80.7 F
Chicago
Wednesday, August 12, 2026
Home Blog Page 23

BP Retreats Further From Green Energy With Archaea Sale

BP Retreats Further From Green Energy With Archaea Sale

Via City A.M.,

  • BP plans to sell Archaea Energy after the US biogas operation delivered weaker-than-expected returns.

  • Second-quarter adjusted profit climbed to $5.7 billion as Middle East disruption lifted oil and gas prices.

  • Meg O’Neill is simplifying BP’s portfolio, reducing debt and concentrating investment on its most profitable assets.

BP has announced that it will offload its US biogas business just days after confirming its exit from the North Sea, as the firm looks to shift its focus back to core oil and gas products.

The London-listed oil giant has previously told investors it planned to market assets across its operating regions as part of a restructuring overseen by new boss Meg O’Neill.

BP acquired Archaea for $4.1bn in 2022, but the business has since faced financial underperformance and slower-than-expected growth, forcing the FTSE 100 giant to reassess the asset’s worth.

O’Neill said the firm must simplify its portfolio “based on value, not sentiment, nor history” and instead focus on assets which “deliver competitive returns and long-term value”.

She has previously announced plans for a major overhaul of the group’s energy channels, splitting it into two divisions, dubbed upstream and downstream, and focusing solely on profitable assets.

The push has also seen the group confirm its exit from the North Sea, leaving the British energy giant without any petrochemical production in its home market for the first time in decades. It also sold its Gelsenkirchen refinery and retail business in Austria.

O’Neill said:

“We are not making the most of our potential. Our performance over the past few years has not met our own expectations, let alone those of our shareholders. 

“We have not delivered consistently; we have written off too much value; and our costs and liabilities are not resilient enough in a low price environment.”

The stock is up over 20% since the start of the year.

Middle East conflict spikes profits

Profits spiked in the second quarter as the group continued to capitalise on volatile oil prices caused by the conflict in the Middle East.

BP reported a surge in profits to $5.7bn (£4.2bn), a $2.5bn increase from the prior period.

This surpassed analyst expectations of $5.1bn.

The firm’s gas and low carbon energy arm reported profits of $1.6bn, up from $1.1bn the prior quarter.

Oil production and operations saw profit climb to $3.4bn from $1.7bn.

Mark Crouch, market analyst at eToro, said:

“Having retreated from its previous push into renewables, BP is accelerating asset sales, simplifying the business and directing more capital towards higher-return oil and gas operations.

If tensions across the Middle East persist or escalate further, energy prices could remain elevated, providing an additional tailwind for the sector. The key question for investors is whether BP can use this favourable backdrop to create lasting shareholder value long after today’s geopolitical uncertainty eventually fades.”

Disruption ahead

The firm anticipates production in the third quarter to range from 2,100 to 2,250 thousand barrels of oil equivalent per day (mboe/d), compared with the second quarter 2,201 mboe/d.

This has caused the group to drop its upstream production expectations for the year to 2,180 to 2,270 mboe/d, compared to last year’s 2,312 mboe/d.

BP pinned its outlook on the “continued disruption in the Middle East” and the likelihood of potential “weather events in the Gulf of America”.

The group expects income taxes paid in the quarter to be roughly $1bn higher, “mainly due to timing effects”.

O’Neill said: “We need to take a clear look at ourselves: assessing what needs to change, stopping what holds us back and building strength where it matters. We have to get fit to grow.”

Tyler Durden
Wed, 08/05/2026 – 06:30

How Economic Power Has Shifted Over The Past 200 Years

How Economic Power Has Shifted Over The Past 200 Years

Over the last 200 years, economic leadership has shifted from China to the British Empire, then to the United States, and increasingly back toward Asia.

This streamgraph, via Visual Capitalist’s Gabriel Cohen, tracks how the share of global gross domestic product (GDP) held by major economies changed from 1820 to 2025. The visualization incorporates the latest available data from the Maddison Project Database, the COLDAT Colonial Dates Dataset, and the IMF’s World Economic Outlook.

All GDP figures are adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP), accounting for differences in living costs and production across countries.

The table below shows how each economy’s share of world GDP changed across two centuries:

Economy Share of World GDP (%)
1820 1855 1890 1925 1960 1995 2025
🇨🇳 China 28.6% 21.1% 12.7% 8.9% 5.3% 9.5% 21.8%
🇺🇸 U.S. 2.3% 7.0% 14.6% 23.9% 24.5% 20.7% 14.7%
🇪🇺 EU 17.0% 12.3%
🇮🇳 India 3.9% 4.3% 9.0%
🇯🇵 Japan 3.5% 2.9% 2.6% 3.8% 4.5% 7.9% 3.4%
🇷🇺 Russia / USSR 9.2% 7.1% 5.3% 5.2% 10.1% 2.5% 2.9%
🇬🇧 British Empire / Britain 23.1% 22.6% 20.7% 14.7% 6.3% 3.2% 1.9%
🇫🇷 France 4.8% 5.8% 5.2% 5.0% 4.1%
🇩🇪 Germany 4.3% 4.8% 6.4% 6.6% 6.7%

Pax Britannica and the European Years

Britain was the first country in the world to industrialize. As a result, the British Empire became the world’s preeminent superpower during the 19th century, an era sometimes known as Pax Britannica because of the relative absence of conflict between the major powers.

In 1845, the British Empire, on which the sun famously “never set,” contributed nearly one-quarter (23.8%) of global GDP. India was the empire’s most economically significant possession before gaining independence in 1947.

The table below shows each economy’s peak share of world GDP, the year it reached that level, and its share in 2025:

Economy Peak Share (%) Peak Year 2025 Share (%)
🇺🇸 U.S. 29.7% 1944 14.7%
🇨🇳 China 28.6% 1820 21.8%
🇬🇧 British Empire / Britain 23.8% 1845 1.9%
🇪🇺 EU 17.9% 2007 12.3%
🇷🇺 Russia / USSR 10.2% 1956 2.9%
🇮🇳 India 9.0% 2025 9.0%
🇩🇪 Germany 8.8% 1913  
🇯🇵 Japan 8.6% 1990 3.4%
🇫🇷 France 6.6% 1858  

The rest of Europe’s fortunes followed a similar trajectory. The French Empire reached its peak share in 1858, at 6.6%, while Germany peaked at 8.8% in 1913, on the eve of the First World War.

Following decades of war and declining influence on the world stage, several European economies joined together in the European Union. The bloc contributed 17.9% of global GDP in 2007, ahead of the global financial crisis, though its share later declined and was further reduced by the UK’s withdrawal in 2020.

The Fall of Empire and the Rise of the U.S.

If the 19th century was the British century, the 20th was the American century. Like Britain before it, the U.S. became the world’s largest exporter for a time.

World War II marked a turning point in global economic leadership. By 1944, the U.S. accounted for 29.7% of world GDP, the highest share reached by any economy in the modern period covered by this dataset.

American economic dominance was supported by high-value industries and the country’s central role in global finance, manufacturing, and trade.

The U.S. also continues to dominate rankings of the world’s largest and most profitable companies today. It also is still the undisputed economic powerhouse in nominal GDP terms.

The Asian Century

For centuries, China was a center of the global economy. Political instability and its failure to keep pace with European industrialization contributed to a long decline in its share of world GDP during the 19th and 20th centuries.

Beginning in the late 20th century, economic reforms and China’s emergence as a global manufacturing hub helped it regain lost ground. By 2025, China accounted for 21.8% of world GDP, or more than one-fifth of the total.

The full dataset below shows each economy’s share of world GDP for every year from 1820 to 2025:

