Introduction Cyber threats targeting supply chains have become a growing concern for businesses across industries. As companies continue to expand their reliance on third-party vendors, cloud-based services, and global logistics networks, cybercriminals are exploiting vulnerabilities within these interconnected systems to launch attacks. By first infiltrating a third-party vendor with undetected security gaps, attackers can establish a foothold, leveraging these weaknesses to penetrate the primary business partners' network. From there, they move laterally through critical systems, ultimately gaining access to sensitive data, financial assets, intellectual property, or even operational controls. Recent high-profile breaches like the 2024 ransomware attack that hit Change Healthcare, one of the world's largest health payment processing companies, demonstrate how attackers disrupted supply chain operations stealing up to 6TB of millions of patients' protected health information (PHI). This incident was one of the most disruptive cyberattacks on U.S. critical infrastructure to date and could have been prevented with simple multifactor authentication (MFA) on the targeted remote server.1 Unlike traditional cyber threats that target a single organization, supply chain attacks exploit the weakest links within a business ecosystem. As businesses work to mitigate risks, it is important to understand the emerging threat landscape, the industries most at risk, and the security strategies necessary to secure supply chains. Additionally, as the U.S. implements new tariffs on foreign goods, businesses must assess whether these trade policies will introduce new cybersecurity challenges or alleviate some existing risks. Emerging Threats Affecting Supply Chains Ransomware Attacks: Ransomware has evolved into one of the most damaging cyber threats to supply chains. Attackers increasingly target logistics providers, manufacturers, and critical suppliers, encrypting their systems and demanding hefty ransoms to restore operations. In 2024 CDK Global, a software provider for nearly 15,000 North American car dealerships, was hit by a ransomware attack. The malware targeted personally identifiable information (PII) such as Social Security numbers, bank account details, and credit card data. Dealerships were forced to revert to manual operations for days if not weeks thereafter, including using pen and paper and physically transporting auto records to Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) offices in the U.S. The attack resulted in significant operational disruptions and financial losses estimated at over $1 billion.1 Software Supply Chain Attacks: Cybercriminals have shifted their focus to compromising software vendors, and injecting malicious code into trusted applications and updates. In April 2024, hackers uploaded malicious Visual Studio projects to GitHub, manipulating search algorithms to increase visibility. These projects contained malware resembling Keyzetsu Clipper, designed to intercept and alter cryptocurrency wallet addresses copied to the clipboard, redirecting funds to attackers.2 Third-Party Credential Theft: Attackers often gain access to corporate networks by exploiting weak authentication measures used by third-party vendors. Phishing attacks, credential stuffing, and password leaks provide hackers with a pathway to infiltrate multiple organizations through a single compromised vendor. Weak vendor security practices can allow unauthorized access to critical systems, leading to data theft and operational disruptions. AI-Powered Cyber Attacks: Artificial Intelligence has become a double-edged sword in cybersecurity. While businesses use AI for threat detection and defense, cybercriminals leverage AI to automate phishing campaigns, bypass security controls, and identify vulnerabilities within supply chain networks. AI-driven attacks make it easier for hackers to evade detection, increasing the frequency and sophistication of supply chain cyber threats. IoT and OT Exploits: Supply chain operations heavily rely on Internet of Things (IoT) and Operational Technology (OT) devices, such as smart sensors, automated manufacturing equipment, medical devices, and connected logistics systems. However, many IoT and OT devices lack robust security measures, making them attractive targets for hackers. Cybercriminals exploit vulnerabilities in these devices to launch distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, manipulate production processes, or gain access to enterprise networks. Industries Most Impacted and Why Manufacturing & Industrial Manufacturers depend on global supply chains for raw materials, hardware components, and logistics. Cyberattacks targeting industrial control systems (ICS) and enterprise resources planning (ERP) software can halt production, delay shipments, and lead to financial losses. Additionally, intellectual property theft poses a significant risk in this sector, as hackers target sensitive trade secrets. Healthcare & Pharmaceuticals The healthcare industry relies heavily on third-party suppliers, wholesale distribution centers, R&D, lab equipment and chemical suppliers, hospitals and clinics, government buyers, and more. Healthcare, and specifically pharmaceutical companies, must manage one of the largest industry supply chains filled with 10s if not 100s of vendors. A breach within the healthcare supply chain can be devastating and compromise patient data, disrupt hospital operations, and even impact the development and/or distribution of critical medicines. This was no more evident than the 2020 attack on the COVID-19 vaccine supply chain that highlighted the vulnerabilities in this sector. Retail & E-Commerce Retailers and e-commerce businesses depend on logistics providers, payment processors, and digital marketing platforms, all of which introduce third-party cyber risks. Cybercriminals frequently target online checkout systems, warehouse automation tools, and supplier databases to steal payment information and personal customer data. Energy & Critical Infrastructure Power grids, fuel