As G7 Weighs Measures to Confront Growing Energy Crisis, Officials Urged to Tackle ‘Fossil Fuel Profiteering’

“It is obscene that companies like TotalEnergies are making enormous profits from war, while ordinary people’s lives are being shattered and the world faces a spiraling economic crisis,” said one campaigner.


Gas prices are displayed at a Mobil gas station on March 30, 2026 in Pasadena, California.
(Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

Julia Conley
Mar 31, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

As energy and finance officials from across the European Union prepared to review energy supply levels amid the US-Israeli war on Iran on Tuesday, campaigners from a leading climate action group renewed their call for officials to go further than just releasing oil reserves in order to keep costs down.

Oil giants that have benefited from the growing global energy crisis set off by the US-Israeli attacks and Iran’s retaliatory closing of the Strait of Hormuz should be held to account for their “fossil fuel profiteering,” said 350.org.

After a virtual meeting of energy ministers from the G7 countries on Monday, 350.org called on officials to tax the windfall profits of companies like France’s TotalEnergies, which is estimated to have made $1 billion in profits in just the last month since Iran closed the strait in retaliation for the US and Israeli attacks.

Total has reportedly “monopolized” about 70 crude oil shipments from the UAE and Oman in the last month, as Murban crude prices surged from $70 to $170 per barrel.

As Common Dreams reported Monday, 350.org released an analysis showing that spiking oil and gas prices resulting from the US-Israeli war have cost consumers and businesses more than $100 billion in the past month.

“It is obscene that companies like TotalEnergies are making enormous profits from war, while ordinary people’s lives are being shattered and the world faces a spiraling economic crisis,” said Fanny Petitbon, France team lead for 350.org. “At a time of such profound human suffering, no company should be allowed to exploit chaos and conflict for financial gain. The G7’s deafening silence on these windfall profits speaks volumes, signaling a failure to hold corporate greed accountable while the rest of the world pays the price.”

Revenues from taxing windfall profits could “be used to support vulnerable households, accelerate the transition to renewable energy, and fund recovery efforts in regions affected by conflict,” said Petitbon.

“The principle is clear: extraordinary profits made in times of crisis should be redirected for the public good, not concentrated in the hands of a few,” she said.

The ministers from the G7 countries—which include the United States, Canada, Japan, Britain, France, Germany, and Italy—met virtually to discuss how the war in Iran is affecting energy and commodity markets and inflation. They called on countries “to refrain from imposing unjustified export restrictions” on oil and gas, but did not announce any specific steps they plan to take.

“We stand ready to take all necessary measures in close coordination with our partners, including to preserve the stability and security of the energy market,” the ministers said in a statement. “We recognize the importance of coordinated international action to mitigate spill overs and safeguard macroeconomic stability.”

Earlier this month, the International Energy Agency coordinated the release of 400 million barrels of oil to mitigate the supply shortfall caused by the closing of the Strait of Hormuz, from which about one-fifth of the world’s oil supply flows.

But gas prices across Europe have continued to rise by 70% nonetheless. In the US, the average price of gas rose to $4 per gallon on Tuesday for the first time since August 2022.

Brent crude oil, which cost about $70 per barrel before the war, has gone up to $119 per barrel, and analysts are projecting prices as high as $200 as the conflict continues.

Monday’s virtual summit was held ahead of an emergency meeting of EU energy ministers, who were told by EU Energy Commissioner Dan Jørgensen in a letter Monday that they were “encouraged to make timely preparations in anticipation of a potentially ⁠prolonged disruption” of energy imports.

Jørgensen emphasized in a video posted on social media Monday that the growing energy crisis underscores how a transition away from oil and gas toward renewable sources is crucial for economies as well as the planet.



“We will need immediate targeted measures to combat this crisis, but all of these measures need to be in line with our long-term strategy, which is more renewables as fast as possible,” said Jørgensen.

Italy delays coal phase-out by over a decade


By AFP
March 31, 2026


Italy's delay to its phase-out of coal runs contrary to EU climate goals. - Copyright AFP Shammi MEHRA

Ella IDE

Italy’s parliament voted Tuesday to delay the closure of the country’s coal-fired power stations by over a decade, a move experts slammed as “worrying” political propaganda.

In a fresh challenge to the EU’s green transition, Giorgia Meloni’s hard-right coalition government pushed the shutdown back from 2026 to 2038 on “energy security” grounds.

Italy is heavily reliant on imported gas and Rome is under pressure from industry and consumers over the rise in already sky-high energy costs due to the Middle East war.

While Brussels insists that phasing out coal is key to achieving the EU’s climate goals, Rome says it may be forced to use its coal-fired power stations if gas prices continue upwards.

But experts who spoke to AFP said that reactivating the plants would not lower electricity prices.

Italy’s move comes as others including Germany, South Korea, the Philippines and Japan, have similarly signalled that coal-fired plants could ease energy woes caused by the war.

The Italian government’s bill extending the phase-out was approved by the lower house of parliament Tuesday, and now goes to the Senate, where the ruling coalition has a majority.

The delay is “a worryingly backward-looking political signal”, while “any security gain is far from guaranteed”, Beatrice Petrovich, senior energy analyst at energy think tank Ember, told AFP.

Only Germany, Poland, and Bulgaria share a coal phase-out date as unambitious as Italy’s new one, she said.

The EU’s climate commissioner, Wopke Hoekstra, who was in Rome Tuesday for a hearing with senators on Italy’s energy mix, declined to comment on Rome’s decision.



– ‘Old fleet’ –



Climate think tank ECCO said Rome’s postponement was “symbolically damaging, but low-impact in practice — at least for now”.

“The government is deliberately maintaining ambiguity between ‘not dismantling’ and ‘actually using’ coal plants for political gains”, it said.

Italy currently has four coal-fired power stations. Two of them are on the mainland, are dormant and lost their authorisation to burn coal in January, ECCO said.

Restarting them would mean applying for new permits, a process that takes years and would be subject to significant legal and community opposition, it said.

The other two are in Sardinia, and are earmarked for closure in 2028-2029, once the island is electrically linked to the mainland via a new submarine cable.

ECCO’s Executive Director Luca Bergamaschi told AFP Italy’s “old and largely non-operational coal fleet would be very expensive to restart”.

Petrovich agreed that “coal plays a minor role in Italy’s power mix and this won’t change going forward”.

Italy’s total coal generation in 2025 was approximately 2,975 GWh, and less than 1 percent of national electricity output, according to state-controlled power grid operator Terna.

There is no financial incentive for operators to return to coal, and the price of coal imported to Europe has recently surged, the experts said.

Coal is also uncompetitive against gas under the EU’s carbon tax scheme.

Including it in the energy security tool-kit “risks being an additional burden on Italy’s electricity consumers, who already pay some of the highest electricity prices in the EU”, Petrovich said.

