Brutal times for the US battery industry | MIT Technology Review

Brutal times for the US battery industry | MIT Technology Review


Brutal times for the US battery industry


Investors are pulling back and companies are going under. What comes next?
By Casey Crownhartarchive page
March 12, 2026
Stephanie Arnett/MIT Technology Review | Adobe Stock, Envato

Just a few years ago, the battery industry was hot, hot, hot. There was a seemingly infinite number of companies popping up, with shiny new chemistries and massive fundraising rounds. My biggest problem was sifting through the pile to pick the most exciting news to cover.

That tide has turned, and in 2026, what seems to be in unlimited supply isn’t battery success stories but stumbles or straight-up implosions. Companies are failing, investors are pulling back, and batteries, especially for EVs, aren’t looking so hot anymore. On Monday, Steve Levine at The Information (paywalled link) reported that 24M Technologies, a battery company founded in 2010, was shutting down and would auction off its property.


The company itself has been silent, but this is the latest in a string of bad signs, and it’s a big one—at one point 24M was worth over $1 billion, and the company’s innovations could have worked with existing technology. So where does that leave the battery industry?

Many buzzy battery startups in recent years have been trying to sell some new, innovative chemistry to compete with lithium-ion batteries, the status quo that powers phones, laptops, electric vehicles, and even grid storage arrays today. Think sodium-ion batteries and solid-state cells.


24M wasn’t trying to sell a departure from lithium-ion but improvements that could work with the tech. One of the company’s major innovations was its manufacturing process, which involved essentially smearing materials onto sheets of metal to form the electrodes, a simpler and potentially cheaper technique than the standard one.

The layers in the company’s batteries were thicker, which cut down on some of the inactive materials in cells and improved the energy density. That allows more energy to be stored in a smaller package, boosting the range of EVs—the company famously had a goal of a 1,000-mile battery (about 1,600 kilometers).


We’re still thin on details of what exactly went down at 24M and what comes next for its tech. The company didn’t get back to my questions sent to the official press email, and nobody picked up the phone when I called. 24M cofounder and MIT professor Yet-Ming Chiang declined to speak on the record.

For those who have been closely following the battery industry, more bad news isn’t too surprising. It feels as if everyone is short on money these days, and as purse strings tighten, there’s less interest in novel ideas. “It just feels like there’s not a lot of appetite for innovation,” says Kara Rodby, a technical principal at Volta Energy Technologies, a venture capital firm that focuses on the energy storage industry.
Related Story
What’s next for EV batteries in 2026


Natron Energy, one of the leading sodium-ion startups in the US, shut down operations in September last year. Ample, an EV battery-swapping company, filed for bankruptcy in December 2025.

There were always going to be failures from the recent battery boom. Money was flowing to all sorts of companies, some pitching truly wild ideas. But what recent months have made clear is that the battery market is turning brutal, even for the relatively safe bets.


Because 24M’s technology was designed to work into existing lithium-ion chemistry, it could have been an attractive candidate for existing battery companies to license or even acquire. “It’s a great example of something that should have been easier,” Rodby says.

The gutting of major components of the Inflation Reduction Act, key legislation in the US that provided funding and incentives for batteries and EVs, certainly hasn’t helped. The EV market in the US is cooling off, with automakers canceling EV models and slashing factory plans.

There are bright spots. China’s battery industry is thriving, and its battery and EV giants are looking ever more dominant. The market for stationary energy storage is also still seeing positive signs of growth, even in the US.

But overall, it’s not looking great.

This article is from The Spark, MIT Technology Review’s weekly climate newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Wednesday, sign up here.

New Disney CEO’s first order of business: layoffs.

 New Disney CEO’s first order of business: layoffs. Disney is reportedly planning to cut as many as 1,000 jobs, as part of a cost-cutting initiative under CEO Josh D’Amaro, who took over as head of the Mouse House last month. The layoffs are expected to primarily impact the company’s marketing department, which was consolidated under the newly created role of chief marketing and brand officer in January, when Bob Iger was still CEO. Disney’s parks and cruises business remains a strong profit center, but the company faces questions around its stock price, franchise fatigue, and linear TV’s decline.

SpaceX Starlink Satellite Malfunctions, Breaks Apart in Orbit

SpaceX Starlink Satellite Malfunctions, Breaks Apart in Orbit

This is the second anomalous incident affecting the megaconstellation in just over three months.