pipelines, transportation, and water treatment facilities depend on complex supply chains involving multiple vendors and contractors. A cyberattack on a single supplier can disrupt entire sectors, as seen in the March 2025 cyberattack targeting Ukraine's state-owned railway company, Ukrzaliznytsia, disrupting both passenger and freight transport services.3 Banking & Financial Services Since Open Banking first exploded, banks and financial institutions work with numerous third-party service providers to access consumer banking data through APIs. It was introduced to foster competition and innovation and enhance customer control over financial data. Open Banking started in response to regulatory initiatives like the PSD2 (Revised Payment Services Directive) in the EU and CMA's Open Banking regulations in the UK, aiming to break the monopoly of traditional banks, encourage fintech growth, and improve financial transparency and services. A supply chain breach in this sector can expose sensitive financial data, disrupt banking operations, and lead to large-scale fraud. Proactive Security Strategies for Supply Chain Protection As global networks expand, businesses must go beyond securing their own environments to account for the risks posed by third-party vendors. The shift has forced organizations to move from reactive incident response toward proactive security strategies that anticipate, detect, and neutralize threats before they can cause disruption. As a result, cybersecurity is no longer just about responding to attacks – it's about predicting and preventing them to strengthen supply chain resilience and ensure business continuity. Here are a few security strategies that are proving effective. Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)Organizations should proactively identify, validate, prioritize, and mitigate security gaps in their supply chains using CTEM frameworks. These approaches continuously analyze attack vectors, ensuring rapid response to emerging threats. Continuous Penetration Testing & External Attack Surface Management (EASM)Automated pentesting can provide continuous testing of vendor systems to help uncover vulnerabilities before cybercriminals do. Attack Surface Management (ASM) tools enable businesses to map and monitor all external-facing assets, reducing the risk of unknown exposures. Regulatory Compliance & StandardsCompanies should align their security strategies with industry regulations such as NIST's Cybersecurity Framework, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) guidelines, and ISO 27001 standards. Compliance with these frameworks ensures a baseline of security practices within supply chains. AI-Driven Threat DetectionLeveraging artificial intelligence for real-time threat detection and anomaly analysis can help businesses identify vulnerabilities within the supply chain that normally would not be discovered. AI-powered security tools analyze large volumes of supply chain data to detect suspicious activities and predict potential attacks. Impact of U.S. Tariffs on Cybersecurity in Supply Chains U.S. tariffs on imported technology, hardware, raw materials, and software, for example, have implications well beyond economics – they also affect the security and resilience of critical infrastructure. As costs rise, businesses may seek alternative suppliers, potentially exposing themselves to greater security risks. These shifts in sourcing can introduce new vendors with varying security standards, increasing the likelihood of supply chain attacks. Increase Costs & Vendor Shifts: New tariffs on foreign goods may force businesses to change suppliers. Vendors from different regions may have weak security protocols, requiring additional vetting and security assessments. Reshoring & Nearshoring Trends: To reduce reliance on foreign suppliers, many U.S. companies are reshoring (bringing production back to the U.S.) or nearshoring (moving operations closer to the U.S.). While this shift may reduce risks associated with foreign supply chain attacks, it may also introduce new cyber threats related to domestic infrastructure security. Regulatory & Compliance Burdens: New trade policies could require companies to comply with additional cybersecurity regulations when sourcing from certain regions. This may lead to increased costs for security compliance and risk assessments. Potential Risk in Cyber Espionage: Geopolitical tensions arising from tariff policies could drive more state-sponsored cyberattacks on U.S. companies. Businesses must remain vigilant against espionage attempts targeting trade secrets and supply chain data. Conclusion A secure supply chain is not just about protecting assets – it's about maintaining trust, resilience, and operational stability. As cyber threats grow in sophistication and supply chain dependencies increase, organizations that take a proactive security stance will be better positioned to mitigate risk and sustain long-term growth. Now, more than ever, is the time to evaluate vendor relationships, strengthen defenses, and embed security into every state of the supply chain lifecycle. The future belongs to those who anticipate threats, not just react to them. References: ProWriters. (2024). What 2024 supply chain attacks can you show your clients. ProWriters Cyber Insurance Blog. Retrieved from https://prowritersins.com/cyber-insurance-blog/supply-chain-cyber-attacks-in-review/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Kaspersky. (2024). The biggest supply chain attacks in 2024: Malicious Visual Studio projects spread malware on GitHub. Kaspersky Official Blog. Retrieved from https://me-en.kaspersky.com/blog/malicious-code-in-github/23858/ Reuters. (2025, March 27). Ukraine railways says online services partially restored after cyber attack. Reuters. Retrieved from: https://www.reuters.com/technology/cybersecurity/ukraine-state-railway-says-online-services-partially-restored-after-cyber-attack-2025-03-27/ Found this article interesting? This article is a contributed piece from one of our valued partners. Follow us on Twitter  and LinkedIn to read more exclusive content we post.