AI agent future is coming, OpenClaw creator tells AFP


By AFP
March 30, 2026


OpenClaw can be connected to existing AI models and given simple instructions through instant messaging apps, as if to a friend or colleague - Copyright AFP ADEK BERRY

Katie Forster

Peter Steinberger’s artificial intelligence agent tool OpenClaw has taken the tech world by storm with its ability to execute real-life tasks such as checking him in for his flight to Tokyo.

AI is not yet a ubiquitous personal assistant for ordinary people, but “you’ll see much more of that this year because this is the year of agents”, Steinberger told AFP in the Japanese capital on Monday.

“There are still some things we need to do to make it better,” the Austrian programmer said.

Demand is ramping up, however, with more developers now “making the future happen”, he added in an interview during a gathering for OpenClaw enthusiasts.

When downloaded, OpenClaw can be connected to existing AI models and given simple instructions through instant messaging apps, as if to a friend or colleague.

Jensen Huang, head of the world’s most valuable company Nvidia, this month hailed the tool — whose symbol is a bright red lobster — as “the next ChatGPT”.

But all the buzz has raised concerns over the cybersecurity risks of allowing AI systems vulnerable to hacks to access personal data such as bank details.

– Chinese ‘momentum’ –

Steinberger built OpenClaw in November while playing around with AI coding tools in an attempt to organise his digital life.

He has since been hired by ChatGPT creator OpenAI “to drive the next generation of personal agents”, the US startup’s boss Sam Altman said in February.

“What you have to know about OpenClaw is, like, it couldn’t have come from those big companies,” Steinberger told AFP.

“Those companies would have worried too much about what could go wrong instead of just, like — I wanted to just show people I’ve been into the future,” he said.

While tech giants work out how agent tools could be used by businesses, the next AI innovation could come from “someone who just wants to have fun”, Steinberger said.

At Monday’s “ClawCon” event in Tokyo, where many of the hundreds of participants were dressed as lobsters, OpenClaw demos were held on stage and experts helped attendees install their agents.

Similar scenes have been seen across China, where users have been particularly quick to embrace OpenClaw’s potential to organise emails, help with coding and a plethora of other digital tasks.

“If you see it as a competition, it certainly looks like China is gaining a lot of momentum” in the AI sector, Steinberger said.

“But right now there’s still quite a bit of a leap between the best models from China and the best models in the US.”

– AI ‘hammer’ –

OpenClaw’s success in China has led national cybersecurity authorities and Beijing’s IT ministry to issue official warnings over potential risks.

Is Steinberger concerned that people could use his tool for illicit purposes?

“Yes, I do worry a bit, especially because there’s now a whole cottage industry of companies that try to make a big buck and make it even simpler to install OpenClaw,” he said.

“I purposefully didn’t make it simpler so people would stop and read and understand: what is AI, that AI can make mistakes, what is prompt injection — some basics that you really should understand when you use that technology.”

But at the end of the day, “if you build a hammer… you can hurt yourself. So should we not build hammers any more”?

A Reddit-like pseudo social network for OpenClaw agents called Moltbook, where chatbots converse, has also grabbed headlines and provoked soul-searching over AI.

“A lot of that was, in my view, very much driven by humans to just create those stories,” Steinberger said, adding that joining OpenAI means he now has more resources to use on “cool ideas”.

He said 2023-2024 “was the year of ChatGPT, last year was the year of the coding agent, this year’s going to be the year of the general agent”.

“I love that I helped a lot of people to bring AI from this scary thing into something that is fun and weird and gets them excited, because we need to to make it good for this next century,” Steinberger explained.

“We need more people to think more about AI.”

Dubious AI detectors drive ‘pay-to-humanize’ scam

ByAFP
March 30, 2026


A crop of fraudulent AI detection tools risk adding another layer of online deception. - Copyright GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP Michael M. Santiago

Anuj CHOPRA, with Ede ZABORSZKY in Vienna, Magdalini GKOGKOU in Athens and Liesa PAUWELS in The Hague

Feed an Iranian news dispatch or a literary classic into some text detectors, and they return the same verdict: AI-generated. Then comes the pitch: pay to “humanize” the writing, a pattern experts say bears the hallmarks of a scam.

As AI falsehoods explode across social media, often outpacing the capacity of professional fact-checkers, bogus detectors risk adding another layer of deception to an already fractured information ecosystem.

While even reliable AI detectors can produce false results, researchers say a crop of fraudulent tools has emerged online, easily weaponized to discredit authentic content and tarnish reputations.

AFP’s fact-checkers identified three such text detectors that claim to estimate what percentage is AI-generated. The tools — prompted in four languages — not only misidentified authentic text as AI-generated but also attempted to monetize those errors.

One detector, JustDone AI, processed a human-written report about the US-Iran war and wrongly concluded it contained “88% AI content.” It then offered to scrub any trace of AI for a fee.

“Your AI text is humanizing,” the site claimed, leading to a page where “100% unique text” was locked behind a paywall charging up to $9.99.

Two other tools — TextGuard and Refinely — produced similar false positives and sought to monetize them.

– ‘Scams’ –

AFP presented its findings to all three detectors.

“Our system operates using modern AI models, and the results it provides are considered accurate within our technology,” TextGuard’s support team told AFP.

“At the same time, we cannot guarantee or compare results with other systems.”

JustDone also reiterated that “no AI detector can guarantee 100 percent accuracy.”

It acknowledged the free version of its AI detector “may provide less precise results” due to “high demand and the use of a lighter model designed for quick access.”

Echoing AFP’s findings, one user on a review platform complained that “even with 100% human-written material, JustDone still flags it as AI.”

AFP fed the tools multiple human-written samples — in Dutch, Greek, Hungarian, and English. All were wrongly flagged as having high AI content, including passages from an acclaimed 1916 Hungarian classic.

The tools returned AI flags regardless of input — even for nonsensical text.

JustDone and Refinely appeared to operate even without an internet connection, suggesting their results may be scripted rather than genuine technical analysis.

“These are not AI detectors but scams to sell a ‘humanizing’ tool that will often return what we call ‘tortured phrases'” — unrelated jargon or nonsensical alternatives — Debora Weber-Wulff, a Germany-based academic who has researched detection tools, told AFP.

– ‘Liar’s dividend’ –

Illustrating how such tools can be used to discredit individuals, pro‑government influencers in Hungary claimed earlier this year that a document outlining the opposition’s election campaign had been entirely created by AI.

To support the unfounded allegation, they circulated screenshots on social media showing results from JustDone.

The tools tested by AFP sought to lure students and academics as clients, with two of them claiming their users came from top institutions such as Cornell University.

Cornell University told AFP it “does not have any established relations with AI detector companies.”

“Generative AI does provide an increased risk that students may use it to submit work that is not their own,” the university said.