BY PASSANT RABIEPUBLISHED MARCH 31, 2026, 3:35 PM ET

READING TIME 2 MINUTES

As of late March 2026, there are over 10,000 Starlink satellites in low Earth orbit. SpaceX

 COMMENTS (13)

A Starlink satellite suffered an unidentified anomaly, generating a small field of debris in low-Earth orbit.

SpaceX lost contact with one of its Starlink satellites on Sunday due to an in-orbit malfunction, the company confirmed on X. Orbital tracking company LeoLabs later reported debris in the vicinity of the satellite after the event, suggesting that the Starlink satellite likely broke apart in orbit.

SpaceX is working to identify the cause of the anomaly, the second such anomaly to affect one of its satellites in just over three months. The company reassured the public, however, that the event doesn’t pose a risk to the International Space Station (ISS), the upcoming launch of the Artemis 2 mission, or SpaceX’s Transporter-16 mission.

Orbital malfunction

The latest incident involved Starlink-34343, which was orbiting Earth at an altitude of approximately 347 miles (560 kilometers) above the surface. SpaceX didn’t clarify what type of anomaly affected its Starlink satellite, only that it resulted in a loss of communication.

The event was likely caused by an internal energetic source rather than an in-orbit collision with space debris or another object, according to LeoLabs. The company detected tens of fragments within the vicinity of the satellite over its radar site in the Azores, Portugal. “Additional fragments may have been produced—analysis is ongoing,” LeoLabs wrote on X.

Because the satellite was at a low altitude at the time of the malfunction, the resulting debris will likely deorbit within a few weeks, according to LeoLabs.

SpaceX also downplayed any risk posed by debris from its satellite. “Latest analysis shows the event poses no new risk to the [ISS], its crew, or to the upcoming launch of NASA’s Artemis II mission,” the company wrote on X. “We will continue to monitor the satellite along with any trackable debris and coordinate with [NASA] and the [U.S. Space Force].”

The rocket company also added that the satellite breakup did not threaten the launch of SpaceX’s Transporter-16 rideshare mission, which lifted off earlier this morning. The mission is “designed to avoid Starlink with payload deploys well above or well below the constellation,” according to SpaceX.

Take two

The recent malfunction is giving us a serious case of déjà vu. In December 2025, another Starlink satellite experienced an anomaly that caused it to fall out of orbit and tumble its way toward Earth. The satellite suddenly dropped around 2.5 miles (4 kilometers) in altitude and created a small field of debris.

There are currently over 10,000 Starlink satellites in orbit, and each is designed to remain operational for around five to seven years. Every day, one or two Starlinks fall back to Earth and break up in the atmosphere. The back-to-back anomalies, however, are not part of Starlink’s scheduled demise.

“These events illustrate the need for rapid characterization of anomalous events to enable clarity of the operating environment,” LeoLabs wrote.

Formula 1 is not slowing down

F1 fans gather this weekend for round 3 of 2026 in Tokyo. Mark Sutton/Getty Images

Somebody wave the red flag, because Formula 1 is making it rain at racetracks around the world. The open-wheel auto racing competition hit $3.9 billion in revenue last year—a 14% jump from 2024, according to its owner, Liberty Media. Much of that success has depended on getting fans out of the house and down to the track. Lights out and away we grow: 2025 was the most-attended F1 season ever, drawing 6.7 million spectators over its 24-race season, which ran from March through December. Per F1: Nineteen events sold out. Eleven races set new attendance records. One race, the British Grand Prix, drew 500,000 fans. Tickets can be expensive, running hundreds of dollars for multiday passes that include the race and other live entertainment. For example, Road House actor (and singer) Post Malone is set to perform at the United States Grand Prix weekend in Austin, Texas, this October. It’s a two-way street Cities and circuits pay F1 millions of dollars in promoter fees for the rights to host races. It’s a steady revenue stream that accounted for about $824 million of F1 earnings in 2025, Sportico reported. For many cities, it’s worth ponying up for a race, since its economic impact can be worth much more. Per CNBC, the Belgian Grand Prix contributes around $250 million to the country’s economy each year, depending on fans’ appetites for beer and waffles. The downsides of being global: The war in Iran forced the cancellation of two Middle Eastern races scheduled for next month in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. Losing those two races from the schedule could cost F1 about $200 million in revenue, according to a Guggenheim Partners analyst report cited by Sportico.