Tameem Iftikhar, CTO, GrowthLoopApril 16, 20254 Min ReadBrain light via Alamy StockBuilding a thriving tech company isn’t all about better code or faster product launches -- you have to foster an environment where experimentation is the norm. Establishing a culture where employees can safely push boundaries encourages adaptability, drives long-term innovation, and leads to more engaged teams. These are critical advantages in the face of high turnover and intense competition.   Through my own process of trial and error, I’ve learned three key strategies engineering leaders can use to make fearless experimentation part of their team’s DNA. Strategy #1: Normalize failure and crazy ideasA few months into my first job, I took down several production servers while trying to improve performance. Instead of blaming me, my manager focused on what we could learn from the experience. That moment gave me the confidence to push boundaries again. From then on, I knew that failure was not an end, but a steppingstone to future wins. It’s now a mindset that I encourage every leader to adopt. Innovation is messy and risky -- here’s how leaders can embrace the chaos and bold thinking: Build a "no-judgment zone": Before every brainstorming and feedback session, re-establish that there are no bad ideas. This might seem straightforward, but it can make the team feel safe, suggesting radical solutions and voicing their opinions.  Related:Encourage "what if?" questions: Out-there ideas like “What would this look like if we had no technical constraints?” or “What would it take to make this 10x better instead of just 10%?” encourage teams to consider problems and solutions from a new perspective. Leaders should walk the walk by asking these same types of questions in meetings. Celebrate the process, not just the outcome: Acknowledge smart risks – even if they don’t succeed. Whether it’s a shoutout in a team meeting or a more detailed discussion in Slack, take the time to highlight the idea and why it is worth pursuing.    Use failure to fuel future successes: If a project falls short of its goals, don’t bury it and move on right away. Instead, hold a session to discuss the positives and what can be done differently next time. This turns missteps into momentum and helps the team get more savvy with every experiment.  Strategy #2: Give experimentation a frameworkFor experimentation to flourish, leaders must provide teams with the guidelines and resources they need to turn bold thoughts into tangible products. I suggest the following: Allow for proof-of-concept testing: Dedicate space for testing in the product development lifecycle, especially when designing technical specifications. Related:Make room for wild ideas: One of my favorite approaches is adding a "Crazy Ideas" section to our product or technical spec templates. Just having it there inspires the team to push boundaries and propose unconventional solutions. Establish hackathons with purpose: At our company, we encourage hackathons that step outside our product roadmap to broaden our thinking. And don’t forget to make them fun! Let teams pitch and vote on ideas, adding some excitement to the process. Use AI to unlock creativity: AI allows developers to build faster and focus on higher-order thinking. Provide the team with AI tools that automate repetitive tasks, speed up iteration cycles, and generate quick proofs-of-concept, allowing them to spend more time innovating and less on process-heavy tasks. AI also helps teams prototype multiple versions of a new solution, letting them test and adjust at speed. I’ve seen these strategies produce incredible results from my teams. Our hackathons have led to some of our most important breakthroughs, including our first AI feature and the implementation of internal tools that have significantly improved our workflows. Related:Strategy #3: Test, learn, and refineHigh-performing teams know that experimentation isn't failure -- it’s insight in disguise. Here’s how to maintain a strong understanding of how each project is progressing: Set clear success metrics: Experimentation works best when teams know what they’re testing for. The key is setting a clear purpose for each experiment and determining quickly whether it’s heading in the right direction. Regularly ask internal teams or customers for feedback to get fresh perspectives. Share what works (and what doesn’t): Prioritize open knowledge-sharing across teams, breaking down communication silos in the process. Whether through Slack check-ins or full-company meetings, the more teams learn from each other, the faster innovation compounds.  