Year Share of World GDP (%)
🇨🇳 China 🇺🇸 U.S. 🇪🇺 EU 🇮🇳 India 🇯🇵 Japan 🇷🇺 Russia / USSR 🇬🇧 British Empire / Britain 🇫🇷 France 🇩🇪 Germany
1820 28.6% 2.3% 3.5% 9.2% 23.1% 4.8% 4.3%
1821 28.4% 2.4% 3.5% 9.2% 23.0% 5.2% 4.4%
1822 28.2% 2.5% 3.4% 9.2% 23.0% 5.0% 4.4%
1823 28.1% 2.5% 3.4% 9.2% 23.0% 5.1% 4.4%
1824 27.9% 2.6% 3.4% 9.2% 23.2% 5.2% 4.6%
1825 27.7% 2.7% 3.4% 9% 23.2% 5.0% 4.6%
1826 27.6% 2.8% 3.4% 9% 22.8% 5.1% 4.7%
1827 27.4% 2.9% 3.4% 9% 23.1% 5.0% 4.6%
1828 27.2% 2.9% 3.3% 9% 23.0% 4.9% 4.5%
1829 27.0% 2.9% 3.3% 9% 22.9% 5.0% 4.5%
1830 26.9% 3.1% 3.3% 8.7% 23.1% 4.9% 4.5%
1831 26.6% 3.4% 3.3% 8.7% 23.0% 5.0% 4.4%
1832 26.4% 3.6% 3.3% 8.7% 23.1% 5.4% 4.5%
1833 26.2% 3.8% 3.3% 8.7% 23.0% 5.2% 4.7%
1834 26.0% 3.7% 3.2% 8.7% 23.0% 5.2% 4.7%
1835 25.8% 3.9% 3.2% 8.4% 23.4% 5.4% 4.7%
1836 25.6% 4.0% 3.2% 8.4% 23.4% 5.2% 4.7%
1837 25.4% 4.0% 3.2% 8.4% 23.2% 5.3% 4.7%
1838 25.2% 4.0% 3.2% 8.4% 23.4% 5.5% 4.6%
1839 25.0% 4.2% 3.2% 8.4% 23.1% 5.3% 4.7%
1840 24.8% 4.1% 3.2% 8.3% 23.4% 5.6% 4.8%
1841 24.6% 4.1% 3.1% 8.3% 23.1% 5.7% 4.9%
1842 24.4% 4.2% 3.1% 8.3% 22.8% 5.5% 4.8%
1843 24.2% 4.3% 3.1% 8.3% 23.0% 5.8% 4.7%
1844 24.0% 4.7% 3.1% 8.3% 23.6% 5.9% 4.7%
1845 23.8% 4.9% 3.1% 8.2% 23.8% 5.7% 4.8%
1846 23.6% 5.0% 3.1% 8.2% 23.6% 5.7% 4.6%
1847 23.4% 5.2% 3.0% 8.2% 23.3% 6.2% 4.6%
1848 23.2% 5.5% 3.0% 8.2% 23.3% 5.8% 4.8%
1849 23.0% 5.4% 3.0% 8.2% 23.2% 5.9% 5.0%
1850 22.9% 5.5% 3.0% 7.7% 22.9% 6.0% 5.0%
1851 22.5% 5.9% 3.0% 7.7% 22.9% 5.8% 4.9%
1852 22.1% 6.3% 3.0% 7.7% 23.0% 6.1% 4.9%
1853 21.8% 6.9% 2.9% 7.7% 23.0% 5.8% 4.8%
1854 21.4% 7.0% 2.9% 7.7% 23.0% 6.0% 4.9%
1855 21.1% 7.0% 2.9% 7.1% 22.6% 5.8% 4.8%
1856 20.8% 7.3% 2.9% 7.1% 22.9% 6.0% 5.1%
1857 20.4% 7.3% 2.9% 7.1% 22.7% 6.3% 5.3%
1858 20.1% 7.4% 2.9% 7.1% 22.2% 6.6% 5.2%
1859 19.8% 7.7% 2.9% 7.1% 22.4% 6.1% 5.2%
1860 19.5% 8.0% 2.9% 7.1% 22.3% 6.5% 5.4%
1861 19.2% 8.0% 2.9% 6.8% 22.0% 6.0% 5.2%
1862 19.0% 8.3% 2.9% 6.1% 21.3% 6.4% 5.4%
1863 18.8% 9.0% 2.8% 7.3% 21.8% 6.6% 5.7%
1864 18.6% 9.4% 2.8% 6.0% 21.8% 6.6% 5.8%
1865 18.3% 9.0% 2.8% 5.4% 21.7% 6.3% 5.8%
1866 18.1% 9.1% 2.8% 6.6% 21.7% 6.3% 5.8%
1867 17.9% 9.5% 2.8% 5.6% 21.6% 5.8% 5.7%
1868 17.7% 9.7% 2.8% 5.7% 21.8% 6.3% 6.0%
1869 17.4% 10.0% 2.8% 5.6% 21.6% 6.4% 6.0%
1870 17.2% 9.8% 2.8% 7.2% 21.8% 5.8% 5.9%
1871 16.9% 10.1% 2.8% 5.9% 21.4% 5.7% 5.7%
1872 16.6% 10.3% 2.7% 6.3% 21.2% 6.1% 6.0%
1873 16.3% 10.6% 2.7% 6.3% 21.1% 5.6% 6.1%
1874 16.0% 10.3% 2.7% 7.6% 20.9% 6.2% 6.5%
1875 15.7% 10.7% 2.6% 5.8% 20.9% 6.2% 6.4%
1876 15.4% 10.6% 2.6% 5.8% 20.6% 5.6% 6.2%
1877 15.1% 10.7% 2.6% 7.1% 20.4% 5.8% 6.1%
1878 14.8% 11.0% 2.6% 7.3% 20.1% 5.6% 6.2%
1879 14.6% 12.1% 2.6% 6.1% 20.0% 5.2% 6.0%
1880 14.3% 13.3% 2.6% 5.6% 20.2% 5.5% 5.8%
1881 14.0% 13.5% 2.6% 7.1% 20.3% 5.7% 5.8%
1882 13.8% 14.1% 2.6% 6.1% 20.7% 5.8% 5.8%
1883 13.5% 14.1% 2.5% 6.3% 20.6% 5.7% 6.0%
1884 13.3% 14.1% 2.5% 6.2% 20.4% 5.5% 6.0%
1885 13.1% 13.9% 2.5% 5.5% 20.2% 5.3% 6.1%
1886 12.8% 14.1% 2.6% 5.2% 19.8% 5.3% 6.0%
1887 12.6% 14.4% 2.6% 6.1% 20.4% 5.2% 6.1%
1888 12.6% 14.1% 2.4% 5.8% 20.6% 5.2% 6.2%
1889 12.7% 14.7% 2.5% 5.4% 20.5% 5.2% 6.3%
1890 12.7% 14.6% 2.6% 5.3% 20.7% 5.2% 6.4%
1891 12.5% 14.9% 2.4% 4.8% 19.6% 5.3% 6.2%
1892 12.3% 16.1% 2.5% 5.2% 19.6% 5.3% 6.4%
1893 12.2% 15.0% 2.5% 5.9% 19.4% 5.3% 6.6%
1894 12.0% 14.3% 2.7% 6.6% 19.8% 5.4% 6.6%
1895 11.9% 15.7% 2.7% 6.1% 19.5% 5.2% 6.8%
1896 11.7% 15.1% 2.5% 6.7% 18.9% 5.3% 6.9%
1897 11.6% 16.2% 2.5% 6.5% 20.1% 5.1% 7.0%
1898 11.4% 16.3% 2.9% 6.6% 20.3% 5.3% 7.1%
1899 11.2% 17.4% 2.7% 7.0% 19.7% 5.5% 7.2%
1900 11.1% 17.5% 2.7% 6.8% 19.6% 5.3% 7.4%
1901 10.9% 19.2% 2.7% 7.0% 19.5% 5.1% 7.1%
1902 10.7% 19.1% 2.5% 7.6% 20.2% 5.0% 7.2%
1903 10.6% 19.7% 2.8% 7.1% 20.1% 5.0% 7.4%
1904 10.4% 19.1% 2.7% 7.8% 19.9% 5.0% 7.6%
1905 10.2% 20.2% 2.6% 6.9% 19.8% 5.0% 7.7%
1906 10.0% 22.2% 2.9% 6.6% 20.2% 5.0% 7.8%
1907 9.9% 22.2% 2.9% 6.4% 19.7% 5.1% 8.0%
1908 9.7% 20.1% 2.9% 7.0% 19.1% 5.0% 8.0%
1909 9.5% 22.0% 2.8% 7.2% 20.1% 5.1% 8.0%
1910 9.4% 21.7% 2.8% 7.8% 20.2% 4.7% 8.2%
1911 9.3% 22.0% 2.9% 7.2% 20.2% 5.1% 8.3%
1912 9.6% 22.5% 2.9% 7.8% 20.1% 5.5% 8.5%
1913 10.0% 22.9% 2.9% 8.2% 20.1% 5.3% 8.8%
1914 9.9% 20.6% 2.8% 7.7% 20.2% 4.9% 7.3%
1915 9.9% 20.8% 3.0% 7.8% 20.3% 4.7% 6.9%
1916 9.9% 23.1% 3.4% 6.8% 20.5% 4.9% 6.8%
1917 9.8% 22.1% 3.5% 5.8% 20.1% 4.1% 6.7%
1918 9.8% 23.5% 3.5% 3.5% 18.8% 3.1% 6.6%
1919 9.8% 23.2% 3.8% 3.0% 16.3% 3.6% 5.3%
1920 9.7% 22.5% 3.4% 2.9% 14.5% 4.2% 5.6%
1921 9.5% 21.4% 3.7% 2.6% 14.1% 3.9% 6.1%
1922 9.4% 21.9% 3.7% 2.9% 14.7% 4.5% 6.5%
1923 9.2% 24.1% 3.6% 3.3% 14.3% 4.6% 5.3%
1924 9.0% 24.1% 3.7% 4.2% 14.6% 5.1% 6.0%
1925 8.9% 23.9% 3.8% 5.2% 14.7% 5.0% 6.6%
1926 8.7% 24.8% 3.7% 5.8% 14.4% 5.0% 6.6%
1927 8.5% 24.3% 3.6% 6.1% 14.6% 4.8% 7.1%
1928 8.4% 23.9% 3.8% 6.4% 14.5% 5.0% 7.2%
1929 8.2% 24.6% 3.9% 6.4% 14.7% 5.2% 7.0%
1930 8.2% 21.8% 3.5% 6.6% 14.4% 5.0% 6.8%
1931 8.0% 19.9% 3.5% 6.6% 13.7% 4.5% 6.1%
1932 8.1% 16.5% 3.7% 6.4% 13.4% 4.2% 5.5%
1933 7.1% 15.6% 3.9% 6.5% 13.2% 4.3% 5.8%
1934 7.1% 16.5% 3.8% 7.0% 13.4% 4.2% 6.1%
1935 7.5% 18.2% 3.9% 7.8% 12.9% 4.0% 6.4%
1936 7.8% 19.5% 4.0% 8.3% 13.2% 4.1% 6.8%
1937 7.4% 20.5% 4.1% 8.9% 13.0% 4.2% 7.1%
1938 7.0% 18.8% 4.2% 8.8% 12.8% 4.1% 7.5%
1939 6.8% 19.7% 4.7% 9.2% 12.7% 4.3% 8.0%
1940 6.5% 20.8% 4.7% 8.8% 13.1% 3.5% 7.9%
1941 6.4% 23.5% 4.8% 8.3% 13.7% 2.7% 8.3%
1942 6.2% 25.8% 4.8% 7.9% 13.8% 2.4% 8.3%
1943 6.1% 27.9% 4.7% 7.6% 14.0% 2.3% 8.4%
1944 6.0% 29.7% 4.7% 7.2% 13.5% 1.9% 8.5%
1945 5.8% 28.8% 3.5% 6.8% 12.9% 2.0% 6.0%
1946 5.7% 25.9% 2.6% 6.5% 12.2% 3.0% 2.8%
1947 5.5% 25.2% 4.2% 2.6% 7.2% 7.0% 3.3% 3.1%
1948 5.4% 26.2% 4.2% 2.8% 8.1% 8.0% 3.5% 3.7%
1949 5.3% 25.4% 4.2% 2.8% 8.9% 8.2% 3.9% 4.2%
1950 5.2% 27.4% 4.2% 3.0% 9.6% 8.1% 4.2% 5.0%
1951 6.0% 28.2% 4.1% 3.3% 9.2% 8.0% 4.2% 5.2%
1952 6.4% 27.9% 4.0% 3.5% 9.4% 7.7% 4.1% 5.4%
1953 6.9% 27.9% 4.1% 3.6% 9.4% 7.6% 4.1% 5.6%
1954 6.2% 26.5% 4.1% 3.6% 9.4% 7.7% 4.1% 5.8%
1955 6.4% 27.1% 4.0% 3.7% 9.7% 7.6% 4.1% 6.1%
1956 6.7% 26.4% 4.0% 3.8% 10.2% 7.3% 4.1% 6.2%
1957 6.5% 25.7% 3.8% 3.9% 9.9% 7.0% 4.2% 6.3%
1958 6.3% 24.3% 3.9% 4.0% 10.2% 6.7% 4.1% 6.3%
1959 5.8% 25.0% 3.8% 4.2% 9.6% 6.7% 4.0% 6.5%
1960 5.3% 24.5% 3.9% 4.5% 10.1% 6.3% 4.1% 6.7%
1961 4.1% 23.8% 3.8% 4.8% 10.1% 6.1% 4.1% 6.6%
1962 4.2% 24.0% 3.7% 5.0% 9.9% 5.7% 4.2% 6.6%
1963 4.6% 23.9% 3.7% 5.1% 9.2% 5.3% 4.2% 6.4%
1964 4.9% 24.0% 3.8% 5.4% 9.9% 5.3% 4.3% 6.5%
1965 5.2% 24.3% 3.5% 5.5% 9.9% 5.1% 4.2% 6.5%
1966 5.2% 24.6% 3.3% 5.8% 9.9% 5.0% 4.2% 6.3%
1967 4.9% 24.0% 3.4% 6.1% 9.9% 4.8% 4.2% 6.0%
1968 4.6% 23.9% 3.4% 6.5% 9.9% 4.7% 4.2% 6.1%
1969 4.8% 23.5% 3.4% 7.0% 9.6% 4.6% 4.3% 6.2%
1970 5.2% 22.4% 3.4% 7.4% 9.8% 4.5% 4.3% 6.1%
1971 5.3% 22.2% 3.3% 7.4% 9.7% 4.3% 4.3% 6.1%
1972 5.2% 22.6% 3.2% 7.8% 9.4% 4.3% 4.4% 6.1%
1973 5.4% 22.9% 3.2% 8.1% 9.8% 4.4% 4.4% 6.1%
1974 5.4% 22.0% 3.1% 7.7% 9.7% 4.2% 4.4% 6.0%
1975 5.5% 21.2% 3.3% 7.6% 9.4% 4.1% 4.2% 5.7%
1976 5.1% 21.4% 3.2% 7.6% 9.5% 4.0% 4.2% 5.8%
1977 5.2% 21.6% 3.3% 7.7% 9.3% 3.9% 4.2% 5.7%
1978 5.6% 22.0% 3.4% 7.8% 9.2% 3.9% 4.2% 5.6%
1979 5.8% 21.9% 3.1% 7.9% 8.8% 3.9% 4.2% 5.7%
1980 5.9% 21.1% 3.2% 7.8% 8.5% 3.6% 4.1% 5.5%
1981 5.9% 21.0% 3.3% 7.8% 8.3% 3.5% 4.0% 5.4%
1982 6.3% 20.0% 3.3% 7.8% 8.3% 3.4% 4.0% 5.2%
1983 6.5% 20.2% 3.4% 7.8% 8.3% 3.5% 3.9% 5.1%
1984 7.0% 21.1% 3.5% 7.8% 8.2% 3.4% 3.8% 5.1%
1985 7.4% 21.2% 3.5% 8.0% 8.0% 3.5% 3.8% 5.0%
1986 7.7% 21.3% 3.5% 8.0% 8.1% 3.5% 3.8% 5.0%
1987 8.1% 21.4% 3.6% 8.0% 8.0% 3.5% 3.7% 4.9%
1988 8.3% 21.7% 3.9% 8.3% 7.9% 3.6% 3.8% 5.0%
1989 8.1% 21.8% 4.0% 8.4% 7.8% 3.6% 3.8% 5.0%
1990 7.9% 21.5% 4.1% 8.6% 7.4% 3.5% 3.8% 4.7%
1991 7.9% 20.7% 4.0% 8.6% 6.8% 3.4% 3.7% 4.8%
1992 8.2% 20.8% 4.0% 8.4% 3.4% 3.2% 3.7% 4.8%
1993 8.7% 20.6% 15.8% 4.1% 8.1% 3.1% 3.2%
1994 9.0% 20.8% 15.8% 4.2% 7.9% 2.6% 3.2%
1995 9.5% 20.7% 17.0% 4.3% 7.9% 2.5% 3.2%
1996 9.8% 20.8% 16.8% 4.5% 7.8% 2.4% 3.2%
1997 9.8% 21.0% 16.8% 4.5% 7.7% 2.4% 3.2%
1998 9.5% 21.2% 16.9% 4.6% 7.3% 2.2% 3.1%
1999 9.6% 21.5% 16.9% 4.7% 7.1% 2.4% 3.1%
2000 9.9% 21.6% 17.1% 4.7% 7.0% 2.6% 3.1%
2001 10.2% 21.0% 16.9% 4.7% 6.8% 2.7% 3.1%
2002 10.5% 20.5% 16.5% 4.7% 6.5% 2.7% 3.0%
2003 10.7% 20.2% 16.1% 4.8% 6.3% 2.9% 3.0%
2004 11.1% 20.2% 17.6% 5.0% 6.2% 3.0% 3.0%
2005 11.7% 20.0% 17.4% 5.1% 6.1% 3.2% 3.0%
2006 12.4% 19.7% 17.4% 5.3% 5.9% 3.4% 2.9%
2007 13.0% 19.3% 17.9% 5.5% 5.8% 3.6% 2.9%
2008 13.0% 18.5% 17.5% 5.6% 5.5% 3.7% 2.7%
2009 13.4% 17.2% 16.2% 5.8% 5.0% 3.4% 2.5%
2010 14.3% 17.0% 16.0% 6.0% 5.0% 3.5% 2.4%
2011 14.7% 16.6% 15.8% 6.2% 4.8% 3.6% 2.4%
2012 15.3% 16.4% 15.2% 6.3% 4.7% 3.6% 2.3%
2013 16.0% 16.2% 14.7% 6.4% 4.6% 3.5% 2.3%
2014 16.6% 16.0% 14.5% 6.7% 4.5% 3.4% 2.3%
2015 17.1% 15.8% 14.3% 6.9% 4.4% 3.2% 2.3%
2016 17.7% 15.6% 14.1% 7.3% 4.3% 3.1% 2.2%
2017 18.2% 15.4% 14.0% 7.5% 4.2% 3.1% 2.2%
2018 18.8% 15.3% 13.8% 7.7% 4.1% 3.0% 2.2%
2019 19.4% 15.2% 13.6% 7.9% 4.0% 3.0% 2.1%
2020 20.4% 15.2% 13.2% 7.5% 3.9% 3.0% 2.0%
2021 20.8% 15.2% 13.1% 7.8% 3.8% 3.0% 2.0%
2022 20.7% 15.0% 13.1% 8.1% 3.7% 2.9% 2.0%
2023 21.2% 14.9% 12.8% 8.4% 3.6% 2.9% 1.9%
2024 21.5% 14.8% 12.5% 8.7% 3.5% 2.9% 1.9%
2025 21.8% 14.7% 12.3% 9.0% 3.4% 2.9% 1.9%

