Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the launch of Foundry School, a national advanced manufacturing education initiative led by Stanford University in partnership with Georgia Tech and six other universities. At Tech, the program will bring industry experts and leaders from advanced manufacturing companies to campus for talks with students about what it takes to build and operate world-class manufacturing enterprises.

The initiative comes as the United States works to expand domestic manufacturing capacity and address a growing need for skilled workers. The State Department estimates American manufacturers will need to fill 3.8 million jobs by 2033 across industries including semiconductors, defense, and energy.

For Tech, that national effort builds on work already underway across the Institute.

Tech’s Advanced Manufacturing Pilot Facility (AMPF) recently expanded to 60,000 square feet, creating a next-generation environment where industry, researchers, and students develop, test, and scale advanced manufacturing technologies. The facility is incorporating artificial intelligence, robotics, and connected equipment to accelerate the path from research to production.

“The launch of Foundry School recognizes something we have seen here at Georgia Tech for years: Rebuilding American manufacturing requires more than building factories,” said Tim Lieuwen, executive vice president for research at Georgia Tech. “It requires the talent, technology, research, and industry partnerships to make those factories successful. Georgia Tech is already bringing those pieces together — helping move technologies from the lab toward production while preparing the people who will drive the next generation of American manufacturing.”

The AMPF is part of a broader Georgia Tech ecosystem that connects research and education with industry and workforce partners, including the Technical College System of Georgia. Georgia Tech also has longstanding relationships with nations participating in the State Department’s Pax Silica initiative.

As manufacturing investment grows in Georgia and across the country, Georgia Tech is helping develop the technology, talent, and partnerships needed to support that growth.

Despite decades of research, the chaotic nature of turbulence makes it difficult to predict and control. This challenge impedes more than smoother air travel. Solving the turbulence problem could lead to advances in areas ranging from sustainable energy to training a smarter workforce for the era of artificial intelligence (AI).

To advance understanding of turbulence, the National Science Foundation is establishing a new, $30 million Science and Technology Center (STC) at Michigan State University. Georgia Tech is among eight universities supporting the center.

Assistant Professor Qi Tang will join the STC for Transformative Explorations in Multi-Physics and Engineering of Scientific Turbulence (TEMPEST). TEMPEST, launching on Sept. 1, aims to build trustworthy, predictive models of real-world turbulence. 

Tang will lead TEMPEST’s modeling and scientific machine learning (ML) efforts. NSF will fund Tang and Georgia Tech with over $1 million from the center’s five-year, $30 million award.

By understanding and predicting turbulence, TEMPEST can unlock new applications, with a focus on fusion energy and national security. The center will also generate long-term research projects with applications in air and space flight, manufacturing, chemistry, and broaden science education and AI fluency.

“Turbulence has resisted prediction for a century,” said Tang, a faculty member in the School of Computational Science and Engineering (CSE).

“STC TEMPEST aims to develop a unified, predictive science that advances fusion energy, improves hypersonic technologies, and deepens our understanding of how stars created the elements that make up our world and ourselves. For everyday people, the center points toward abundant clean energy and faster, more efficient flight."

Turbulence is the motion of a fluid characterized by chaotic changes in pressure and speed. Turbulent flows can occur across all scales, from interactions between subatomic particles to astrophysical scales, including supernovas, black holes, and cosmic rays. 

While turbulent flows are common and occur naturally, scientists still do not fully understand them. Small changes in a turbulent flow can produce dramatically different outcomes. Combined with the countless interactions across multiple scales of time and space, this makes turbulence extraordinarily difficult to predict.

“Rather than studying individual pieces of this enormously complex problem in isolation, we are bringing together theory, experimentation, computation and artificial intelligence to develop a deeper understanding of turbulence across scales,” said Michael Murillo, an MSU professor and the director of TEMPEST. 

“Our goal is not simply to understand turbulence better, but to make it predictable and controllable in ways that will enable new technologies and scientific discoveries.”

The NSF TEMPEST award supports students and researchers at Michigan State University, Auburn University, Baylor University, Georgia Tech, San José State University, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi, University of Rochester, and Yale University to combine theory, computation, AI techniques, and experimentation to build trustworthy predictive models of real-world turbulence for high-consequence applications.

Additional partners include Los Alamos National Laboratory, Sandia National Laboratories, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Pacific Fusion, and General Atomics.

Together, TEMPEST researchers will build more accurate and reliable physics-grounded models. The center will test new ideas against real-world observations, then use those results to refine the models. 

Tang contributes expertise in ML, scientific computing, and plasma physics to STC TEMPEST. 

Earlier this year, Tang received an Early Career Research award from the Department of Energy’s Office of Science. He is using the award to build ML and data science tools that help scientists analyze massive datasets from fusion experiments and simulations.

This interdisciplinary approach is intended to move science from understanding why turbulence behaves as it does to predicting how it will behave. Through prediction and simulation, scientists could eventually engineer solutions to control turbulence in real-world scenarios.

The center will make its data and software broadly available and engage the public through museum exhibitions, immersive media, and educational programs that are expected to reach more than 10,000 K-12 students annually. TEMPEST will also help train an AI-fluent scientific workforce prepared to tackle complex problems across disciplines.

“One reason I am excited to work in TEMPEST is because it aligns perfectly with our School of CSE mission. As a discipline, CSE complements theory and experimentation as a mode of scientific discovery,” Tang said. 

“We build computational models to simulate scientific and engineering concepts, like turbulence in this case, so that we can test theories that are too difficult, expensive, or risky for physical experiments.”

Using mathematical formulas, engineering principles, and a curiosity for exploration, a Georgia Tech alumnus is on a path to biking every public street in Los Angeles, covering more than 7,500 miles.  

Georgia Tech rose to No. 3 in the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression's (FIRE) 2027 College Free Speech Rankings. 

Maintaining campus buildings often means identifying problems before they become visible. Georgia Tech’s Planning, Design, and Construction department is piloting an innovative building envelope assessment at Lyman Hall that uses drone-mounted infrared technology to detect hidden moisture intrusion and potential building performance issues.  

Walking down the stairs in the Clough Undergraduate Learning Commons, you might look up to discover a set of letters made out of construction paper. Backlit by blue and red light, it reads, “Plant Library: Fridays 3:30 – 4:30”. This sign has caught the eye of many students, who walk inside to discover a bustling scene. Instead of books lining shelves, plants of all sorts are gathered in the windows, drinking in the sunlight. A group of students browses for a few moments before leaving with a plant of their own to nurture. The majority are gathered around a table, cutting up English ivy to propagate in recycled containers.   

Microbes from space have fueled the plots of science fiction mainstays like “Project Hail Mary” and “The Andromeda Strain.” But with more space missions launching each year, finding extraterrestrial life in a microbial form is becoming more plausible. What will the response be back here on Earth if – or when – scientists discover extraterrestrial microbes? Will the international policy and security communities be prepared for the fallout?

When you hear about extraterrestrial life, your mind may go to intelligent life, like the kind present in a lot of Hollywood science fiction. But even the confirmation of microbial life that originated somewhere other than on Earth – which is much more likely – would be a paradigm-shifting event. Thinking about what these consequences might look like early on can help nations and the international community prepare.

Our team is interested in this question. We’re made up of a full professor of international affairs, who earned a Ph.D. in chemistry, and whose expertise is on how emerging science and technologies could affect global conflict and cooperation, as well as an emerging scholar in space policy and security and an expert on social and political implications of frontier technologies, such as AI, space, quantum and energy sources.

Multiple Mars landers have identified large amounts of frozen and liquid water, essential for life, on the red planet. Samples retrieved by Japan’s Hayabusa2 spacecraft from a near-Earth asteroid revealed the presence of uracil, part of RNA, which is a building block of life. Uncrewed space probes like NASA’s Europa Clipper and the European Space Agency’s Jupiter Icy Moons Explorer are on their way to conduct detailed reconnaissance of the planet’s moons and to investigate whether they have conditions suitable for life.

Along with data from the James Webb Space Telescope and future missions targeting Saturn’s icy moon Enceladus, the likelihood of discovering extraterrestrial microbial life has increased substantially.

A Governance Challenge

The discovery of microbial life would expose significant gaps in international governance related to space.

While there are some existing international agreements, including the Outer Space Treaty, that provide space law guidelines, these are ill-equipped to address the complexities posed by extraterrestrial biology.

The Outer Space Treaty, established in 1967, dictates that countries should use outer space peacefully. It also states that no single nation may claim ownership or exert sovereignty over parts of outer space or celestial bodies such as the Moon.

However, it doesn’t have much to say about who can own extraterrestrial organisms or what to do about biosecurity risks. It doesn’t have direction for who can use, preserve or destroy living things, such as bacteria or fungi, that may be discovered in space.

Historical Analogies and Future Pathways

While people have yet to discover extraterrestrial life of any kind, there are some major geopolitical events that can help researchers understand what the consequences might look like.

While the space race of the 1950s and ’60s led to exploration of the Moon, it was driven by a Cold War power struggle between two nations back on Earth. Instead of coming together to explore space, both countries experienced a renewed sense of nationalism. They used the new discoveries that came from the space race to invest in their military capabilities.

On the other hand, researchers can look at how states respond to asteroid threats. Since an asteroid could pose a truly existential threat from space, preventing the worst-case scenario requires cooperation and thinking ahead.

Astronomers have built a global, collaborative network to monitor for and sound the alarm about any potential threats. This network has shown that nations can put aside terrestrial rivalries to work together if they perceive something from space as a truly existential threat.

The International Space Station is another example showing how nations that are competing great powers on Earth work together to cooperate in space. Countries have collaborated to solve issues on the International Space Station that have specific, short-term and clearly identified goals.

These examples show a range of possible reactions to the discovery of space microbes. The situation could renew space races between competing countries and lead to militarization, or it could create unprecedented cooperation.

Potential Outcomes

We’ve identified three main possible outcomes to the discovery of microbial extraterrestrial life.

First, there’s a cooperative outcome, reminiscent of the asteroid threat network or the International Space Station. Here, nations collaborate to regulate research, share data, protect the planet or advance specific interests they share.

This pathway isn’t inherently benign or malignant. It could entail expanding the roles of international organizations or creating new legal instruments.

Second there’s a competitive outcome, characterized by strategic rivalry between countries. Like in the space race, nations could fight to be technologically superior. They might try to monopolize access to the extraterrestrial microbes or to leverage biological discoveries from the microbes for their own economic or military advantage.

Scientific breakthroughs derived from extraterrestrial organisms could lead to innovations in medicine, agriculture, energy and beyond. However, the organisms could also be weaponized, intentionally or otherwise, which would amplify biosecurity risks. In this sense, the discovery of microbial life could create a new form of technological competition, one that merges space exploration with biological research and development.

The increasing role of private companies, such as SpaceX, complicates this dynamic. These companies receive contracts from the government, blurring the lines between commercial civilian and strategic activities.

For example, around 60% of all satellites currently orbiting the Earth belong to SpaceX’s Starlink subsidiary. The company can – and has – chosen to block access selectively, in alignment with its political priorities. When commercial interests and national priorities diverge, who has access versus who is denied access can be uncertain.

Research around biopiracy may come into play. Biopiracy is a term that applies to two primary issues: the patenting of indigenous knowledge or the patenting of natural resources, such as microbes, for profit. The Budapest Treaty prohibits claiming ownership of a naturally occurring microbe on Earth, but there’s no equivalent for microbes in space.

Third is an isolationist outcome, in which states could sever their involvement in international cooperation due to biosecurity concerns or political distrust. The potential for unknown biological risks, however minimal, could trigger precautionary restrictions on data sharing, which limits international collaboration.

Countries may lose or gain allies as they grapple with whether the microbe could cause harm to humans or the environment, or be developed into a biological weapon.

Emerging technologies will also shape these outcomes. Artificial intelligence and machine learning are already integral to scientific research. Scientists use them to process astronomical data and identify potential biosignatures. Nanotechnology and advances in the life sciences and engineering could allow researchers to study, modify or exploit extraterrestrial microbes, if they’re given access to them.

Countries will have to prepare not only for the scientific implications of discovery but also for its societal and political reverberations. The politicization of scientific discoveries from the microbes could complicate or change how countries respond domestically and at the international scale. Misinformation about the microbes could shape policy and public response.

Preparing for the Unprecedented

The discovery of extraterrestrial microbial life would not merely mark a scientific milestone. It would be a geopolitical event.

Rather than attempting to predict a singular outcome, policymakers could adopt scenario-based planning approaches in the meantime to anticipate and prepare for a range of possibilities. In these approaches, participants explore multiple futures through structured activities similar to professional or military wargaming or path games, in which they explore multiple outcomes systematically to test strategies, to plan and to analyze potential outcomes under realistic uncertainty.

In our view, the question is not whether humanity will discover life beyond Earth, but whether it is prepared for the consequences when it does.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

As Georgia Tech President Ángel Cabrera delivered his final Institute Address from the Walter G. Ehmer Theater inside the John Lewis Student Center, he emphasized that the end of his tenure is not the end of a race but rather the next leg of a relay. As he prepares to pass the baton to the next president, he outlined Tech’s unprecedented momentum.  