Run micro-pilots: Leverage these small-scale, real-world tests with a subset of users. Instead of waiting to perfect a feature internally, my team launches a basic version to 5-10% of our customers. This controlled rollout lets us quickly gather feedback and usage data without the risk of a full product launch missing the mark. Make experimentation visible: For example, host weekly “demo days” where every team presents its latest experiments, including wins, failures, and lessons learned. Moments like this foster cross-team collaboration, which is key to staying agile. Most transformative technologies -- from email to generative AI -- probably sounded off the wall at first. But because the engineers behind them were allowed to push boundaries, we have tools that have changed our lives. Leaders must create an environment where engineering teams can take risks, even if they sometimes fail. The companies that experiment today will be the ones leading innovation tomorrow. About the AuthorTameem IftikharCTO, GrowthLoopTameem Iftikhar is the chief technology officer at GrowthLoop, a seasoned entrepreneur, and a technology leader specializing in AI and machine learning. He co-founded Rucksack and Divebox, and has worked as an engineer and developer with Symantec and IBM. Tameem holds a Bachelor of Applied Science in Electrical and Computer Engineering from the University of Toronto. See more from Tameem IftikharWebinarsMore WebinarsReportsMore ReportsNever Miss a Beat: Get a snapshot of the issues affecting the IT industry straight to your inbox.SIGN-UPYou May Also Like

The following post and video contains spoilers for the season finale of Daredevil: Born Again.Wilson Fisk survived Bullseye’s assassination attempt — but pay close attention to the blood stain on his bright white shirt in the scenes that follow. It looks almost exactly like the blood on Muse’s shirt and on his artwork, linking these two key villain characters from this season on Daredevil: Born Again. It also symbolically shows just how dirty Fisk’s hands are, regardless of whatever he claims in public.That’s one of the many Easter eggs, Marvel references, and little details you might have missed in the final episode of Daredevil: Born Again for 2025. In our latest Daredevil video, we’ll also talk about the Kingpin’s signature white suit, what his master plan has been over the course of the entire season, and the callback to Matt and Foggy’s time in law school. Watch our full Easter egg breakdown below:READ MORE: The Worst Marvel Comics EverIf you liked that video on all of the Easter eggs in the season finale of Daredevil: Born Again, check out more of our videos below, including one on Daredevil: Born Again Episode 7 and why the end of the Muse storyline was a huge mistake, one on why Spider-Man isn’t among the announced cast of Avengers: Doomsday, and one on what we can expect from every member of the Avengers: Doomsday cast, and why RDJr. shushed everyone. Plus, there’s tons more videos over at ScreenCrush’s YouTube channel. Be sure to subscribe to catch all our future episodes. The full season of Daredevil: Born Again is now streaming on Disney+.Sign up for Disney+ here.Get our free mobile appEvery Marvel Cinematic Universe Movie, Ranked From Worst to BestIt started with Iron Man and it’s continued and expanded ever since. It’s the Marvel Cinematic Universe, with 35 movies and counting. But what’s the best and the worst? We ranked them all.

