developed after the Cold War as a more affordable successor to the extremely capable Seawolf class.

Instead of building a small number of very expensive submarines, the United States focused on producing a larger fleet of advanced boats that could be upgraded over time.

Virginia-class submarines are used for anti-submarine warfare, intelligence gathering, special operations support, and precision land attack.

Russia’s Yasen class, also known as Project 885, had a longer and more difficult birth. Its design roots go back to the Soviet period, but the first boat, Severodvinsk, entered service only in the 2010s.

The upgraded Yasen-M version is smaller, more modern, and believed to be quieter than the original. Russia does not have as many Yasen-class submarines as the US has Virginias, so each Yasen is treated as a high-value strategic asset.

That difference matters. The US Navy can deploy Virginia-class boats across multiple theatres at once. Russia uses the Yasen class more selectively, often as a way to project power into the North Atlantic, Arctic, Mediterranean, or near US waters.

Stealth and sensors

Submarine warfare is not mainly about speed or size. It is about who detects whom first. On that front, the Virginia class is widely regarded as one of the quietest attack submarines in the world.

Its design emphasizes acoustic stealth, advanced sonar, and the ability to work with other US naval assets. It also benefits from decades of American experience in undersea surveillance.

The Yasen class is also considered a major leap over older Russian submarines. It uses a large spherical sonar array, flank arrays, and a towed array, giving it strong detection capability.

Western officials have repeatedly treated the Yasen-M as a serious tracking challenge, especially because it can carry long-range cruise missiles while remaining difficult to locate.

Still, most open-source assessments give the Virginia class an edge in quietness and undersea networking. The Yasen is dangerous not because it is necessarily quieter, but because it combines stealth with a large missile load.

Firepower and mission profile

This is where the Yasen class stands out. It can carry a mix of Kalibr land-attack cruise missiles, Oniks anti-ship missiles, and newer Zircon hypersonic missiles on some boats.

That gives it the ability to threaten warships, naval bases, command centers, and infrastructure from long distances.

The Virginia class also carries Tomahawk cruise missiles and heavyweight torpedoes. Earlier Virginia boats have 12 vertical launch tubes, while Block V submarines add the Virginia Payload Module, significantly increasing missile capacity.

This makes newer Virginias more powerful land-attack platforms while keeping their traditional hunter-killer role.

So, who wins?

The Virginia class has the overall edge.

The Yasen class is extremely dangerous, especially because of its heavy missile load and ability to threaten ships, bases, and land targets from long range.

A single Yasen-M submarine can force NATO navies to spend major effort tracking it, which shows how serious the threat is.

But the Virginia class is the better all-round attack submarine. It is widely regarded as quieter, benefits from stronger undersea sensor networks, and is deeply integrated with the wider US Navy.

It is also being built in larger numbers and continuously upgraded, especially with newer Block V boats adding more missile capacity.

That gives the Virginia class an advantage not just in a one-on-one fight, but in real-world naval operations. Submarine warfare depends on stealth, detection, crew training, logistics, and fleet support, not just the number of missiles carried.

The Yasen class may be the more heavily armed submarine, but the Virginia class is the more complete weapon system. If one side has to be picked, America’s Virginia-class comes out ahead.

India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has completed three back-to-back flight tests of its Phase 2 Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) system, marking a major step in the country’s effort to build a credible multi-layered missile shield.

The trials were carried out on June 10 and 11 and saw interceptors destroy targets in both the endo-atmospheric and exo-atmospheric regions.

In simpler terms, the system demonstrated its ability to engage incoming missile threats both within Earth’s atmosphere and outside it.

The Phase 2 shield is designed to counter faster and longer-range ballistic missiles than the earlier version of the program. It is also expected to eventually scale up toward intercepting intercontinental ballistic missile threats.

“The interceptors successfully engaged their respective targets. The systems are designed and developed with the latest technologies to address the emerging missile threats,” the ministry stated.

“These tests have put the country in the elite group of nations having BMD capability to engage up to Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles.”

Designed for longer-range threats

The Phase 2 system includes two interceptors, AD-1 and AD-2, which are meant to destroy ballistic missile threats during different phases of flight. The system is network-centric, relying on launchers, long-range radars, launch control centers, and a mission control center.

While the Ministry of Defense said the system can engage threats up to the ICBM class, the latest demonstrations reportedly involved targets in the 2,000 to 5,000-kilometer range.

Missiles in this range are generally classified as intermediate-range ballistic missiles, while ICBMs are usually defined as missiles with ranges above 5,500 kilometers.

The trials still represent a significant step up from the earlier Phase 1 system, which was developed to defend against shorter-range ballistic missile threats.

Two decades in the making

India’s BMD program began in the late 1990s, after Pakistan’s 1998 nuclear tests. Its first major success came in 2006, when a Prithvi-II ballistic missile target was intercepted in an endo-atmospheric test at an altitude of around 48 kilometers.

Phase 1 of the missile shield was completed in 2019 and was designed to protect key cities such as Delhi and Mumbai.

It used the Prithvi Defense Vehicle for high-altitude interception and the Advanced Air Defense interceptor for lower-altitude engagements.

Phase 3 eyes hypersonic weapons

DRDO is already working on the next stage of the program. Phase 3 is expected to focus on more complex threats, including hypersonic glide vehicles and missiles carrying Multiple Independently Targetable Re-entry Vehicles, or MIRVs.

Hypersonic glide vehicles are especially difficult to intercept because they travel above Mach 5 and can maneuver during flight. MIRV-equipped missiles pose another challenge because a single missile can release multiple warheads aimed at different targets.

The next-generation interceptors, reportedly designated AD-AH and AD-AM, are still at an early conceptual stage, with flight testing yet to begin.

The latest BMD trials come as China continues to field advanced missile systems and Pakistan develops longer-range and MIRV-capable weapons. For New Delhi, the tests mark another step toward a more advanced defensive shield against evolving missile threats.