We encourage everyone to allow extra travel time when moving through these affected areas:

• The Historic Academy of Medicine.
• Clough Undergraduate Learning Commons.
• Price Gilbert Memorial Library.
• Crosland Tower.
• Tech Green.
• Harrison Square.
• Kessler Campanile area.
• Bobby Dodd Way and Cherry Street corridors.

Production activity is expected to take place primarily during the day, starting as early as 7 a.m., and in the early evening hours, with setup, filming, and breakdown occurring throughout the three days. While every effort will be made to minimize disruption, brief holds may be necessary at various times to ensure the safety of the campus community and filming crew.

Campus parking and vehicular traffic may also be affected in select areas due to production vehicle and equipment staging. This includes parking in E84, W21, and limited spaces along Ferst Drive near the John Lewis Student Center. Please follow all posted signage.

We appreciate your patience and cooperation as Georgia Tech hosts this production.

You’ve been planning your dream beach vacation for months, only to arrive and find the shoreline covered in large piles of smelly, brown seaweed, with even more floating offshore. It’s disappointing, for sure – and increasingly common.

Since 2011, summer scenes like this have played out on beaches in South Florida and throughout the Caribbean.

The consequences are even greater for people who live and work along the Caribbean and Gulf coasts and the coasts of the tropical Atlantic. Large masses of sargassum seaweed can clog harbors, interfering with fishing and boating, and in some cases harm marine life. As the seaweed begins to decompose it releases gases, including hydrogen sulfide, ammonia and methane, raising concerns for both public health and the environment.

To reduce the impact of these sargassum blooms, a crucial first step is understanding why the seaweed started growing in the first place and what’s sustaining it now.

We study the oceans, marine life, and algae blooms, such as sargassum. Our research suggests that these vast mats of smelly seaweed may have entered a self-sustaining cycle, effectively feeding their own expansion. It’s creating a chronic disaster for the affected coasts, with little sign of ending.

Columbus and the Great Sargasso Sea

Pelagic sargassum is a type of brown seaweed that floats on the ocean surface and is naturally abundant in the Sargasso Sea, a region of the subtropical North Atlantic.

The seaweed takes its name from sargaço, the Portuguese word for grape. When Portuguese navigators reached the region, they noticed its small, grapelike, air-filled bladders that keep the seaweed afloat. Christopher Columbus later wrote about encountering vast mats of it during his voyage to the Americas.

However, in 2011, people began noticing unusually large mats of sargassum in the tropical Atlantic, between the coasts of Africa and Brazil. In the years since, these blooms have become more frequent, lasted longer, and grown much larger, with vast amounts of sargassum washing ashore across Central America, the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico.

In this new area, now called the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt, the amount of sargassum surpassed an estimated 37,500 million tons in 2025. Forecasts suggest summer 2026 could break records again.

Sargassum’s Drivers Changed Over Time

For years, scientists have searched for the causes of the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt.

They explored changes in ocean nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilizer and other human activities in the Amazon and Congo river basins, increasing amounts of Saharan dust blowing in the wind, and changes in ocean temperatures, winds and currents. None of the hypotheses could fully explain year-to-year variations in the sargassum belt.

Our research suggests something else is also going on – the main cause has changed.

In the winter of 2010, strong winds brought some sargassum southward from the Sargasso Sea to the tropical Atlantic. For a few years, winds stayed strong in winter and spring, acting like a giant spoon and mixing deeper, nutrient-rich water up to the sunlit surface, giving the algae the resources it needed to bloom and grow.

A floating sargassum mat is much more than just seaweed. It is like a floating city, home to fish, shrimp, crabs and countless tiny living organisms, all food for larger fish. Together, they form an ecosystem that we call the sargassumsphere. It’s much like a mobile reef or forest.

These animals collect food around the floating mats and recycle nutrients through their waste and the breakdown of older sargassum. In this way, nutrients are gathered from a much larger area and concentrated around the seaweed, helping the next bloom to grow.

This process can make sargassum blooms very likely to persist in the years ahead.

To test this theory, we created a mathematical model that accounts for the mechanisms controlling the blooms. With the measurements of nitrogen content and isotopic composition in argassum collected around the U.S. Virgin Islands, our model not only reproduced the blooms from 2011 to 2022 but also predicted ahead of time the size and evolution of blooms that occurred in 2023 and 2024, suggesting the theory is correct.

Better Forecasts, Better Solutions

Our work shows that the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt is likely here to stay.

Predicting when blooms will occur, and understanding what drives them, can help create early warning systems that give coastal communities time to prepare for their unwanted arrival. It can also support long-term efforts to turn sargassum from a costly nuisance into a valuable resource.

Sargassum biomass has attracted growing interest as a renewable feedstock for biofuel production. Unlike bioenergy crops grown on land, sargassum does not need land, freshwater or fertilizers, reducing competition with food production. The seaweed is rich in carbohydrates that can be converted into bioethanol, biogas, bio-oil, or hydrogen through processes such as fermentation, anaerobic digestion, hydrothermal liquefaction and gasification.

Scientists at a university in Barbados, for example, developed a way to produce biofuel from a combination of the excessive sargassum on the island’s shores and wastewater from the local rum industry.

The island is also encouraging farms to use sargassum as a fertilizer and soil amendment, providing a sustainable alternative to synthetic fertilizers. Sargassum is rich in organic matter, potassium, calcium, magnesium and trace elements. After careful processing to remove the salt and excessive metals, it can be used to improve soil structure, enhance water retention and stimulate plant growth.

Sargassum is increasingly also being explored as a sustainable construction material, particularly in Mexico and Brazil. The biomass can be incorporated into building products, such as compressed panels similar to drywall that were developed by researchers at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, and low-cost bricks developed by entrepreneur Omar Vázquez Sánchez in Mexico using about 40% sargassum with limestone and other organic materials. Using sargassum as a mortar additive also helps reduce dependence on conventional, carbon-intensive materials.

By learning to live with and make use of sargassum, affected regions may be able to transform a growing challenge into a new opportunity.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

You’ve probably heard artificial intelligence models described as “open” or “closed.” These are not descriptions of the model’s personality. Large language model AIs like the one under the hood of ChatGPT don’t have actual personalities, despite appearances.

The labels refer to whether all of the information about how an AI model works is publicly available and the model can be modified, or whether the model’s developer keeps its inner workings secret and the model itself private property.

Open-Source Software

The concept of open-source software originated in the free software movement of the 1980s and ’90s. The movement’s founders believed that software creators and users had the right to “four freedoms” – to run the program, to study and modify it, to distribute copies of the original, and to distribute copies of subsequently modified versions. The fundamental requirement was that the source code – the basic instructions – for a program should be made available.

In the late 1990s, software developers associated with projects such as the Netscape web browser and the Linux operating system coined and promoted the term “open source” to refer to these ideals.

As part of the evolving movement, certain organizations developed open-source licenses that specified how a particular piece of source code could be used and distributed, including the Gnu General Public License, Apache License, MIT License and the Berkeley Software Distribution. Each type of license also specified any potential restrictions on how software patents applied to the source code.

Open Source or Open Weight?

The open-source idea has risen to prominence again in the past several years as artificial intelligence large language models have surged, notably OpenAI’s ChatGPT, released in 2022. Developers first train new models on large datasets, then deploy the models for use by other people.

Meta was one of the first large companies to release an open-source large language model, called LLaMa. The company released LLaMa on Feb. 24, 2023, and made available the “inference” source code – the instructions that run the model. And it released the so-called weights, the encoded knowledge the model learned during training. However, open-source organizations such as the Open Source Initiative have stated that the LLaMa licensing guidelines prohibit commercial reuse, which the initiative maintains is not truly open source.

Other companies have released “open weight” models, such as DeepSeek from DeepSeek AI and Qwen from Alibaba. The models have less restrictive terms for reuse, and the AI community has adopted them rapidly. Still, many developers believe that a true open-source AI model must not only include the source code and weights but also the data that is used to train the model.

A Lot to Open Up

The Open Source Initiative’s definition of a fully open-source AI model includes the training data as a key element. Some developers wonder, however, how feasible it is to distribute the enormous datasets required.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Across corporate earnings calls, investor presentations and marketing pitches, “artificial intelligence” has become the buzzword of choice. Yet a troubling pattern lies under the hype. Many claims vastly overstate actual AI sophistication, misleading people about true capabilities, future outcomes and potential harms.

A case in point is the recent 600% share price surge of Allbirds, after the once-trendy sustainable footwear business issued a vague announcement in April 2026 that it would pivot to AI. In the coming months, the company plans to rename itself NewBird AI and give up its status as a public benefit corporation.

As a scholar who studies corporate sustainability, I see parallels between this “AI washing” phenomenon – when companies oversell the benefits of AI while glossing over the risks – and the greenwashing trend in the recent past, when companies claimed to commit to sustainability but didn’t enact fundamental change. Widespread deception was rampant, with businesses spending far more on green marketing than on actual sustainability improvements. And those efforts often backfired on both the companies and the communities they served. Even more worrisome: AI washing’s rapid rise and widespread adoption will likely eclipse the greenwashing trends.

How We Got Here

AI washing is thriving because companies and policymakers ignore four important principles. These shortfalls, in the past, also characterized greenwashing.

First, AI guidelines lack standardization. By 2019, 84 sets of AI ethics principles and guidelines had already been published. By 2023, this number had exploded to more than 200 – a mess of voluntary frameworks from companies, research institutions and public organizations.

Making matters worse is that the U.S. currently relies on fragmented AI rules, with most being voluntary. The Trump administration has generally sided with Big Tech to push back efforts at state or federal regulation. At a global level, one of the few exceptions is the European Union AI Act, perhaps one of the most comprehensive frameworks, but its implementation won’t be fully phased in until 2027 or later.

In the early 2000s, corporate sustainability faced a similar credibility crisis. Every company measured sustainability differently, making comparisons impossible and greenwashing easy. The breakthrough came only when standardized, industry-specific metrics allowed meaningful benchmarking. Initiatives such as the Global Reporting Initiative and Sustainability Accounting Standards Board established common metrics for measuring environmental impact, social responsibility and quality of governance, known by the shorthand ESG.

When companies must report carbon emissions using the same methodology, for example, or disclose labor conditions using identical categories, investors can compare performance, identify laggards and allocate capital accordingly. This push made comparisons possible and deception harder, although it still wasn’t foolproof. For example, a 2023 United Nations Environment Programme report on the fast-fashion industry found that many companies continue to make “vague and inflated” sustainability claims.

Second, there are no comprehensive frameworks in the U.S. that require businesses to judge how AI affects them in a material way and publicly disclose those impacts. Examples of AI-driven material impacts include whether algorithmic bias shapes business outcomes, or whether decisions on how to use AI systems carry significance for shareholders and the public.

Instead, AI governance remains dominated by the narrow inner circle of companies that build the AI systems, while affected communities rarely have a say in determining which AI impacts are material enough to warrant public attention. For example, Big Tech companies like Google, Microsoft, Apple, NVIDIA and others adhere to their own AI governance guidelines, with relatively little public input.

The development of sustainability principles offers some examples of how to build these frameworks. The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive requires over 50,000 companies to formally evaluate which sustainability topics are material to their stakeholders, and then disclose that information. These efforts try to ensure that accountability is clear across entire supply chains.

While nowhere nearly as comprehensive, U.S. regulations such as the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform and California’s law requiring reporting on statewide greenhouse gas emissions provide a similar blueprint that U.S. policymakers could build on if they chose.

A third problem is the general lack of third-party verification, making AI washing trivially easy. Effective disclosure means reporting all material impacts – not just cherry-picked successes.

In practice, AI audits can vary dramatically in rigor, scope and methodology. One auditor might conduct extensive testing across demographic groups, analyze decision-making and validate the quality of training data. Another might simply review documentation and accept company explanations at face value. Given the variety of AI auditing models out there, different auditors may use incompatible methodologies, making results impossible to compare. If companies adopted third-party accreditation systems to assess how they use AI, they would help ensure the accountability that self-reported claims cannot match.

By contrast, there was reasonable progress in this respect as companies adopted ESG principles. For example, institutions such as the Carbon Disclosure Project and Global Reporting Initiative have a network of partners that offer independent verification. These providers, certified under international standards, verify corporate sustainability data against rigorous criteria. That way, they provide the assurance that lets companies show the progress needed to unlock sustainable finance and mitigate legal risks. Third-party audits are far from perfect, but they offer a clear path for improvement.

The fourth principle is robust enforcement. Early ESG initiatives relied on reputational pressure and stakeholder goodwill – things that corporations routinely ignored when profits were at stake. When change came, it was because regulations established legal liability and financial penalties.

These consequences changed how corporations assess risk and continue to shape sustainability practices today. Volkswagen’s 2015 ‘Dieselgate’ scandal, for example, cost the company over US$30 billion in fines, settlements and criminal charges after U.S regulators found that the carmaker was cheating emissions tests. BP faced billions in penalties and liabilities for the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, the biggest oil spill in the history of marine oil drilling operations.