Position descriptionFreedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting, defending, and empowering public-interest journalism, is hiring a senior UX engineer to implement improvements to our websites Freedom.press, the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker, and SecureDrop.org.Reporting to the engineering manager (web and Dangerzone), this position will join a small team of web developers working on high-impact projects like the integration of “Action Center” functionality on the FPF website, deeper integration between our CMS and email newsletters, and improved data visualizations for the U.S. Press Freedom Tracker.ResponsibilitiesDesign, prototype, and implement website components, pages, and templatesDevelop integration code with Python APIs and the Wagtail CMSInform internal needs-finding processes with design ideas and prototypesDevelop internal style guides and front-end development documentationTest our websites for accessibility and usability issues and resolve them consistent with best practicesQualificationsRequiredFive-plus years of experience as a UX engineer, front-end developer, product engineer, or comparable hybrid role at the intersection of development and UX, working as part of a teamPassion for the First Amendment and protecting the press freedom rights of allDeep understanding of HTML, CSS (including responsive design and modern CSS features like grids), and modern JavaScript frameworks like ReactProficiency in building and maintaining component libraries, style guides, or design systems.Experience with apps such as Figma, Sketch, or other UX tools creating user flows, wireframes, or interactive prototypes.Capability in writing and modifying Python classes and methods to support front-end features. You don’t need to be as capable in Python as in front-end technology, but you should be familiar with itPreferredExperience working in Python-based projects (e.g., Django-based CMS code)Familiarity with WCAG guidelines, ARIA attributes, and screen-reader testing toolsExperience conducting (or closely collaborating on) user testing and incorporating feedback into design and codeUnderstanding of front-end performance tools and techniques (e.g., Lighthouse audits, bundle optimization)Working with usThis is a full-time role with a competitive nonprofit salary in the range of $115,000-125,000, depending on experience. This position will preferably be based in FPF’s Brooklyn headquarters; however, strong U.S.-based remote candidates will also be considered. For more information on our full benefits package, please visit our website’s careers page. FPF does not discriminate on the basis of an individual’s sex, age, race, color, creed, national origin, alienage, religion, marital status, pregnancy, sexual or reproductive health decisions, sexual orientation or affectional preference, gender identity and expression, disability, genetic trait or predisposition, carrier status, citizenship, veteran or military status, and other personal characteristics protected by law.How to applyIf you think you’d like to be a part of our team, please submit your résumé and a cover letter (no longer than one page). Portfolios of previous design or engineering work are welcome but not required.After an initial application review, FPF’s hiring process involves a phone screen with HR, an interview with the hiring manager, and an at-home test. For candidates moving to the final stages, an organization-wide panel and a final meeting with our executive director will follow.

Update: Sources confirm that, at an 11:15AM meeting, undersecretary Darren Beattie has announced the closure of the office, and the termination of all remaining positions.  The only office within the US State Department that monitors foreign disinformation is about to be eliminated, two State Department officials have told MIT Technology Review. The Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference (R/FIMI) Hub is a small office in the State Department’s Office of Public Diplomacy that tracks and counters foreign disinformation campaigns.  In shutting R/FIMI, the department’s controversial acting undersecretary, Darren Beattie, is delivering a major win to conservative critics who have alleged that it censors conservative voices. Created at the end of 2024, it was reorganized from the Global Engagement Center, a larger office with a similar mission that had long been criticized by conservatives who claimed that, despite its international mission, it was censoring American conservatives. In 2023, Elon Musk called the center the “worst offender in US government censorship [and] media manipulation” and a “threat to our democracy.”  The culling of the office will leave the State Department without a way to actively counter the increasingly sophisticated disinformation campaigns from foreign governments like those of Russia, Iran, and China. The office could be shuttered as soon as today, according to sources at the State Department who spoke with MIT Technology Review. Shortly after publication, employees at R/FIMI received an email inviting them to an 11:15AM meeting with Beattie, where employees were told that the office—and their jobs— is being eliminated.  Censorship claims For years, conservative voices both in and out of government have accused Big Tech of censoring conservative views—and they often charged R/FIMI’s predecessor office, the Global Engagement Center (GEC), with enabling such censorship.  GEC had its roots as the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications (CSCC), created by an Obama-era executive order, but shifted its mission to fight propaganda and disinformation from foreign governments and terrorist organizations in 2016, becoming the Global Engagement Center. It was always explicitly focused on the international information space. It shut down last December after a measure to reauthorize its $61 million budget was blocked by Republicans in Congress, who accused it of helping Big Tech censor American conservative voices.  