Together, China and India accounted for 30.8% of global GDP in 2025. Their large populations and lower production costs give both countries greater weight when output is measured using purchasing power parity.

Whether this shift continues will depend partly on how China addresses demographic pressures similar to those facing Japan and the European Union, as well as broader challenges related to productivity and economic growth.

To see how the world’s major Western industrialized economies are losing GDP share, read The G7’s Share of Global GDP is Shrinking on Voronoi, the new app from Visual Capitalist.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 08/05/2026 – 04:15

US Expands Strategic Foothold On Somalia’s Coast As Yemen Conflict Simmers

US Expands Strategic Foothold On Somalia’s Coast As Yemen Conflict Simmers

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

A US military delegation visited the local government in Somalia’s northeastern Puntland region on Sunday and signed a deal to expand the US military presence in Bosaso, a port city on the Gulf of Aden, according to the Puntland government.

Saeed Abdullahi Deni, the president of Puntland State, held talks with a delegation led by Maj. Gen. Claude Tudor, the commander of US Special Operations Command Africa.

Maj. Gen. Tudor and President Deni. Source: Puntland government image

“Puntland and the United States also signed a new agreement to expand their cooperation. Under the agreement, the United States will expand its military base in Bosaso to improve operations against terrorism and to help protect maritime security,” the Puntland government said in a statement on the meeting.

The US has been operating from a UAE-built airbase in Bosaso, which the UAE has reportedly used to arm the RSF in Sudan.

An expanded US military presence in Bosaso could be used as a launchpad for operations against Yemen’s Ansar Allah, also known as the Houthis, and the deal comes as Ansar Allah is enforcing a new maritime blockade on Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea ports, which began after Saudi strikes on Yemen’s Sanaa International Airpoirt, attacks that reignited the conflict that was in a state of ceasefire since 2022.

Tudor visited Puntland a day after meeting with officials in Somaliland, a de facto independent state within Somalia’s internationally recognized borders.

It’s unclear if any deals were signed in that meeting, but Israel recently became the first country to recognize Somaliland as an independent country and is seeking to establish a military and intelligence presence for operations against Yemen.

According to the Somali Guardian, the US-Puntland deal bypassed the US-backed federal government in Mogadishu, which has been at odds with Puntland amid a political crisis sparked by changes to the constitution made by Somali President Hassan Sheik Mohamud. Puntland withdrew from the federal system in 2024, and this year clashes have occurred between forces loyal to the federal government and Puntland security forces.

The US has continued to back the federal government with airstrikes against al-Shabaab, and it has also been engaged in an air campaign against an ISIS affiliate in Puntland, where it backs local Puntland forces.

via BBC

President Trump has overseen a major escalation in Somalia, launching at least 124 airstrikes in 2025, a record number. The US has launched at least 77 airstrikes in Somalia this year, though the war receives virtually no media coverage in the US.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 08/05/2026 – 03:30

Which Countries Think They’re On The Right Track?

Which Countries Think They’re On The Right Track?

Public confidence in national direction varies dramatically around the world. Respondents in several Asian countries are broadly optimistic, while majorities across much of Europe and the Americas believe their countries are on the wrong track.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Gabriel Cohen, ranks 30 countries by the percentage of adults ages 16 to 74 who believe their country is moving in the right or wrong direction.

The visualization uses 2026 survey data from Ipsos Global Opinion Polls and covers 25,709 respondents.

Asian Optimism in 2026

Asian countries dominate the top of the ranking, accounting for six of the seven countries where a majority of respondents believe their country is on the right track.

Singapore leads at 86%, followed by Malaysia at 74% and India at 69%. Indonesia and Thailand are tied at 62%, while South Korea stands at 58%.

This table ranks all 30 countries:

Country Approval of Country Direction (%) Disapproval of Country Direction (%)
🇸🇬 Singapore 86 14
🇲🇾 Malaysia 74 26
🇮🇳 India 69 31
🇹🇭 Thailand 62 38
🇮🇩 Indonesia 62 38
🇰🇷 S. Korea 58 42
🇦🇷 Argentina 55 45
🇨🇱 Chile 48 52
🇨🇴 Colombia 46 54
🇨🇦 Canada 45 55
🇦🇺 Australia 44 56
🇵🇱 Poland 43 57
🇮🇪 Ireland 42 58
🇯🇵 Japan 41 59
🇺🇸 U.S. 40 60
🇮🇱 Israel 36 64
🇲🇽 Mexico 36 64
🇧🇷 Brazil 34 66
🇳🇱 Netherlands 32 68
🇸🇪 Sweden 31 69
🇪🇸 Spain 31 69
🇮🇹 Italy 31 69
🇧🇪 Belgium 30 70
🇹🇷 Türkiye 28 72
🇿🇦 South Africa 23 77
🇭🇺 Hungary 23 77
🇩🇪 Germany 23 77
🇬🇧 Great Britain 21 79
🇵🇪 Peru 15 85
🇫🇷 France 10 90
🌐 World 41 59

Economic momentum may help explain some of this confidence. The AI boom is supporting major South Korean companies such as Samsung and SK Hynix, while India and Indonesia remain two of the world’s largest emerging markets.