The current enforcement gap in AI creates a predictable dynamic. The expected value of AI washing – like potential investment gains, competitive advantage, and market valuation increases – far exceeds the expected cost in terms of penalties and risk of detection. Until enforcement imposes consequences that exceed benefits, AI washing will persist as a rational business strategy rather than a risk to a business’s reputation.

Fortunately, investors are beginning to step up. The Federal Trade Commission, for example, launched Operation AI Comply in 2024, targeting deceptive AI claims, although this effort has been partially scaled back by the current Trump administration.

New Standards For a New Era

Until businesses address these four principles, AI washing will continue. Without standards and audits, even well-intentioned companies can’t know if their work meets adequate rigor. Without assessments of material impact, some groups of consumers or shareholders will be hurt. And without liability, even thorough auditors won’t be able to identify whether a business’s claims about AI are truthful.

These principles, applied broadly, also help explain why greenwashing persists. For example, the lack of universal reporting standards continues to leave some gaps, with data-quality issues persisting even as reporting frameworks emerged. More fundamentally, political buy-in for ESG has diminished significantly, particularly in the U.S., where over 150 bills were introduced across multiple states by 2023 to disincentivize firms from adopting ESG. Major financial institutions – including JP Morgan, State Street, BlackRock and PIMCO – have retreated from their earlier climate commitments amid political pressure as well as antitrust concerns.

This trend shows that even well designed accountability measures require durable political support to succeed. After all, corporate sustainability took more than 25 years to develop from an initial framework to mandatory standards, and it still remains a work in progress. AI, by contrast, is advancing exponentially in terms of its reach and societal impact. There may not be 25 years to catch up – but at least there are lessons from the recent past.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

On May 22, 2026, the Pentagon released a second batch of previously classified photos and videos showing what appear to be unexplained flying objects. These file dumps were the culmination of a process that was set in motion back in July 2023, when a group of government whistleblowers testified before Congress that the U.S. government was secretly in possession of extraterrestrial spacecraft and suspected alien body parts.

That congressional hearing marked the beginning of a cultural shift in which UFO reports are increasingly treated as a matter for serious discussion, both within the government and the scientific community.

But is this newfound legitimacy deserved? As an aerospace scientist who studies aircraft and spacecraft design, I approach this question using math, physics and the principles of engineering. To assess the plausibility of alien visitors, it’s necessary to understand the obstacles that an extraterrestrial vessel would need to overcome to reach Earth.

The Tyranny of Distance

There is no evidence of intelligent alien life in our solar system. So any extraterrestrial visitors would likely have to come from another star system within our Milky Way galaxy.

Proxima Centauri, the star closest to our Sun, is located 4.25 light-years (about 25 trillion miles or 40 trillion kilometers) away.

For perspective, if Earth were the size of a pea, the distance to Proxima Centauri would roughly equal the distance between New York and Sydney, Australia.

Since only a fraction of stars are thought to host intelligent life, the nearest alien civilization – if one exists – is surely much farther away than Proxima.

A Need for Speed

Given the scale of interstellar distances, it’s inevitable that any alien voyage to Earth would span many years and possibly several centuries. But as the time spent in transit increases, so does the risk of catastrophic accidents or system malfunctions that could jeopardize the mission. So it’s important to avoid an overly lengthy journey by traveling as fast as possible.

No object can reach or exceed the speed of light (roughly 186,000 miles or 300,000 kilometers per second). But well before approaching that threshold, engineering constraints begin to assert themselves. Limited fuel availability and the potential for structural damage will restrict the spacecraft’s peak velocity.

There is no universally accepted upper limit on interstellar flight speeds, but studies tend to converge around 19,000 miles per second (30,000 km/s) – 10% of the speed of light – as a realistic cruise velocity. At this speed, a journey of 10 light-years will take approximately 100 years to complete.

Fueling the Dream

Finding a way to accelerate the ship to its target cruise speed is the central challenge facing any would-be alien explorers.

Interstellar space is unforgivingly vast, but the emptiness has some advantages. The lack of atmosphere means there is no aerodynamic drag. So when the ship reaches its cruise speed, it can shut down its propulsion system and coast toward the final destination. Unfortunately, the lack of atmosphere also means there is nothing to slow the ship down prior to arrival. So ideally, the propulsion system would be used for both acceleration at the start of the trip and deceleration at the end.

One of the more exotic propulsion strategies employs high-powered laser beams to push the ship through space. The beam is projected from a stationary array near the travelers’ home planet and directed toward a thin reflective sail attached to the ship. The beam’s photons exert radiation pressure on the sail, propelling the ship forward.

This approach has a major advantage in that it requires no onboard fuel. But the amount of energy and infrastructure needed to operate the laser would be staggering. Also, beamed propulsion provides no mechanism for deceleration. At best, this method could be deployed as part of a hybrid strategy that uses a separate system for deceleration.

A more practical approach is to use rocket propulsion. Rockets generate propulsive force, also known as thrust, by expelling high-velocity exhaust in a rearward stream. By reversing the direction of the exhaust, rockets can also be used to slow the ship down.

Their main disadvantage is that rockets must carry their own fuel in addition to carrying the passengers, the habitat and other life-sustaining systems. The extra load necessitates even more fuel. In other words, you need fuel to transport your fuel. The result is a costly snowball effect that can cause the total fuel requirement to balloon to absurd proportions.

Rocket propulsion can be divided into three broad categories.

Chemical propulsion uses chemical reactions – typically combustion – to extract energy from the bonds between atoms. All human space missions thus far have used chemical propulsion. The problem with this method is that it accesses only a tiny fraction of the energy contained within the fuel.

Consequently, using chemical propulsion on a spacecraft with a cruise velocity of 19,000 miles per second (30,000 km/s) would require more fuel than all the mass in the observable universe.

Antimatter propulsion is theoretically the most efficient option. When antimatter comes into contact with ordinary matter, the two undergo mutual annihilation and 100% of their combined mass is converted into energy. This makes it possible to achieve the same cruise velocity – one-tenth the speed of light – with fuel accounting for less than a quarter of the ship’s total mass. This is science fiction-level fuel efficiency, which makes antimatter an attractive option for interstellar propulsion.

The downside is that antimatter is extremely unstable and difficult to make. To date, particle physicists have produced less than 20 billionths of a gram of antimatter. Moreover, these particles had lifespans lasting only fractions of a second and a price tag in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

Nuclear fusion offers a more viable alternative to antimatter. This approach harvests energy stored inside the nucleus of an atom using the same process that powers the Sun. With current technology, fusion engines remain aspirational, but they could, in theory, produce 10 million times more energy per kilogram than chemical rockets.

Still, a fusion-powered ship with a cruise velocity of 19,000 miles per second (30,000 km/s) would require fuel equivalent to 150 times the mass of the ship itself.

A Delicate Balancing Act

These numbers assume that our extraterrestrial visitors have figured out how to efficiently convert the energy released by their reactor – whether nuclear fusion or antimatter – into thrust.

Just as importantly, they must be able to create optimized fuel tank structures that are ultra lightweight yet highly secure. Designing the structure of the ship, from the fuel tanks to the hull, would be one of the biggest engineering challenges of the entire mission.

Interstellar space contains a sparse smattering of hydrogen atoms and microscopic grains of cosmic dust. At 19,000 miles per second (30,000 km/s), dust particles would smash into the ship’s hull with the energy of a .22-caliber bullet. The bombardment of hydrogen atoms would produce a violent cascade of radiation that could erode even the most resilient engineering materials.

Surviving the onslaught would require no less than a flying fortress with complex magnetic shielding. This would increase the total mass of the ship, which further drives up the demand for fuel.

This example is just one of the hundreds of delicate design trade-offs that would plague any interstellar vessel. Each individual design requirement acts as a filter, reducing the number of feasible solutions.

Finding a single system that simultaneously satisfies all the requirements is analogous to shopping for a car online. With each new filter you apply – four-wheel drive, black exterior, less than 10,000 miles on the odometer – the number of available options dwindles.

When design requirements are in tension with one another – for example, requiring a structure that is lightweight but also supremely durable – the number of feasible solutions can drop to zero.

No single law of physics prohibits an interstellar voyage to Earth. But the combined effects of hundreds of extreme, often conflicting engineering requirements may render it physically infeasible.

It’s also possible that alien civilizations have discovered novel technologies that outperform anything currently known to humans. But like the examples discussed here, any such technology will inevitably encounter its own engineering hurdles.

The Trillion-Dollar Question

Ultimately, engineering challenges are just some of the many barriers to interstellar travel. Any prospective alien visitors must also have sufficient cognitive ability, technological maturity, physical resources, collective desire and proximity to Earth.

That said, if the stars were to align and an alien vessel made it to Earth intact, it would trigger a torrent of burning questions: Where are they from? What do they want? What are they made of?

But the question that would go furthest in shedding light on the deeper mysteries of the universe is, “How on Earth did they get here?”

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Did you see the landmarks in the distance that make up the city skyline? Did you drive right past the grocery store you promised to stop by at the corner of this Peachtree Street or that Peachtree Street, a struggle Atlanta locals know well?

“Oops! Force of habit,” you might say to yourself as you miss your turn and begin to think about when and where you can turn around.

Relying on familiarity can either facilitate or impede daily navigation. As a researcher studying memory and navigation, I aim to understand how the brain supports spatial navigation and what happens if the cognitive mechanisms for choosing the best route home begin to decline, such as during stress or with aging.

Humans are creatures of habit – at least that’s what people tell themselves when wary of trying something new. But what if a new route is faster or safer than the one you usually take? Would you try it?

Research from my team suggests that people balance between exploration and habit – that is, trying something new or sticking with the familiar – when deciding what route to take. Which navigation strategy someone chooses depends not only on their spatial abilities but on their network of brain regions that support navigation.

A Spatial Blueprint

Spatial navigation refers to the cognitive ability that helps you travel from one location to another. It may sound simple, but it requires using cognitive functions such as memory, attention, decision-making and assessing potential rewards – never mind the ability to simply perceive the environment itself.

Spatial navigation uses memories of things you consciously experienced. Two types of memory relevant to navigation are what scientists call episodic and semantic.

For example, you might retrieve an episodic memory about a specific event: remembering a detour you took a week ago to drop a package off at the post office, including the traffic and weather that day.

You might also retrieve a semantic memory that’s more factual and knowledge-based: remembering how many blocks away the post office is from the park and the turns you need to make to get there.

Together, these kinds of memory inform your spatial memory, which allows you to retrieve location information. This could be where buildings are in relation to each other or where objects are situated in your house. Spatial memories help form your cognitive map, which is essential for getting around in the world.

Often, these different ways of remembering interact, and you can use one type of memory to inform the other. For example, you’ve become accustomed to your commute to work and know it’s relatively short (semantic memory), but over the past three days you’ve been arriving late due to heavy traffic (episodic memory), so you choose to take a different route next time.

Research from my team has found that disagreements in your brain over possible routes can happen. Different types of memory can come up with different solutions for what route you can take, and this conflict is a big factor in how hard your brain needs to work when navigating an environment.

Responding to New and Familiar Memories

Habits stem from what researchers call stimulus-response memories. These include the knee-jerk reaction you might have to familiar landmarks – when you perceive these places, your brain signals you to make a turn along your commute without needing to consciously think about it.

Habits are rigid, but they can also be beneficial: By taking care of the navigation for you, habit frees up your brain to have a conversation with someone or plan what to make for dinner when you get home.

When navigating less familiar routes or environments, where habit doesn’t kick in automatically, you rely on brain regions such as the hippocampus to call on detailed memories from recent experiences to help guide the way.

But let’s say you’re shopping at a new grocery store where most things are where you expect them to be, even though you’ve never been in this particular store before. What happens when your brain experiences both something new and something familiar about an environment?

Researchers have shown that when something about an environment is familiar and aligns with your prior experiences, the prefrontal regions of your brain – those responsible for executive functions such as decision-making – become more active. They can bypass or even inhibit your hippocampus’s ability to form new memories about specific events.

In other words, your brain can weave information about a new experience into your database of existing knowledge, rather than storing it as completely new information with little relation to the past. This process may help fast-track your understanding about new experiences.

Updating Cognitive Maps

Researchers know that cognitive maps of the environment depend on the hippocampus and its database of memories about specific events. However, I and other researchers argue these maps can also function as a schema – a collection of memories made up of associations between environmental details. You can add new information to these collections and use it to infer new relationships.

Say a new pedestrian bridge is built between the park and the post office. Your brain can more easily weave this new route information into your existing memories compared with learning a new environment from scratch. Similarly, if you just moved to a new town and know very little about the spatial layout, you might rely on your past experiences of towns to infer where something is.

Using neuroimaging techniques as well as virtual reality programs designed to test a participant’s ability to navigate different routes, my team found that there is likely an interdependent relationship between the brain areas that store memories of specific events and areas that store related information across memories when planning to navigate less familiar places.