 

Oracle cutting thousands in latest layoff round as AI spending booms

Oracle cutting thousands in latest layoff round as AI spending booms

Oracle has started telling employees that it’s cutting thousands of jobs, CNBC has confirmed, as the software maker deals with a plummeting stock price tied to hefty capital commitments for building out AI infrastructure.

While Oracle’s core business is on the receiving end of market panic about competitive risk from generative artificial intelligence models, the company is also facing pressure from investors about the amount of debt it’s raising for AI investments and its dwindling cash flow.

Business Insider reported on the latest cuts earlier on Tuesday. CNBC confirmed the cuts with two people familiar with the matter who asked not to be named because the announcement hasn’t been made public.

Oracle, which employed 162,000 people as of May 2025, declined to comment. The company’s stock price is down 26% this year, dropping more than all of tech’s megacaps.

Oracle continues to sell its flagship database for storing and serving up corporate information. In recent years, alongside cloud rivals such as Amazon, the company has ratcheted up capital expenditures as it builds data center infrastructure that can handle AI workloads. But Oracle is smaller than its cloud peers.

Oracle has been leaning on the debt market to fund its buildout. In January, Oracle announced plans to raise $50 billion in debt and equity. During earnings last month, executives said there were no more plans to raise debt in 2026.

The US fertility rate dropped to another record low

 The US fertility rate dropped to another record low. Last year, the number of births per 1,000 women of reproductive age fell by about 1%—an all-time low, per new federal data. That rate is down by nearly 20% from two decades ago. Despite a growing pronatalist movement, American women are waiting to have children later in life, while some are deciding not to due to concerns about the economy, climate change, and healthcare. Experts say that a decline in the birth rate can be an economic “drag” on the US, as it reduces demand and the labour force.

The economics of war extend far beyond energy prices and stock markets

The Conversation – Articles (CA)

Truth, or misinformation? A statistician explains the challenge of assessing evidence


The Conversation – Articles (CA) · a day ago

The economics of war extend far beyond energy prices and stock markets


The Conversation – Articles (CA) · a day ago
by Junaid B. Jahangir, Associate Professor, Economics, MacEwan University


In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, student groups pushed for curriculum change in economics. They wanted to learn about real-world economics beyond the stylized models that embroil students in mathematics.

As an economics professor, my own students have asked me about issues like Gaza and Iran, when textbooks aren’t much help. Based on their input, I’ve revamped the way I teach economics by complementing standard textbook economics with alternate perspectives.

The courses I now teach include the Economics of Racism, the Economics of Inequality and the Economics of Gaza, which has been translated to Arabic by the Iraqi Economists Network.

These new courses reveal that the economics of war go beyond the impact on energy, stock markets and inflation.
Democracies instigate war

It’s usually believed that dictators start wars to legitimize their rule. However, 2024 research suggests that democratically elected leaders often instigate war due to the right-wing populism and nationalism that arise because of inequality and precarity in advanced economies.

This helps shed light on why democratically elected leaders like Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu have initiated wars against theocracies like Iran.

Such democratically elected leaders use propaganda to demonize the enemy and paint conflict as an existential threat, even when it could be solved through diplomacy.
Big Oil

The military-industrial complex is notably absent from economics textbooks. It’s a system based on the military establishment and arms industry, which wields power and influence over the government.

But its very existence challenges the idea of consumer sovereignty — the military-industrial complex, after all, attempts to generate public support for war to maximize profits, captures the government (where private corporate interests influence government regulation to supersede public interest) and lobbies for large military budgets.

Companies like Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman profit from conflict because they provide great investment opportunities during wars. Defence stocks soared in value, for example, during Israel’s assault on Gaza. Despite uncertainty, there have also been gains for defence contractors due to the ongoing war in Iran.

In terms of the Gaza situation, large oil companies don’t gain much by the production of oil; it’s the exercise of power and war that benefits them. Energy conflicts like the 1991 Gulf War or the ongoing war in Iran, which reflect control or disruption of resources, are followed by above-average returns of leading oil companies.

In other words, both the military industrial complex and Big Oil profit from war.
Unintended consequences

War also contributes to climate costs, post-war debt burden and refugee flows. It also increases the likelihood of terrorism.