US firm Aurelius Systems has completed live testing of its Archimedes autonomous directed-energy system for the Pentagon, demonstrating the laser weapon’s ability to counter unmanned aerial system threats in a live exercise.

The test was held at Camp Atterbury in Indiana and formed part of a broader evaluation effort involving nearly 60 platforms being assessed for their potential to improve warfighter protection, operational effectiveness, and next-generation defense capabilities.

During the exercise, Archimedes engaged more than 20 quadcopter drones and five U.S. Army-supplied unmanned aerial systems. According to the company, the event marked the first time the system was tested against military-provided targets.

Laser tested against army drones

The California-based defense firm said Archimedes successfully neutralized the simulated aerial threats during the demonstration.

The result, it said, validated the system’s readiness as a counter-drone tool at a time when small unmanned aircraft are becoming a growing concern for military bases, frontline units, and critical infrastructure.

The live test also showed the system’s ability to autonomously detect, identify, track, and defeat drone threats without relying on traditional missile-based interceptors.

“Archimedes proved that autonomous directed energy systems are ready to play a meaningful role in modern air defense operations,” said Michael LaFramboise, CEO of Aurelius Systems.

Built for Group 1 and 2 UAS

Archimedes is designed to counter Group 1 and Group 2 unmanned aerial systems.

These include smaller drones and UAS platforms weighing up to 1,320 pounds (599 kilograms), with speeds of up to 250 knots, or around 288 miles per hour (463 kilometers per hour).

The system combines high-energy laser output with advanced sensing technology, allowing it to repeatedly engage targets at ranges beyond 1,000 meters, or about 3,281 feet.

Unlike missile interceptors, which can be expensive and limited by magazine depth, directed-energy systems offer a different approach.

They use concentrated energy to disable or destroy threats and can potentially deliver multiple shots at a much lower cost per engagement.

That cost advantage is becoming increasingly important as relatively cheap drones are being used in large numbers across modern battlefields.

Low-cost air defense option

Aurelius Systems has positioned Archimedes as a compact, scalable counter-UAS system that can support force protection missions.

The company says the platform offers low size, weight, power, and cost characteristics, making it easier to deploy than larger air defense systems.

“The ability to autonomously acquire, identify, track, and defeat aerial threats in a compact, [low size, weight, power, and cost] platform at a significantly lower cost than traditional systems provides America with a powerful new option for protecting military forces,” La Framboise said.

The demonstration comes as the Pentagon continues to search for faster, cheaper, and more sustainable ways to defeat drones.

Small UAS threats can be difficult to detect and expensive to counter with conventional weapons, especially when launched in swarms or used repeatedly.

With its latest live test, Archimedes has now shown that it can operate against both commercial-style quadcopters and Army-supplied targets, giving Aurelius Systems a stronger case for the laser weapon’s role in future layered air defense.

Electric cars and hydrogen cars are often compared as rival technologies. However, both are electric at the wheel. The main difference is how they store and deliver energy.

Battery-electric vehicles, or BEVs, store electricity directly in a battery pack. Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles, or FCEVs, store energy as hydrogen and convert it into electricity inside the vehicle.

Both offer zero tailpipe emissions, but they differ sharply in efficiency, infrastructure, cost, and likely use cases.

Over the next two decades, battery EVs are expected to dominate passenger cars. Hydrogen vehicles are more likely to serve specific transport sectors such as long-haul trucks, buses, coaches, and high-use commercial fleets.

How the technologies work

A battery EV is charged by plugging into the electricity grid. The electricity is stored in a lithium-ion battery and then sent to an electric motor that drives the wheels. Because the process is direct, BEVs are highly efficient. Their electricity-to-wheel efficiency is often above 70 percent.

Hydrogen vehicles use a more complex chain. Hydrogen is produced elsewhere, compressed, stored, transported, and then refuelled into the vehicle. Inside the vehicle, a fuel cell combines hydrogen with oxygen to produce electricity. That electricity powers the motor.

The fuel-cell stack itself is usually below 70 percent efficient. When the full green hydrogen chain is included, from electricity generation to hydrogen production, compression, transport, and conversion, the final well-to-wheel efficiency can fall closer to 20–30 percent.

This means hydrogen vehicles use much more primary energy than battery EVs when both are powered by the same renewable electricity. This efficiency gap is one of the strongest arguments in favor of battery EVs for regular passenger transport.

Efficiency, range, and cost

Battery EVs have a clear advantage in energy use and running costs. Since fewer conversion steps are involved, more of the original electricity reaches the wheels. This usually makes BEVs cheaper to operate per kilometer.

Hydrogen vehicles have an advantage in refueling time and potential range. Many FCEVs can be refueled in about 5 minutes, and some models offer 300–400 miles of range or more. 

This makes hydrogen attractive for vehicles that need long range and cannot afford long charging breaks.

For private cars, this advantage is less decisive. Most daily driving distances are short enough for modern battery EVs. Home charging, workplace charging, and public fast charging can cover most passenger vehicle use cases.

For commercial transport, the calculation changes. Trucks, buses, and fleet vehicles often run for long hours and need quick turnaround. In these cases, refueling speed, payload, and route flexibility can matter more than maximum energy efficiency.

Infrastructure challenge

Infrastructure is another major difference.

Battery EVs can use the existing electricity network. Charging infrastructure still needs major expansion, and power grids will require upgrades, but the basic system already exists. EVs can be charged at homes, offices, depots, highways, and public charging stations.

Hydrogen needs a new supply chain. It requires clean hydrogen production, compression, storage, transport, and dedicated refueling stations. This makes deployment slower and more expensive.

There is also the emissions issue. Hydrogen cars produce no tailpipe emissions, but most hydrogen today is still produced using fossil fuels, especially natural gas.