New routes are more difficult to follow when they differ from your prior experiences. Thus, a stronger schema helps integrate your knowledge of the spatial relationships between locations and landmarks (such as the distance between the post office and the park) with more general knowledge (such as prior route difficulty). This all informs how you choose to navigate.

Navigating Daily Life

These memory principles help explain why inconsistencies with your previous experiences can make it so difficult to navigate many aspects of daily life.

Imagine you woke up tomorrow and the GPS on your smartphone was no longer available. How will you plan your route to get to your destination?

You might be used to navigating north from your home to the grocery store – but have you ever tried to navigate to that grocery story from a different location? It’s much harder!

Factors such as stress, aging and general cognitive decline can affect brain function and human behavior. Imagine how much harder that new route to the grocery store is for an older adult.

Relating new information to your prior experiences may help strengthen your schema and make navigation easier. And understanding what processes the brain needs to go through to solve these navigation problems can help you understand why getting around can be challenging.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Not all earthquake faults behave the same. Some stick and snap, causing earthquakes. Others move slowly over time.

For years, the leading explanation for slow-moving faults has been that high-pressure fluids along the fault lubricate it, allowing the slabs to slide steadily rather than building up stress until that stress is eventually released in a large, destructive earthquake.

But in a new study of the Shumagin Gap, a quiet section of the Alaska-Aleutian subduction zone – the area where one tectonic plate dives below another – my colleagues and I found that the fault does not contain enough fluid to explain why it slides slowly. Scientists may need to rethink this assumption about subduction zones around the world.

Pinning down why faults creep matters for how scientists build models of the world’s most powerful earthquake zones to assess long-term earthquake and tsunami hazards, from Alaska to Japan to the Pacific Northwest. Knowing how earthquakes are likely to behave is essential for helping communities decide where and how to build homes and other infrastructure so they can withstand an earthquake and tsunami.

How Earthquakes Happen Along Faults

An earthquake fault is a break in Earth’s outer rock layer where two blocks of rock slide past each other. The way they slide determines what kind of shaking, if any, reaches the surface.

Some faults are “locked.” They do not budge until stress builds to a breaking point, then they release it all at once in a sudden rupture. This is what happens during most damaging earthquakes. Other faults “creep.” They glide past each other steadily, releasing stress gradually.

The biggest and most destructive earthquakes on Earth happen along subduction zones, where one tectonic plate dives beneath another. The Alaska-Aleutian margin, the Japan Trench, the subduction zone off Chile and the Pacific Northwest’s Cascadia zone are all examples. When a locked patch of a subduction fault suddenly slips, the seafloor can jolt upward and a tsunami can follow.

A Quiet Fault Challenges a Common Assumption

Deep underground, fault behavior is hard to see directly, especially offshore where faults often sit beneath kilometers of seawater and sediment.

Scientists rely on measurements from GPS stations, seismometers and seafloor sensors, and then build computer models of what must be happening below. For decades, the leading explanation for creeping faults has been that high-pressure fluids along the fault reduce friction, the way a film of water causes tires to hydroplane.

Testing that idea requires seeing the fluids, and that’s where our team came in.

We use marine electromagnetic imaging, a method that maps how easily underground materials conduct electricity. A ship tows an instrument close to the seafloor, sending electromagnetic signals into the rocks below, while other instruments on the seabed record the response. Different materials beneath the seafloor conduct electricity differently, and that shows up in the measurements. Because salty water conducts electricity very well, the method is especially good at mapping where fluids are and where they aren’t.

We surveyed a 75-mile (120-kilometer) stretch of seafloor across the Shumagin Gap, a section of the Alaska-Aleutian subduction zone that has been creeping for more than a century. The Shumagin Gap had long been considered a quiet part of the margin, even though neighboring segments have produced magnitude 8 and larger earthquakes.

To our surprise, the fault at the Shumagin Gap was not as fluid-rich as the leading explanation would predict.

Our images show that the shallow part of the fault, closest to the ocean, has little open space in the rock for fluid to occupy. And the fluid that is there is under roughly normal pressure, not the high pressure that the “slippery fluid” model predicts.

The fault surface is bumpy and rugged. The upper plate appears to be a patchwork of stronger and weaker material, and we found possible pathways where fluids may drain into the rock above the fault.

In other words, this quiet fault isn’t quiet because it’s well lubricated. Something else is keeping it stable, most likely a combination of rough fault surface, varying rock strength and, in some places, fluid.

What This Means for Assessing Earthquake Risks

Our findings about this fault have consequences for assessing earthquake and tsunami hazards more broadly.

Many models lean on the idea that fluid pressure helps determine whether a subduction fault slips suddenly or creeps. If fluid isn’t the main control keeping the Shumagin Gap quiet, other quiet faults might similarly lack fluid, raising questions about how stable those faults really are.

Understanding these mechanisms matters for assessing coastal communities’ earthquake and tsunami risks. A shallow slip near a trench is what drives the most destructive tsunamis. Tsunamis from Alaska–Aleutian earthquakes have reached distant coasts before. Large earthquakes in 1946, 1957 and 1964 generated tsunamis that damaged the coasts of Hawaii and California.

As our results show, there isn’t a single, simple story explaining slow-sliding faults. More and better offshore data will help scientists more accurately assess earthquake and tsunami hazards around the world and help communities well beyond Alaska prepare.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The milestone was driven by startup activity in CREATE-X and Quadrant-i, two cornerstone initiatives of the Office of Commercialization, and reflects the expanding reach of Tech's innovation ecosystem. The programs support students, faculty, researchers, and alumni in transforming ideas into companies within industries ranging from healthcare and robotics to legal technology and accessibility.

"Crossing the 200 startup teams milestone is more than a record. It's a reflection of a commercialization ecosystem that is helping translate ideas into products and companies that solve real problems," said Raghupathy "Siva" Sivakumar, chief commercialization officer. "Building a dense, connected community of founders is essential to our vision of becoming the nation's leading startup campus and maximizing the value of Georgia Tech innovation."

Diverse Paths to Entrepreneurship

The founders behind this year's milestone represent the many paths entrepreneurs can take at Georgia Tech. They come from different disciplines, pursue various industries, and arrive with a wide range of experiences, but all share a desire to solve meaningful problems.

For alumnus Alberto Flores Guerrero, who earned an M.S. in cybersecurity from the Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts in 2025, and his longtime friend and co-founder, Luis Estala, that journey to CREATE-X began nearly 2,000 miles from Atlanta.

The pair are building Separate, an AI-powered platform designed to help people navigate divorce by simplifying legal processes, organizing paperwork, and connecting users with resources. Drawing on Flores Guerrero's background as a lawyer, the company aims to make one of life's most stressful experiences more manageable.

When they learned about CREATE-X Startup Launch's kickoff just two weeks before it began, they didn't hesitate. Flying wasn't an option, so they packed the car and drove from Mexico to Atlanta.

Four days later, they arrived at Georgia Tech, convinced the opportunity was worth every mile. Inspired by the kickoff experience, Flores Guerrero soon returned to Mexico, packed his belongings, and moved to Atlanta for the summer.

For both of them, Startup Launch became more than a summer program. It gave them the confidence to build their company as part of a community of founders.

"This experience has completely changed the way we think about ourselves and what's possible for our company," Estala said. "This is the chance of our lives."

"I've learned so much just by being around these people," Flores Guerrero said. "Georgia Tech has some of the smartest students in the world, and then you put the most entrepreneurial of them together in one room. Nice things should happen."

Building a Deep-Tech Startup

For Georgia Tech master's student Rohit Gore in the College of Computing and co-founder Patrick Walsh, entrepreneurship began with one idea. But their startup took shape after they pivoted in a new direction.

As they developed a low-cost drone, they kept encountering the same challenge: Robots that performed well in simulations often struggled in real-world environments. After talking with robotics teams across the country, they launched Brio Robotics, a company developing a simulation and automated testing platform for autonomous systems.

CREATE-X Startup Launch helped the team refine its approach to customer discovery, sales, and commercialization.

"We're engineers by trade, and we don't know anything about B2B sales," Gore said, noting that Startup Launch Director Margaret Weniger “has been hugely helpful. It was so valuable to hear her perspective on what good sales metrics look like, what the goal of a customer call should be, and how to approach those conversations."

Today, Brio Robotics is finalizing its first design partnership with a drone company and has five additional robotics companies in its sales pipeline.

Turning Research Into a Startup

While many startups begin with student entrepreneurs, others emerge directly from Georgia Tech's research labs.

For Yue Chen, associate professor in the Wallace H. Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering, commercialization meant looking beyond the lab. Working with Ph.D. students Yixuan Xia, Yilin Cai, and Samuel Wilcox, Chen launched Fructus, a startup developing robotic harvesting technology to help growers address labor shortages and improve harvesting quality.

The technology began as a USDA-funded blackberry harvesting project. But through Quadrant-i Startup Launch, conversations with growers and industry stakeholders revealed a greater opportunity in Georgia's blueberry industry, prompting the team to pivot toward a larger market and a more pressing need.

"For faculty, we focus on research and developing fundamental science" Chen said. "But there's a gap between the work we do in the lab and the final product." Startup Launch helped bridge that gap through customer discovery. It “gave us the opportunity to get out of the lab, talk to stakeholders, and understand what they really need."  

For Cai, the experience changed the team's perspective. "As researchers, we usually focus on solving a research problem," he said. "Through Startup Launch, we learned to see the problem from the customer's perspective and think about what it really takes to build a product."

Looking Ahead

More than 150 startups will showcase their ventures at CREATE-X Demo Day on Thursday, Sept. 3, at LOOP, Georgia Tech's newest creative arts and performance venue. The event will bring together students, investors, mentors, industry leaders, and the broader community to meet the founders behind this record-breaking cohort and explore the next generation of Georgia Tech innovation.

"This experience has completely changed the way we think about ourselves and what's possible," Estala said. "If you have an idea, just do it. You never know where it might take you.” 

When Chevron reported its highest quarterly profit in six years on July 31, 2026, it was just one detail in a larger picture: Analyst firm Wood Mackenzie estimates the global oil and gas industry is on course for a cash windfall of US$495 billion in 2026. That’s profit above and beyond what the industry expected before the U.S.-Israel war with Iran began.

Three separate bills seeking to tax those profits are now in Congress, and President Donald Trump has even said the oil companies are “making too much money.”

As an applied microeconomist, I am often asked how taxes affect economic activity. Economists have long held a more nuanced view of windfall taxes than either side of the current debate suggests. Advocates often make overly optimistic revenue projections, and opponents often overstate how much such a tax might discourage investment. A 1980s U.S. windfall-tax experiment is instructive on both counts.

Other Nations Have This Type of Tax

In the U.K., a windfall tax on North Sea oil and gas – layered on top of existing levies to produce a combined rate of 78% on profits – is on course to generate an estimated 8 billion pounds in 2026 (about $10.8 billion), roughly double its 2024–25 revenue.

A similar European Union-wide tax imposed as a one-time measure after Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine raised 26.15 billion euros ($30 billion). Five EU countries are now calling for a second one in response to the Iran war.

How to Tax a Windfall

Many taxes are deliberately designed to change behavior. But a windfall tax is different: It goes after money that results from a company making the same production decision it was already planning to make before prices rose. The oil was going to be pumped regardless; the war just made each barrel worth more.

A textbook windfall tax would not fall on all profits, but only on the amount exceeding a baseline level. Australia’s Petroleum Resource Rent Tax and Norway’s special petroleum tax are the closest working examples. Under those, companies deduct all costs — including exploration and investment – plus a normal rate of return, before any windfall tax is owed.

In the U.S., the Crude Oil Windfall Profit Tax, enacted in 1980, was projected to raise $393 billion over its planned 10-year life. It raised about $80 billion before being repealed in 1988 – roughly a fifth of the projection. Prices collapsed after 1986, domestic production was increasingly exempted, and the tax was generating almost nothing by the time it was repealed.

What Congress is Considering

The bills currently in Congress are structured very differently from the textbook design – and from each other.

A proposal by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Rep. Ro Khanna of California, both Democrats would levy a 50% excise tax per barrel on the difference between the current average Brent crude price and the 2025 average of $69. With a July 2026 average of $84, a company would owe $7.50 per barrel – regardless of production costs or profitability.

A second bill, the Iran War Oil Crisis Windfall Profits Tax Act by Democratic Rep. Brad Sherman of California, is more aggressive: a 100% tax on the amount by which crude prices exceed $75 per barrel. At the July 2026 average of $84, companies would owe $9 per barrel. That tax would be in effect only until hostilities end and prices fall below that threshold.

Both are triggered by prices, not by any measure of underlying profit. A third proposal, the Taxing Buybacks from Big Oil Windfalls Act by Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden, Chuck Schumer, and Michael Bennet, takes a different approach: raising the excise tax on stock buybacks from 1% to 25% for large oil and gas companies, targeting not the windfall itself but what companies do with it.