“Unfortunately, it is unlikely that detection technologies will provide a workable solution to this problem. It can be very difficult to accurately detect AI-generated content.”

Fact-checkers, including those from AFP, often rely on AI visual detection tools developed by experts, which typically look for hidden watermarks and other digital clues.

However, they too can sometimes produce errors, making it necessary to supplement their findings with additional evidence such as open-source data.

The stakes are high as false readings from unreliable detectors threaten to erode trust in AI verification broadly — and feed a disinformation tactic researchers have dubbed the “liar’s dividend”: dismissing authentic content as AI fabrications.

“We often report on misinformers and other hoaxsters using AI to fabricate false images and videos,” said Waqar Rizvi from the misinformation tracker NewsGuard.

“Now, (we are) monitoring the opposite, but no less insidious phenomenon: claims that a visual was created by AI when in fact, it’s authentic.”

burs-ac/dw

Anthropic releases part of AI tool source code in ‘error’


ByAFP
April 1, 2026


A figurine in front of the logo of the AI assistant "Claude" seen in Paris in February - Copyright AFP/File Joel Saget

Anthropic accidentally released part of the internal source code for its AI-powered coding assistant Claude Code due to “human error,” the company said Tuesday.

An internal-use file mistakenly included in a software update pointed to an archive containing nearly 2,000 files and 500,000 lines of code, which were quickly copied to developer platform GitHub.

“Earlier today, a Claude Code release included some internal source code. No sensitive customer data or credentials were involved or exposed,” an Anthropic spokesperson said.

“This was a release packaging issue caused by human error, not a security breach.”

A post on X sharing a link to the leaked code had more than 29 million views early on Wednesday.

The exposed code related to the tool’s internal architecture but does not contain confidential data from Claude, the underlying AI model by Anthropic.

Claude Code’s source code was partially known, as the tool had been reverse-engineered by independent developers. An earlier version of the assistant had its source code exposed in February 2025.

AI giant Anthropic says ‘exploring’ Australia data centre investments


By AFP
March 31, 2026


Australia's arts sector has accused Anthropic and other AI companies of pushing to loosen copyright laws so chatbots can be trained on local songs and books - Copyright AFP JOEL SAGET
Steven TRASK

Artificial intelligence giant Anthropic is eyeing data centre investments in Australia, saying Wednesday the nation was a “natural partner” for work in the booming sector.

With immense renewable energy potential and vast stretches of uninhabited land, Australia has touted itself as a prime location for the power-hungry data centres needed to power AI.

US-based Anthropic said it was “exploring investments in data centre infrastructure and energy throughout the country” after signing a memorandum of understanding with the Australian government.

“The visit to Australia marks the beginning of long-term collaboration and investment into the Asia-Pacific region,” the technology company said in a statement.

“Australia’s investment in AI safety makes it a natural partner for responsible AI development.”

The agreement, signed by Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei in capital Canberra, said the firm would abide by local laws to “maintain strong social licence for investment”.

Australia’s arts sector has accused Anthropic and other AI companies of pushing to loosen copyright laws so chatbots can be trained on local songs and books.

Anthropic said it had also agreed to share AI research and safety information with Australian regulators, mirroring similar agreements in Japan and Britain.

Industry Minister Tim Ayres said Australia and Anthropic would “harness AI responsibly”.



– Energy-intensive –



New data centres — warehouse facilities that store files and power AI tools — are springing up worldwide.

But there are increasing fears about the environmental impact of hulking data hubs.

Singapore halted data centre developments between 2019 and 2022 over energy, water and land use worries.

Australia last week adopted new rules governing the operation of data centres.

Tech companies must show how they will source renewable energy and minimise their emissions.

“As demand for AI grows, continued expansion of data centre infrastructure must reflect Australian values and be environmentally and socially sustainable,” the guidelines state.

Anthropic’s Claude is the Pentagon’s most widely-deployed frontier AI model and the only such model currently operating on its classified systems.

But the company is locked in a dispute with the US government, after saying it would refuse to let its systems be used for mass surveillance.

Washington has since described Anthropic’s tools as an “unacceptable risk to national security”.

The United States has not only blocked use of the company’s technology by the Pentagon, but also requires all defense contractors to certify that they do not use Anthropic’s models.

Life with AI causing human brain ‘fry’


By AFP
March 30, 2026


Anthropic's AI assistant Claude vies with rival chatbots from OpenAI, Google and others to be the "agent" relied upon by businesses to independently get jobs done. — © AFP/File Joel Saget

Thomas URBAIN

Heavy users of artificial intelligence report being overwhelmed by trying to keep up with and on top of the technology designed to make their lives easier.

Too many lines of code to analyze, armies of AI assistants to wrangle, and lengthy prompts to draft are among the laments by hard-core AI adopters.

Consultants at Boston Consulting Group (BCG) have dubbed the phenomenon “AI brain fry,” a state of mental exhaustion stemming “from the excessive use or supervision of artificial intelligence tools, pushed beyond our cognitive limits.”

The rise of AI agents that tend to computer tasks on demand has put users in the position of managing smart, fast digital workers rather than having to grind through jobs themselves.

“It’s a brand-new kind of cognitive load,” said Ben Wigler, co-founder of the start-up LoveMind AI. “You have to really babysit these models.”

People experiencing AI burnout are not casually dabbling with the technology — They are creating legions of agents that need to be constantly managed, according to Tim Norton, founder of the AI integration consultancy nouvreLabs.

“That’s what’s causing the burnout,” Norton wrote in an X post.

However, BCG and others do not see it as a case of AI causing people to get burned out on their jobs.

A BCG study of 1,488 professionals in the United States actually found a decline in burnout rates when AI took over repetitive work tasks.

– Coding vigilance –

For now, “brain fry” is primarily a bane for software developers given that AI agents have excelled quickly at writing computer code.

“The cruel irony is that AI-generated code requires more careful review than human-written code,” software engineer Siddhant Khare wrote in a blog post.

“It is very scary to commit to hundreds of lines of AI-written code because there is a risk of security flaws or simply not understanding the entire codebase,” added Adam Mackintosh, a programmer for a Canadian company.

Anthropic has released tools such as Claude Code that excel at helping developers write software – Copyright GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP Michael M. Santiago

And if AI agents are not kept on course by a human, they could misunderstand an instruction and wander down an errant processing path, resulting in a business paying for wasted computing power.

– ‘Irritable’ –

Wigler noted that the promise of hitting goals fast with AI tempts tech start-up teams already prone to long workdays to lose track of time and stay on the job even deeper into the night.

“There is a unique kind of reward hacking that can go on when you have productivity at the scale that encourages even later hours,” Wigler said.

Mackintosh recalled spending 15 consecutive hours fine-tuning around 25,000 lines of code in an application.