Low-emissions hydrogen accounted for less than 1 percent of global production in 2024/2025. For hydrogen vehicles to deliver major climate benefits, the fuel must increasingly come from low-emission or renewable sources.

Market outlook

The market already shows a major lead for battery EVs. Global electric car sales exceeded 20 million in 2025, reaching about 25 percent of total car sales. The IEA expects sales to grow to 23 million in 2026, representing around 28 percent of total car sales.

Hydrogen vehicles are growing from a much smaller base. One estimate values the hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle market at about $0.2 billion in 2024, rising to around $2.1 billion by 2030. That shows rapid growth in percentage terms, but the market remains tiny compared with battery EVs.

Some forecasts suggest fuel-cell vehicles may account for only around 4 percent of zero-emission vehicles by 2044. However, hydrogen could have a stronger role in heavy transport, especially in long-distance trucks and high-use commercial fleets.

Final verdict

Battery EVs are likely to go further in mainstream adoption. They are more efficient, easier to scale, cheaper to run, and already supported by a fast-growing charging network.

Hydrogen is unlikely to replace battery EVs in normal passenger cars. Its future is more specialized. It can be useful in sectors where battery technology is limited, including long-haul trucking, intercity coaches, industrial fleets, shipping, and possibly aviation.

The future is not a simple electric-versus-hydrogen battle. Battery EVs are set to dominate everyday road transport, while hydrogen will compete in the harder-to-electrify parts of the transport system.

Long before humans built cities, made tools, or even appeared on Earth, the planet was already leaving behind clues to its earliest history. Some are tiny crystals almost as old as Earth itself.

Others are fossils, ancient rocks, mountain ranges, and tools that reveal when life began, how early humans evolved, and how our world changed over billions of years. These seven discoveries are among the oldest things ever found on Earth.

1. UR 501 jawbone

Wikimedia Commons

The UR 501 jawbone is considered one of the oldest known human fossils. Found in Malawi, it is estimated to be around 2.5 to 2.3 million years old. The fossil belongs to the Homo rudolfensis group, an early human relative.

Its discovery was important because early Homo fossils had not been found in Central Africa before. The jawbone suggests that early humans or their close relatives may have moved through the East African rift system, offering clues about how early Homo spread across the continent.

2. Lomekwi stone tools

The Lomekwi stone tools, discovered in West Turkana, Kenya, are around 3.3 million years old. They are considered the oldest known tools ever found. Archaeologists uncovered anvils, cores, and flakes at the site.

What makes these tools remarkable is that they are older than the earliest known humans by about 500,000 years.

This means they may have been made by early human relatives such as Australopithecus or Kenyanthropus. Their discovery changed the idea that toolmaking was only a human trait.

3. Lake Zaysan

Wikimedia Commons

Lake Zaysan in Kazakhstan is believed to be around 65 million years old. While Lake Baikal is often called the world’s oldest lake, Lake Zaysan may be even older.

The lake is thought to have formed during the Cretaceous period, though its exact age is difficult to confirm. Today, it is located near artificial reservoirs and the Bukhtarma dam. The dam raised the lake’s water level, increasing its area and causing some sources to group it with nearby reservoirs.

4. Makhonjwa Mountains

The Makhonjwa Mountains, located in South Africa and Eswatini, are about 3.6 billion years old. They are widely known as the oldest mountain range in the world.

The mountains are part of the Barberton Greenstone Belt, one of Earth’s oldest geological structures. They also contain some of the oldest known signs of life and ancient gold deposits. In 2018, the Makhonjwa Mountains were added to UNESCO’s World Heritage List.

5. Stromatolites

Wikimedia Commons

Stromatolites are layered rock structures formed by ancient cyanobacteria. Some of the oldest stromatolites are about 3.5 billion years old, making them among the earliest visible evidence of life on Earth.

These organisms once existed in large numbers around the planet. Although they became less common in the fossil record about a billion years ago, stromatolites still grow in some places today. They remain one of the clearest records of early life.

6. Hematite tubes

Hematite tubes found in Quebec, Canada, may be between 3.7 and 4.2 billion years old. Researchers have suggested that these tiny structures could be some of the oldest fossils ever discovered.

The tubes resemble structures made by modern microbes near hydrothermal vents. They also contain chemical signs often linked with life, including carbon and phosphorus.

However, some scientists remain cautious, arguing that the structures may have been misread or may not be as old as claimed.

7. Jack Hills zircon

Wikimedia Commons

The Jack Hills zircon crystals from Australia are believed to be the oldest known material found on Earth. They have been dated to about 4.375 billion years old.

These tiny crystals formed only around 165 million years after Earth itself. Their chemistry suggests that early Earth may have cooled quickly enough to have surface water and continental-type rocks. That means the young planet may not have been as hostile as once believed.

Natural disasters are usually remembered for the destruction they leave behind. But some disasters do more than destroy cities, villages, or coastlines. They change the direction of history.

Across centuries, earthquakes, floods, eruptions, and storms have weakened empires, stopped invasions, changed belief systems, and forced societies to rethink how they build and survive.

Here are five of the deadliest natural disasters that changed human civilization.

1. The Minoan eruption

Wikimedia Commons

Around 1600 B.C., a massive volcanic eruption struck Thera, now known as Santorini in Greece.

The eruption was one of the most powerful volcanic events of the ancient world. It sent ash into the sky, buried settlements, and triggered tsunamis across the Aegean Sea. One of the societies most affected was the Minoan civilization, based on Crete.

The Minoans were among the most advanced people in the ancient Mediterranean. They had large palaces, strong trade routes, and a powerful seafaring culture. But the eruption disrupted their economy and weakened their influence.

The disaster did not destroy the Minoans in one moment. However, it likely accelerated their decline and helped shift power toward the Mycenaeans. Some scholars have also linked the event to later stories about Atlantis, the lost island civilization described by Plato.

2. The typhoons that stopped the Mongols

In the 13th century, the Mongol Empire was one of the most powerful forces in the world. After conquering large parts of Asia and Europe, the Mongols turned toward Japan.