Japan is a notable exception to the broader regional pattern. Following decades of economic stagnation, 41% of Japanese respondents believe their country is on the right track, matching the global average.

Pessimism Outside Asia

Outside Asia, most countries surveyed across Europe, the Americas, and Africa report greater pessimism than optimism.

In the United States, 40% of respondents approve of their country’s direction. Israel and Mexico are tied at 36%, while 34% of Brazilians believe their country is on the right track ahead of national elections in October 2026.

Türkiye stands at 28%, while South Africa is lower at 23%. In Peru, which has had nine presidents in a decade, 85% of respondents believe their country is on the wrong track.

Europe’s Pessimistic Outlook

France ranks last overall, with only one in 10 respondents saying the country is headed in the right direction.

Several of its European neighbors also rank near the bottom. In Great Britain, which has had multiple prime ministers since the 2016 Brexit vote, 79% of respondents believe the country is on the wrong track.

Germany also ranks near the bottom, with just 23% of respondents saying the country is moving in the right direction. Economic weakness and job losses may be contributing to the country’s broader social and political unease.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Visualized: Approval Rating of Global Leaders in 2026 on Voronoi.

Tyler Durden
Wed, 08/05/2026 – 02:45

Half Of Foreign Welfare Recipients In Spain Are Moroccan

Half Of Foreign Welfare Recipients In Spain Are Moroccan

Via Remix News,

Nearly half of all foreign nationals receiving Spain’s Minimum Living Income (IMV) are Moroccan, according to previously unpublished figures obtained by The Objective through a transparency request.

The National Social Security Institute recorded 139,446 foreign recipients of the benefit, including 69,517 Moroccan nationals.

Foreigners therefore account for approximately half of the nearly 280,000 registered recipients, while Moroccans represent almost 50 percent of the foreign total.

The figures provide the first official nationality-by-nationality breakdown of foreign IMV recipients.

Public statistics had previously distinguished only between Spanish and foreign claimants without identifying their countries of origin.

Romanians formed the second-largest foreign group, with 15,262 recipients, followed by Ukrainians with 4,612.

Colombians accounted for 3,549 recipients, Algerians for 3,362, Italians for 3,043, and Bulgarians for 2,826.

Other recipients included Portuguese, Pakistani, Venezuelan, Brazilian, and Nigerian nationals. More than 100 nationalities were represented overall, alongside 215 people categorized under “other nationalities” and 175 stateless recipients.

The data counts only the registered recipient in each household, rather than every family member supported by the payment. The actual number of people benefiting from the program is therefore higher.

The totals also exclude the Basque Country and Navarre, which administer the Minimum Living Income independently under their special fiscal arrangements.

Social Security data also indicates that around 70 percent of Moroccan women of working age do not formally contribute to Spain’s employment system, reflecting particularly low labor-force participation among that group.

The publication of the figures comes at a politically sensitive time, given the much-reported migrant influx from the Arab country into the Spanish enclave of Ceuta.

Over 50,000 Moroccans are estimated to have entered the autonomous city illegally within the past week, and the number to have since been returned is heavily disputed.

Read more here…

Tyler Durden
Wed, 08/05/2026 – 02:00

The Last Places Standing When The Sky Turns To Ash

The Last Places Standing When The Sky Turns To Ash

Authored by Madge Waggy,

We are standing at the precipice of something we cannot comprehend, and the silence from those who know is deafening. The mechanisms are already in motion, the chess pieces positioned with mathematical precision while the world sleeps. I have seen the projections. I have read the classified briefings that never reached your evening news. What comes next will not be war as your grandparents understood it – it will be something that rewrites the very definition of survival. The question is no longer if, but when. And when it happens, the concept of ‘safe’ will become the most precious commodity on Earth.” 

– Dr. Elias Vance, Former Strategic Analyst, NATO Defense College

The Last Sanctuaries Where Humanity Might Endure When the World Ends

The clock isn’t just ticking anymore… it’s screaming.

You feel it in your bones when you wake up at 3 AM, drenched in sweat, the residue of dreams you can’t quite remember but know involved running, always running. You see it in the way world leaders speak in coded language now, how the word “tactical” has replaced “nuclear” in press conferences, how the maps on television show arrows pointing toward borders that didn’t matter yesterday but suddenly matter more than your next breath. The architecture of global stability is cracking in places the architects never anticipated, and the rest of us are living in a house whose foundation has already turned to dust—we just haven’t felt the collapse yet.

But some of us are paying attention. Some of us have been watching the patterns long enough to recognize that history doesn’t repeat, as the cliché goes, but it rhymes with terrifying precision. The 1910s had their assassination in Sarajevo. The 2020s have their powder kegs scattered across multiple continents, each one guarded by fingers hovering over buttons that could reduce civilization to radioactive ash and memory. And when—not if, but when—those fingers finally press down, the world you know will vanish not with a bang that you hear, but with a silence that swallows everything you’ve ever loved.

This isn’t fear-mongering. This isn’t conspiracy theory dressed in journalism’s clothing. This is the mathematics of survival in an era where we’ve built machines capable of ending all life while simultaneously convincing ourselves that nobody would ever be irrational enough to use them. It’s the same delusion that preceded every catastrophe in human history—the unshakeable belief that tomorrow will look like today, until suddenly it doesn’t.

So let’s speak plainly about what comes after. Not the immediate horror, the blinding light and the shockwave that turns cities into memories, but the long, dark aftermath where survival becomes the only morality left.

Where do you go when the northern hemisphere becomes a graveyard of poisoned air and toxic rain? Where can you breathe when the jet stream carries death on its back, circling the globe like a vulture waiting for the last heartbeat? Where does humanity hide when the weapons we’ve spent eighty years perfecting finally sing their song of annihilation?

The answer lies in geography, in the accidents of tectonic plates and ocean currents that created pockets of isolation in a world that has otherwise grown terrifyingly small. These aren’t paradise destinations or luxury retreats—the rich have already bought their bunkers in New Zealand, carving out survivalist compounds that would make feudal lords jealous. No, these are places defined by their relationship to distance, by how far they sit from the crosshairs of nuclear targeting computers that don’t care about your dreams or your children’s names.

What follows is not a travel guide. It is a map of the possible, a cartography of the places where the human experiment might continue when the laboratories of civilization have burned down. Read it with the understanding that survival is never guaranteed, only slightly less impossible.

The Fortress at the Edge of the World: Milford Sound and the New Zealand Sanctuary

There is a reason the billionaires have been buying land here with the desperation of men who can read the writing on the wall. New Zealand sits at the absolute extremity of the habitable world, separated from Australia by the Tasman Sea—a body of water wide enough to function as a moat against the poisons that would sweep eastward from any nuclear exchange in the Northern Hemisphere. When the winds carry death across continents, New Zealand’s position in the roaring forties creates atmospheric circulation patterns that would delay, though not entirely prevent, the arrival of nuclear winter’s embrace.

The image you see above is Milford Sound, located deep within Fiordland National Park on New Zealand’s South Island. This is not a place that welcomes human habitation easily. The sheer cliffs rise vertically from waters that plunge to depths of 400 meters, creating a landscape that looks more like the imagination of a fever dream than geography that actually exists. The waterfalls that cascade down these granite walls—some dropping over 150 meters—would provide fresh water long after conventional sources become contaminated. The sound itself, technically a fjord carved by ancient glaciers, represents the kind of natural fortress that no army could penetrate and no fallout could easily reach.

The country’s isolation is its armor. Over 2,000 kilometers separate it from its nearest neighbor, a distance that becomes insurmountable when fuel supplies collapse and the global supply chains that feed the world become memories of abundance. But this isolation cuts both ways. New Zealand possesses something almost no other developed nation can claim: genuine agricultural self-sufficiency. Its dairy industry, its sheep stations stretching across landscapes that look like Middle Earth because they are, its capacity to feed a population many times its current size—these aren’t economic statistics. They are survival infrastructure disguised as farming.

The terrain itself offers protection. The Southern Alps create natural barriers against whatever contamination might drift southward, their peaks catching radioactive particles in ice and stone before they can reach the coastal plains where most of the population lives. The country’s geothermal activity in the North Island provides energy independence that doesn’t rely on fossil fuels that would become inaccessible or nuclear plants that might melt down when the technicians stop coming to work. And the water—God, the water—fed by glaciers and rainfall that originates in the cleanest skies left on Earth, carrying none of the industrial toxins that poison the aquifers of more “developed” nations.

But there’s a darkness here too, one that the survival guides don’t mention. New Zealand’s very attractiveness as a refuge means it will be overwhelmed when the exodus begins. The wealthy have already purchased citizenship through investment visas, carving out estates in Queenstown and the Wairarapa that will be defended by private security when the desperate arrive by boat. The Māori population, who have lived through one apocalypse already when European colonization arrived, understand better than anyone that the land remembers and protects its own—but there may not be enough land left to protect everyone who needs it.

The nuclear targeting maps, those classified documents that theorize which cities must be destroyed to cripple an enemy, barely acknowledge New Zealand’s existence. There are no missile silos here, no nuclear submarines prowling the harbors, no strategic bases that would warrant the expenditure of a warhead that could be used elsewhere. In the calculus of mutual assured destruction, New Zealand is a rounding error—and that mathematical insignificance might be the only thing that saves it.

When the ash falls and the sun disappears behind clouds of radioactive dust, New Zealand’s latitude means it will still receive enough solar radiation to grow crops when other regions enter permanent winter. Its location in the Southern Hemisphere places it opposite the primary nuclear targets of the north. The Coriolis effect, that invisible force that spins storms and distributes fallout, becomes a shield rather than a weapon. The same isolation that made New Zealand a laboratory for bizarre evolutionary experiments—the kiwi, the kakapo, the absence of mammals that allowed birds to rule—now makes it a laboratory for human survival.

But survival here won’t look like survival in the old world. The cities—Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch—would become death traps as refugees arrive by the hundreds of thousands, bringing with them the diseases and desperation that follow collapse. The real New Zealand, the one that might endure, exists in the small communities scattered along the coasts and valleys, places where people still know how to fish and farm and fix machinery without waiting for parts to arrive from overseas. The Māori concept of kaitiakitanga—guardianship of the land—takes on new meaning when the land is all you have left.

The billionaires in their bunkers will discover what the locals already know: New Zealand’s weather is capricious and cruel, its isolation absolute, and its beauty a mask for how quickly the elements can turn hostile. But when the alternative is the northern hemisphere’s nuclear winter, even a hostile paradise becomes sanctuary.

