Whether you’re hiking, tailgating, or relaxing in the garden, take the weight off in style with these WIRED-tested chairs for the great outdoors.

British fintech Wise said this week it would shift its primary listing from London to New York, joining a growing list of firms snubbing the London Stock Exchange. UK chip designer Arm opted for a New York IPO in 2023, while food delivery giant Just Eat Takeaway quit the LSE for Amsterdam in November.  Sweden’s Klarna has confirmed plans to go public in New York, following in the footsteps of fellow Stockholm-based tech darling Spotify, which listed on the NYSE in 2018.  The draw? Bigger valuations, deeper capital, and more appetite for risk. Register Now “The US economy continues to perform far better than the EU, and valuations are simply higher for companies that can list there,” Victor Basta, managing partner at Artis Partners, told TNW.    The numbers back him up. The NYSE boasts a market cap of around $27 trillion — compared to just $3.5 trillion for the LSE.  That scale — and the deep-pocketed investors it attracts — pushed Arm to list across the pond. Wise followed for the same reason, according to CEO Kristo Käärmann.  Käärmann said the move would tap “the biggest market opportunity in the world for our products today, and enable better access to the world’s deepest and most liquid capital market.”  Beyond sheer growth potential, US investors are also known for taking bigger bets on growth-stage tech companies.   “US investors understand the whole ‘revenue-before-profit’ strategy,”  Andrey Korchak, a British serial entrepreneur, told TNW. “Meanwhile, in Europe, they often want to see revenue from day one.”  That risk aversion, Korchak believes, restricts the growth of startups. “Europe just doesn’t have the same density of tech unicorns,” he said. “And when startups here do hit that billion-dollar mark, most still prefer to list in the US.” Sean Reddington, co-founder of UK tech firm Thrive, fears that Wise’s New York listing will deepen the problems.  “Wise’s move to the US signals a worrying trend,” he said. “It threatens a ‘brain drain’ of capital and talent, making it harder for growth-stage VCs to invest in UK scaleups without a clear US exit plan.” He called for urgent government action, including providing “meaningful incentives” for tech firms to list in the UK.  “If the ultimate reward of a domestic IPO is diminished, it pushes more companies to consider relocating or listing overseas,” he said. Europe’s startup struggles will be a hot topic at TNW Conference, which takes place on June 19-20 in Amsterdam. Tickets for the event are now on sale — use the code TNWXMEDIA2025 at checkout to get 30%. Story by Siôn Geschwindt Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehic (show all) Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehicles, he's happiest sourcing a scoop, investigating the impact of emerging technologies, and even putting them to the test. He has five years of journalism experience and holds a dual degree in media and environmental science from the University of Cape Town, South Africa. When he's not writing, you can probably find Siôn out hiking, surfing, playing the drums or catering to his moderate caffeine addiction. You can contact him at: sion.geschwindt [at] protonmail [dot] com Get the TNW newsletter Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week. Also tagged with

Missing the big picture US science is being wrecked, and its leadership is fighting the last war Facing an extreme budget, the National Academies hosted an event that ignored it. John Timmer – Jun 4, 2025 6:00 pm | 16 Credit: JHVE Photo Credit: JHVE Photo Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more WASHINGTON, DC—The general outline of the Trump administration's proposed 2026 budget was released a few weeks back, and it included massive cuts for most agencies, including every one that funds scientific research. Late last week, those agencies began releasing details of what the cuts would mean for the actual projects and people they support. And the results are as bad as the initial budget had suggested: one-of-a-kind scientific experiment facilities and hardware retired, massive cuts in supported scientists, and entire areas of research halted. And this comes in an environment where previously funded grants are being terminated, funding is being held up for ideological screening, and universities have been subject to arbitrary funding freezes. Collectively, things are heading for damage to US science that will take decades to recover from. It's a radical break from the trajectory science had been on. That's the environment that the US's National Academies of Science found itself in yesterday while hosting the State of the Science event in Washington, DC. It was an obvious opportunity for the nation's leading scientific organization to warn the nation of the consequences of the path that the current administration has been traveling. Instead, the event largely ignored the present to worry about a future that may never exist. The proposed cuts The top-line budget numbers proposed earlier indicated things would be bad: nearly 40 percent taken off the National Institutes of Health's budget, the National Science Foundation down by over half. But now, many of the details of what those cuts mean are becoming apparent. NASA's budget includes sharp cuts for planetary science, which would be cut in half and then stay flat for the rest of the decade, with the Mars