“At the end, I felt like I couldn’t code anymore,” he recalled.

“I could tell my dopamine was shot because I was irritable and didn’t want to answer basic questions about my day.”

A musician and teacher who asked to remain anonymous spoke of struggling to put his brain “on pause”, instead spending evenings experimenting with AI.

Nonetheless, everyone interviewed for this story expressed overall positive views of AI despite the downsides.

BCG recommends in a recently published study that company leaders establish clear limits regarding employee use and supervision of AI.

However, “That self-care piece is not really an America workplace value,” Wigler said.

“So, I am very skeptical as to whether or not its going to be healthy or even high quality in the long term.”

One man, his dog, and ChatGPT: Australia’s AI vaccine saga


By AFP
March 30, 2026


Image: — © AFP/File SEBASTIEN BOZON

Purple ROMERO

Desperate to help his sick dog, one Australian man went down the ultimate ChatGPT research hole, using artificial intelligence to design a personalised experimental treatment and finding top scientists to administer it.

Paul Conyngham’s months-long quest to fight his rescue mutt Rosie’s cancer has grabbed the attention of OpenAI boss Sam Altman, who called it an “amazing story” in an X post on Friday.

Sydney-based AI consultant Conyngham told AFP that eight-year-old Rosie’s mast cell cancer is now in partial remission and her biggest tumour has shrunk dramatically.

“She regained a lot of mobility and function” after receiving a custom mRNA vaccine along with powerful immunotherapy in December, he said.

Conyngham does not call his findings a cure — but experts unrelated to the dogged endeavours said they highlight AI’s potential to accelerate medical research.

“I would have conversations and just keep them going non-stop” with ChatGPT, Gemini and Grok to study cancer therapies in-depth, Conyngham said.

Following the chatbots’ advice, he paid $3,000 to have Rosie’s genome sequenced, and used the same online tools to analyse her DNA data.

Next he turned to AlphaFold, a scientific AI model that won 2024’s chemistry Nobel, to better understand one of the mutated doggy genes.

Conyngham sought the help of a University of New South Wales (UNSW) team — also thanks to a ChatGPT recommendation — and other academics in Australia who made his research a reality.

– ‘Just a rash’ –

Rosie’s cancer was misdiagnosed for nearly a year, Conyngham said on the phone during one of the long daily walks the pair have resumed.

“I took her to the vet three times. And two times, the vet said, don’t worry about it, it’s just a rash,” he said.

But Rosie got sicker and a biopsy showed in 2024 that she did have terminal cancer.

Having tried chemotherapy, standard immunotherapy and surgery, costs were mounting and Conyngham wanted more options.

So he used AI to delve deep into the world of emerging treatments including mRNA vaccines, which train the body’s immune system and were widely used during the Covid pandemic.

“This was not a clinical trial by any means” and “it’s not that AI cured cancer”, said UNSW professor Martin Smith, who sequenced Rosie’s genome for Paul.

“It was really driven by his determination to help his dog.”

The combination of “three different disruptive technologies: genome sequencing, artificial intelligence, and RNA therapeutics… offers new possibilities and challenges”, Smith said.

– AI promise –

Chatbots also assisted Conyngham in navigating the reams of paperwork for ethical approval.

And through his new scientific network, he met a professor at the University of Queensland able to administer the fine-tuned treatment.

Not all the tumours responded as well as the largest one, however. Rosie has had to have another operation since, and it’s unclear how long she has left to live.

The “short answer is we don’t know for sure” what actually led to the reduction in size of Rosie’s biggest tumour, said Pall Thordarson, director of UNSW’s RNA institute which created the vaccine.

“He used the AI program… to design the actual mRNA sequence. And then he gave that information to us,” Thordarson explained.

“AI holds lots of promise to improve and accelerate our research strategies,” Nick Semenkovich at the Medical College of Wisconsin, unrelated to the Rosie saga, told AFP.

But UNSW and Conyngham “haven’t published scientific details outside of their press release and interviews, so we don’t know enough about the vaccine to understand how much AI helped in its development — or if the vaccine worked the way it was designed”, Semenkovich said.

Patrick Tang Ming-kuen, a professor from The Chinese University of Hong Kong, said AI-powered research could help pets and humans survive, although the risk of errors is real.

“AI transforms a ‘needle-in-a-haystack’ search into a data-driven selection process, drastically shortening the timeframe between diagnosis and vaccine construction,” he said.

Since Conyngham’s story went global, Smith said his team have been fielding various new requests.

“You know: my cat’s got a disease, my dog’s got a disease, my aunt has got a disease.”

But “it’s hard for us to be able to help”, he said. “There’s a lot of things that have to align.”

SPACE/COSMOS

Artemis will take NORTH Americans to the moon for the 1st time since 1972. Why has it been so hard to go back?

Five reasons human space flight is a bigger challenge today than it was during the Apollo era.

Andrew Romano, Reporter
Tue, March 31, 2026 

Updated Tue, March 31, 2026
Yahoo 


Astronaut Edwin E. "Buzz" Aldrin during an Apollo 11 moon walk in 1969.(Heritage Space/Heritage Images via Getty Images)

On Sept. 12 1962, President John F. Kennedy famously declared that the United States would “go to the moon … and do it first, before this decade is out.”

“We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things,” Kennedy said, “not because they are easy but because they are hard.”

Then America followed through. Less than seven years later, on July 20, 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin descended from their lander and left humankind’s first lunar footprints.

Today that pace of progress might seem impossible. On April 1, NASA is scheduled to launch Artemis II — America’s first crewed lunar spaceflight in more than a half century. Its mission is clear-cut: Send four astronauts around the moon and back in 10 days.

But Artemis II’s mission is also … familiar. In 1968, three Apollo 8 astronauts circled the moon without landing, then traveled back to Earth.

In other words, NASA already pulled off a version of Artemis II nearly 60 years ago — and did so without the long delays that have plagued Artemis II itself (which was previously scheduled to lift off, and then delayed, almost every year since 2021).

How can going to the moon be so difficult if we already did it? Here are five reasons human space flight is such a big challenge today.
Rustiness

The last time humans set foot on the moon was in 1972, with Apollo 17. That was also the last crewed mission beyond low Earth orbit — period. Even uncrewed lunar landers fell out of favor soon after, with more than 35 years elapsing between one successful robotic landing on the moon’s surface (the Soviet Union’s Luna 24 in 1976) and the next (China’s Chang’e 3 in 2013).

“There were decades when people were not developing landers,” one expert told the Guardian in 2024. “The technology is not that common that you can easily learn from others.”

Turns out that it’s hard to resume human space exploration after a multi-decade hiatus — especially when complex new technologies need to be integrated with older ones.

“We stopped, and then we forgot,” Scott Pace, director of the Space Policy Institute at George Washington University, recently told Scientific American. Just because you ran an Olympic marathon 50 years ago, Pace went on to explain, doesn’t mean you could do it again tomorrow.