The Island That Shouldn’t Exist: Iceland’s Geological Fortress

Iceland shouldn’t exist, not as a place where humans can live. It sits astride the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, where the North American and Eurasian tectonic plates are slowly tearing apart, bleeding magma onto the surface in displays of geological violence that make human warfare look like children’s games. The photograph above captures Thingvellir National Park, where you can literally stand with one foot on each continent, watching the earth tear itself apart at a rate of two centimeters per year. The island is volcanic in the way that other places are rainy—it’s not a feature but the fundamental nature of the place. And yet, this violence creates the conditions for survival in a poisoned world.

The country’s energy independence is absolute in a way that no other nation can match. While the rest of the world relies on fossil fuels that would run out or nuclear plants that would melt down, Iceland draws 100% of its electricity and 90% of its heating from geothermal sources. The same volcanic activity that makes the ground shake provides hot water that flows through pipes beneath Reykjavik’s streets, heating homes without combustion, without supply chains, without the infrastructure that would collapse when the bombs fall. In a world where energy becomes life, Iceland has already solved the equation.

But it’s the water that matters most. Iceland’s aquifers are fed by glaciers that have been frozen since before humans invented war, water that filters through volcanic rock for decades before emerging as the purest liquid on Earth. When the rest of the world’s water sources become contaminated with fallout and industrial toxins, Iceland’s springs will still run clear. The country has already experienced what happens when the global system breaks down—during World War II, when Europe burned, Iceland’s isolation kept it safe even as it was occupied by Allied forces who recognized its strategic value as a staging ground.

That strategic value cuts both ways. Iceland sits between North America and Europe, a stepping stone across the Atlantic that has made it important in every major conflict of the last century. But in a nuclear war, its importance diminishes precisely because there’s nothing here worth destroying. No military bases that couldn’t be rebuilt elsewhere, no population centers large enough to matter in the calculus of civilian casualties, no industry that would cripple an enemy if removed. Iceland becomes valuable not as a target but as a void—a place where the missiles won’t fall because there’s no reason for them to fall there.

The darkness here is different from other places. Icelanders have lived with the knowledge that their island could erupt at any moment, that the ground beneath their feet is temporary in geological terms, that survival here has always been a negotiation with forces that don’t care about human plans. This psychology—the acceptance of impermanence, the preparation for catastrophe, the community bonds that form when you know your neighbor might be the only one who can dig you out when the volcano erupts—creates a population uniquely suited to endure what comes after.

The language itself reflects this reality. Icelandic has changed so little since the Viking age that modern Icelanders can read thousand-year-old sagas without translation, a continuity that represents more than linguistic curiosity. It is the preservation of knowledge across generations, the understanding that what matters isn’t the individual life but the continuation of the story. When the world ends, the Icelanders will still be telling their sagas, still remembering how their ancestors survived the dark winters of the past.

But the real survival value of Iceland lies in its fish. The surrounding waters are among the richest fishing grounds on Earth, feeding not just Iceland but Europe for centuries. When agriculture collapses in the poisoned lands of the continent, when the grain silos empty and the livestock die, the fish will still swim in the North Atlantic, indifferent to human catastrophe. The Icelandic fishing fleet, small enough to be maintained with local resources, large enough to feed a population many times its current size, becomes the ark that carries humanity through the flood.

The cold is the price you pay. Iceland’s winters are brutal in a way that southern climates cannot imagine, months of darkness where the sun barely crests the horizon and the wind carries knives of ice that cut through any clothing not specifically designed for the environment. But that same cold preserves food, prevents disease, keeps the desperate refugees who would overwhelm warmer climates away. Iceland’s harshness is its protection, its indifference to human comfort the very thing that makes it survivable when comfort becomes a memory.

The Continent at the End of the World: Antarctica’s Frozen Sanctuary

There is nowhere on Earth more hostile to human life than Antarctica, and that is precisely why it might be the safest place when the bombs fall. The image above shows McMurdo Station, the largest settlement on the continent, a collection of buildings that looks like it was dropped onto an alien planet—and in many ways, it was. Antarctica is not a place where humans evolved to live. It is a place where humans survive only through the massive importation of resources from the rest of the world, a dependency that seems to make it the worst possible refuge in a collapsed civilization.

But look closer at what the photograph reveals. The Dry Valleys visible in the background represent some of the only ice-free land on the continent, areas where the mountains are so high that they block the glaciers from flowing, creating deserts where it hasn’t rained in millions of years. These valleys contain microbes that survive in conditions that would kill anything else, life forms that have adapted to extreme cold, extreme dryness, extreme radiation. They are the closest analogues we have to what life might look like on Mars, and they suggest that survival is possible even in the most hostile environments imaginable.

Antarctica’s protection is absolute in ways that no other place can match. It is the only continent with no indigenous human population, no history of warfare, no borders to dispute because there is nothing here worth fighting over. The Antarctic Treaty System, signed in 1959, demilitarized the entire continent before the nuclear age reached its maturity, creating a space that is legally prohibited from hosting military installations or weapons of mass destruction. When the missiles fly, there are no targets here worth hitting, no cities to destroy, no infrastructure to cripple.

The ice itself becomes a shield. The Antarctic ice sheet, averaging over 2 kilometers thick, would absorb radiation that would kill surface dwellers elsewhere. The extreme cold would prevent the spread of diseases that would ravage warmer climates in the aftermath of collapse. The isolation, the distance from any population center that might produce refugees, the impossibility of reaching the continent without sophisticated transportation—all of these become assets rather than liabilities when the alternative is the radioactive wasteland of the north.

But the real value of Antarctica lies in what it represents rather than what it is. It is the proof that humans can survive in environments that evolution never prepared us for, that technology and community and sheer stubborn will can overcome conditions that should be fatal. The research stations that dot the coast—McMurdo, Palmer, the various national bases that maintain a continuous human presence—are experiments in closed-system survival that have been running for decades. The scientists who winter over, who spend months in darkness with the same small group of people, eating frozen food and breathing recycled air, are the unwitting pioneers of post-apocalyptic living.

The darkness is literal. During the Antarctic winter, the sun disappears completely for months, plunging the continent into a night that has driven people mad with its absolute blackness. But that same darkness preserves knowledge, prevents the degradation of materials that sunlight would destroy, creates conditions where preservation becomes possible on timescales that would be impossible elsewhere. When the world ends, the records stored in Antarctica—already designated as a place to preserve the seeds of civilization in the Svalbard model—might be the only records that survive.

The cold would kill most who tried to reach it. The journey across the Southern Ocean, the most violent body of water on Earth, has claimed thousands of lives even in times of peace and plenty. But for those who make it, who establish the foothold that could become a colony, Antarctica offers something no other place can: time. Time measured not in the frantic pulse of civilization but in the slow rhythm of ice, the patient accumulation of snow that will become the glaciers of future ages. Here, if nowhere else, the human story might continue long enough to outlast the consequences of its own madness.

The Spine of the World: Patagonia’s Mountain Sanctuary

The Andes Mountains run like a spine down the western edge of South America, and at their southern extremity, where the peaks meet the Southern Ocean, lies a region that might be the most defensible territory on Earth. The photograph above captures Torres del Paine National Park in Chilean Patagonia, granite towers that rise vertically from the Patagonian steppe, creating a landscape that looks designed by a deity with a taste for the dramatic. These mountains are not just beautiful; they are fortress walls that have never been breached by invading armies because no invading army has ever been foolish enough to try.

Patagonia’s safety lies in its geography of extremes. The Andes create a rain shadow that makes the eastern side of the mountains a desert while the western side receives some of the highest rainfall on Earth. The result is a region of microclimates where survival is possible even when conditions become impossible elsewhere. The mountains themselves contain glaciers that feed rivers running to both the Atlantic and Pacific, fresh water that would remain uncontaminated long after the aquifers of the north become poisoned.

The photograph shows the Torres del Paine themselves, three granite towers that rise over 2,500 meters above the surrounding landscape. These peaks are climbable only by the most experienced mountaineers, their faces sheer enough to repel any force that might try to scale them. The valleys between contain forests of lenga and ñire, southern beech trees that grow in conditions that would kill their northern cousins, providing timber and shelter in a region where both are scarce.

But the real protection of Patagonia is its emptiness. This is one of the least populated regions on Earth, with population densities measured in fractions of people per square kilometer. The towns—Puerto Natales, El Calafate, the scattered estancias that raise sheep on land too marginal for other agriculture—are small enough to be self-sufficient, large enough to maintain the skills and knowledge that collapse would destroy elsewhere. When the global system fails, these communities would barely notice, their isolation already complete, their dependence on the outside world already minimal.

The wind is the guardian here. Patagonian winds blow with a ferocity that has shaped the landscape and the people who live in it, bending trees into permanent angles, preventing the accumulation of snow that would bury other regions, scouring the air of contaminants that would linger elsewhere. The same wind that makes life difficult becomes the mechanism of survival, the natural ventilation system that keeps the atmosphere breathable when other places choke on their own pollution.

The darkness of Patagonia is the darkness of the end of the world. This is the southernmost habitable land on Earth before Antarctica, the place where the continents break apart into islands and the islands dissolve into the Southern Ocean. The indigenous peoples who lived here—the Tehuelche, the Selk’nam, the Kawésqar—were driven to extinction or marginalization by European colonization, their knowledge of survival in this harsh environment lost to the violence of “civilization.” Those who remain are the descendants of colonizers themselves, Welsh and German and Croatian immigrants who came seeking freedom from the oppression of the Old World and found instead a land that demands everything and forgives nothing.

But that harshness is the point. Patagonia doesn’t welcome you; it tests you. The weather changes with a violence that can kill the unprepared, the distances between settlements measured in days of travel rather than hours, the resources scarce enough that waste becomes impossible. These are the conditions that create survivors, that select for the traits—stubbornness, community, the willingness to endure discomfort—that would matter when the world ends. The people who live here have already survived the apocalypse of migration, of leaving everything familiar behind to build something new in a land that didn’t want them. They would survive the next apocalypse too.

The Bunker in the Mountains: Switzerland’s Fortress Democracy

Switzerland has been preparing for the end of the world since before the world had ends. The photograph above shows the Gotthard Military Fortress, a complex of tunnels and bunkers carved into the granite of the Swiss Alps, part of a defensive network that covers the entire country in a web of underground shelters capable of protecting the entire population. This is not paranoia; this is policy. Switzerland’s neutrality is not a moral stance but a military strategy, the recognition that survival in a world of great powers requires making invasion so costly that no potential aggressor would consider it worth the price.