Sample Return mission canceled. All other science budgets, including Earth Science and Astrophysics, take similar hits; one astronomer posted a graphic showing how many present and future missions that would mean. Active missions that have returned unprecedented data, like Juno and New Horizons, would go, as would two Mars orbiters. As described by Science magazine's news team, "The plans would also kill off nearly every major science mission the agency has not yet begun to build." A chart prepared by astronomer Laura Lopez showing just how many astrophysics missions will be cancelled. Credit: Laura Lopez The National Science Foundation, which funds much of the US's fundamental research, is also set for brutal cuts. Biology, engineering, and education will all be slashed by over 70 percent; computer science, math and physical science, and social and behavioral science will all see cuts of over 60 percent. International programs will take an 80 percent cut. The funding rate of grant proposals is expected to drop from 26 percent to just 7 percent, meaning the vast majority of grants submitted to the NSF will be a waste of time. The number of people involved in NSF-funded activities will drop from over 300,000 to just 90,000. Almost every program to broaden participation in science will be eliminated. As for specifics, they're equally grim. The fleet of research ships will essentially become someone else's problem: "The FY 2026 Budget Request will enable partial support of some ships." We've been able to better pin down the nature and location of gravitational wave events as detectors in Japan and Italy joined the original two LIGO detectors; the NSF will reverse that progress by shutting one of the LIGOs. The NSF's contributions to detectors at the Large Hadron Collider will be cut by over half, and one of the two very large telescopes it was helping fund will be cancelled (say goodbye to the Thirty Meter Telescope). "Access to the telescopes at Kitt Peak and Cerro Tololo will be phased out," and the NSF will transfer the facilities to other organizations. The Department of Health and Human Services has been less detailed about the specific cuts its divisions will see, largely focusing on the overall numbers, which are down considerably. The NIH, which is facing a cut of over 40 percent, will be reorganized, with its 19 institutes pared down to just eight. This will result in some odd pairings, such as the dental and eye institutes ending up in the same place; genomics and biomedical imaging will likewise end up under the same roof. Other groups like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration will also face major cuts. Issues go well beyond the core science agencies, as well. In the Department of Energy, funding for wind, solar, and renewable grid integration has been zeroed out, essentially ending all programs in this area. Hydrogen and fuel cells face a similar fate. Collectively, these had gotten over $600 billion dollars in 2024's budget. Other areas of science at the DOE, such as high-energy physics, fusion, and biology, receive relatively minor cuts that are largely in line with the ones faced by administration priorities like fossil and nuclear energy. Will this happen? It goes without saying that this would amount to an abandonment of US scientific leadership at a time when most estimates of China's research spending show it approaching US-like levels of support. Not only would it eliminate many key facilities, instruments, and institutions that have helped make the US a scientific powerhouse, but it would also block the development of newer and additional ones. The harms are so widespread that even topics that the administration claims are priorities would see severe cuts. And the damage is likely to last for generations, as support is cut at every stage of the educational pipeline that prepares people for STEM careers. This includes careers in high-tech industries, which may require relocation overseas due to a combination of staffing concerns and heightened immigration controls. That said, we've been here before in the first Trump administration, when budgets were proposed with potentially catastrophic implications for US science. But Congress limited the damage and maintained reasonably consistent budgets for most agencies. Can we expect that to happen again? So far, the signs are not especially promising. The House has largely adopted the Trump administration's budget priorities, despite the fact that the budget they pass turns its back on decades of supposed concerns about deficit spending. While the Senate has yet to take up the budget, it has also been very pliant during the second Trump administration, approving grossly unqualified cabinet picks such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. All of which would seem to call for the leadership of US science organizations to press the case for the importance of science funding to the US, and highlight the damage that these cuts would cause. But, if yesterday's National Academies event is anything to judge by, the leadership is not especially interested. Altered states As the nation's premier science organization, and one that performs lots of analyses for the government, the National Academies would seem to be in a position to have its concerns taken seriously by members of Congress. And, given that the present and future of science in the US is being set by policy choices, a meeting entitled the State of the Science would seem like the obvious