This is reflective of the law of unintended consequences — in other words, bombing to curb terrorism instigates more terrorism. The economics of terrorism shows that the structural root causes of terrorism — like apartheid, occupation and the economic grievances of citizens — must be addressed to truly end terrorism.

The law of unintended consequences also holds in the case of sanctions. In the Russia-Ukraine war, economic sanctions have ended up helping Russia because Russian oligarchs who previously supported integration with the West were forced to invest their massive wealth at home.

Similarly, bombing and sanctions on Iran have only strengthened its resolve to push back. Instead of citizens turning on the Iranian regime, a surge in Iranian nationalism is reportedly taking hold.

Read more: War in Iran: Why destroying cultural heritage is such a foolish strategic move in any conflict
The petro-dollar system

Students of economics learn that the American dollar serves as the world reserve currency. Its demand arises from the petro-dollar system, where U.S. dollars are required to buy oil. In return for this system, the U.S. supposedly provides the so-called GCC countries — Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman and Bahrain — with military protection.

These GCC countries then reinvest the petro-dollars in U.S. financial markets. This helps explain why the war on Iran goes beyond oil or uranium enrichment to the very viability of the petro-dollar system.

This petro-dollar system allows the U.S. to exercise economic power through access to cheap credit and the ability to sanction other countries. The rest of the world is dependent on this system because of its network effects. The analogy here is that of Facebook. Because of its size and scope, it would now be very difficult to replace it with another platform for social networking.

But the petro-dollar system is at risk if competing countries like China and Russia can shift other countries away from the U.S. dollar. Iran then becomes a focal point in this shifting multi-polar world order.
Demonizing dissenters

Conflict Economics defines genocide as acts committed or conditions generated with intent to destroy in whole or in part a racial or religious group.

It rejects the “mad Nazi thesis” that monsters cause evil, holding that bad acts are perpetrated by ordinary people because of obedience to authority. Malevolent attitudes and norms grow when leaders promote exclusionary ideas.

In the past, workers were labelled as “communists” for demanding labour rights. Today, Muslims are dehumanized as “terrorists” in democracies like the U.S. and India, even though imperial powers apply and withdraw that label based on their own interests at any given time.

War’s economic impact extend far beyond energy prices and stock markets. Studying the economics of war reveals that democracies can start wars and commit human rights abuses, corporations can profit, military force and sanctions can backfire and conflicts are tied to broader extractive systems — not just oil — as some privileged groups justify extreme violence without moral hesitation.

Junaid B. Jahangir does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

 

US bans all new imported routers

Adobe Stock

Uncle Sam wants the box transmitting your wi-fi named after an obscure anime to be made in the US. The Federal Communications Commission said it’ll stop approving new foreign internet routers this week, citing their role in cyberattacks by China-affiliated hackers. Most routers are made in China, with router brands like TP-Link, Asus, and Netgear—which account for ~60% of the US market—manufactured abroad. But don’t rush to whip out an Ethernet cable: The ban only applies to new router models. Foreign-made models with existing government authorization that are currently in Americans’ homes and sold in stores are still allowed. New foreign models will also be able to get an exemption from the Defense Department through a process that includes devising a stateside manufacturing plan. Are router-makers in trouble? Not necessarily. The China-founded TP-Link said it’s planning to set up US manufacturing and welcomed the industry-wide decision, which comes after the government reportedly considered a targeted ban on its products. Meanwhile, Netgear’s stock jumped this week—possibly because it’s a US company and its routers are made outside of China, so investors likely expect the ban to give it a competitive edge. Shares of Asus, which has been shifting its supply chain out of China, held steady. Are US-made routers safer? Experts say that a router’s vulnerability to attacks depends less on where it’s produced and more on its cybersecurity protocols.