R/FIMI had a similar goal of fighting foreign disinformation, but it was smaller: The office had a $51.9 million budget and a staff that, by mid-April, was down to just 40 employees, from 125 at GEC. Sources say that those employees will be put on administrative leave and terminated within 30 days.  With the change in administrations, R/FIMI had never really gotten off the ground. Beattie, a controversial pick for undersecretary—he was fired as a speechwriter during the first Trump administration for attending a white nationalism conference, has suggested that the FBI organized the January 6 attack on Congress, and has said that it’s not worth defending Taiwan from China—had instructed the few remaining staff to be “pencils down,” one State Department official told me, meaning to pause in their work.  The administration’s executive order on “countering censorship and restoring freedom of speech” reads like a summary of conservative accusations against GEC: “Under the guise of combatting “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “malinformation,” the Federal Government infringed on the constitutionally protected speech rights of American citizens across the United States in a manner that advanced the Government’s preferred narrative about significant matters of public debate.  Government censorship of speech is intolerable in a free society.” In 2023, the Daily Wire, founded by the conservative media personality Ben Shapiro, was one of two media outlets that sued GEC for allegedly infringing on the company’s First Amendment rights by funding two nonprofit organizations, the London-based Global Disinformation Index and New York–based NewsGuard, that had labeled the Daily Wire “unreliable,” “risky,” and/or (per GDI) susceptible to foreign disinformation. The lawsuit alleged that this amounted to censorship by “starving them of advertising revenue and reducing the circulation of their reporting and speech.” Those projects were not funded by GEC. In 2022, the Republican attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana named GEC among the federal agencies that, they alleged, were pressuring social networks to censor conservative views. Though the case eventually made its way to the Supreme Court, which found no First Amendment violations, a lower court had already removed GEC’s name from the list of defendants, ruling there was “no evidence” that GEC’s communications with the social media platforms had gone beyond “educating the platforms on ‘tools and techniques used by foreign actors.’” The stakes The GEC—and now R/FIMI—was targeted as part of a wider campaign to shut down groups accused of being “weaponized” against conservatives.  Conservative critics railing against what they have called a “disinformation-industrial complex” have also taken aim at the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and the Stanford Internet Observatory, a prominent research group that conducted widely cited research on the flows of disinformation during elections.  CISA’s former director, Chris Krebs, was personally targeted in an April 9 White House memo, while in response to the criticism and millions of dollars of legal fees, Stanford University shuttered the Stanford Internet Observatory ahead of the 2024 presidential elections.   But this targeting comes at a time when foreign disinformation campaigns—especially by Russia, China, and Iran—have become increasingly sophisticated.  According to one estimate, Russia spends $1.5 billion per year on foreign influence campaigns. In 2022, the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, that country’s primary foreign propaganda arm, had a $1.26 billion budget. And a 2015 estimate suggests that China spent up to $10 billion per year on media targeting non-Chinese foreigners—a figure that has almost certainly grown. In September 2024, the Justice Department indicted two employees of RT, a Russian state-owned propaganda agency, in a $10 million scheme to create propaganda aimed at influencing US audiences through a media company that has since been identified as the conservative Tenet Media.  The GEC was one effort to counter such campaigns. Some of its recent projects have included developing AI models to detect memes and deepfakes and exposing Russian propaganda efforts to influence Latin American public opinion against the war in Ukraine.  By law, the Office of Public Diplomacy has to provide Congress with 15-day advance notice of any intent to reassign any funding allocated by Congress over $1 million. Congress then has time to respond, ask questions, and challenge the decisions—though to judge from its record with other unilateral executive-branch decisions to gut government agencies, it is unlikely to do so. 

A former pub and canalside cash and carry could be demolished to free up the site Simplified view of how the scheme could look when built. It is currently submitted as an outline application. Buttress Architects has submitted outline planning applications for 141 homes on a derelict site bordering the Caldon Canal.  The proposals, designed for Stoke-on-Trent Council, are for a mixed-tenure scheme at Pyenest Street, Shelton, comprising 35 properties for social, affordable or intermediate rent and the rest for market housing. Several industrial buildings along the canal may be demolished to make way for development. These include a former cash and carry canalside warehouse and the former Harry Ranjams pub, which has partially collapsed. Both are classed as “non-designated heritage assets”. The majority of the buildings on the council-owned site have already been demolished, with the remaining structures left in various stages of disrepair. In February, Stoke-on-Trent Council named Manchester-based developer Genr8 Kajima Regeneration Limited preferred bidder for its Etruscan Square project, which aims to deliver around 400 homes alongside leisure facilities and shops in the city centre. The project team also includes Planit as landscape architect and Stantec on transport and planning.

Google says it will still provide local search results while redirecting its country-level domains to google.com.