place to address those concerns. If so, it was not obvious to Marcia McNutt, the president of the NAS, who gave the presentation. She made some oblique references to current problems, saying, that “We are embarking on a radical new experiment in what conditions promote science leadership, with the US being the treatment group, and China as the control," and acknowledged that "uncertainties over the science budgets for next year, coupled with cancellations of billions of dollars of already hard-won research grants, is causing an exodus of researchers." But her primary focus was on the trends that have been operative in science funding and policy leading up to but excluding the second Trump administration. McNutt suggested this was needed to look beyond the next four years. However, that ignores the obvious fact that US science will be fundamentally different if the Trump administration can follow through on its plans and policies; the trends that have been present for the last two decades will be irrelevant. She was also remarkably selective about her avoidance of discussing Trump administration priorities. After noting that faculty surveys have suggested they spend roughly 40 percent of their time handling regulatory requirements, she twice mentioned that the administration's anti-regulatory stance could be a net positive here (once calling it "an opportunity to help"). Yet she neglected to note that many of the abandoned regulations represent a retreat from science-driven policy. McNutt also acknowledged the problem of science losing the bipartisan support it has enjoyed, as trust in scientists among US conservatives has been on a downward trend. But she suggested it was scientists' responsibility to fix the problem, even though it's largely the product of one party deciding it can gain partisan advantage by raising doubts about scientific findings in fields like climate change and vaccine safety. The panel discussion that came after largely followed McNutt's lead in avoiding any mention of the current threats to science. The lone exception was Heather Wilson, president of the University of Texas at El Paso and a former Republican member of the House of Representatives and Secretary of the Air Force during the first Trump administration. Wilson took direct aim at Trump's cuts to funding for underrepresented groups, arguing, "Talent is evenly distributed, but opportunity is not." After arguing that "the moral authority of science depends on the pursuit of truth," she highlighted the cancellation of grants that had been used to study diseases that are more prevalent in some ethnic groups, saying "that's not woke science—that's genetics." Wilson was clearly the exception, however, as the rest of the panel largely avoided direct mention of either the damage already done to US science funding or the impending catastrophe on the horizon. We've asked the National Academies' leadership a number of questions about how it perceives its role at a time when US science is clearly under threat. As of this article's publication, however, we have not received a response. At yesterday's event, however, only one person showed a clear sense of what they thought that role should be—Wilson again, whose strongest words were directed at the National Academies themselves, which she said should "do what you've done since Lincoln was president," and stand up for the truth. John Timmer Senior Science Editor John Timmer Senior Science Editor John is Ars Technica's science editor. He has a Bachelor of Arts in Biochemistry from Columbia University, and a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California, Berkeley. When physically separated from his keyboard, he tends to seek out a bicycle, or a scenic location for communing with his hiking boots. 16 Comments

The transformation of Hangzhou’s old steelworks into a park is a tribute to China’s industrial past in a city of the future The congressional hearing about Chinese AI engine DeepSeek held in the US this April has propelled Hangzhou, the heart of China’s new digital economy, to the headlines. With companies such as DeepSeek, Unitree and Alibaba – whose payment app allowed me to get on the metro without needing to buy a ticket – headquartered in Hangzhou, China’s future in AI, robotics and automation is emanating from this city. Getting off the metro in the suburban area of Gongshu, the sun was shining on an old steelworks, overgrown with vines and flowers now that it is being transformed by Jiakun Architects and TLS Landscape Architecture into the Grand Canal Steelworks Park. The unfolding trade war might help to accelerate China’s journey into an automated future, leaving the world of factories behind, yet this new public space shows an impulse to commemorate the country’s economic history, and the forces that have shaped its contemporary built environment. Starting in Hangzhou and travelling more than 1,700km to Beijing, the Grand Canal is an engineering project built 2,500 years ago to connect the different regions of eastern China. The country’s geography means rivers flow from west to east: from higher elevations, culminating in the Himalayas, to the basin that is the country’s eastern seaboard. Historically, it was difficult to transport goods from mercantile centres in the south, including Hangzhou and Suzhou, to the political centre in Beijing up north. As a civil engineering project, the Grand Canal rivals the Great Wall, but if the Great Wall aims to protect China from the