The Gotthard fortress complex represents the culmination of this strategy. The mountains themselves have been hollowed out to create spaces where the Swiss military could continue fighting even if the surface was completely occupied by enemy forces. The tunnels connect to reservoirs of fresh water, to ammunition depots, to living quarters designed to sustain thousands of soldiers for months or years. When the bombs fall, the Swiss won’t be scrambling for shelter—they’ll be walking into spaces that have been waiting for this moment for generations.

But the military bunkers are only the most visible part of Switzerland’s survival infrastructure. Every building constructed since the 1960s is required to have a nuclear fallout shelter, spaces that would protect the civilian population from radiation, from blast, from the chaos that follows. There are enough of these shelters to protect the entire population of the country, a statistic that becomes meaningful when you realize that most nations have shelter space for less than one percent of their citizens. The Swiss don’t plan to survive as individuals; they plan to survive as a nation, as a culture, as a continuity of the experiment that began with their confederation in 1291.

The photograph reveals the aesthetic of this survival: concrete and steel blended into the natural landscape, the entrance to the fortress disguised as part of the mountain itself. This is the Swiss approach to apocalypse—not to run from it but to dig in, to make the cost of destruction higher than any potential benefit, to create a nation that is literally too difficult to destroy. The Alps provide the raw material for this strategy, granite mountains that have resisted erosion for millions of years and would resist nuclear fire with equal indifference.

The darkness here is the darkness of preparation, of a nation that has never been able to take its survival for granted. Switzerland’s wealth is recent, the product of banking secrecy and pharmaceutical innovation that transformed a poor mountain nation into one of the richest countries on Earth. But the psychology of insecurity remains, the memory of being surrounded by larger powers who could crush you if they chose, the knowledge that neutrality must be defended with weapons to have any meaning at all.

The food supply is part of this preparation. Switzerland maintains stockpiles of essential goods—grain, medicine, fuel—sufficient to sustain the population for months without any imports. When the global supply chains collapse, when the ships stop sailing and the trucks stop running, the Swiss will still have bread, still have medicine, still have the infrastructure that makes civilization possible. This is not accident; this is law, government policy that mandates the maintenance of reserves against exactly the catastrophe that now approaches.

But the real protection of Switzerland is its geography of inconvenience. The mountain passes that connect northern and southern Europe are narrow, easily defended, easily destroyed if defense fails. An invading army would have to fight for every kilometer of ground, would have to maintain supply lines through terrain that offers no forgiveness for error, would have to face a population that has been training for guerrilla warfare since childhood. The Swiss militia system requires every adult male to maintain military equipment in his home, to train regularly, to be prepared to mobilize within hours of a threat emerging. This is not a population that would collapse into chaos; this is a population that has been preparing for collapse for generations.

The bunkers would become cities when the surface became uninhabitable. The Swiss have thought through what comes after the bombs, the years of darkness and cold that would follow a nuclear exchange, the social structures that would need to be maintained when the old structures burned. They have planned for the end of the world with the same thoroughness they bring to watchmaking, the same precision that makes their trains run on time. And in that planning, they have created the possibility that their world—their specific, peculiar, mountain democracy—might survive when the larger world that surrounds it becomes ash.

The Geography of Survival

What connects these places is not their beauty, though they are beautiful. It is not their resources, though they have resources. It is their relationship to the networks of destruction that define modern civilization. Each of them sits at a node of isolation created by geography, by history, by the accidents of plate tectonics and ocean currents that placed them far from the centers of power that would become the primary targets of nuclear war.

The targeting computers don’t think in terms of survival; they think in terms of damage, of counterforce and countervalue, of silos and submarine bases and command centers. New Zealand doesn’t have these. Iceland doesn’t have these. Antarctica, Patagonia, Switzerland—their value lies precisely in their lack of value as targets, their exclusion from the calculus of destruction that would determine where the warheads fall. They are the negative space in the map of annihilation, the places defined by what they are not rather than what they are.

But this safety is temporary and conditional. Nuclear winter doesn’t respect borders; fallout travels on winds that don’t care about neutrality; the collapse of global agriculture would reach even the most self-sufficient nations eventually. The safety of these places is measured not in certainty but in probability, in the mathematics of delay and diminishment that might allow something human to survive long enough to rebuild.

The darkness that accompanies this knowledge is the darkness of selection, of the recognition that not everyone can reach these places, that the journey itself would kill most who attempted it, that the survivors would be those who had the resources and foresight to prepare before the crisis became obvious. This is not justice; this is not fairness; this is the brutal arithmetic of catastrophe that doesn’t care about your moral worth or your good intentions.

And yet, there is something hopeful in the mapping of these sanctuaries, in the recognition that the world is larger than our conflicts, that geography provides refuges that politics cannot destroy, that life persists in conditions that would seem impossible to those who have never tested the limits of survival. The mountains will remain when the cities fall. The ice will persist when the fires burn out. The ocean will continue its ancient circulation, indifferent to the temporary disruptions of human violence.

The question that remains is not whether these places can survive—they can, or at least they have better odds than anywhere else. The question is whether the survivors will be worth the name human, whether the qualities that allowed us to build the weapons will be the same qualities that allow us to survive their use, whether we can learn from the catastrophe or whether we are doomed to repeat it in some future age when the memory of the last apocalypse has faded into myth.

Dr. Vance’s warning, the one that began this exploration, was not a call to despair but a call to attention. The mechanisms are in motion, yes, but they can still be stopped. The chess pieces are positioned, but the game is not yet over. The places described here are not destinations but possibilities, not endpoints but reminders that survival is always possible for those who prepare, who pay attention, who refuse to let the darkness have the final word.

When the sirens sound—if they sound, when they sound—remember that the map of destruction is not the only map. There are other geographies, other ways of being in the world, other possibilities for survival that don’t depend on the continuation of the systems that created the danger. The mountains wait. The ice waits. The remote places at the edges of the world wait, as they have always waited, for those who can reach them and learn to live in the conditions that they demand.

The end of the world is not the end of everything. It is only the end of this world, this specific configuration of civilization that we have built and that now threatens to destroy us. What comes after—if anything comes after—depends on who survives and what they carry with them into the darkness. The places described here are the places where the carrying might be possible, where the seeds of whatever comes next might find soil deep enough to take root.

Choose wisely. Prepare quietly. And remember that the maps we make before the catastrophe are the maps that will guide us through it, if we have the wisdom to read them and the courage to follow where they lead.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 08/04/2026 – 23:25

Oil Markets Price In An Iran Deal That Does Not Exist Yet

Oil Markets Price In An Iran Deal That Does Not Exist Yet

Oil prices tumbled Tuesday as traders once again priced in a U.S.-Iran agreement before anyone had actually signed one.

West Texas Intermediate was trading at $75.64 per barrel shortly before 2 p.m. ET, down $4.70, or 5.85%, while Brent had fallen $4.61 to $79.16. Both benchmarks touched three-week lows as hopes rose that an agreement could reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

As reported earlier, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said a deal could come Tuesday or Wednesday, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio said talks involving Iran and Oman had made progress. Qatar also said diplomatic efforts were continuing. President Donald Trump went further, calling an agreement to reopen the strait and denuclearize Iran “imminent.”

Iran, naturally, offered a less tidy version. As OilPrice notes, Tehran has denied holding direct talks with Washington and says it is negotiating through mediators in Oman. Iran is also seeking control over inbound shipping and visibility over outbound traffic, with the ability to intervene when it sees fit.

Actual shipping data offered little support for Tuesday’s enthusiasm. Just six vessels were tracked moving through Hormuz on Monday, down from seven a day earlier, while traffic through Bab el-Mandeb was also largely unchanged. A cargo vessel was also struck near Oman, adding another complication to the negotiations.

Before the war, roughly one-fifth of global oil and gas supply moved through Hormuz. Persian Gulf producers have since been forced to slash output, and Saudi Aramco estimates the world has lost more than 2.6 billion barrels since fighting began in February.

Goldman Sachs expects Brent to remain between $80 and $90 until there is either a confirmed agreement or another major escalation. Brent was already below that range Tuesday afternoon, suggesting traders may have gotten a little ahead of the diplomats.

Oil has spent months whipping between peace headlines and missile strikes while physical flows remain badly impaired.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 08/04/2026 – 23:17

Abbott Orders Pause On Texas Data Center Approvals Pending Audit

Abbott Orders Pause On Texas Data Center Approvals Pending Audit

Texas Governor Greg Abbott just ordered a pause on approving new data center projects via the state’s grid interconnection process over concerns that a surge in electricity demand could threaten reliability amid growing opposition to the projects

The timing couldn’t be worse – as Texas is on the cusp of becoming one of the world’s largest hubs for data-centers, with Reuters citing industry forecasts that it could surpass Virginia by 2030 thanks to abundant land, energy, and a business-friendly environment. 

In a letter to the Public Utility Commission of Texas and ​grid operator ERCOT sent Monday, Abbott directed the agencies to conduct an audit of all planned data centers seeking grid connections before any more facilities are allowed to move forward.

ERCOT is currently reviewing roughly 474 gigawatts of proposed new electricity demand, more than five times the state’s record ​peak load, the governor said, adding that about 90% of the requests are from data centers. –Reuters

Under Abbott’s directive, developers will now need to provide ‘more info on power demand, water use, tax incentives, ownership, and efforts to mitigate local impacts’

As POWER Magazine noted earlier (serious inside baseball below)… 

Abbott has directed the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) to conduct a comprehensive audit of every data center advancing through the state’s interconnection queue, warning that projects that fail to disclose ownership, financial, water, and community-impact information could be denied grid access.

The directive, issued in an Aug. 3 letter to PUCT Chairman Thomas Gleeson and ERCOT President and CEO Pablo Vegas, arrives as the ERCOT large-load interconnection queue has surged to 474 GW—of which approximately 90% is data centers, according to testimony ERCOT delivered on July 29 to the Texas Senate.

That is more than five times Texas’ record peak electricity demand for ERCOT,” Abbott wrote in his letter, referencing an all-time hourly peak of 91,089 MW that ERCOT set on July 22, 2026. “That unprecedented load growth could endanger the reliability and stability of the Texas electric grid.”

The audit is tied directly to non-compliance with existing state law, Abbott wrote. “The failure of some data centers to comply with the PUC’s survey measuring water and power usage under the General Appropriations Act makes this necessary,” he wrote. “Failure to fully comply with that law hinders your ability to make fully informed decisions.”

Our top priority is to protect Texans’ safety and quality of life,” Abbott said. “Any project that fails to comply with the requirements set forth by the PUCT and ERCOT, and by state law, must be denied connection to the Texas grid. Simply put, Texans must come first.”

Large-Load Interconnection Requests. ERCOT was tracking approximately 474.7 GW of large-load interconnection requests as of June 2026, including 420.8 GW, or 90.2% of the total, identified as data centers. The chart also distinguishes projects by development status, including requests with no studies submitted, projects under ERCOT review, and loads that have met more advanced interconnection requirements. Source: Electric Reliability Council of Texas, “ERCOT Update,” presentation by ERCOT President and CEO Pablo Vegas to the Texas Senate Committee on Business and Commerce, July 29, 2026.