April 16, 20255 min readShift to Clean Energy Will Persist under Trump, New Analyses SayPresident Trump’s efforts to dismantle climate policies won’t stop renewables from rising or fossil fuels from slowing, according to outlooks from the U.S. Energy Information Administration and BloombergNEFBlades of wind turbines surround an oil well pumping unit in an agricultural field in Denton, Texas. Ed Lallo/Getty ImagesCLIMATEWIRE | America’s energy transition will slow — but won’t stop entirely — if President Donald Trump is successful in repealing environmental regulations and slashing green subsidies, according to a pair of analyses released Tuesday.The annual energy outlooks from the U.S. Energy Information Administration and BloombergNEF offer a window to the country's potential energy future after Trump. Both project rising renewable electricity generation, even in scenarios where Trump’s deregulatory agenda is successful. And both forecast rising electricity demand through 2050, though the EIA outlook notably finds that overall U.S. energy demand will fall as homes and vehicles use less fossil fuel.Coal generation, oil production and gasoline consumption are predicted to fare better in scenarios where Trump succeeds in rolling back regulations, under EIA’s projections. The agency — an independently operating data crunch branch of the Department of Energy — also forecasts big spikes in electricity prices over the next few decades.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.DOE blasted its own agency's findings Tuesday.“Today’s report from EIA reflects the disastrous path for American energy production under the Biden administration — a path that was soundly rejected by the American people last November,” DOE spokesperson Andrea Woods said in a statement. “By unleashing energy that is affordable, reliable, and secure, this administration is ensuring America’s future is marked by energy growth and abundance — not scarcity.”The EIA outlook is the first since 2023. The agency paused the report last year to update its models.Total U.S. electricity demand is expected to rise by roughly 50 percent by 2050 in EIA’s reference case. That forecast fits with broad expectations for big jumps in electricity demand as artificial intelligence and data center projects proliferate. It also follows increased electrification in the wake of the Inflation Reduction Act, the 2022 climate law that provided billions of dollars in tax credits and grants for new clean energy systems.“It’s pretty clear that electricity demand is increasing and more end use demands are being met with electricity. Much of that was incentivized with the Inflation Reduction Act,” Joseph DeCarolis, the EIA administrator under former President Joe Biden, told POLITICO's E&E News in an interview.Republican congressional leaders are aiming to repeal parts of the IRA as part of an upcoming budget package. But Matthias Kimmel, co-author of the BNEF report, said policymakers need to invest even more in clean energy to tackle climate change and "capitalize on emerging opportunities surrounding energy supply and security."“Major investment and rapid deployment of clean energy technologies across markets is essential to materializing real change," said Kimmel, head of energy economics at BNEF. The research firm covers the energy transition and is part of the wider media empire owned by Michael Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor and an outspoken climate hawk.AI boomRising electricity demand associated with data centers and artificial intelligence figures prominently in both EIA and BNEF outlooks.EIA projects that commercial electricity sales will grow by roughly 20 percent through 2035 as a result of data center growth. BNEF sees a similar trend. Data centers are expected to account for 8.6 percent of U.S. electricity demand in 2035, up from 3.5 percent last year, the consulting firm said.The EIA outlook predicts more modest growth in electricity demand than other recent analyses. In December, a report from Grid Strategies, a prominent consultancy, showed electricity demand could increase 3 percent annually in the second half of this decade. Wood Mackenzie also predicted in October that electricity demand in the U.S. will increase up to 15 percent by 2029.EIA is projecting an 8 percent rise by 2030.The agency on Tuesday published several sets of data, including its reference case, which assumes the implementation of Biden administration emissions regulations on power plants and the auto sector. It also published forecasts assuming no power plant and auto sector regulations, which are respectively referred to as the alternative electricity and alternative transportation projections.EIA predicts that electricity prices will spike in both the reference and alternative electricity cases to more than 20 cents per kilowatt-hour by 2050. In 2024, the average price of U.S. electricity is 13 cents per kilowatt-hour, according to EIA.In all circumstances, EIA said coal and natural gas consumption will fall in the U.S. over the next several decades. But the pace of that decline could depend in part on policy decisions.Biden’s power plant rules require coal facilities to install carbon capture and sequestration by 2032. The EIA’s reference case shows coal generation falling 53 percent in 2032 as a result and declining 98 percent in 2050. But in the alternative electricity scenario, where the EPA rules are scrapped, coal generation would fall 48 percent in 2032 and 70 percent by 2050.EIA foresees a similar story with oil.EPA’s tighter vehicle emission standards under Biden lead to a 44 percent drop in gasoline consumption by 2050, EIA’s projections