Where the Money is Going

The American Petroleum Institute has argued that proposals like these “erode the certainty needed to make investment” decisions. The Tax Foundation has warned that “taxing producers is the opposite of a solution to a supply crisis.” Neither side, however, has put a specific dollar figure on how much investment would actually be deterred.

The data tells a different story. According to Wood Mackenzie, the 49 largest oil and gas companies will pocket about $272 billion of the sector’s windfall – roughly equal to 70% of their combined annual investment budgets. Yet investment spending has barely moved, stock buybacks are on course to fall, and dividends have stayed flat. The cash is simply accumulating on balance sheets.

This is exactly what economic research predicts: When a windfall doesn’t change a firm’s underlying investment opportunities, managers hold the cash and wait. In 2026, the industry is waiting for clarity on how long the war lasts, whether prices have peaked and whether Congress will pass a windfall tax. The argument that such a tax would prevent important economic activity weakens by the day.

What the Current Proposals Would Mean

For oil companies, the direct effect is straightforward: Every dollar paid in tax is a dollar less in earnings. The indirect effect – discouraging investment – is likely weaker than usual because the windfall isn’t being invested now anyway.

For government revenue, the 1980 experience is a cautionary tale: Projections built on current prices tend to overstate what a tax will collect.

For consumers, a tax only on domestic production is largely borne by producers, while a tax that touches imports can raise pump prices.

But the use of the revenue matters too. Both the Whitehouse-Khanna and Sherman bills rebate proceeds directly to households. The Whitehouse-Khanna proposal could give an estimated $216 a year to a single taxpayer at $100-per-barrel oil – helping offset pump prices particularly for lower-income families, who spend a larger share of their budgets on fuel.

Whether the trade-off between taxing companies’ war-driven windfall profits and the risks of market intervention is worth making depends on human values as much as on financial estimates. People differ on how fair it is to let companies keep profits that result from a war, and on the reliability of projections about revenue raised and investment lost. Those are not questions economists alone can settle.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The semester may have only just started, but it’s time for a day off. Georgia Tech’s campus will be closed on Monday, Sept. 7, in observance of Labor Day.   

Angus Wilkinson, associate chair and professor in the School of Chemistry and Biochemistry and the School of Materials Science and Engineering, has been elected chair of Georgia Tech's Faculty Executive Board. 

In time for the fall semester, the ribbon has been cut, and students will soon move into Georgia Tech’s newest traditional residence hall — the Bud and Val Peterson Residence Hall.  

On Monday, Aug. 31, the Georgia Tech Police Department (GTPD) began increased enforcement of micromobility violations across campus, reinforcing existing state laws and City of Atlanta ordinances that apply to all micromobility devices. 

The effort builds on GTPD's ongoing micromobility education and safety initiatives and is intended to promote safer riding behaviors and reduce conflicts among riders, motorists, and pedestrians. 

Know the Rules of the Road 

Under Georgia law, micromobility devices are considered vehicles, and riders are expected to follow applicable traffic laws while operating them. This includes obeying traffic signals and posted signs, yielding to pedestrians, and following other rules that apply to vehicles operating on public roadways. More information regarding applicable laws can be found here.  

Riders should also remember that the walkways surrounding Tech Green are designated for pedestrians and ADA mobility devices during peak pedestrian traffic, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Cyclists, scooter riders, and other micromobility users should dismount and walk their devices through the area during those times. 

Education Remains Essential 

Along with enforcement, GTPD will offer a Micromobility Diversion Class designed to reinforce safe riding behaviors and educate eligible riders about applicable traffic laws and expectations. 

The rider improvement course focuses on safe driving attitudes and behaviors, rules of the road, and responsible micromobility operation. 

The diversion program will be available to eligible Georgia Tech-affiliated micromobility riders who receive a citation from GTPD. To be eligible, you must have a referral from a GTPD officer. Micromobility users determined to be at fault in a collision are not eligible. Additional circumstances may also affect eligibility, and receiving a micromobility citation does not guarantee admission into the diversion program.  

Safety Is a Shared Responsibility 

GTPD has continued to expand micromobility education as bicycles, scooters, and other devices become increasingly common modes of transportation across campus. Riders are encouraged to wear a helmet; remain alert; avoid distractions; use appropriate lighting at night; and be mindful of pedestrians, vehicles, buses, and other micromobility users. 

Whether traveling across campus for class, work, or another activity, the expectation is simple: Know the rules of the road, ride responsibly, and help keep Georgia Tech safe for everyone. 

For additional information about micromobility rules, safety practices, violations, and educational resources, visit the Georgia Tech Police Department's Micromobility webpage. 

The Georgia Institute of Technology has established the Michael E. Tennenbaum Family Institute for Technology and Civic Leadership, a new interdisciplinary institute designed to prepare students to navigate the intersection of technology, civic life, and leadership. The naming was recently approved by the University System of Georgia Board of Regents in recognition of a transformative philanthropic commitment from Georgia Tech industrial engineering alumnus Michael E. Tennenbaum and his family. 

Building on initial seed funding from the State of Georgia and shaped by substantial engagement with Georgia Tech stakeholders, and in alignment with the vision of the Board of Regents, the Governor’s office, and the Georgia General Assembly, the institute will serve as a convening hub for students, faculty, and external partners. Tennenbaum's investment will create a permanent endowment to support the institute's long-term operations and strategic initiatives. It will also expand programming, strengthen faculty and student engagement, and help position Georgia Tech as a national leader in addressing societal challenges through innovation. 

“At Georgia Tech, we believe that technological innovation and civic leadership must go hand in hand,” said Ángel Cabrera, president of Georgia Tech. “The Tennenbaum Family Institute will help to ensure that our students grow as productive, open-minded, engaged leaders, ready to work across ideological lines to get the job done. We are grateful to Michael Tennenbaum and his family for making this vision possible.” 

Rooted in Georgia Tech's motto of Progress and Service, the institute will foster open inquiry, civil discourse, and responsible problem-solving through teaching, research, and public engagement. Georgia Tech's strengths in engineering, computing, the liberal arts, entrepreneurship, and interdisciplinary collaboration position it to address important questions arising from rapid technological change. “Given the complexity of modern social life, the Tennenbaum Family Institute will be essential in building the well-rounded, technical leaders we’ll need in the future,” said Amanda Murdie, dean of the Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts at Georgia Tech and Ivan Allen Jr. Chair.

“The institute will support new courses and programming that encourage students to grapple with a wide range of perspectives and prepare them to lead in a world shaped by rapidly advancing technology,” said Aaron Levine, interim executive director of the Michael E. Tennenbaum Family Institute for Technology and Civic Leadership and interim chair of the Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter School of Public Policy. “We hope this new institute will engage our students and faculty with external partners as they work together to address pressing real-world questions at the intersection of technology and the human condition.” 

Tennenbaum is a distinguished alumnus and business leader whose philanthropy has supported entrepreneurship initiatives, interdisciplinary research, student scholarships, faculty positions, and programs across Georgia Tech. He also played an instrumental role in the growth of CREATE-X, the Institute’s student startup program. In recognition of his achievements, leadership, and service, Georgia Tech awarded an honorary doctorate to Tennenbaum in 2016. 

“The challenges facing society today do not fit neatly within any one discipline,” said Tennenbaum. “Addressing them requires leaders who understand technology, appreciate civic responsibility, and can work across differences to find solutions. My family and I are proud to support Georgia Tech in creating an institute that will encourage the exchange of ideas and will prepare the next generation of thoughtful leaders.”  

Tennenbaum’s commitment is part of Transforming Tomorrow: The Campaign for Georgia Tech, helping advance priorities to expand opportunity, accelerate innovation, and strengthen Georgia Tech's impact in Georgia and beyond. 

Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, will pay $17.1 billion and implement new protections to reduce the harmful effects of social media on young people, settling a lawsuit alleging that the social media giant violated consumer protection laws and targeted teenagers through its addictive features.  

On Sept. 3, CREATE-X Demo Day will take place for the first time at LOOP, Georgia Tech’s new creative and cultural hub, where more than 100 startups will give a firsthand look at what Tech founders have spent the summer building and launching. 

Previously known as Velocity Startups, The Venture Arcade serves as a bridge between early-stage startup founders who have participated in Georgia Tech initiatives like CREATE-X, Quadrant-i, and Biolocity and are focused on scaling their businesses and preparing themselves for late-stage accelerators such as the Advanced Technology Development Center, Engage, Fusen, and Atlanta Tech Village. 

Hodgson brings more than two decades of entrepreneurial leadership, capital markets expertise, and global operating experience to the role. As CEO of RoxWrite, she led the development of an industry-leading, AI-powered underwriting, onboarding, and risk-monitoring platform. Hodgson co-founded and led Now Corp from 2010 to 2024, serving as president and CEO of the innovative business-to-business payments company that created NowAccount. Earlier in her career, she co-founded Nourish Inc., served as executive VP of Dunk.net and chief marketing officer and chief operating officer of Dewberry Capital Corporation, and was senior vice president and general manager at iXL, where she built and led the Retail and Consumer Products Practice across 26 global offices serving clients such as The Home Depot, Coca-Cola, and Nike. 

"As a Georgia Tech graduate, serial entrepreneur, and longtime mentor to founders at CREATE-X and Harvard Business School, I've seen what it takes to start and scale a business, and I've seen how much faster and more successful that journey can be with the right resources,” she said. “The Venture Arcade is built to deliver exactly that, with access to Georgia Tech’s unparalleled resources. Bringing capital, capacity, and customers, The Venture Arcade’s flywheel of growth will give Georgia Tech founders and local technology companies, including hard tech and deep tech, an unfair advantage. I'm proud to work with Georgia Tech to bring this program to Atlanta, a city ready to take its place as a top five technology and startup hub in the U.S."

Hodgson is also a nationally recognized thought leader on entrepreneurship and access to capital. She co-authored the award-winning book Level Up: Rise Above the Hidden Forces Holding Your Business Back (2022), published by Portfolio Penguin and now widely used in university entrepreneurship courses. She previously served as an entrepreneur-in-residence at Harvard Business School, where she continues to mentor founders and judge venture competitions. She has also served as a mentor in Georgia Tech’s CREATE-X 10x program, coaching high-potential founders as they scale and pursue significant market opportunities.

“Lara possesses the capital formation expertise and business acumen to put The Venture Arcade on the map,” said Raghupathy “Siva” Sivakumar, chief commercialization officer at Georgia Tech and president of Georgia Advanced Technology Ventures. “Her experience building, scaling, and financing companies makes her uniquely suited to shape The Venture Arcade into a meaningful pathway for high-potential startups. Lara truly embodies the entrepreneurial spirit of Georgia Tech, and we are thrilled to have her on the leadership team.” 

A proud Georgia Tech alumna, Hodgson earned her bachelor’s degree in aerospace engineering with highest honors and an MBA from Harvard Business School. She is a trustee of the Georgia Tech Foundation and serves on multiple corporate and nonprofit boards. Her honors include recognition as a 2019 EY Entrepreneurial Winning Woman, a Worthy 100 honoree by Worth magazine, and inclusion in Pathway of Progress, the campus installation celebrating women at Georgia Tech.

About The Venture Arcade

The Venture Arcade is a startup accelerator that propels deep-tech innovation, providing the resources and infrastructure for founders to take their innovations to market. Located in the heart of Tech Square in the historic Biltmore Innovation Center, The Venture Arcade offers mentorship, infrastructure, strategic programming, and funding opportunities. The accelerator is made possible through a partnership with Georgia Advanced Technology Ventures Inc. and the Georgia Tech Foundation. 

Georgia Tech is introducing a new Academic AI Strategy and launching a new Academic AI Playbook. This marks the next step in the Institute's efforts to prepare students for an AI-enabled future while supporting innovation across teaching and learning.

Georgia Tech is excited to host the University of Colorado for the Yellow Jackets’ football season opener at 8 p.m. on Thursday, Sept. 3, at Bobby Dodd Stadium at Hyundai Field. 

Since becoming the first woman to serve as dean of the College in 2019, Lozier's strategic approach has led to historic growth in enrollment, research activity, philanthropy, and reputational excellence. During her tenure, the College has launched dozens of innovative programs and expanded support and mentoring for more than 3,300 students and 550 faculty across six internationally ranked Schools. 

In fiscal year 2026, the College reached a record $70 million in research expenditures. Undergraduate enrollment is up by more than 60%, with nearly 180,000 undergraduate credit hours taught each year. More than three-quarters of the College's undergraduate students are from Georgia.

“It has been nothing short of an honor and pleasure to serve as dean,” said Lozier. “If my tenure will be remembered as one that fostered an environment where amazingly talented students, faculty, and staff felt supported and encouraged in their work, then I will have accomplished what I set out to do. From year one to year seven, the people in the College of Sciences community have been my top priority.” 

The College has added new minors ranging from astrophysics and quantum science to the science of mental health and well-being. New offerings include bachelor’s degrees in math and computing and environmental science, as well as the interdisciplinary doctoral program in Neuroscience and Neurotechnology. 

Under Lozier’s leadership, the College also achieved reputational highs, with all graduate degrees ranked in the top 10% of their respective U.S. News & World Report program rankings. 