The Space Launch System (SLS), with the Orion crew capsule, at Kennedy Space Center in 2026.(Steve Nesius/Reuters)

Ambition

Despite some superficial similarities, the Artemis program isn’t really Apollo, part two. Apollo sought to put people (briefly) on the moon. Artemis aspires to establish a permanent base there — a base that astronauts can later use as a stepping stone to Mars.

That’s a much more ambitious goal, and it defines every facet of Artemis: the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket that propels the astronauts beyond Earth’s atmosphere; the Orion spacecraft in which the four of them can spend 21 days; separate next-generation space suits for launch and entry as well surface exploration; robotic landers carried on commercial rockets that deliver equipment to the moon itself; and finally, the reusable rocket-and-human-lander system — either SpaceX’s Starship or Blue Origin's Blue Moon — that will eventually orbit the moon and dock with Orion before transporting the Artemis crew to and from the surface.

In short, there are more moving parts now than there were in the 1960s, which means more potential delays.

Motivation

In the 1960s, the U.S. was competing with the Soviet Union in an existential space race. Cold War conventional wisdom decreed that whichever superpower arrived on the moon first would reinforce its military dominance — and project precisely the kind of soft power that could sway newly independent countries to choose democracy over communism.

There’s a certain clarity about one-on-one competition, and the U.S. immediately mobilized around beating the Soviets to the moon. Now that clarity is gone. In its place is a more nebulous (and less pressing) objective: international cooperation in the name of scientific discovery. Japan, Canada, the United Arab Emirates and the European Space Agency are all collaborating with the United States on Artemis.

As a result, one president’s spaceflight plans are often canceled by the next, only to be resurrected later in a different form, and delays accrue while countries do the important work of getting on the same page about the future of space and contributing hardware to the cause.

Money

Between 2012 and 2025, the U.S. spent roughly $93 billion on the Artemis program. Total spending is expected to top $105 billion by 2028, the year the first Artemis astronauts are supposed to land on the moon.

That’s no small sum. But Apollo cost more than three times as much: about $320 billion in today’s dollars, according to the Planetary Society. Likewise, about 4% of the federal budget went to NASA in the Apollo era. Today the space agency is lucky to get 1%.

Experts say that shift is sensible. “There’s no reason to spend money like it was a war,” John Logsdon, professor emeritus at George Washington University and founder of the Space Policy Institute, told Scientific American. “There’s really no national interest or political interest that provides the foundation for that kind of mobilization at this point.”

But sensible or not, less funding almost always means slower progress.

Left to right, the Artemis II crew at Kennedy Space Center in 2025: pilot Victor Glover, mission specialist Jeremy Hansen of CSA (Canadian Space Agency), commander Reid Wiseman and mission specialist Christina Koch.(Joe Raedle/Getty Images)More
Safety

Given the scientific, cooperative nature of today’s moon missions — not to mention all the advances in computer modeling since the 1960s — it would be irresponsible for NASA not to consider every possible safety consequence of Artemis — to the astronauts themselves and to the broader environment.

This wasn’t quite the case during the Apollo era. Back then, swashbuckling fighter pilots were converted to astronauts and rocketed into space much in the way they’d previously been deployed to war: with the knowledge that they were doing something very, very dangerous. The risk was worth the reward (i.e., winning the space race).

But today engineers can run detailed simulations on Orion’s materials and the stresses the capsule will be under, including high temperatures and intense acceleration forces — and that’s exactly what they’ve been doing for years.

Even then, Artemis I — an uncrewed moon-orbiting mission launched in 2022 — showed that Orion’s heat shield broke down differently than predicted; that bolts on the spacecraft faced “unexpected melting and erosion”; and that the power system experienced anomalies that could endanger the future crew.

It took time for NASA to resolve these issues — just as it will take time to address any issues with, say, Orion’s life support systems that arise during its first crewed mission. Building earthbound infrastructure is slower and more expensive today than it was in the 1960s; so too is exploring the cosmos.

Some would argue that the tradeoff is worth it. “For Artemis, having a more robust rocket system, asking people what they think, keeping people safer and working with global partners are probably better for this world — even if they don’t result in expedience off-world,” Scientific American concluded in its recent story on the subject.

Put another way: At least NASA is still doing hard things, even if they’ve gotten (a lot) harder.

Why are NASA's Artemis astronauts wearing orange? What are they bringing to space? What to know about the preparation for their moon mission.

The custom suits are equipped with survival gear in case the crew has to exit the spacecraft after splashdown — and are easily visible in the ocean.

Dylan Stableford, Reporter
Updated Tue, March 31, 2026
Yahoo 



Left to right: Artemis II NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, and Christina Koch, and Canadian Space Agency astronaut Jeremy Hansen.(Frank Michaux/NASA)More


The four astronauts preparing to take part in NASA’s Artemis II moon mission will be wearing bright orange spacesuits on the Orion spacecraft for this week’s historic launch.

Officially called the Orion Crew Survival System, NASA says the spacesuits can help keep astronauts alive if they lose cabin pressure.

“Astronauts could survive inside the suit for up to six days as they make their way back to Earth,” the space agency explains on its website.



The suits are also equipped with survival gear should they have to exit the spacecraft after splashdown.

Each suit comes with its own life preserver that includes a personal locator beacon, a rescue knife, and a signaling kit with a mirror, strobe light, flashlight, whistle and light sticks.


And the reason they’re neon orange? “To make crew members easily visible in the ocean,” NASA says.

The astronauts will also be equipped with another spacesuit “that functions as a self-contained personal spaceship,” and is designed to be worn outside the spacecraft.
When is Artemis II scheduled to launch?

A full moon is seen shining over NASA's Space Launch System and Orion spacecraft at Kennedy Space Center on Feb. 1.(ASSOCIATED PRESS)More

After weeks of delays, NASA is targeting April 1 for the launch of the Artemis II mission — the first U.S. human lunar spaceflight in over 50 years.

The countdown clock officially started on Monday afternoon, and a two-hour launch window opens Wednesday at 6:24 p.m. ET, with additional launch opportunities through Monday, April 6.

The crew — NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover and Christina Koch and Canadian Space Agency astronaut Jeremy Hansen — won’t be landing on the moon. Instead, they’ll venture 600,000 miles around the moon and will return at 30 times the speed of sound, according to NASA.

During their 10-day trip, they’ll test life support systems in the Orion capsule for future crewed missions to the moon’s surface. A moon landing would occur during Artemis III, which is targeted to launch in 2027.
How else is the crew preparing for the mission?

The Artemis II crew arrived at the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Fla., on Friday and have been in quarantine ahead of launch.

The four astronauts have spent months getting to know each other while preparing for the launch, which Wiseman says has helped him as the mission's commander.