Second Intervention Amid SB 6 Rulemaking

Abbott’s directive arrives as the second intervention in less than two months, even as the PUCT is developing rulemaking to implement Senate Bill 6 (SB 6)—the statute Gov. Abbott signed in June 2025 that overhauls how large-load customers of 75 MW or more interconnect to the ERCOT grid.

Essentially, SB 6 amends the Public Utility Regulatory Act (PURA) to direct the PUCT to establish interconnection standards for large loads at a 75 MW threshold, requires each applicant to disclose whether it is pursuing substantially similar interconnection requests elsewhere in Texas and to disclose any on-site backup generation capable of serving at least 50% of the facility’s demand, and requires financial commitments and site control before ERCOT will study a project.

The statute also authorizes ERCOT, once the PUCT defines emergency criteria, to instruct qualifying large loads with dedicated behind-the-meter backup generation to curtail net consumption during grid emergencies after ERCOT has exhausted market services other than frequency response. Separately, SB 6 amends PURA to require transmission service providers to curtail non-critical new large loads energized after Dec. 31, 2025 during firm load-shed events, and to govern net-metering arrangements between new large loads and generation resources that were registered with ERCOT before Sept. 1, 2025. Finally, the law directs the PUCT to reexamine wholesale transmission cost allocation and to require new large loads to contribute to interconnection cost recovery. SB 6 took effect immediately on June 20, 2025, and requires PUCT implementation by Dec. 31, 2026.

The PUCT is executing SB 6 across five dedicated rulemakings, two of which are already complete. In February 2026, the commission adopted 16 TAC §25.370, which sets minimum standards for the information a utility must submit before ERCOT will include a proposed large load in its forecast. And in March 2026, the commission adopted 16 TAC §25.205, which requires PUCT approval before a new large load can be net-metered with any generation resource that was already registered with ERCOT before Sept. 1, 2025.

Then on June 10, 2026, Abbott issued his first intervention. In a letter to Gleeson and Vegas, the governor issued three directives to the two agencies: to ensure that data-center interconnections result in reduced residential electric bills, to require data centers to pay for all of their electric infrastructure costs so that no residential ratepayer is burdened by them, and to review existing PUCT and ERCOT authority to identify further consumer safeguards.

Abbott set two deadlines. The two agencies had to submit a joint memorandum by July 17 summarizing actions already taken, identifying statutory limitations, and recommending legislation for the 2027 session. In addition, the PUCT had to initiate action to reduce residential ratepayer transmission costs by July 31.

Abbott also pledged to pursue six items with the legislature next session: codifying that data centers pay their own infrastructure costs, requiring that data centers add to Texas’ electric capacity rather than only to its demand, mandating water-efficient technologies such as closed-loop cooling systems for new builds, requiring large data centers to annually report electricity and water usage to the PUCT, repealing sales-tax exemptions and other incentives for data centers, and requiring data centers to reduce impacts on neighbors through setbacks, noise-reduction technology, and similar measures. The directive, effectively, asked the PUCT to sharpen the rulemakings still in progress.

Eight days after Abbott’s letter, on June 18, the PUCT approved ERCOT’s Batch Study framework, built through Nodal Protocol Revision Request NPRR1325 and Planning Guide Revision Request PGRR145. The framework groups qualified large-load projects of 75 MW and above into a single interconnection study, and requires each applicant to post financial security of $50,000/MW by July 10, 2026, to remain eligible.

Testifying at a July 29 Texas Senate hearing, ERCOT’s Vegas said the framework is designed to deliver three outputs to each qualified project: an annual megawatt allocation from 2028 through 2032, transparency on interconnection and upgrade costs, and a coordinated transmission plan identifying the upgrades required to serve additional load. Approximately 205 GW of large-load requests are eligible for inclusion in Batch Zero based on existing studies, according to a preliminary ERCOT overview—65 GW as base load, 114 GW as allocated load, and 25 GW awaiting a final base-or-allocated determination.

For now, ERCOT plans to issue classifications by Aug. 7, complete the ensuing dispute, security-reconciliation, and data-correction process by Sept. 1, and begin the Batch Zero interconnection study no later than Sept. 2. Study results are scheduled for April 9, 2027, followed by interconnection agreements and final confirmation of capacity allocations by June 8, 2027. Projects excluded from Batch Zero—because they cannot post financial security or otherwise meet eligibility criteria—will be considered in a subsequent round that ERCOT and stakeholders have referred to as Batch One, though its start date and criteria are still being developed.

On July 17, Gleeson sent Abbott a written response developed in consultation with ERCOT, filed at the PUCT Interchange under Project 58317. The letter documents four actions the two agencies have already taken—the two adopted rules, the May 2026 transmission-cost evaluation, and the June 18 approval of PGRR 145—and identifies three rulemakings in progress: interconnection standards in Project 58481, a demand-management reliability service in Project 58482, and a follow-on transmission-cost recovery rulemaking in Project 58000. Gleeson told Abbott the commission will consider a final Project 58481 rule “later this summer.”

On July 24, Abbott released Gleeson’s letter along with three legislative recommendations for the 2027 session: expand the Lone Star Infrastructure Protection Act to cover large computational loads, require data centers to register with both the PUCT and ERCOT, and clarify the PUCT’s authority to impose reliability requirements – including direct ERCOT-to-load curtailment instructions – on large computational customers. On July 30, 2026, the PUCT advanced Project 58482 to Proposal for Publication, with a Sept. 4 comment deadline. The commission’s SB 6-mandated evaluation of transmission cost recovery had already produced a staff draft on May 4, 2026, before the June 10 directive; the follow-on Project 58000 rulemaking must be completed by the December 2026 statutory deadline.

The core interconnection-standards rulemaking in Project 58481—the rule that will set financial security, study fees, and site-control requirements for every large load requesting interconnection—remains in scoping.

Abbott’s Audit Goes Beyond Batch Zero Screening

Batch Zero, notably, already imposes several commercial-readiness gates. Applicants must submit qualifying studies, technical and dynamic models, commissioning plans, attestations, and financial security. ERCOT will also verify supporting evidence from a sample of applicants, including purchase orders for long-lead equipment, real-estate and land-use agreements, end-user agreements, and construction contracts. Projects that cannot demonstrate eligibility will be disqualified.

But Abbott’s Aug. 3 directive appears to extend that scrutiny by ordering a review of every large-load request and seeking disclosures covering ownership, water use, infrastructure needs, and community effects. Whereas Batch Zero is principally designed to determine whether projects are sufficiently advanced and technically prepared to enter the interconnection study, the new directive adds a broader examination of who is behind the projects and how they could affect surrounding communities.

During the July 29 Texas Senate Committee on Business and Commerce hearing, data center representatives generally supported stronger qualification and cost-recovery requirements, though they differed over whether Batch Zero’s existing screens would work as intended.

Chris Matos, who leads Google’s energy market development in Texas, said the hyperscaler had urged ERCOT and the PUCT to develop an interconnection process that is “both rigorous and fair,” including financial commitments calibrated to “hold existing ratepayers harmless for stranded costs.” He cautioned regulators, however, to “avoid retroactive financial penalties that could inadvertently stall mature and already advanced development.”

Matos noted Google had contracted for more than 7.8 GW of new grid-connected generation and capacity in ERCOT ahead of its energy needs. Matos said Google had committed “$30 million in energy impact funding to scale and accelerate energy efficiency initiatives.” Google operates established data center campuses in Midlothian and Red Oak and in November 2025 announced a $40 billion Texas investment program through 2027. As POWER reported in June, that buildout now includes the Meitner Energy Center in Gray and Roberts counties, a more-than-1-GW complex that will pair a Google data center with new wind, solar, battery storage, and on-site gas-fired generation. The facility will use air cooling instead of evaporative cooling, eliminating the cooling-tower water withdrawals typically associated with large data centers and limiting water use to domestic purposes.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) likewise endorsed requirements intended to keep large-load costs from shifting to other customers. Ray Fakhoury, an AWS energy policy manager, said the company wanted to ensure that the cost of developing its infrastructure “is not passed on to others” and committed to paying its “full cost of service.” AWS, which does not yet operate data centers in Texas but is evaluating investments in the state, also supported collateral that could be drawn when projects drop out after infrastructure has been planned or built. Fakhoury, notably, called for a broader package that includes capacity reallocation, exit fees, defined contract terms, and load-ramp requirements.

However, Compass Data Centers offered a sharper critique of the process. Cliff Pompe, the company’s vice president of power and emissions, said the queue was “being distorted from both directions,” with “ghost and transom loads being given allocation while real projects are kept out.” He also suggested “a lack of requisite criteria and inadequate prerequisite criteria” was allowing speculators to create false demand.

Compass operates a campus in Red Oak where it has invested more than $100 million in grid infrastructure, Pompe noted. In the weeks before the July 10 Batch Zero security deadline, Pompe said Compass was personally pitched more than 14 sites totaling over 15 GW by speculators who needed the company to front roughly $790 million in security deposits, which they could not post themselves. Some proposals claimed power densities two to four times the roughly 1.5 MW per acre that Pompe said legitimate hyperscale facilities rarely exceed. They were “basically impossible to construct,” he told state senators, because the available real estate could not physically accommodate the requested capacity.

Compass’s own second Red Oak project, filed with its transmission provider in May 2024, was excluded from Batch Zero. Pompe said the provider did not submit the project to ERCOT until March 2026, “nearly two years later,” even though Compass had engaged directly with ERCOT and participated in the stakeholder process throughout, supplying additional evidence of project maturity, including enhanced site-control documentation, site surveys, and $6.5 million in deposits. “We were told these requests were to demonstrate the seriousness of our project, which we were happy to do,” Pompe said. “We understood the rules proposed by ERCOT for Batch Zero were to ensure legitimate and mature projects were provided allocation. Unfortunately, as we sit today, that is not what ended up happening.”

Pompe said Compass learned the week before the July 29 hearing that the project had been excluded. Its transmission provider also told the company it was stopping work on the required dynamic-stability study while awaiting further ERCOT guidance for Batch One. ERCOT created a good-cause exemption that same day for projects that had substantially met Batch Zero’s requirements, but eligibility for the exemption required a completed transmission study. “That makes a lot of sense,” Pompe said. “But because our project had not had that study completed, we could not apply for this exemption.”

The problem, he stressed, was not the study requirement itself, but the absence of a firm deadline for the transmission provider to complete it. “The fact that our study isn’t complete does not make sense,” Pompe said. Without a firm completion date, Compass faces “real risk of this project finding itself in the same position next year during Batch One—excluded, having done everything we can and everything we were asked to do.”