In 2025, Sciences was the first college to surpass its Transforming Tomorrow campaign goal, raising more than $90 million and counting. Philanthropic contributions to the College have created new undergraduate scholarships and set record fellowship and endowment support for graduate students, faculty, and postdoctoral scholars. The College also advanced new initiatives for student support and career education, faculty mentoring and teaching, and alumni engagement, and expanded programming to convene experts in space exploration, health and ecology, and artificial intelligence and brain science. 

Lozier established four new strategic research centers to extend work on critical minerals, artificial intelligence, and spatial processing and navigation. She also led the creation of Georgia Tech for Georgia’s Tomorrow, a wide-ranging effort to address pressing health and climate challenges across the state, from farms and forests to Georgia’s coastal communities and growing cities. 

“Dean Lozier has set a remarkable example of what it means to lead with purpose, generosity, and deep commitment,” said Raheem Beyah, provost and executive vice president for Academic Affairs. “She has left an enduring mark on the College of Sciences and on the many people who have benefited from her guidance, advocacy, and mentorship. She has helped position the College for an exciting future while bringing distinction to Georgia Tech through her leadership and scholarship. We are grateful for all she has given to the Institute, and I look forward to seeing the continued impact of her tenure in the years ahead.” 

Beyond Georgia Tech, Lozier has served in leadership roles in several international scientific organizations, including a recent term as president of the American Geophysical Union, representing more than 62,000 members across 144 countries, and as president of The Oceanography Society. She currently serves on the Board of Trustees for the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and is a member of the Board of Directors for the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute. 

Recent honors include election as a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2020 and receipt of the Henry Stommel Research Medal in 2022, the highest honor given to an oceanographer by the American Meteorological Society. In 2025, Lozier was named Faculty of the Year by the Georgia Tech Graduate Student Government Association and, earlier this year, received the Lettie Pate Whitehead Evans Award. 

An active researcher and one of the world’s foremost physical oceanographers, Lozier remains the international project lead for the $32 million National Science Foundation-funded Overturning in the Subpolar North Atlantic Program observing system, known as OSNAP. 

In planning for new leadership, Beyah has named Mitchell Walker, dean of the College of Engineering, to serve as chair of the search committee. Details about interim leadership and the timing of the search process will be announced soon.

What's Changing

All first-year, transfer, and new graduate students on the Atlanta campus are receiving a digital BuzzCard as their primary credential this year. For most of these students, the digital version is their only BuzzCard. A physical card is issued only in specific circumstances, such as a documented device-compatibility limitation or a religious consideration.

Why You May See Both This Year

Current and returning students will continue using their existing physical BuzzCards until additional campus systems and integrations are ready to support digital credentials more broadly later this semester. More information about system availability can be found on the BuzzCard website.

That means physical and digital BuzzCards will both be in use this year. If a student can't present a physical card, that isn't necessarily a problem — it may simply mean they're an incoming student using their digital credential as intended.

How This Differs From Faculty and Staff Cards

Faculty and staff who activate a digital BuzzCard can continue using both the physical and digital versions; activating one does not deactivate the other. New students do not have that option. Their digital credential replaces the physical card entirely, with exceptions given to those with religious considerations or device compatibility issues.

Questions?

Faculty, staff, or students with questions can contact Swarm Support in person at the Pavilion, by phone at 404.894.2470, or by submitting a support ticket.

Georgia Tech’s secure research enclave, Shield, has achieved Level 2 Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) following a Certified Third-Party Assessor Organization (C3PAO) assessment. This positions the Institute among a select group of organizations with independently validated cybersecurity controls designed to safeguard Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and support defense-related research. Shield received the Supplier Performance Risk System’s highest rating of 110, meeting all 110 CMMC-required security practices.  

The 2026 FIFA World Cup may have ended, but for three Georgia Tech students, the tournament gave them work experience that will last a lifetime.  

Shreyes N. Melkote, Morris M. Bryan Jr. Professor in the George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering and executive director of the Novelis Innovation Hub at Georgia Tech, has been named interim associate vice president of Corporate Engagement, effective Sept. 1. He will report to Executive Vice President for Research Tim Lieuwen and will lead the Office of Corporate Engagement (OCE) during a national search for the position’s permanent successor. 

As a new semester dawns and thousands of new Yellow Jackets arrive, Week of Welcome is a chance for students new to campus to learn their surroundings, meet new people, and have fun before classes begin.  

Generating $6.3 billion in economic impact for Georgia’s economy in fiscal year 2025, Georgia Tech surpassed its own record and continues to lead all state public universities, according to a University System of Georgia (USG) study.  

The high cost of renting and buying homes in U.S. cities is no secret. But this affordability problem isn’t limited to urban regions – it affects rural areas as well.

Rural areas, home to about 25% of Americans, benefit from federally supported rental housing programs – particularly a U.S. Department of Agriculture program to provide affordable homes for low-income residents.

The USDA’s Section 515 program is the primary way that the U.S. government finances affordable rental homes in rural communities. Since its inception in 1963, the program has supported the construction of over 533,000 apartments, townhouses and other small, multifamily rental homes.

The program offers below-market-rate loans to private and nonprofit developers who build and manage residential housing for low-income residents in small towns and rural counties. The terms of the deal between property owners and the government obliges these landlords to keep rents affordable for their occupants for decades, generally restricting rent to about 30% of tenants’ income.

Last New Loans Were in 2011

People who live in Section 515 housing typically pay around US$325 per month. That’s much less than rural market-rate rents, which typically run $800-$1,100 per month for modest homes.

Because the USDA stopped issuing new Section 515 loans in 2011, this arrangement is phasing out now as existing loans mature.

Loans for about 90% of all remaining Section 515 homes will mature by 2045, according to the Housing Assistance Council, a national nonprofit that supports affordable housing efforts throughout rural America. By 2050, the owners of nearly all properties currently in the program’s portfolio are projected to have paid off their mortgages.

And once most of the owners of these homes exit the Section 515 program, it will have been fully phased out.

An Often-Overlooked Housing Program

As a public policy professor who studies housing, I wanted to understand what happens when Section 515 loans mature. I also was interested in what determines whether properties remain affordable or leave the program after the loans are paid off.

To find out, I worked with three other housing policy researchers on a national study that was peer-reviewed and published in Housing Policy Debate in September 2025.

As of 2024, these loans were still supporting some 400,000 homes on almost 13,000 properties across 87% of all U.S. counties.

The roughly 750,000 Americans in those homes are among the nation’s poorest. The average household income of someone living in Section 515 housing in 2023 was just about $16,000 per year, which was only about one-fifth of the national median household income, which hovered around $76,600 during the same period in inflation-adjusted 2023 dollars.

In addition to having a very low income, more than 60% of the people enrolled in the program are over 62, have disabilities, or fall into both of those categories.

Market-Rate Options After Maturity

The vast majority of these affordable rental homes were built in the 1970s through the 1990s and financed with USDA loans that last between 30 and 50 years.

By 2050, there will be no Section 515 housing left.

The owners of these rental properties no longer have to keep rents affordable once they have paid off their loans. And their owners and tenants may also lose access to a USDA rental assistance program, which helps keep tenants’ housing costs low.

They can refinance the homes or sell the properties. They also can continue to charge affordable rents to occupants or convert those units to market rate. Because of this flexibility, a large share of rural affordable housing units could soon be converted to properties rented at market rates.

What the Data Shows So Far

For this study, our research team analyzed data from nearly 15,000 of the Section 515 properties throughout the country, which have been placed in service since 1963 – including many that are no longer providing rural affordable housing.

We found that the largest factors determining whether a building remains affordable after a Section 515 loan matures are who owns and manages that property. Buildings owned by for-profit companies are far more likely to leave the program than those that belong to nonprofit housing organizations.

Nonprofit-owned buildings, after accounting for building age and local market conditions, are 30% to 40% less likely to convert formerly Section 515 affordable housing into market-rate properties after the owners pay off their loans.

After analyzing this data, we also concluded that buildings run by small property management companies are more likely to leave the program than those managed by larger ones. Properties where the owner manages the homes are also more likely to exit.

Landlords owning more residential properties were also more likely to exit the program. This indicates that larger landlords may be able to afford the renovations and upgrades required to turn their buildings into market-rate housing once restrictions end.

Why Subsidies and Local Markets Matter

Having subsidies through other government programs can help keep affordable housing units from being converted to market-rate housing.

One-third of Section 515 properties also get support from other programs, including Section 8 vouchers and low-income housing tax credits. Those tax credits are another federal incentive that’s provided to developers who build and rehabilitate affordable rental housing while allowing lower rents for low-income tenants.

Those properties are more likely to remain affordable, even years after some of these tax incentives expire.

Local economic conditions can play a role too. In areas with high unemployment rates, large military populations and low housing inventory, properties are also more likely to exit the program.

That means the same rural counties experiencing economic or demographic pressures are often the most likely to have a decline in affordable housing units when owners pay off their Section 515 loans.

Steps That Can Be Taken

Congress and the USDA have taken some steps to slow the loss of affordable housing in rural areas.

For example, the USDA has funded preservation efforts such as the Multifamily Housing Preservation and Revitalization pilot program, which provides grants, loan restructuring and other financing tools to help repair aging Section 515 properties and extend their affordability.

These efforts have helped preserve some buildings and support ownership transfers from private sector landlords to nonprofit housing groups. But they spend only tens of millions of dollars per year and focus mainly on maintaining existing properties rather than building new housing.

Researchers estimate that about $5.6 billion in repairs would be needed to preserve the affordable housing currently tied to the Section 515 program.

Some lawmakers have proposed reforms aimed at doing more than chipping away at the loss of this kind of affordable housing. The bipartisan Rural Housing Service Reform Act, first introduced in 2023 and reintroduced in 2025, would modernize USDA rural housing programs and allow certain rental assistance contracts to continue after mortgages mature. As of early 2026, the bill remains under consideration.

Over the next two decades, most of these landlords will pay off their Section 515 loans. Unless the government reinvigorates the program or replaces it with something else, much of rural America’s affordable rental housing could gradually disappear as owners convert all Section 515 properties to market-rate housing.

Whether rural communities retain affordable housing will depend not only on what the federal government does, but also on the properties’ owners.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Emerging Leaders Program has cultivated leadership potential at Georgia Tech since 2016 and is open to senior and principal academic and research faculty from all academic units.

"Our faculty and researchers are at the heart of Georgia Tech's success," said Raheem Beyah, provost and executive vice president for Academic Affairs. "The Emerging Leaders Program invests in future leaders by creating opportunities for collaboration, growth, and learning. I congratulate this year's cohort and look forward to seeing how they help shape the future of our Institute."

The 2026-27 cohort includes the following members:

College of Business

• Alex Hsu, Associate Professor of Finance
• Mingfeng Lin, Dean's Distinguished Term Professor, Professor of IT Management, and ITM Ph.D. Program Coordinator
• Karthik Ramachandran, Professor, Operations Management Area

College of Computing

• Alex Endert, Professor, School of Interactive Computing

College of Design

• Leandro Miletto Tonetto, Interim Chair and Associate Professor, School of Industrial Design

College of Engineering

• Blair Brettmann, Associate Professor, School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering; School of Materials Science and Engineering
• Santanu S. Dey, Anderson-Interface Chair and Professor; Director of Doctoral Recruiting and Admissions, School of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• Erin Ratcliff, Professor, School of Materials Science and Engineering
• Levi Wood, Associate Professor and Deputy Director of the Bioengineering Graduate Program, School of Mechanical Engineering

College of Lifetime Learning

• Lacy Hodges, Director of Learning Analytics & Assessment, Professional Education

College of Sciences

• Neha Garg, Associate Professor and Blanchard Early Career Professor, School of Chemistry and Biochemistry 
• Alexander Robel, Jean “Chris” Purvis Associate Professor, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
• Emily Weigel, Senior Academic Professional, School of Biological Sciences

Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts

• Chris Hayter, Associate Professor, School of Public Policy

Georgia Tech Research Institute

• Adam Meier, Principal Research Scientist, CIPHER LAB

Partnership for an Advanced Computing Environment (PACE)

• Jeffery Young, Principal Research Scientist

The Emerging Leaders Program is a collaborative initiative of the Office of the Provost, the Office of the Executive Vice President for Research, the Institute for Leadership and Social Impact, and the Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty. 
 

Monitoring these tiny changes results in a wide range of applications — from improving navigation and natural disaster forecasting, to smarter medical imaging and detection of biomarkers of disease, gravitational wave detection, and even better quantum communication for secure data sharing.

Georgia Tech physicists are pioneering new quantum sensing platforms to aid in these efforts. The research team’s latest study, “Sensing Spin Wave Excitations by Spin Defects in Few-Layer Thick Hexagonal Boron Nitride” was published in Science Advances this week. 

The research team includes School of Physics Assistant Professors Chunhui (Rita) Du and Hailong Wang (corresponding authors) alongside fellow Georgia Tech researchers Jingcheng Zhou, Mengqi Huang, Faris Al-matouq, Jiu Chang, Dziga Djugba, and Professor Zhigang Jiang and their collaborators. 