They launched two major invasions, first in 1274 and again in 1281. Both campaigns involved large naval fleets carrying troops across the sea.

But both invasions were struck by massive typhoons. The storms destroyed many Mongol ships and scattered the invading forces before they could take control.

In Japan, these storms became known as kamikaze, or “divine winds.” They helped preserve Japan’s independence and stopped Mongol expansion further east.

The storms also became an important part of Japanese memory, reinforcing the belief that the country was protected by divine forces.

3. The 1556 Shaanxi earthquake

The 1556 Shaanxi earthquake remains the deadliest earthquake in recorded history.

It struck China during the Ming Dynasty and killed an estimated 830,000 people. The death toll was so high partly because many people lived in cave dwellings carved into soft loess soil. When the earthquake hit, these homes collapsed almost instantly.

The disaster destroyed villages, farmland, roads, and local administrative systems. Entire communities were wiped out.

The earthquake showed that the impact of a disaster depends not only on nature’s force but also on how people live. It pushed later discussions around safer buildings, better settlement planning, and disaster response.

4. The 1755 Lisbon earthquake

Wikimedia Commons

On November 1, 1755, a massive earthquake struck Lisbon, Portugal. It happened on All Saints’ Day, when many people were inside churches.

The earthquake was followed by a tsunami and fires that destroyed much of the city. Tens of thousands were killed, with some estimates reaching up to 100,000.

But the disaster did not only reshape Lisbon. It changed European thinking.

At the time, many people saw disasters mainly as acts of divine punishment. Lisbon’s destruction forced philosophers, scientists, and leaders to ask new questions. Could earthquakes be studied? Could cities be built to survive them?

The event influenced Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire and helped push early ideas in seismology. Lisbon was later rebuilt with stronger planning and more resilient design.

5. The 1931 China floods

Wikimedia Commons

The 1931 China floods are among the deadliest natural disasters in human history.

They were caused by heavy snowmelt, extreme rainfall, and overflowing rivers, including the Yangtze and Huai. Vast areas of China were submerged.

The disaster killed an estimated 1 million to 4 million people through drowning, famine, disease, and the collapse of basic services. Crops were destroyed, communities were displaced, and cities and villages remained underwater for long periods.

The floods forced China to rethink flood-control policies, river management, urban planning, and agriculture. They showed how deadly extreme weather can be when it meets densely populated areas and weak infrastructure.

Conclusion

History shows that natural disasters are never just moments of destruction. Their impact depends on how societies prepare, respond, rebuild, and learn from what went wrong.

In many cases, the real legacy of a disaster is not the damage it causes, but the changes it forces into the future.

A Unitree G1 humanoid robot is being prepared for a planned Mount Everest expedition later this year after taking part in a high-altitude test on Mount Chimborazo in Ecuador.

The robot, named Pemba, was provided by Eastworlds Labs, the AI robotics initiative of Virtuals Protocol. It was part of a Geologic Dome expedition that placed the robot at 20,312 feet on June 5, 2026.

The Chimborazo mission is being treated as an early test before the planned Everest trek in the fall. Mount Chimborazo is known for a unique geographical fact. Its summit is the farthest point from Earth’s center and the closest point to the Sun on Earth.

Eastworlds Labs said the expedition supports its larger goal of bringing autonomous AI agents into the physical world.

The team also documented the mission and plans to create a trailer for the Everest expedition. The project is working with the production crew behind Netflix’s 14 Peaks: Nothing Is Impossible.

Everest is the next challenge

The planned Mount Everest trek will take the project into one of the world’s most difficult mountain environments.

For Eastworlds Labs and Geologic Dome, the aim is not only to place a robot in extreme terrain.

The larger goal is to test whether humanoid robots can support conservation, research, and monitoring in places that are hard or dangerous for people to reach often.

According to Eastworlds Labs, the Unitree G1 robot will be donated to the local Sherpa community for the Everest expedition. The company said this will connect the project’s legacy to the region where the next mission will take place.

The Everest plan follows the Chimborazo expedition, where Pemba was the only humanoid robot used. The Unitree G1 weighs 77 pounds (35 kg) and can fold down to 690 mm, which made it easier to transport through difficult terrain.

During the Ecuador mission, the team disassembled the robot and carried it between camps. It was then reassembled at different stages of the journey.

Chimborazo test pushed the robot

Mount Chimborazo gave the team a difficult test before Everest.

Temperatures on the mountain can fall to 5 degree Fahrenheit (-15°C), while wind gusts can reach 55 miles per hour (90 km/h). To help the robot handle these conditions, the Unitree G1 was fitted with custom cold-weather jackets, gated enclosures, and composite feet.

The robot’s autonomy system was trained in NVIDIA Isaac Sim at 1,620 times real-time speed. Eastworlds Labs said the system achieved 85 percent sim-to-real transfer on uneven terrain.

The robot was also pretrained to respond to wind turbulence and recover its balance on technical alpine terrain.

Communication during the expedition was supported by a proprietary mesh relay across camps. Satellite internet at each camp delivered 25 ms latency. This stayed below the 50 ms limit needed for live teleoperation with Reflex’s latency software.

Conservation goal behind the mission

The Everest plan is part of Geologic Dome’s broader conservation work.

The organization is building autonomous infrastructure for conservation zones. This includes communication relays, AI-powered ecological monitoring, and energy-independent robotic platforms.

Eastworlds Labs said it sponsored the Chimborazo expedition and is also contributing funding toward Geologic Dome’s nature conservation work.

Geologic Dome is currently testing its approach across three sites. These include equatorial forest in the Democratic Republic of Congo, montane cloud forests in Ecuador, and the full Himalayan altitude gradient in Nepal.

Researchers at Los Alamos National Laboratory have developed a new tool called the Prelim Attention Score, or PAS, to help detect when a vision-language model’s output is grounded in the image and when it may be relying too heavily on its own generated text.