Queue Scrutiny Carries Wider Power-Market Consequences

Determining which large-load projects are real is also central to decisions confronting the rest of the Texas power sector. The load that survives ERCOT’s screening will shape reliability assessments, scarcity pricing, transmission development, power-purchase negotiations, and decisions to build or retain generation. At the July 29 hearing, power-market participants warned that errors in either direction could prove costly.

Large-Load Interconnection Requests. ERCOT was tracking approximately 474.7 GW of large-load interconnection requests as of June 2026, including 420.8 GW—90.2% of the total—identified as data centers. The chart also distinguishes projects by development status, including requests with no studies submitted, projects under ERCOT review, and loads that have met more advanced interconnection requirements. Courtesy: Electric Reliability Council of Texas, “ERCOT Update,” presentation by ERCOT President and CEO Pablo Vegas to the Texas Senate Committee on Business and Commerce, July 29, 2026.

As Jeff McDonald, director of the ERCOT Independent Market Monitor and vice president at Potomac Economics, cautioned, even ERCOT’s revised midterm load forecast remains uncertain. McDonald credited ERCOT and the PUCT with bringing the forecast into “a much more reasonable range” by incorporating additional real-world constraints into the modeling. But some of its largest variables remain difficult to model.

“The AI business model and the AI revenue model in particular is still sort of in its infancy compared to other industries,” he told senators. He pointed to rising prices from major AI providers, public reports that some large users have directed employees to scale back AI use, local resistance to data-center development, and normal business cycles as factors that could suppress actual construction. ERCOT’s projection, he said, “could be considered an upper bound,” while the capacity ultimately installed and placed into commercial operation “might be considerably lower than that.”

Julia Harvey, representing Texas Electric Cooperatives, warned that even partial realization could alter ERCOT’s supply balance and wholesale prices. “Those dynamics could change quite significantly if even a fraction of the load currently forecast materializes,” she said. ERCOT could face a supply deficit in both its reliability assessments and actual operations, leaving the system dependent on large-load curtailments to preserve reliability.

While Senate Bill 6 provides mechanisms for those curtailments, Harvey warned that the associated price adjustments could produce high prices “with some frequency” if ERCOT adds more load than it can serve. She also cautioned against interpreting a modeled reliability deficiency as requiring enough new capacity to serve all projected large-load demand without curtailment. Large incremental additions “don’t fit as well in the conventional one-event-in-10-years framework,” she said, because “by design, the curtailments will happen more frequently than that.” Applying the conventional standard without accounting for those operating characteristics could impose unnecessary resource-adequacy costs on cooperative customers, she said.

The uncertainty also affects investment decisions. Walt Baum, representing Powering Texans and Texas Competitive Power Advocates, said greater clarity from Batch Zero would give generators more confidence that prospective customers are genuine. “When we get Batch Zero out there and know who it’s going to be, that is going to help spur new development because we’re going to know that these projects are real,” he said. That clarity, Baum added, could support new long-term power purchase agreements and new generation construction.

Bill Barnes, senior director of regulatory affairs at NRG Energy, said Batch Zero had already shown that financial security by itself was not enough to distinguish credible projects. The initial assumption, Barnes said, was that the queue contained applicants seeking a free option and that imposing financial requirements would clear them out. “And that is not what has happened,” he said. Instead, the process revealed a secondary market in interconnection positions and rewarded access to capital, Barnes said.

“The people with the most money are the ones that won,” he said, including applicants that partnered with other entities to secure a position. “There are going to have to be additional indicia of maturity besides just money going forward,” Barnes concluded, because money “did not have the culling effect that we thought it was going to.”

NRG also urged ERCOT to use the batch process to favor projects that improve system conditions. Barnes said transmission capacity should prioritize large loads that bring new generation or can operate flexibly as controllable resources.

Texas is already using public incentives to expand dispatchable supply through the Texas Energy Fund. Launched in 2024, the fund provides grants and low-interest loans for the construction, maintenance, and modernization of electric facilities. Its In-ERCOT Generation Loan Program offers 20-year loans at a fixed 3% interest rate for projects adding at least 100 MW of new dispatchable capacity, with financing capped at 60% of project costs. As of June 24, 2026, the program had committed $3.65 billion to eight projects totaling 4,994 MW, including three NRG plants and projects sponsored by Constellation, Competitive Power Ventures, Vistra, Rayburn Country Electric Cooperative, and the Kerrville Public Utility Board. Completion-bonus grants had brought total ERCOT-supported capacity to 5,516 MW.

Barnes said NRG is developing three gas-fired plants totaling 1,500 MW through the fund, including two combustion-turbine projects and one combined-cycle plant. The first of those projects, a peaker, was commissioned earlier this summer at NRG’s T.H. Wharton site in northwest Houston. Cedar Bayou and Greens Bayou are targeted for 2028. Barnes argued that the interconnection process could similarly reward large loads designed to support the grid.

“We have this opportunity here where we can provide a carrot, not a mandate, but a carrot and incentive,” he said. “If you want to build a large load in Texas, if you’re going to design your site in a way that is more reliable for the consumers of Texas, then you should have an incentive. That means maybe you get access to the transmission capacity before everyone else.”

Sonal C. Patel is a POWER senior editor (@sonalcpatel, @POWERmagazine).

Tyler Durden
Tue, 08/04/2026 – 22:35

Socialist Wisconsin Gov Candidate Won’t Back Down After Calling To “Cancel Thanksgiving”

Socialist Wisconsin Gov Candidate Won’t Back Down After Calling To “Cancel Thanksgiving”

Far-left Wisconsin gubernatorial contender Francesca Hong appeared to double down on resurfaced comments demanding that Thanksgiving be abolished, declining to walk back the post when confronted about it on national television.

“Cancel Thanksgiving. Should have done this in 1621,” Hong wrote on X in a post she later deleted, according to Fox News.

“If it takes a worldwide pandemic for us to realize we should stop celebrating colonialism and the original superspreader event that killed indigenous folx [sic] and women, so be it,” she added.

On Monday, Hong appeared on CNN’s “The Source with Kaitlan Collins,” where the Democratic socialist was pressed about her controversial comments.

“Do you still believe that Thanksgiving should be canceled?” Collins asked.

Rather than answer directly, Hong clumsily pivoted to her resume.

“I’m a chef, and one of the first meals that I made that was for the community when I was 16 [years old] was a Thanksgiving meal,” Hong said. “I always think my hospitality background in owning a restaurant for seven, eight years, that bringing folks around the table to share conversation and build community is always a good thing.”

“But Thanksgiving is also a time that’s incredibly painful for many people in our communities,” Hong continued. “And so I think there, I wanted to make sure that people understood that there are multiple views, but views can evolve.”

“And the position that I’m running for right now, and I think my background as a chef will actually help me become a better governor that’s able to bring more people to the table,” she added.

The refusal to back down comes as Hong sits atop the Democrat primary field. A Marquette University Law School Poll conducted July 22 to 27 surveyed 407 Democrat primary voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 6.6%.

Hong led the field with 38%, followed by Mandela Barnes, who has since dropped out of the race, at 16%, David Crowley at 7%, and Joel Brennan and Kelda Roys at 2% apiece, with 34% of voters still undecided. When undecided voters who lean toward a candidate are counted, Hong climbs to 46%, Barnes to 21% and Crowley to 11%.

Oh and she also hates white people

Tyler Durden
Tue, 08/04/2026 – 22:10

Florida’s Ban On Children Attending Drag Shows Is Constitutional, Appeals Court Says

Florida’s Ban On Children Attending Drag Shows Is Constitutional, Appeals Court Says

Authored by Troy Myers via The Epoch Times,

A federal appeals court says Florida’s ban on children attending sexualized drag shows is constitutional. On Tuesday, the court overturned a lower court’s decision that had blocked the state’s law.

Hamburger Mary’s, a bar and restaurant chain that holds drag shows and previously held what it called “family friendly” performances for children on Sundays, sued the state over the ban. The chain claimed its law was unconstitutional, but judges on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed in an 8–5 ruling.

Judge Andrew Brasher, writing on behalf of the majority opinion, said, “We are convinced the district court erred” for two reasons.

“First, the district court lacked authority to impose a universal injunction that prevented the enforcement of the Act,” Brasher said.

“Second, Hamburger Mary’s was not entitled to even a more limited preliminary injunction to prevent the enforcement of the Act because its claims do not have a substantial likelihood of success on the merits.”

Lawyers for Hamburger Mary’s did not respond to a request for comment.

The restaurant claimed Florida’s 2023 Protection of Children Act violated the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.

The law would make it a misdemeanor for businesses to knowingly allow a child to an “adult live performance” that “depicts or simulates nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, or specific sexual activities.”

The act further identified prohibited adult live performances as those that “predominantly appeal to a prurient, shameful, or morbid interest” and “taken as a whole, [are] without serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for the age of the child present.”

Businesses in violation of the Protection of Children Act could face suspension or loss of license as well as a $5,000 fine for a first offense and a $10,000 fine for each subsequent offense.

A district court previously sided with Hamburger Mary’s, granting a preliminary injunction that blocked enforcement of the law and applied it to all venues in the state.

Gov. Ron DeSantis petitioned for the U.S. Supreme Court to halt the injunction, but the justices refused.

“This shouldn’t even be controversial, yet our law protecting kids required us to fend off lawsuits and win a case before a divided appellate court,” DeSantis wrote in a post on X after the appeals court’s Tuesday ruling.

A three judge-panel for the 11th Circuit also sided with the restaurant in a 2–1 ruling last year, upholding the injunction. Writing for the majority in the three-judge panel’s decision in May 2025, Judge Robin Rosenbaum said the act “wields a shotgun when the First Amendment allows a scalpel at most.”

But the court granted a re-hearing en banc, meaning all the judges on the 11th Circuit could consider the district court’s injunction and the Florida law’s constitutionality, and issued its 8–5 ruling affirming the legislation.

“There is no doubt the Act is rational. We will not second-guess the Florida Legislature’s decision to regulate obscenity,” Brasher said in the majority opinion. “Preventing children from attending adult live performances obscene for them is rationally related to Florida’s interest in safeguarding the well-being of minors.”

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier praised the 11th Circuit’s decision, calling it a “huge victory.”

Judges writing in dissent of Tuesday’s decision gave sharp criticisms of the majority’s ruling, accusing the state of giving no assistance to businesses of what is age appropriate for a child.

Hamburger Mary’s, with no guidance, faces jail time, thousands of dollars in fines, and loss of its license if it guesses the standards of Florida’s law incorrectly, Rosenbaum said in dissent.

“As it turns out, chilling all drag performances when those under the age of eighteen are present appears to be the point,” she said. “In other words, Florida purposely created a mess-around-and-find-out statute to chill drag.”

Tyler Durden
Tue, 08/04/2026 – 21:45