show. If those standards are repealed, gasoline consumption would still fall 17 percent by midcentury. Domestic oil production drops 15 percent by 2050 in the reference case but would fall 11 percent in a scenario where the vehicle emissions standards are repealed.The reference case predicts natural gas consumption will decrease from roughly 31 quadrillion British thermal units (btu) in 2024 to 27.4 quadrillion btu in 2050. The alternative electricity case predicts gas consumption will drop even more to 26.8 quadrillion btu.EIA also forecasts a cut in total energy use in the U.S. by 2050 — from nearly 94 quadrillion btu in 2024 to 88 quadrillion btu in the reference case and 89 quadrillion btu in the alternative electricity scenario with no power plant regulations.Renewables expandNotably, EIA sees a massive expansion in renewable generation regardless of the fate of EPA’s power plant rules. Renewable generation is expected to more than triple by 2050, becoming the country’s leading source of power generation by the early 2030s.Those trend lines mirror BNEF’s findings. The future of U.S. clean power technologies “remains bright” over the coming decade, according to the outlook. Solar capacity is expected to triple by 2035 while wind capacity is expected to double over the next 10 years.However, the research firm has scaled back its projections for clean energy based on Trump’s agenda. Its base case forecast for new wind generation is 15 percent lower than its 2024 outlook. The firm also lowered its prediction for electric vehicles.BNEF now thinks U.S. emissions will fall 16 percent by 2035, compared to the 24 percent reduction it predicted for 2035 last year.Under Biden, the U.S. produced more crude oil, natural gas and renewable energy in global history. The U.S. also dramatically increased shipments of liquefied natural gas abroad.Trump has pledged to increase fossil fuel production, but the industry now faces new challenges.The president has levied tariffs on a wide range of goods, including steel and other materials that are necessary for energy systems. Fossil fuel producers are also worried that an economic downturn will decrease demand for their products.This story also appears in Energywire.Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2025. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals.

Next project in Frostpunk universe set for 2027 release, and 11 bit Studios is working on a new IP as well Cool. News by Robert Purchese Associate Editor Published on April 16, 2025 Frostpunk developer 11 bit Studios has begun work on "the next project set in the Frostpunk universe", which it plans to launch "as early as 2027". Eurogamer recently heard word of this new project from 11 bit CEO Przemysław Marszał, who was talking to me about the history of the studio, and about its future. Today, 11 bit has now confirmed the project in its latest financial results. With two games released in the Frostpunk series already, and the series' recent second entry still on wobbly ground with the community - Steam reactions are currently "mixed" - I asked Marszał whether the series had, for the moment, run its course, or whether there was a future for it. Marszał replied: "We totally believe in Frostpunk. We believe in that IP. We totally believe in that fantasy. I don't want to spoil it but I can tell you that in about two weeks, you will hear about something, so it's really soon. We totally believe in the IP and we will definitely work on the IP more." 11 bit acknowledges that there's a lot of work still to do on Frostpunk 2.Watch on YouTube He added: "On the Frostpunk 2 front, we are doing a lot of work right now. The patch is coming, the DLCs are coming, etc. We see the problems with the game, we know the strengths of the game, and we are working on that game. But that's not only it. Frostpunk is definitely one of our key IPs, key games, and we love the IP so, yeah, we will work on that more." Incidentally, while we are still waiting for a release date more specific than "summer 2025" for the console versions of Frostpunk 2, I'd be surprised if the upcoming teased announcement was for it - not least because Marszał separately said during our conversation that "the console version is releasing very soon". But this new Frostpunk game - could it be an expansion? - is not the only new project the Polish studio is currently working on. "We've started working on two other things," Marszał said. "One thing is connected to Frostpunk and one thing is something new. We totally believe we should do new things." To see this content please enable targeting cookies. Frostpunk 2 was released last September and arrived to glittering critical reviews, my Eurogamer Frostpunk 2 review included, but it struggled - and continues to struggle - to convince fans. "It is a mixed release for us," said Marszał. "We have a very good game, we have really awesome reviews from the press; then on the other hand, a lot of players aren't satisfied. There's a disconnection here. Then on the other hand, we had really awesome sales at the beginning with that game, but now the question is if those sales will be long-term, especially with the mixed reviews we have right now. We understand that it's a lot of work, still." The mixed reaction to Frostpunk 2 highlighted a difficult second half of 2024 for 11 bit Studios which, at the end of the year, announced it had cancelled a full-scale game, Project 8, which it had been working on for several years. It's a game not much has been known about until now, but I have seen a video of it in action and spoken at length to Marszał about it. I can tell you all about Project 8 in a separate article.