The system is being viewed as a means to enhance vision-language model safety and trustworthiness.

“The PAS is a real-time, plug-and-play metric that acts as an internal monitor for the AI,” said Manish Bhattarai, a Los Alamos computer scientist.

“The system works with major existing vision-language models and requires minimal additional computational overhead, making it an efficient way to detect potential hallucinations. PAS achieves state-of-the-art accuracy in catching hallucinations, offering developers a practical path toward safer and more trustworthy multimodal AI systems,” he added.

Tracking where the model gets its answer

Most commonly used vision-language models are autoregressive. They generate each new token, or word, partly by relying on the words they have already produced.

While this process helps the model form coherent responses, it can also cause the system to lean too strongly on its own previous output rather than the image itself.

PAS monitors a vision-language model’s prediction of each token. By doing so, it helps identify where the model is drawing information from and where hallucinations are likely to occur. The tool then presents a score that alerts users to the possible presence of hallucinations in the output.

A low-overhead hallucination detector

Many autoregressive vision-language models are based on transformer architectures, a class of deep-learning neural networks that use attention patterns to weigh information as they generate an output.

The Los Alamos team studied how these models attend to the image, the text prompt and the model’s own preliminary generated words.

When PAS is integrated into a vision-language model workflow, it can run alongside the model as it handles a request.

For object mentions in the response to an image and text input, PAS computes an attention-based score showing how strongly the model relied on its own previously generated words.

The closer the PAS score is to zero, the less likely it is that the model has produced a hallucination.

“By understanding the way a vision-language model pays attention to preliminary information, PAS can help identify the exact instance where a model begins to over-rely on its own words,” said Xuan Nhat Hoang, Los Alamos intern.

“Our tool reads signals the AI is already producing, representing a low-overhead way to help ensure that information is reliable and useful,” he added.

Reliability checks for visual workflows

PAS could be used in applications where images, documents, diagrams and text are analyzed by vision-language models.

The researchers say it could eventually support reliability checks in areas such as medical imaging, scientific document analysis, engineering diagrams, remote sensing and other visual workflows where unsupported claims could affect downstream decisions.

The Los Alamos team is presenting PAS at the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 2026 conference, sponsored by the IEEE and Computer Vision Foundation, in Denver this month.

The work was supported by the Laboratory Directed Research and Development program at Los Alamos.

A long-shuttered US nuclear reactor has moved closer to a planned 2027 restart after securing two important regulatory boosts from federal agencies.

The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has approved Constellation’s request to transfer 760 MW of capacity interconnection rights from another Pennsylvania power plant to the former Three Mile Island unit 1.

The reactor, now called the Crane Clean Energy Center, is being prepared for a return to service in 2027.

Separately, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued for public comment its draft finding that restarting operations at the site would have no significant environmental impact.

Constellation announced in 2024 that it planned to restart the pressurized water reactor, which was shut down in 2019.

The company later filed an interconnection request with regional grid operator PJM to allow Crane to add 835 MW of emissions-free electricity to the grid.

The rights that could support return

To help support the 2027 restart schedule, Constellation filed a waiver request with FERC on March 31. The request sought permission to transfer capacity rights from Eddystone, a six-unit, dual-fuelled plant in Pennsylvania.

Two 380 MW units at Eddystone, known as Eddystone 3 and 4, had been scheduled to close last year.

However, they have remained online beyond their planned retirement date to support grid reliability under emergency orders issued by US Energy Secretary Chris Wright.

FERC has now granted the waiver, allowing Constellation to remove the Eddystone units from Capacity Resource status and make their capacity interconnection rights available for transfer. The decision was issued by FERC on June 1.

NRC opens restart review for public comment

The second regulatory boost came from the NRC. On June 8, the agency issued a draft environmental assessment and draft finding of no significant impact, or FONSI, for public comment.

The review evaluated the reasonably foreseeable environmental effects of allowing power operations to resume at Three Mile Island unit 1. At the time of its closure in 2019, the reactor had a renewed operating license valid until 2034.

Constellation has asked the NRC to approve one exemption request and three license amendment requests to support the resumption of power operations through the previous license expiration date.

The company has also said it plans to seek an extension that would allow Crane Clean Energy Center to operate beyond that, to 2054.

The NRC’s draft assessment concluded that restarting operations would not require a full environmental impact statement.

The Commission said in a Federal Register notice that “the NRC staff has made the preliminary determination that the proposed actions will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Therefore, the NRC staff has made the preliminary determination that it will not prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the proposed actions and that a FONSI is warranted.”

The NRC will make its final decision after reviewing comments received during the 30-day public comment period, which runs until July 8.

A Finnish deep-tech energy startup is moving to industrialize a renewable supercapacitor made from waste wood and agro residues, offering a fast-response power storage layer for grids and industrial operations.

Granarium Technologies, which originated from VTT, is developing a patented nanocellulose-based energy storage technology that upcycles waste materials into 100% renewable supercapacitors.

The technology uses a nanocellulose-based material platform that binds biocarbon structures for power storage, creating systems the company says are safe, scalable, and locally producible.

The system is designed to complement batteries, not replace them. It targets short-duration power needs such as grid balancing, frequency response, peak load management, distributed power generation, and industrial power quality.

Fast-response storage for unstable grids

The shift to renewable energy and electrification is increasing pressure on power networks, especially as grid volatility rises across Europe and EU requirements around grid codes and resilience frameworks tighten.

Granarium’s technology aims to provide a fast-response layer within energy systems, helping grids and industrial facilities respond quickly to fluctuations in power supply and demand.

“A key structural shift is that storage is no longer just `backup power’ – it is becoming core grid infrastructure. Granarium is the perfect addition to our portfolio because the company is solving a massive global challenge in a safe and scalable way,” said Jana Budkovskaja, Partner at BSV Ventures.