 

Eli Lilly doubles down on AI-generated drug discovery

Jetcityimage/Getty Images

Eli Lilly made a $2.75 billion deal with Hong Kong-based Insilico Medicine, a startup that uses AI to accelerate drug discovery. Under the terms: Insilico will receive $115 million up front and can earn the full value of the deal if the drugs it produces and Lilly licenses reach certain regulatory and sales milestones, as well as through royalties. Lilly gets the exclusive rights to sell an Insilico-developed GLP-1 drug for diabetes, per the Financial Times. It’s not just about GLP-1s. Lilly’s weight loss and diabetes injectables helped it become the first drugmaker to reach a $1 trillion valuation late last year. But to find its next success cycle, it’s turning to AI investments. The next major breakthrough may be in China The country’s significant investments in research and the comparatively low cost of running trials there are making it attractive for drug discovery targets. Chen Yu, the founder of biotech investment firm TCGX, told CNBC that through licensing, American drug companies can “get clinical proof of concept” of a drug in China and then bring it to the US “for the expensive clinical development when we actually know the drug works.” However, if American lawmakers take umbrage at large drugmakers paying China for assets rather than acquiring US drug startups, legislation or an executive order could shut down this avenue.

 

The Iran war is impacting aluminum, too

Aluminum ingots at Emirates Global Aluminium in Abu Dhabi. Bloomberg Creative/Getty Images

Over the weekend, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it intentionally attacked two aluminum producers in US-allied nations in the region in response to earlier attacks on two Iranian steel plants. The development underscores concerns that the conflict could drive prices of the metal higher. What happened On Saturday, the top producer in the region, Emirates Global Aluminum, said an Iranian drone and missile attack caused “significant damage” to its production plant in Abu Dhabi. The company said several employees were injured, but not fatally. That same day, an Iranian attack hit Aluminum Bahrain (known as Alba). The company, home to the world’s largest aluminum smelter (a high-energy industrial apparatus), said in a statement yesterday that it’s still assessing the damage. Earlier this month, Alba said it temporarily suspended 19% of its production capacity due to being unable to get supply through the Strait of Hormuz. Another element to consider Aluminum is the most abundant metal on the planet, but it requires large amounts of energy to extract and process, making it susceptible to natural gas shipping problems in the Strait of Hormuz: Under normal conditions, the Middle East is responsible for producing about 9% of the global aluminum supply. A plant in Qatar, jointly owned by QatarEnergy and Norwegian company Norsk Hydro, scaled its aluminum production back to about 60% capacity because it had trouble getting the gas it needed to extract the metal, according to the WSJ. It’s not just the Middle East: Hindalco Industries in India, which provides aluminum to auto manufacturers, notified customers it would invoke force majeure clauses in its contracts to avoid fulfilling orders. Anonymous sources told Bloomberg it was due to issues stemming from the Iran war, including disruptions to gas supplies. That issue can ripple to smelters around the world as the conflict continues. Big picture: Aluminum prices were rising in the US before the war started because of President Trump’s 50% tariffs on the metal. The US gets most of its aluminum from other countries, and domestic production has been dropping for years. According to the London Metal Exchange benchmark, prices of aluminum (pronounced the British way) are up about 4% since the war started on February 28

Gemini on Google TV

 If you have ever spent more time scrolling through rows of content than actually watching one, Google has a fix. With the latest Gemini update for Google TV, you can talk to the assistant, ask questions, and get relevant information in one place.

The update brings three Gemini features so you don’t have to grab your phone to check scores or figure out what to watch.

Smarter answers and deep learning on your Google TV

Google

Gemini now responds with richer, more useful results depending on what you ask. If you ask for a recipe, you will get a video tutorial instead of just text. It basically combines visuals, videos, and information in one response, so you don’t need to search elsewhere.

There is also a new “deep dives” feature that turns your TV into a learning tool. You can explore topics like health, technology, or economics through narrated visual breakdowns.

Google

For example, Gemini can explain how cold plunging affects your body or show how matcha is made step by step. You can even go further by tapping “Dive deeper,” which opens guided, interactive explanations with follow-up questions.

Gemini on Google TV will keep you updated on sports news

Google is also expanding its short news summaries into sports. These new sports briefs give you quick, narrated updates on leagues like the NBA, NHL, MLB, and more. If you check sports scores, you will see a live scorecard along with where to watch.

Google

Instead of searching on the web, you can get highlights, player updates, and game summaries through Gemini. It can also help change your Google TV settings through voice commands.

These features are now rolling out to Gemini-enabled devices in the U.S. and Canada, with broader device support coming soon. The Gemini voice assistant on Google TV is expected to reach more countries later this year.

If this works as intended, your smart TV could become the place where you search, learn, and stay updated without ever reaching for your phone.