An ultra-sensitive platform

The new research investigates quantum sensing by leveraging color centers — small defects within crystals (Du’s team uses diamonds and other 2D layered materials) that allow light to be absorbed and emitted, which also give the crystal unique electronic properties. 

By embedding these color centers into a material called hexagonal boron nitride (hBN), the team hoped to create an extremely sensitive quantum sensor — a new resource for developing next-generation, transformative sensing devices. 

For its part, hBN is particularly attractive for quantum sensing and computing because it could contain defects that can be manipulated with light — also known as "optically active spin qubits."

The quantum spin defects in hBN are also very magnetically sensitive, and allow scientists to “see” or “sense” in more detail than other conventional techniques. In addition, the sheet-like structure of hBN is compatible with ultra-sensitive tools like nanodevices, making it a particularly intriguing resource for investigation.

The team’s research has resulted in a critical breakthrough in sensing spin waves, Du says, explaining that “in this study, we were able to detect spin excitations that were simply unattainable in previous studies.” 

Detecting spin waves is a fundamental component of quantum sensing, because these phenomena can travel for long distances, making them an ideal candidate for energy-efficient information control, communication, and processing.

The future of quantum

“For the first time, we experimentally demonstrated two-dimensional van der Waals quantum sensing — using few-layer thick hBN in a real-world environment,” Du explains, underscoring the potential the material holds for precise quantum sensing. “Further research could make it possible to sense electromagnetic features at the atomic scale using color centers in thin layers of hBN.”

Du also emphasizes the collaborative nature of the research, highlighting the diverse skill sets and resources of researchers within Georgia Tech. 

“Within the School of Physics, Professor Zhigang Jiang's research group provided the team with high-quality hBN crystals. Jingcheng Zhou, who is a member of both Professor Hailong Wang’s and my research teams, performed the cutting-edge quantum sensing measurements,” she says. “Many incredible students also helped with this project.”

Du is a leading scientist in the field of quantum sensing — this year, she received a new grant from the U.S. Department of Energy, along with a Sloan Research Fellowship for her pioneering work on developing state-of-the-art quantum sensing techniques for quantum information technology applications. The prestigious Sloan award recognizes researchers whose “creativity, innovation, and research accomplishments make them stand out as the next-generation of leaders in the fields.” 

DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adk8495

This work is supported by the U. S. National Science Foundation (NSF) under award No. DMR-2342569, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research under award No. FA9550-20-1-0319 and its Young Investigator Program under award No. FA9550-21-1-0125, the Office of Naval Research (ONR) under grant No. N00014-23-1-2146, NASA-REVEALS SSERVI (CAN No. NNA17BF68A), and NASA-CLEVER SSERVI (CAN No. 80NSSC23M0229).

With a record-setting $5.8 billion economic impact, Georgia Tech led all Georgia public institutions in fiscal year 2024, according to the latest data released by the University System of Georgia (USG).  

The first week of June marks National CPR and AED Awareness Week, but year-round, Georgia Tech students are helping equip the campus community with lifesaving skills. 

Sherman Lofton Jr. has been a Yellow Jacket for more than 40 years, as a student, alumnus, and employee, currently serving as the senior director of cybersecurity operations. He arrived on campus in 1984 and earned a bachelor’s degree in management in 1990, and he never imagined that decades later he’d be graduating with a master’s degree from Tech on the same day as his daughter.  

What started as concern about food waste has grown into a campuswide effort to help food-insecure Georgia Tech students while keeping thousands of meals out of the waste stream. Since launching in 2024, Green Forks has transformed surplus food from catered events into a valuable resource for students in need. 

--Written by Anne Wainscott-Sargent

From a single Atlanta church to a growing network across the Southeast, Georgia Tech engineer Sofía Pérez-Guzmán is connecting communities and researchers to support resilience in extreme weather events. 

The Georgia Tech Solar Racing team returned from this year’s Formula Sun Grand Prix (FSGP) and Electrek American Solar Challenge (ASC) with hardware in hand, setting team and competition records in the process.  

Most members of the Georgia Tech community rarely think about campus utilities, and that's exactly how Jermaine Clonts likes it. 

As during previous editions, this year’s conference featured more than two dozen scientists, engineers, policy experts, and thought leaders from Georgia Tech and beyond, illustrating how collaboration across fields – from science and engineering to public policy and international affairs – helps to advance strategic research priorities. 

“Frontiers is about discovery and connections across disciplines and generations,” says Susan Lozier, dean of the College of Sciences and Betsy Middleton and John Clark Sutherland Chair. “This edition provided an inspiring glimpse into the future of space exploration and the many ways Georgia Tech is contributing to research and missions seeking answers to what lies beyond our planet.” 

Commitment to Space

Space research is a key institutional priority at Georgia Tech, which is home to numerous academic and research programs in planetary sciences, robotics, mission design, space policy, and other areas. 

The recently established Space Research Institute (SRI) serves as the central hub connecting the broad range of space-related research across campus. Led by Jud Ready, who also serves as principal research engineer at the Georgia Tech Research Institute, SRI has expanded support for space research and commercialization through initiatives such as the CreationsVC Space Fellows Program and Centers, Programs, and Initiatives seed grant program.

SRI’s efforts are in line with Georgia Tech’s long-standing contribution to space exploration. Hundreds of Yellow Jacket alumni work in the space sector, including several graduates who are playing key roles in the Artemis program. To date, more than a dozen Georgia Tech alumni have traveled to space.

Exploring the Final Frontier

The conference featured a series of panels and discussions led by faculty and researchers from the Colleges of Sciences and Engineering as well as the Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts. 

Sessions explored how researchers are studying the processes and conditions that support planetary habitability, seeking to answer one of humanity’s greatest questions: Does life exist beyond Earth? Speakers also examined how analog fieldwork in Earth’s extreme environments can inform space exploration, and how space research, in turn, can deepen our understanding of our own world.

Additional conversations centered on building better space missions through improved understanding of team and individual resilience, data collection, navigation, and the development of advanced technologies like the robots developed through the NASA LASSIE Project. 

Frontiers also highlighted Georgia Tech’s commitment to preparing the next generation of space scientists, engineers, and leaders. Student training and engagement were recurring themes throughout the day, with speakers emphasizing opportunities for student-led and student-run missions and research. A panel of Georgia Tech alumni shared their own STEM career journeys, challenging the idea of “one right path” to success — and acknowledging the resources and opportunities available at the Institute. 

A highlight of the conference was a fireside chat with Atlanta-native, retired U.S. Army Colonel and NASA Astronaut R. Shane Kimbrough (M.S. Operations Research 1998). Kimbrough, who spent a total of 388 days in space and performed nine spacewalks across three missions, reflected on his career and the evolution of spaceflight. He emphasized the expanding role of public-private and international partnerships in advancing ambitious goals, such as creating a permanent human outpost on the Moon. 

Policy and Public

The conference also explored how policy influences space discovery and innovation, with discussions touching on such issues as space security, access, governance, sustainability — and the influence of technology and science fiction on public perception and policy. 

Panelists described current policy frameworks governing outer space as struggling to keep pace with rapidly advancing technologies and expanding activities. According to these experts, increasing tensions among commercial, research, and recreational uses of space call for greater coordination among private and government entities to balance competing priorities while maximizing opportunities for innovation and exploration. 

The conference was punctuated by a networking lunch connecting attendees with Atlanta’s public astronomy community – including partners at several universities and the Georgia Tech Astronomy Club, which set up telescopes for attendees to safely observe the sun. Later that evening, the Georgia Tech Observatory hosted its Public Night, welcoming the broader Atlanta community to campus for telescope views of Jupiter, the Orion Nebula, and other celestial bodies. 

The Observatory Night was a fitting conclusion to a full day focused on Georgia Tech’s commitment and contributions to inspiring future generations of space explorers through research, education, and outreach. 

Experience the Frontiers conference in pictures on the College of Sciences’ Flickr account.

Georgia Tech is one of America’s best colleges, according to Money magazine.  

As Atlanta continues to grow as one of the nation's leading technology and innovation hubs, Georgia Tech is helping to shape that growth through strategic partnerships, entrepreneurial programs, and community-driven experiences that connect innovators across the region. 

Read more »

Plan accordingly for delays in the following areas: 

• West Campus.
• Techwood Drive.
• Centennial Olympic Park Drive (East Campus and North Avenue move-in).
• Tenth Street (graduate housing).

Additionally, drivers should abide by all posted signage, including parking notices and “No Parking” signs, as these areas are necessary for resident check-in, unloading, and short-term parking. 

Some parking areas will be reserved for move-in use only. If you park in the following areas, see alternate parking locations for move-in days:

• W10 – Campus Recreation Deck 
  • Alternate parking location: W02 – Student Center Deck
• ER54 – North Avenue Apartments South Deck 
  • Alternate parking location: Park on levels 2 and 3 only
• WR29 – On-street parking near Armstrong/Hefner Residence Halls (West Campus Residential)
  • Alternate parking location: W31 – Institute of Paper Science and Technology (IPST) Lot 
• ER51 – On-street parking near Gray/Hayes Residence Halls (Southeast Housing)
  • Alternate parking location: E52 – Peters Deck 

But discovering and vetting those materials can be slow, expensive, and hands-on, requiring researchers to prepare samples, run experiments on specialized equipment, and repeat the cycle through trial and error.

Now, Georgia Tech aims to deliver a paradigm shift in materials and manufacturing research with a new Programmable Cloud Laboratory that will leverage artificial intelligence (AI), simulation, and autonomous experimentation to accelerate that process dramatically.

Built upon Georgia Tech’s Advanced Manufacturing Pilot Facility (AMPF), a core facility of the Georgia Tech Manufacturing Institute (GTMI), the cloud lab will allow researchers across the country to direct work remotely, refine experiments based on results and AI recommendations, and tap into advanced manufacturing capabilities without spending weeks on-site. In effect, the cloud lab will bring the facility to the researcher.

“By making advanced manufacturing and AI-driven experimentation accessible from anywhere, we are accelerating the discovery of critical new materials and shaping the future of U.S. innovation,” said Tim Lieuwen, executive vice president for Research. “Georgia Tech is proud to provide the world-class infrastructure to help meet this national need and strengthen our research partnerships.”

The cloud lab is supported by $18.1 million from the National Science Foundation (NSF) and is part of a broader effort to build a national network of 20 AI-enabled cloud laboratories. The labs are designed to work together, eventually allowing researchers to combine capabilities and workflows across the network. The new research ecosystem will connect advanced scientific infrastructure with expertise across the country.

“Researchers can ask a question, have work recommended by AI agents, have experiments carried out at the facility using robotics, and get the results back,” said Aaron Stebner, GTMI associate director, Eugene C. Gwaltney Jr. Chair, James R. and Sarah R. Borders Faculty Fellow, and professor in the School of Materials Science and Engineering and the George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering (ME). “They can use AMPF resources to advance their own research without having to be experts in each piece of equipment or send students to AMPF for weeks at a time.”

By lowering costs and barriers to conducting that research, Stebner said, the cloud lab will dramatically expand who can take advantage of AMPF’s capabilities.

A Self-Driving Research Lab

AMPF is a mixed-use facility where both industry and academic partners can discover new materials and do manufacturing research. Today, the facility is approaching autonomous workflow capabilities across about 38 pieces of equipment. Through the cloud lab, the team aims to expand automated and autonomous workflows to more than 100 of AMPF’s 160 pieces of equipment.

The cloud lab will also bring together stages of materials development that have traditionally happened separately, allowing researchers to explore materials discovery, manufacturing, testing, and scale-up within the same research environment.

Pascal Van Hentenryck, director of the NSF AI Institute for Advances in Optimization and A. Russell Chandler III Chair in the H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, said the automation extends beyond individual pieces of equipment. Robots can operate machines and move materials from one station to another, physically carrying out workflows requested by researchers from afar. AI will help determine which machines and robots are needed for each task and manage their movements across the facility.

Van Hentenryck compared the process to following a recipe.

“When you cook, you have a recipe, and the recipe tells you what you have to do,” Van Hentenryck said. “You don’t need to understand exactly how the stove is working. You just need to know what you need to accomplish with it.”

AI agents will take those high-level “recipes” from researchers, translate them into detailed workflows, and coordinate experiments, simulations, and data flows across the facility.

The system will rely in part on digital twins — virtual models of the facility that can help plan, monitor, and improve experiments before and during execution. Van Hentenryck said the system is also designed to learn from each run, improving how machines are tuned and how future workflows are scheduled.

The project will integrate Duke University’s Automatic FLOW for Materials Discovery software platform, led by professor Stefano Curtarolo, to connect computational discovery with physical experimentation and help researchers more rapidly identify and evaluate promising new materials. Contextualize, led by founder and CEO Branden Kappes, will provide the data platform that seamlessly connects researchers, instruments, data, and IT systems across the distributed network. Tech AI will also contribute to the project as part of the broader research team.