“We were also impressed with the company’s technology and experience, as well as the capacity to use local raw materials to make the production process sustainable and inexpensive,” he said.

According to the company, the technology can enable up to 80% lower production capital expenditure compared with large-scale battery manufacturing investments.

Built from local renewable carbon

Granarium’s approach is based on renewable carbon sources instead of finite critical raw materials. By using waste wood and agro residues, the company says its devices can be produced using locally sourced materials, reducing reliance on complex logistics chains.

The underlying technology and intellectual property have been transferred from VTT to the newly established company, giving Granarium a route to turn advanced bio-based material research into commercial energy storage systems.

“Granarium demonstrates how successful technology transfer can turn advanced bio-based materials into real industrial solutions for secure and resilient energy storage,” said Atte Virtanen, Vice President, Advanced bio-based materials at VTT.

Pilots planned within six months

Granarium has secured pilot customers and key value chain partners and is preparing to launch its first pilots within six months.

The initial deployments will focus on process industries and continuously running production operations, where power quality and stability are critical.

Initial commercial production will begin at a small industrial scale, with capacity to deliver up to 50 units per year.

The company plans to use this phase as the basis for rapid scale-up through industrial partnerships and international market expansion.

“We are not just improving existing solutions but redefining how power storage can be built and utilized,” said Otto-Ville Kaukoniemi, CTO at Granarium.

“Compared to lithium-based energy storage devices that utilise finite resources, our devices are far more environmentally sustainable as they derive from local and self-sufficient renewable carbon sources, and lower in cost to produce compared to battery gigafactory investments,” he added.

Some science experiments last a few minutes. Some take years. And then there is the Pitch Drop Experiment, which has been running for nearly a century and is still not finished.

The Pitch Drop Experiment, housed at the University of Queensland in Australia, is widely known as the world’s longest-running laboratory experiment.

A liquid that looks solid

The material at the center of the experiment is called pitch. Pitch is a black, tar-like substance that was once commonly used for waterproofing boats.

At room temperature, it looks, and feels solid. You can hit it with a hammer and it may shatter like glass. But scientifically, pitch is not a true solid. It is an extremely viscous liquid, meaning it can flow — just very, very slowly.

To prove this, Parnell heated some pitch and poured it into a glass funnel. He then let it settle for several years.

In 1930, the stem of the funnel was cut, allowing the pitch to begin its slow journey downward. Since then, the experiment has consisted of waiting for drops of pitch to fall from the funnel into a beaker below.

Why one drop takes years

That is where the experiment becomes famous. Since it began, only nine drops have fallen. The ninth drop separated in April 2014 during an operation to replace the beaker beneath it. The tenth drop is still forming.

The reason it takes so long is viscosity. Viscosity is a measure of how resistant a fluid is to flowing. Water has low viscosity, so it pours quickly. Honey has higher viscosity, so it flows more slowly. Pitch is on another level entirely.

The University of Queensland describes pitch as the world’s thickest known fluid, and Guinness World Records notes that the experiment has shown pitch to be about 100 billion times more viscous than water.

This is why the Pitch Drop Experiment is so useful as a teaching tool. It challenges our everyday idea of what solids and liquids are. We usually judge materials based on what we can see over a short time. If something does not move in front of us, we call it solid.

But science often works on timescales far beyond human patience. A mountain may seem permanent, but it can erode.

Glass may look rigid, but materials can behave differently under different conditions. Pitch shows that some substances can appear solid in daily life while still flowing over long periods.

A century-long lesson in patience

The experiment is also famous because of its strange history of near-misses. For decades, no one actually saw a drop fall in person. Drops fell at inconvenient moments, or cameras failed to capture them.

The eighth drop fell in 2000, and the ninth separated in 2014. Today, the experiment can be watched online, turning one of the slowest events in science into a kind of global waiting game.

What makes the experiment remarkable is not technological complexity. It is actually very simple: pitch, a funnel, a beaker, and time. But that simplicity is exactly why it works.

It makes an invisible idea visible. It turns viscosity from a textbook term into something you can understand with one image: a drop that takes years to fall.

The Pitch Drop Experiment is not about speed, spectacle, or instant results. It is a reminder that nature does not always move at the pace humans expect. Some truths reveal themselves only when someone is patient enough to keep watching.

Nearly 100 years after it began, the experiment continues. And somewhere inside that glass funnel, the next drop is slowly making its way down.

Buildings are often judged by height, beauty, engineering complexity, or cultural importance. But there is another way to measure ambition: cost.

The world’s most expensive buildings are not just oversized construction projects. They are statements of religion, tourism, technology, sport, luxury, and national identity.

Some were built to host millions of pilgrims. Others were designed to redefine entertainment, corporate campuses, or stadium architecture.

From Mecca to Singapore, California, and Macau, these seven buildings show how far architecture can go when budgets stretch into billions of dollars.

1. Al-Masjid al-Haram, Saudi Arabia

Wikimedia Commons

Price: $100 billion

The most expensive building in the world is not a skyscraper or a casino. It is Al-Masjid al-Haram in Mecca, Saudi Arabia.

The mosque has been expanded repeatedly over centuries, but its modern expansion projects have turned it into one of the largest religious complexes ever built.

Today, it covers around 356,800 square meters and can hold up to 820,000 worshippers. Ongoing expansion work aims to increase that area to about 456,000 square meters and raise capacity to around 1.2 million people.

2. Abraj Al Bait Towers, Saudi Arabia

Wikimedia Commons

Price: $19.5 billion

Standing next to the Grand Mosque, the Abraj Al Bait Towers form one of the most recognizable skylines in Mecca.

The complex is best known for the Mecca Royal Clock Tower Hotel, a central skyscraper that rises over 1968 feet (600 meters). Its giant clock faces are among the largest in the world, each measuring around 141 feet (43 meters) in diameter and lit by more than two million LEDs.