“I can just watch my crewmates here. I know their facial expressions. They know mine,” Wiseman said during a virtual press conference on Sunday. “We know when we're tense. We know when an immediate decision needs to be made.”

Wiseman also said that the crew has practiced restraint.

“We try to remind ourselves — every single time we fly, we say, ‘No fast hands in the cockpit,’” he explained. “You do not want to do anything too quick in this vehicle. You need to take your time. You need to process everything.”

He added: “We're going to go slow and we have the ultimate trust in each other. And that's how we will get through this.”

Is the crew bringing anything special to space?

The astronauts will have a mascot named Rise, designed by Lucas Ye, a second-grader from Mountain View, Calif., which will serve as a zero-gravity indicator to visually indicate when they are in space.

Ye’s design was selected from more than 2,600 submissions from over 50 countries, according to NASA.

Inside the mascot is an SD card with the names of more than 5.6 million people who participated in the “Send Your Name With Artemis” campaign.
What will the crew eat?

The quality of airline food is often the butt of jokes, but NASA’s menu for the Artemis crew is enough to make even Earth-bound diners jealous.

A total of 189 unique food items will be brought along for the journey, including beef brisket, macaroni and cheese and cobbler. The food brought on board isn’t just chosen for its taste, however. It’s carefully chosen to meet the astronaut’s needs.

“Food selections are developed in coordination with space food experts and the crew to balance calorie needs, hydration, and nutrient intake while accommodating individual crew preferences,” NASA wrote.

Everything also needs to last without being refrigerated, and be easy to prepare and safe to eat in microgravity — that means minimal crumbs. Even with those restrictions, NASA is able to send a surprising variety of options, including 10 different drinks; five hot sauces; nine condiments, spreads and spices; and a variety of sweets.
Why does NASA want to go to the moon again?

The Artemis program is NASA’s long-term mission to return humans to the moon to establish a continuous human presence. The goal is to develop a lunar settlement at its south pole, a region where it’s believed water ice is abundant and could be used for drinking, breathing and as a source for rocket fuel.

Another long-term mission of Artemis is to lay the foundation for future crewed missions to Mars. The program is building on the legacy of the Apollo-era missions to the moon in the late 1960s and early ’70s. The Artemis program is named for the ancient Greek goddess of the moon — the twin sister of Apollo.

“It is our strong hope that this mission is the start of an era where everyone — every person on earth — look at the moon and think of it as also a destination,” Koch said.

Scientists Investigating Whether Object NASA Is Approaching Is Core of Destroyed Planet

Victor Tangermann
Tue, March 31, 2026
FUTURISM

Researchers tried to figure out whether asteroid 16 Psyche, which NASA is visiting in 2029, is the remnant of a planet's core.
Key takeawaysPowered by Yahoo Scout. Yahoo is using AI to generate key points from this article. This means the info may not always match what’s in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.
Scientists are studying the asteroid 16 Psyche to determine if it is a core of a planetesimal or a homogeneous mixture of iron and rock.See more


Scientists have long been intrigued by an enormous potato-shaped asteroid, dubbed 16 Psyche, that they suspect to be teeming with metal — and therefore potentially worth a ludicrous amount of money to future asteroid mining operations.

The 173-mile object, which orbits the Sun in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, features two enormous crater-like depressions, which researchers say could be closely related to its still largely unknown origin story.

In a new paper published in the journal JGR Planets, an international team of researchers tried to get to the bottom of one of the key questions regarding 16 Psyche that remains unanswered. Is it a core of a planetesimal, a billions-of-years-old building block of a planet, in which case it would have a “large metallic core buried under rocks,” or is it a “homogeneous mixture of iron and rock?”

Put differently, could 16 Psyche be the ancient exposed remains of a planetary core whose crust and mantle were blown off, or is it a separate primordial lump of far less dense and potentially riddled-with-holes rock that either started out metal-rich or became blended with metal after colliding with other asteroids?

While the latest paper doesn’t necessarily exclude any of these possibilities — its simulations support both hypotheses — the goal was to know what to look out for once NASA’s mission to the space rock, which launched in October 2023, arrives roughly three and a half years from now.

Once there, the spacecraft could finally allow us to solve the mystery surrounding 16 Psyche’s history once and for all. As Universe Today points out, 16 Psyche’s size makes it far more approachable than the thousands of miles we’d have to drill into the Earth. (So far, we’ve only made it around 0.2 percent of the way to our own planet’s center.)

For their paper, the researchers took into consideration 16 Psyche’s unusual dented shape, previous findings that concluded it may be teeming with metal material, and its porosity.

“Large impact basins or craters excavate deep into the asteroid, which gives clues about what its interior is made of,” said first author and University of Arizona doctoral candidate Namya Baijal in a statement. “By simulating the formation of one of its largest craters, we were able to make testable predictions for Psyche’s overall composition when the spacecraft arrives.”

“One of our main findings was that the porosity — the amount of empty space inside the asteroid — plays a significant role in how these craters form,” she added. “Porosity is often ignored because it’s difficult to include in models, but our simulations show it can strongly affect the impact process and shape of craters left behind.”

A more porous asteroid would theoretically feature deeper and steeper-sided craters on its surface. The researchers are hoping that close-up observations by NASA’s Psyche mission could allow them to determine its porosity and therefore infer if its interior is metal clad in rock, or a more homogenous mix of both.

To explain their line of thinking, the researchers used the unusual metaphor of an abandoned pizza parlor.

“The cooks have long left, but you can look at what’s left behind — the ovens, scraps of dough, the toppings — and make inferences about how the pizzas were made,” said coauthor and University of Arizona’s Lunar and Planetary Laboratory professor Erik Asphaug in a statement. “We can’t get to the cores of Earth or Mars or Venus, but maybe we can get to the core of an early asteroid.”

The team came up with two possible interior structures.

“One is a layered structure with a metallic core and a thin, rocky mantle, which likely formed if a violent collision stripped away the outer layers,” Baijal explained. “The other is a uniform mixture of metal and silicate, created by a more catastrophic impact that mixed everything together, like some metal-rich meteorites found on Earth.”

By simulating a series of asteroid belt collisions with objects of varying sizes, they tried to reproduce the known dimensions of 16 Psyche’s craters.

“We found that an impactor about three miles across would create a crater of the right dimensions,” Baijal said. “The crater’s formation is consistent with both scenarios of Psyche’s makeup.”

In short, while we’re only inching closer to answering the question of whether 16 Psyche is the ancient remains of a planetary core, we’ll be ready when NASA’s mission gets there.

“When the spacecraft arrives at Psyche in a few years, the geochemists, geologists and modelers on the team will all be looking at the same object and trying to interpret what we see,” said Asphaug.

“This work gives us a head start,” he added.