outside, the Grand Canal articulates Chinese commerce from the inside. The historic waterway has been an important conduit of economic and cultural exchange, enabling the movement of people and goods such as grain, silk, wine, salt and gravel across the country. It became a UNESCO World Heritage site in 2014. The state‑owned enterprise collective was founded, and the physical facility of Hangzhou steelworks built, in the 1950s during the Great Leap Forward, when China strove for self‑sufficiency, and wended its way through the country’s economic trajectory: first the economic chaos of the 1960s, then the reforms and opening up in the 1980s. Steel remains an important industry today in China, home to more than half of the world’s production, but the listing of the Grand Canal enabled city leaders to move production to a new site and decommission the Hangzhou steelworks. External mandates, including entry into the World Trade Organization, the Beijing Olympics and UNESCO listings, have been instrumentalised in the country to pursue a range of internal interests, particularly economical and real estate ones.  In 2016, the factory was shut down in 150 days, in what the company describes as a ‘heroic’ effort, and the site attracted tourists of industrial ruins. In the competition brief, Hangzhou planners asked for ‘as much of the existing blast furnaces and buildings’ as possible to be preserved. When I arrived in China in 2008, Chinese cities were notorious for heritage demolition, but today urban planners and architects increasingly work to preserve historical buildings. Just like several industrial sites in Beijing and Shanghai have been transformed into major public and cultural spaces in the past decade, in the Yangtze River Delta – of which Hangzhou is a major hub – several industrial sites along the Grand Canal’s course are being given a new lease of life. Today, the three blast furnaces of Hangzhou steelworks remain, with the silhouettes of their smokestacks easily recognisable from a distance. The project preserves as much as possible of the aesthetics of a steel mill with none of the danger or dust, ready to welcome instead new community facilities and cultural programmes in a vast and restored piece of landscape. Situated in a former working‑class district that has been gentrifying and welcoming young families, the new park is becoming a popular venue for music festivals, flower viewing in springtime and year‑round picnics – when I visited, parents were teaching their children to ride a bicycle, and students from Zhejiang University, about a kilometre from the park, were having lunch on the grass. New programmes accommodated in the old coke oven and steel mills will include a series of exhibition halls and spaces welcoming a wide range of cultural and artistic workshops as well as events – the project’s first phase has just completed but tenant organisations have not yet moved in, and works are ongoing to the north of the park. On the day of my visit, a student art exhibition was on display near one of the furnaces, with works made from detritus from the site, including old packing containers. The rehabilitated buildings also provide a range of commercial units, where cafés, restaurants, shops, a bookshop, ice cream shop and a gym have already opened their doors to visitors.  Several structures were deemed structurally unsafe and required demolition, such as the old iron casting building. The architects proposed to partially reconstruct it on its original footprint; the much more open structure, built with reclaimed bricks, now houses a semi‑outdoor garden. Material choices evoke the site’s industrial past: weathered steel, exposed concrete and large expanses of glazing dominate the landscape. The widespread use of red, including in an elevated walkway that traverses the park – at times vaguely reminiscent of a Japanese torii gate in the space below – gives a warm and reassuring earthiness to the otherwise industrial colour palette. Elements selected by the designers underwent sanitisation and detoxification before being reused. The landscaping includes old machinery parts and boulders; recuperated steel panels are for instance inlaid into the paving while pipes for pouring molten steel have been turned into a fountain. The train tracks that once transported material continue to run through the site, providing paths in between the new patches of vegetation, planted with local grasses as well as Japanese maples, camphors and persimmon trees. As Jiawen Chen from TLS describes it, the aesthetic feels ‘wild, but not weedy or abandoned’. The landscape architects’ inspiration came from the site itself after the steelworks’ closure, she explains, once vegetation had begun to reclaim it. Contaminated soil was replaced with clean local soil – at a depth between 0.5 and 1.5 metres, in line with Chinese regulations. The removed soil was sent to specialised facilities for purification, while severely contaminated layers were sealed with concrete. TLS proposed phytoremediation (using plants to detoxify soil) in selected areas of the site ‘as a symbolic and educational gesture’, Chen explains, but ‘the client preferred to be cautious’. From the eastern end of the park, hiking trails lead to the mountain and its Buddhist temples. The old steel mill’s grounds fade seamlessly into the hills. Standing in what it is still a construction site, a sign suggests there will soon be a rowing centre here.  