But the project is not just about height or spectacle. It was built to support the huge number of pilgrims who travel to Mecca every year for Hajj and Umrah.

The hotel complex can accommodate more than 30,000 people and includes over one million square meters of floor space.

3. Marina Bay Sands, Singapore

Wikimedia Commons

Price: $7.8 billion

Marina Bay Sands is one of those buildings that became a global icon almost instantly.

Located in Singapore, the complex includes a hotel, casino, shopping mall, exhibition center, theaters, restaurants, bars, and the ArtScience Museum. But its most famous feature is the massive rooftop SkyPark that stretches across three 55-story towers.

The roof garden sits nearly 623 feet (190 meters) above the ground and includes one of the world’s most famous infinity pools.

Designed by architect Moshe Safdie, the structure was reportedly inspired by stacked playing cards, which explains its dramatic, almost impossible-looking form.

4. SoFi Stadium, United States

Wikimedia Commons

Price: $5.5 billion

SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, California, is the most expensive stadium ever built.

Opened in 2020, it is home to the Los Angeles Rams and Los Angeles Chargers. The stadium can seat more than 70,000 people and can be expanded to over 100,000 for major events.

But the cost is not just about seating capacity. SoFi Stadium features a huge translucent roof, a 360-degree video board, premium hospitality spaces, and a futuristic design built for NFL games, concerts, Super Bowls, and other global events.

5. Apple Park, United States

Wikimedia Commons

Price: $5 billion

Apple Park in Cupertino, California, is one of the most famous corporate headquarters in the world.

Often called “the spaceship,” its ring-shaped main building measures around 1,509 feet (460 meters) in diameter and contains about 260,000 square meters of office space. It was designed to reflect Apple’s obsession with simplicity, precision, and product-like architecture.

The building uses large curved glass panels, open workspaces, landscaped surroundings, and energy-efficient design. The campus is home to more than 12,000 employees and is surrounded by thousands of trees.

6. Resorts World Sentosa, Singapore

Wikimedia Commons

Price: $4.9 billion

Singapore appears again on the list with Resorts World Sentosa, a massive integrated resort on Sentosa Island.

The complex includes luxury hotels, restaurants, event spaces, shopping areas, two casinos, a water park, Universal Studios Singapore, and the S.E.A. Aquarium, which houses more than 100,000 marine animals.

Unlike a single tower or stadium, Resorts World Sentosa is more like an entire entertainment district packed into one destination. It was designed to attract tourists, families, business travelers, and casino visitors at the same time.

7. Wynn Palace, Macau

Wikimedia Commons

Price: $4.2 billion

Wynn Palace in Macau completes the top seven with an estimated construction cost of $4.2 billion.

Located in the Cotai district, often compared to the Las Vegas Strip, Wynn Palace is a luxury resort built around high-end hospitality, gaming, retail, and entertainment.

The complex includes more than 1,700 rooms and suites, a casino, luxury boutiques, restaurants, a spa, and an artificial lake.

One of its standout attractions is a performance lake with fountains, light, and music, along with a cable car system that adds to the theatrical experience.

More than buildings

The seven most expensive buildings in the world are very different from one another. But they all have one thing in common: they were built to do more than occupy space.

They were built to create identity, attract people, support economies, and project ambition at an enormous scale. Their price tags are huge, but so are the purposes behind them.

In that sense, the most expensive buildings in the world are not just examples of lavish spending. They are monuments to what societies, companies, and cities choose to value most.

Aviation is entering a strange but exciting phase.

For decades, most passenger aircraft have followed the same basic design: a long tube, two wings, and engines under the wings. But that may not remain the case forever.

A new generation of aircraft is progressing at different speeds, ranging from early research concepts to full-scale flight demonstrators. Some are focused on cutting fuel burn. Others are built around electric propulsion, hydrogen, or completely new aircraft shapes.

Not all of them will enter service quickly. Some may arrive by the late 2020s, while others may take until the 2030s or even later. But all of them show where the future of aviation could be heading.

1. Boeing X-66A Truss-Braced Wing

Boeing’s X-66A is not a normal passenger plane. It is a NASA-backed demonstrator designed to test a new wing concept.

The aircraft uses an ultra-long, thin wing supported by diagonal trusses. This design is called the Transonic Truss-Braced Wing. The idea is simple: longer and thinner wings can reduce drag, but they need extra support to remain strong.

NASA and Boeing expect the design to cut fuel burn by around 8–10% compared with the best single-aisle jets available today. The first flight is planned for 2028.

If the technology works, it could influence the next generation of 130- to 210-seat aircraft in the early-to-mid 2030s.

2. Heart Aerospace ES-30

The Heart Aerospace ES-30 is one of the more practical aircraft on this list.

It is a 30-seat hybrid-electric regional aircraft designed for short routes. On battery power alone, it can fly up to 124 miles (200 kilometers) with zero emissions.

In hybrid mode, its range can increase to around 249 miles (400 kilometers) with a full passenger load, or up to 497 miles (800 kilometers) with fewer passengers and reserves.

This makes it useful for short regional flights where fully electric aircraft may still struggle because of battery limitations.

Heart Aerospace is targeting entry into service around 2028. Airlines such as Air Canada, United, and Mesa have already shown interest through orders.

3. JetZero Pathfinder / Z4

JetZero is developing one of the most radical aircraft designs on this list.

The California-based startup is working on a blended-wing-body aircraft, where the wings and fuselage are merged into one large lifting surface. Instead of looking like a traditional tube-and-wing airliner, the aircraft has a much wider, flatter shape.

The main advantage is efficiency. Since more of the aircraft helps generate lift, the design can reduce drag and burn less fuel. JetZero claims its Z4 aircraft could cut fuel burn and emissions by up to 50% compared with similar aircraft flying today.

The 250-passenger Z4 is expected to have a range of roughly 5,754 miles (9,260 kilometers).