Oops! NASA Once Lost a $125 Million Spacecraft Because Engineers Forgot to Convert to Metric

Elizabeth Rayne
Tue, March 31, 2026



Epic math fail doomed a NASA spacecraft

NASA - Getty Images


Here’s what you’ll learn when you read this story:

The Mars Climate Orbiter (MCO) launched in late 1998 and was predicted to reach Mars nine months later. But that never actually happened.


As the MCO approached Mars, it ventured far too close and either burned up in the atmosphere or was lost to another orbit.


NASA’s postmortem later found that the failure of the mission was a result of their contractor, Lockheed Martin, neglecting to convert to metric units in the software.

December 11, 1998—launch day for the Mars Climate Orbiter (MCO) and the accompanying Polar Lander, both of which were part of a larger NASA initiative known as Mars Surveyor ’98. NASA had commissioned Lockheed Martin to design and build the MCO, which was was destined to gather data on Martian weather while communicating with the Polar Lander.

There was just one problem: The orbiter would never reach Mars.

Superficially, everything seemed to be going according to plan. Lockheed Martin was at the design helm, and NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) was overseeing every aspect of the project. The MCO was equipped with eight thrusters intended to boost it into Mars orbit. It also had reaction wheels that could adjust its altitude and orientation, though they occasionally overdid the momentum, resulting in the MCO needing an angular momentum desaturation (AMD) event to reset itself. Once in orbit, the MCO was supposed to beam data back to specialized software on Earth, which would figure out its position and plan any necessary AMD events for the near future.

That communication was crucial, as it is for all active space missions. But soon after launch, software problems began to arise. During the journey, which was projected to last nine and a half months, the MCO’s software began acting up, requiring ground navigation data to be emailed to NASA for solutions. Even with corrections to the software, however, the MCO was still transmitting nonsensical data back to Earth.

In September of 1999, engineers computed and executed the final planned Trajectory Correction Maneuver (TCM-4) to refine the Mars Climate Orbiter’s approach to Mars. The intended trajectory would have produced a first periapsis (closest position to Mars) of about 140 miles (226 km) above the planet after orbit insertion. But navigators determined that the spacecraft’s predicted closest approach was lower than expected, revealing a serious trajectory error. The planet’s gravity was beginning to pull the orbiter in.

By the morning of September 23, 1999, the MCO had vanished with no way to reestablish communication. So…what happened?

According to NASA’s initial postmortem analysis, the spacecraft was only about 35 miles (57 km) from the ruddy surface of Mars when contact was lost. Engineers concluded that the orbiter either burned up in the Martian atmosphere or skipped off the atmosphere and was lost in space. When the agency investigated the following month and found a data issue, they noticed something suspicious about the small forces software that had been responsible for determining the MCO’s position and AMD: while everything else used metric units, this software was using Imperial units.

Lockheed Martin’s use of the wrong units in its software meant that the MCO was not even close to the trajectory it was supposed to be on. While NASA required Lockheed Martin to convert its measurements to metric units, the agency never verified which measurement system the company had employed before sending the MCO off to Mars, and there was reportedly no response from upper management when navigation staff voiced their concerns during the mission.

Investigators claimed that NASA was the party responsible for the failure of the mission, rather than Lockheed Martin. They stated that NASA officials had rushed everything to the detriment of the mission, neglecting to thoroughly test the small forces software as they should have, and that it was impossible to tell whether the systems engineering team had validated and verified the software to begin with.

Unfortunately, no matter whose fault it was, the Mars Polar Lander bore the brunt of the unit-conversion failure. Not long after this simple error pulled it disastrously away from its intended orbit, it was doomed to crash and bur



Starlink Satellite Explodes In Orbit, Yet Another Moment Of SpaceX Engineering Excellence

Ryan Erik King
Tue, March 31, 2026



The Headquarters of SpaceX in Hawthorne, California, with a Falcon 9 booster in March 2024. - Sven Piper/Getty Images

There are roughly 10,000 Starlink satellites in low Earth orbit, making it a crowded place due to Elon Musk's business ventures.

It would be ideal if satellites in a massive communications constellation didn't just spontaneously explode, but here we are. SpaceX announced that one of its Starlink satellites "experienced an anomaly on-orbit" on Sunday, which is a gentle way of saying that it blew to smithereens. This isn't the first time an Elon Musk internet box has detonated in low Earth orbit, with a similar incident in December. I would be surprised if Sunday's explosion was the last.

SpaceX claimed that the loss of Starlink satellite 34343 poses no new risk to the International Space Station or NASA's planned launch of Artemis II this week. According to The Verge, the incident created a debris field of "tens of objects." The debris should burn up in the atmosphere in a few weeks. Starlink satellites are already designed to die and completely disintegrate at the end of their service life. Hopefully, the debris doesn't cause any chaos in orbit before re-entry.

Space may be a near-perfect vacuum, but it isn't empty

Illustration concept of a fleet of Internet Starlink satellites in orbit above planet Earth. A line of communication satellites with the sun in the horizon. - xnk/Shutterstock

There are roughly 10,000 Starlink satellites in low Earth orbit, over a third of all the tracked objects in that part of space. Low Earth orbit is a crowded place, largely due to the business ventures of Elon Musk. It could get even worse. SpaceX filed a request with the Federal Communications Commission in January to launch one million AI data centers into orbit. Ignoring the fact that energy and cooling needs make that harebrained scheme impossible for even a single data center, the constellation would cut Earth off from the rest of space.

It would only be a matter of time before a SpaceX orbital data center exploded, spraying debris into neighboring data centers and triggering a chain reaction. The theoretical scenario was first posited in the 1970s by NASA scientists Donald Kessler. A Kessler syndrome event would destroy every satellite in low Earth orbit and smother the planet in a cloud of debris, making space launches impossible. While experimental technologies are being developed to capture space debris, it has already impacted human spaceflight: a Chinese crewed capsule was deemed unsafe following a debris strike in orbit last year.

US allies 'furious' ​Trump left them 'holding the bag' on war they didn't want: analyst

Matthew Chapman
March 31, 2026

RAW STORY


President Donald Trump's latest posture to get out of the war he started in Iran without fixing global oil markets has allied nations infuriated, Washington Post foreign affairs correspondent David Ignatius told MS NOW's Katy Tur on Tuesday.

This comes as Trump considers dropping the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz as a condition for ceasing hostilities, which would essentially keep 20 percent of the world's global oil trade suspended.

"David, can I go back to the other threat that Donald Trump made, the one up top, which is that this is not his problem. The Strait is not my problem, it's the allies' problem. They don't — we don't even need oil from the Strait. We have it here. If you want your oil, go and get it. I broke it, you fix it," said Tur. "How are our allies reacting to that?"

"Well, they are furious," said Ignatius. "They feel that — that they didn't start this war off, and in many cases that they didn't support it. And now they're being left holding the bag.