The cloud lab will help bridge a longstanding gap between research and industrial adoption. Companies can be reluctant to interrupt working production lines to test unproven technologies, while startups and academic researchers often lack access to industrial-scale facilities where they can demonstrate that their ideas work. AMPF provides an environment where emerging technologies can be tested and de-risked without disrupting commercial production.

“The cloud lab will give industry partners and manufacturers the ability to evaluate new ideas before they commit to large-scale deployment,” said Tom Kurfess, executive director of GTMI and Agustin A. Ramirez/HUSCO International Distinguished Chair in Fluid Power Systems in ME. “This initiative will shorten development cycles and make it easier to bring promising technologies into production, enabling our partners and us to innovate at the speed of thought.”

Expanding Access to Advanced Research

The project aims to serve more than 400 users from 150 academic, industry, and government institutions, with more than half participating remotely.

“Making these autonomous labs available to a very wide community is key to innovation,” Van Hentenryck said. “You just give a lot of people the opportunity to try things out.”

The cloud lab builds on a larger effort Georgia Tech has pursued through AMPF for years: integrating AI, automation, and advanced manufacturing to create a flexible research environment that can evolve with technology, expand access, and strengthen U.S. leadership in materials and manufacturing.

For Stebner, the cloud lab represents a critical next step in bringing that vision to life.

“We are six years into this effort, and we’re already at a place I thought would take us 20 years to reach,” Stebner said. “This cloud lab is going to take us to a level of technology, research, leadership, and access that I didn’t know if we would reach by the end of my career.”

Georgia Tech’s Office of Sustainability, in partnership with the Office of Research Operations, is launching Georgia Tech’s first Sustainable Lab Certification program, which will provide a framework for campus laboratories to implement practical, high-impact sustainability measures. Labs earn recognition for their efforts through tiered certification levels — bronze, silver, or gold — based on the number and results of practices implemented.  

Fueled by the generosity of thousands of alumni, donors, corporations, foundations, and friends, this defining moment builds on the strongest two-year fundraising performance in Georgia Tech’s history and reflects extraordinary engagement across the Institute. Recent milestones underscore the breadth of support behind Transforming Tomorrow, including the 79th Roll Call, which raised $8.8 million, and Georgia Tech Athletics’ Full Steam Ahead initiative, which led to more than $100 million in gifts and commitments.

The collective support of donors, including gifts from first-time donors, is already making a difference across campus — in the experiences of students, the work of faculty, and the spaces that shape learning and discovery.

Transforming Campus and Expanding Opportunity

Donor support has fueled major projects such as the Thomas A. Fanning Student-Athlete Performance Center, which opened in May, and George Tower | Scheller Tower, which will open in September. Scheller Tower will house MBA and executive education programs for the Ernest Scheller Jr. College of Business, while George Tower will become the new home of the H. Milton Stewart School of Industrial and Systems Engineering. These facilities are designed to foster collaboration, innovation, and student success.

This momentum continues as Georgia Tech advances new capital projects, including the Aerospace Engineering Building, Medical Innovation Building, Creative Quarter, and Alumni Welcome Center — each critical to the Institute’s future growth.

At the same time, philanthropy is transforming access to education. Donors have contributed more than $513 million to expand scholarship and fellowship support, opening doors for talented students and ensuring that financial barriers do not limit opportunity.

Investing in Students, Faculty, and Research

Support for students extends from undergraduate access to graduate-level research and discovery. Graduate fellowships funded through the campaign are enabling students to pursue advanced study, contribute to research labs, and play a central role in Georgia Tech’s academic mission.

At the faculty level, donor investment continues to strengthen Georgia Tech’s ability to attract and retain world-class educators and researchers. A landmark example is the $100 million bequest from the estate of alumnus John W. Durstine, the largest gift in the Institute’s history, supporting faculty excellence in the George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering.

In health research, a significant commitment has established the Parker H. Petit Center for AI-Driven Health Innovation, a new research hub focused on using artificial intelligence to model diseases, identify treatment paths, and move discoveries closer to patient care.

Driving Innovation Through Collaboration and Industry Engagement

Philanthropy is also fueling new interdisciplinary initiatives that reflect Georgia Tech’s collaborative, forward-looking approach. The Tony Kepano Joint Center for Real Estate brings together the Ernest Scheller Jr. College of Business and the College of Design to create a multidisciplinary platform for education, research, and industry engagement.

Corporate and foundation partnerships are accelerating progress in key areas. The Delta Air Lines Foundation’s $5 million commitment is helping fund the new Aerospace Engineering Building. This facility will elevate one of the nation’s top-ranked aerospace programs, fuel the state’s economy, and accelerate innovation across the aviation industry.

Georgia Tech’s multidecade partnership with Hyundai Motor Company is advancing research and education in sustainable mobility, hydrogen technologies, and workforce development, while strengthening the Institute’s role in driving innovation and economic growth.

Looking Ahead: Sustaining Momentum

The campaign’s success reflects the collective efforts of alumni, donors, volunteers, faculty, staff, students, and partners who have advanced Georgia Tech's mission and strengthened its impact. The momentum created through their generosity will help shape the Institute’s future for years to come.

“Behind every gift is someone who believes in Georgia Tech’s mission and wants to help us amplify our impact,” said Georgia Tech President Ángel Cabrera. “Their generous support has expanded access to education, strengthened research and innovation, and strengthened our Institute to make sure it keeps creating value for generations to come. I am profoundly grateful to each of our donors for investing in Georgia Tech. 

I’m equally grateful to our deans, faculty, Campaign Steering Committee volunteers, and every member of our Development team for opening doors, carrying our message everywhere, and persuading others to participate in this campaign. Congratulations to all of them on reaching the most ambitious philanthropic goals in Institute history.”

The fierce backlash against data centers shows no sign of easing up.

Since early 2024, more than 1,200 public actions – including zoning fights, public campaigns and temporary moratoriums – have been logged by the Data Center Tracker, a public U.S. database of community responses to data center site selection. Among the concerns, grid capacity, water use and transparency around siting appear most often.

This momentum is leading to political action. In Maine, lawmakers passed a contested bill in spring 2026 that would have imposed the nation’s first statewide moratorium on new data centers. Gov. Janet Mills ultimately vetoed the measure on grounds that it would scuttle a US$550 million conversion of the closed Androscoggin Mill in the town of Jay into a data center.

But in a nod to the political climate, Mills said she supported in principle a pause in development and signed separate legislation barring state tax incentives going to data centers. She also pledged to create a council to study the industry statewide.

Maine’s dispute shows how statewide decisions on whether to promote or curb data centers can come down to one local case. It was no isolated example: Up to 10 other states are considering similar measures to contain their expansion.

But lawmakers across the country still lack clear evidence on whether new data centers can boost the economies of the communities hosting them.

As scholars of how technological change and innovation shape business strategy, we set out to produce rigorous research so that policymakers can make better decisions for their communities despite the emotions on both sides.

What we found was that data center development can boost growth and jobs – but these benefits are most pronounced when the local economy is more urban and developed. In fact, it turns out that the local economy around a data center matters more than the facility itself.

Testing the Data Center Promise

For years, state and local governments have courted data center projects with property tax abatements, sales tax exemptions and other incentives. Some jurisdictions still compete aggressively, but more and more are turning the other way, blocking tens of billions of dollars in proposed investments.

To understand the full economic impact, we combined records of when the centers began operating with data on local economic activity. We then compared how those economic outcomes changed before and after a county’s first data center opened relative to similar counties without data centers.

Overall, we found that data centers do boost growth. In the first three years after one opened, local employment rose on average by about 0.9%, wages by 1.1%, and the number of business establishments by 1%. Longer term, those effects grew to roughly 3.5%, 5% and 4.7%, respectively. Household income and building permits, meanwhile, increased by 1.9% and 16.1%, respectively. All of these gains accumulate gradually, rather than at once.

But the average effects mask an important pattern. Data centers are more likely to juice the economy when there’s a cluster of labor and capital already nearby, such as construction contractors, equipment suppliers, professional services and a skilled workforce.

In metropolitan counties, where that cluster of labor and capital is thicker, employment jumped by about 4.1%, while wages increased by 5.5%. In less populous counties, by contrast, job and wage spillovers were negligible. This suggests that the host community’s level of economic development matters more than the size of the project.

That said, other factors also affected local economic effects from one area to the next. Facilities operated by major tech companies, for example, raised local wages more than smaller companies. In addition, counties that attracted multiple data centers within five years of the first showed larger cumulative gains than counties with a single, isolated facility.

What About Electric Bills?

Electricity in the United States is delivered through complex regional grids and regulated utilities. In turn, retail prices depend on state and local rules and how costs are allocated among households, businesses and large industrial users.

This complicated patchwork goes to the heart of one of the biggest criticisms of data centers: Because they’re extraordinarily power-intensive, opponents say, they hike electric bills for consumers. So we looked at counties where a utility’s service area was localized enough to isolate the effects. We found that retail electricity prices rose by about 5% after a data center becomes operational.

Our estimate of 5% is not universal, however. Utility territories most often span multiple counties, while rate-setting rules differ by state and utility. And prices are affected by other factors, such as weather, transmission systems and regulations. That made the electricity effect harder for us to pin down than the other economic outcomes we studied.

But if our estimates stand, our figure is substantially lower than some more sensational reports, which may not be correct in attributing bigger hikes in electric bills to data centers.

Why Tensions are Running High

Pushback against data centers has picked up since 2024, as proposed projects have grown larger and more visible. Communities often make decisions amid uncertainty, with little local evidence to draw on.

Our findings help clarify part of that uncertainty: Economic spillovers are strong in metropolitan counties, while many rural counties see minimal gains in job growth.

We also find that opposition to data centers is more common where data centers already operate. That pattern suggests local experience may matter, although it doesn’t explain how much opposition reflects direct local experience versus broader anxiety about the impact of artificial intelligence more generally.

Beyond the Construction Incentives

As more data center siting decisions come up, lawmakers will need to judge whether a county’s economy will benefit and whether the project’s terms will help all residents even when they don’t share those gains. This means that the details of local subsidy design matter, including tax incentives, electricity tariff arrangements, grid and water upgrades, and whether any new resulting tax revenue will boost public services.

Together, those factors can matter more than the headline investment figure touted in a company press release. While our findings are a starting point to help navigate this emotional debate, more work is needed on how these other decisions shape community outcomes.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Without using a zero, what is the lowest possible four-digit number you can make in which the digits add up to 18? 

Artificial intelligence (AI) is changing far more than hospital paperwork. Researchers say it's beginning to help doctors make clinical decisions, identify mental health risks earlier, expand care through smartphones and wearable devices, and extend healthcare to people who might otherwise go without it. 

In this feature, follow Jeonghyun “Jonna” Lee’s path from English language educator in Seoul to leading a research team in Georgia Tech’s College of Lifetime Learning.

Read more »

Read more »

Read more »

Read more »

Read more »

Read the full story here>>

DeMillo was among 80 computer scientists worldwide selected for the Academy's founding class and was the only Georgia Tech faculty member recognized.

"I am honored to be included in the inaugural class of the ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Academy," said DeMillo. "This recognition reflects the work of outstanding students, collaborators, and colleagues over many years. Software engineering research has transformed the way society builds and depends upon software, and I hope our community will continue to advance the scientific foundations needed to make software more reliable, secure, and worthy of the trust people place in it."

Established by ACM SIGSOFT, the Software Engineering Academy is a standing body of honor that recognizes members of the software engineering community whose lasting technical contributions, leadership, and service have shaped the field. The Academy celebrates researchers whose cumulative work and influence have advanced software engineering as both a scientific discipline and professional practice.

"Rich's research in software testing is recognized among the most influential contributions to the field of software engineering," said SCP Interim Chair Mustaque Ahamad. "His inclusion in the inaugural ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Academy demonstrates the lasting impact of his research on building more reliable software systems."

The inaugural class was selected from leaders whose contributions have already been widely recognized across the software engineering community, including ACM Fellows and recipients of ACM SIGSOFT's Outstanding Research Award. Beginning next year, new Academy members will be elected annually through a community nomination process.

DeMillo served as the founding chair of Georgia Tech's School of Cybersecurity and Privacy, the first school of its kind at a top research university. He previously served as the John P. Imlay Dean of the College of Computing and directed the Georgia Tech Information Security Center.

Throughout his career, DeMillo has held leadership positions across academia, industry, and government. He served as Hewlett-Packard's first chief technology officer, led computing research at Bell Communications Research, directed the Computer Research Division at the National Science Foundation, and led the Software Test and Evaluation Project in the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

His research spans software engineering, cybersecurity, election security, and the societal impacts of digital technology. His 1979 paper, Social Processes and Proofs of Theorems and Programs, is widely regarded as a foundational work in software engineering and has been recognized as one of the 50 most influential papers in computer science.

In addition to his research, DeMillo has helped shape higher education through the creation of Georgia Tech's Center for 21st Century Universities. He is a fellow of both the Association for Computing Machinery and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Read more »