4. Airbus ZEROe Hydrogen Aircraft

Airbus’s ZEROe program is one of the biggest attempts to bring hydrogen-powered aircraft into commercial aviation.

The original goal was to introduce a hydrogen aircraft around 2035, but the timeline now appears more likely to move toward the late 2030s or around 2040.

Early concepts included hydrogen turbofan aircraft, turboprops, and even a blended-wing-body design. Airbus has since focused more on fuel-cell-driven electric propulsion, where hydrogen is used to generate electricity for propellers.

If successful, ZEROe could become one of the world’s first large zero-emission commercial aircraft.

5. Bombardier EcoJet

Bombardier’s EcoJet is a futuristic business jet research project.

Like JetZero’s aircraft, it uses a blended-wing-body design to improve efficiency. Bombardier says the project could help cut emissions by as much as 50% compared with today’s business jets.

The company has already been testing an autonomous demonstrator with an 18-foot wingspan. The goal is to study aerodynamics, structures, and systems before applying the lessons to future aircraft.

There is no firm service date yet, but Bombardier sees EcoJet as a step toward the future of low-carbon business aviation.

6. Flying-V Long-Haul Concept

The Flying-V is one of the strangest-looking aircraft concepts in development.

Created by KLM and TU Delft, the aircraft has a V-shaped design where passengers, cargo, and fuel are all placed inside the wings. It is designed to carry about the same number of passengers as an Airbus A350 while using around 20% less fuel.

A small-scale model has already completed its first flight. However, this is still a long-term project. Researchers believe a commercial Flying-V would not carry passengers before around 2040 at the earliest.

7. Eviation Alice Electric Commuter

Eviation’s Alice is a fully electric commuter aircraft designed to carry nine passengers.

It completed its maiden flight in 2022 and showed how quiet, clean short-range electric aviation could look.

However, battery limitations have made the project difficult. Its expected range has been reduced to around 288 miles (463 kilometers), and entry into service has been delayed several times.

The project was also paused in 2025. Still, if the company can solve its funding and technology challenges, Alice, or an aircraft inspired by it, could become one of the first fully electric commuter planes to enter commercial service.

Taken together, these seven projects show that the future of flight is not a single silver bullet, but a portfolio of electric, hybrid, hydrogen, and radically aerodynamic designs converging on the same goal – drastically lower emissions and noise without giving up speed or range.

Earth is filled with places and phenomena so spectacular that they seem almost unreal.

From glowing skies to giant reefs, massive canyons, towering mountains, and roaring waterfalls, the planet’s greatest natural wonders show just how powerful and diverse nature can be.

While different lists exist, these seven natural wonders are unanimously celebrated for their scale, beauty, and uniqueness.

1. Aurora Borealis

The Aurora Borealis, or northern lights, is one of the most magical sights on Earth. It appears when charged particles from the sun collide with gases in Earth’s upper atmosphere, creating glowing waves of green, pink, violet, and sometimes red light.

The display is never exactly the same twice, which makes it feel alive and unpredictable. Seen in polar regions on clear dark nights, it is one of the few natural wonders that can turn the sky itself into a spectacle.

2. Grand Canyon

The Grand Canyon in Arizona, USA, is one of the world’s most famous geological landmarks. Carved by the Colorado River over millions of years, it reveals layer after layer of rock that tells the story of Earth’s ancient past.

Its vast scale, steep cliffs, and shifting colors make it look different throughout the day. At sunrise and sunset, the canyon becomes especially dramatic, with light and shadow deepening its immense depth.

3. Great Barrier Reef

The Great Barrier Reef off the coast of Australia is the largest coral reef system on the planet. Stretching over an enormous area, it is made up of thousands of reefs, islands, and cays.

Beneath the surface lies a thriving world of coral, fish, turtles, sharks, and countless other species. It is not only beautiful but also ecologically vital, serving as one of the richest marine habitats on Earth. Its scale and biodiversity make it a true natural treasure.

4. Harbor of Rio de Janeiro

The Harbor of Rio de Janeiro is famous for its stunning setting, where the sea meets steep mountains and rocky peaks. Sugarloaf Mountain and the surrounding coastline create a natural amphitheater around the city.

The combination of water, stone, and urban life gives Rio one of the most dramatic landscapes anywhere in the world. It is a place where geography and beauty come together in a way that feels almost cinematic.

5. Mount Everest

Mount Everest is the highest mountain above sea level on Earth and one of the most iconic peaks in human history. Rising from the Himalayas, it stands as a symbol of endurance, adventure, and extreme natural grandeur.

Its snowy summit and harsh conditions make it both beautiful and formidable. For climbers, it represents one of the greatest challenges imaginable; for everyone else, it remains a breathtaking reminder of how high and powerful the Earth can be.

6. Parícutin

Parícutin, in Mexico, is one of the rarest natural wonders because people actually witnessed its birth. In 1943, a volcano erupted suddenly in a farmer’s field and began growing rapidly from the ground.

Within a short time, it had formed a new volcanic cone and reshaped the surrounding landscape. Unlike ancient mountains or reefs, Parícutin is a modern geological event, making it a unique example of nature creating something new before human eyes.

7. Victoria Falls

Victoria Falls, on the border of Zambia and Zimbabwe, is one of the largest and most powerful waterfalls in the world. The Zambezi River plunges into a deep gorge, creating a massive curtain of water and a cloud of mist that can rise high into the air.

The local name, “The Smoke That Thunders,” captures the sound and force perfectly. Victoria Falls is unforgettable because it combines raw power with extraordinary beauty in one dramatic scene.

Taken together, these seven wonders highlight the many forms greatness can take in nature. Some are visible in the sky, some carved into stone, some hidden beneath the sea, and others formed by fire or water.

What they all share is the ability to inspire awe. They remind us that Earth is not only our home, but also a planet full of extraordinary wonders waiting to be seen.