"That said, the pain of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is going to be felt by all of our allies, by China, by Japan, and simply in their own self-interest, they need to get moving to try to facilitate some solution," said Ignatius. "If they don't, the future is going to be increasingly bleak for them economically."

In other words, he said, "At some point, anger at Donald Trump for having helped create the situation needs to give way to something more pragmatic, and I would expect that will happen soon."

‘Learn How to Fight for Yourself’: Trump Says U.K. and Others Should Go to Strait of Hormuz and 'Take' Oil

Olivia-Anne Cleary and Tiago Ventura
Tue, March 31, 2026 

TIME

FILE - Ships sail through the Arabian Gulf toward the Strait of Hormuz as the sun sets in the United Arab Emirates Monday, March 23, 2026. (AP Photo,)


President Donald Trump said nations that are struggling to get jet fuel due to Iran’s chokehold of the Strait of Hormuz should go to the vital waterway and “take” the oil.

“All of those countries that can’t get jet fuel because of the Strait of Hormuz, like the United Kingdom, which refused to get involved in the decapitation of Iran, I have a suggestion for you: Number 1, buy from the U.S., we have plenty, and Number 2, build up some delayed courage, go to the Strait, and just take it,” he said Tuesday morning.

Continuing his message to nations who refused, beyond defensive measures, to actively get involved with the Iran war, Trump warned: “You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us.”

Trump went on to claim that Iran has “been, essentially, decimated” and that the “hard part” has been done by the U.S.

“Go get your own oil,” he concluded.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth echoed the President's sentiment during a Pentagon press briefing Monday morning, insisting that other nations should take greater responsibility for securing the Strait.

“There are countries around the world who ought to be prepared to step up on this critical waterway as well. It's not just the United States Navy,” he argued.

Taking aim at the U.K. efforts, in particular, he added: “Last time I checked, there was supposed to be a big, bad Royal Navy that could be prepared to do things like that as well.”

Hegseth said Trump is merely "pointing out this is an international waterway that we use less than most. In fact, dramatically less than most. So the world ought to pay attention to be prepared to stand up."

Soaring oil prices take a toll worldwide amid Iran war

The Trump Administration's messaging comes as high fuel prices and stockpile concerns are taking a toll worldwide.


Giddy Trump, 79, Posts Giant Explosion Video as Aides Cue Up Daily Destruction Footage

The U.K. is reportedly set to receive its last tanker of jet fuel from the Middle East this week, according to the Financial Times.

Korean Air is transitioning to emergency management mode in an effort to mitigate the impact of soaring jet fuel costs.

And consumers in the U.S. are also feeling the financial implications of the war, which is in its 32nd day.

According to price-tracking service GasBuddy and the American Automobile Association, for the first time since 2022, the national average retail price of gasoline crossed $4 per gallon. This marks an increase of more than $1 from before the Iran war began on Feb. 28.
Strikes rage on as Iran targets oil tanker after Trump's grave threat

U.S. and Iranian officials are in talks about potentially bringing an end to the war, yet strikes are continuing.

A Kuwait-flagged oil tanker anchored off the coast of Dubai was struck by Iranian missiles in the early hours of Tuesday.

According to local media, the Kuwait Petroleum Corporation said that the “Al-Salmi,” a large crude carrier, was “directly attacked by Iranian forces while positioned in the anchorage area of Dubai Port in the UAE.”

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center, run by the British military, also reported the strike, saying the vessel was 31 nautical miles (57 kilometers) northwest of Dubai.

The tanker was en route to Qingdao, China, according to MarineTraffic.com.

Maritime intelligence firm TankerTrackers.com said the ship was carrying around 1.2 million barrels of Saudi crude and 800,000 barrels of Kuwaiti crude, and had completed loading last month.

Iran’s military has not confirmed responsibility for the attack.

The attack came after Trump delivered a threat to Iran’s energy infrastructure and Kharg Island on Monday.

“Great progress” has been made in talks to end the war, Trump said, but he warned of grave action ahead if a “deal is not shortly reached” and if the vital Strait of Hormuz waterway “is not immediately open for business.”

Trump said the U.S. military action, if carried out, would be “in retribution for our many soldiers, and others, that Iran has butchered and killed over the old regime’s 47-year reign of terror.”

Is the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz integral to a U.S.-Iran cease-fire deal?

Despite Trump’s repeated emphasis on unblocking the Strait—a key transit route between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman through which around a fifth of global oil production flows—the White House signaled later on Monday that ending the war does not depend on fully reopening the waterway.

Press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that ensuring safe passage for oil tankers is not one of the Administration’s “core objectives.”

“The full reopening of the Strait is something the Administration is working towards, but the core objectives of the operation have been clearly defined for the American people by the Commander in Chief,” Leavitt said.

When asked if securing the Strait of Hormuz is an essential objective of the military operation, Hegseth referred reporters to the President's Tuesday morning statement and reiterated the Trump Administration's stance that the Strait is "not just a United States of America problem."

THE GRIFT

US Polar LNG eyes equipment of sanctioned Russian Arctic LNG 2 project

/ NovatekFacebook

TwitterLinkedInTelegramlipboardeedly

By bne IntelliNews March 31, 2026

US-based Polar LNG is seeking approval to purchase discounted equipment from sanctioned Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 project, owned by gas major Novatek (NVTK), to support an LNG plant in Alaska, according to Reuters citing company CEO Joel Riddle.

As followed by bne IntelliNews, Russia remained the fourth-largest supplier of natural gas to the EU in 2025, exporting nearly 38bn cubic metres despite ongoing efforts by the bloc to reduce energy reliance on Moscow following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. 

For LNG in particular, the EU remained the top buyer of Russian Arctic LNG operated by Novatek despite the 2027 phase-out pledge.

Reuters now reports that Polar LNG aims to acquire equipment, including a partially completed liquefaction train from Arctic LNG 2, a project under US sanctions imposed by both the Joe Biden and the Donald Trump administrations. 

The company is reportedly seeking approval from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), while the US Treasury declined to comment, and Novatek did not respond to requests.

Riddle said the company plans to make a final investment decision by mid-2027 and begin production in 2029 or 2030. He noted that the project will target exports to Japan, South Korea and other markets, and that the equipment is “Arctic tested”, making it suitable for Alaska’s North Slope conditions.

The project’s first phase is expected to require $8bn-9bn in investment, with potential expansion through additional phases of similar scale. Polar LNG intends to finance more than half of the project with US capital, while remaining open to investment from international partners.

Reuters also reiterated previous reports that investor Gentry Beach, with ties to Trump, is involved in the project. The company reportedly also plans to acquire six icebreakers and coordinate with the broader Alaska LNG initiative supported by the US administration.

IN COMPETITION WITH CANADAS WEST COAST LNG TERMINALS