While Jiakun Architects and TLS have prioritised making the site palatable as a public space, the project also brings to life a history that many are likely to have forgotten. Throughout, the park incorporates different elements of China’s economic history, including the life of the Grand Canal and the industrial era. There is, for example, a Maoist steelworker painted on the mural of one of the cafés, as well as historical photographs and drawings of the steelworks peppering the site, framed and hung on the walls. The ambition might be in part to pay homage to steelworkers, but it is hard to imagine them visiting. Gongshu, like the other suburbs of Hangzhou, has seen rapid increases in its property prices.  The steelworks were built during the Maoist era, a time of ‘battling with earth, battling with heaven, battling with humanity’, to borrow Mao’s own words. Ordinary people melted down pots and pans to surpass the UK in steel production, and industry was seen as a sharp break from a traditional Chinese way of life, in which humans aspire to live in harmony with their environment. The priorities of the government today are more conservative, seeking to create a garden city to attract engineers and their families. Hangzhou has long represented the balmy and sophisticated life of China’s south, a land of rice and fish. To the west of the city, not far from the old steelworks, are the ecologically protected Xixi wetlands, and Hangzhou’s urban planning exemplifies the Chinese principle of 天人合一, or nature and humankind as one.  Today, Hangzhou is only 45 minutes from Shanghai by high‑speed train. The two cities feel like extensions of one another, an urban region of 100 million people. The creation of the Grand Canal Steelworks Park reflects the move away from heavy industry that Chinese cities such as Hangzhou are currently making, shifting towards a supposedly cleaner knowledge‑driven economy. Yet the preservation of the steelworks epitomises the sentimental attitude towards the site’s history and acts as a reminder that today’s middle classes are the children of yesterday’s steelworkers, drinking coffee and playing with their own children in grassy lawns next to shuttered blast furnaces.  The park’s second phase is already nearing completion, and the competition for the nearby Grand Canal Museum was won by Herzog & de Meuron in 2020 – the building is under construction, and should open at the end of this year. It is a district rich in history, but the city is resolutely turned towards the future.  2025-06-02 Reuben J Brown Share AR May 2025CircularityBuy Now

The joy of going camping is usually found in going off-grid for a few days and reconnecting with nature. However, having creature comforts like light and warmth, and even access to medical devices like a CPAP machine, make it worthwhile taking a portable power solution with you. That's where portable power stations come in. Think power banks, only bigger. Power stations come in a variety of power capacities and sizes, and that means that you can find a portable power station for every type of camping, no matter whether you're a backpacker, a car camper, or an RVer.  What is the best portable power station for camping right now?  We've tested dozens of portable power stations in a lab setting and have also done hands-on testing during camping trips and road trips. Based on both experiences, our pick for the best portable power station for camping overall is the Jackery Explorer 2000 Plus, thanks to its versatility and the amount of power it provides. As an avid camper myself, I've also included other portable power stations from brands like EcoFlow and Bluetti so you can improve your next camping experience. Sort by All The best portable power stations for camping in 2025 Show less View now at Amazon Jackery is a well-known brand in the power station space, and for good reason. Its versatile power stations consistently rank among our best products, thanks to the enormous power these devices provide and their flexibility in setup, especially in a camping scenario.Steve Conaway, the director of CNET Test Labs, at our sister site, has tested dozens of power stations and said the Jackery is one of his top picks. "The versatility of modularity is what makes this power station so impressive," Conaway said. "You can choose to take just the one unit for regular camping, but if you wanted a bigger setup to power a cabin, you could easily add on more units."Review: This portable battery station can power your home for 2 weeksAnd the great thing about this unit is that if you need more power storage capacity, you can add on the PackPlus E2000 Plus battery pack for an additional 2042.8Wh of electrical storage capacity to the system.Jackery has a long track record of building quality, durable, and long-lasting power stations -- which is exactly what you need if you are spending the big bucks on a power station.Remember that the more additions you add to this setup, the heavier it will be. On its own, it weighs 41.9 pounds but can reach well over 100 pounds with more units. Despite the weight, Reddit users note that the solar additions, in particular, have been useful in camping and outdoor situations.Jackery Explorer 2000 Plus specs: Watts/hr: 2042.8W | Continuous watts: 3000W | Surge watts: 6000W | Solar input (W): 1400 | Ports: 2 USB-A, 2 USB-C, 4 AC | Weight: 61.5 pounds Pros Clean, easy-to-read LCD display Expansion battery modules Solar panels are durable and highly efficient Wheels make moving it a lot easier Cons Expensive Jackery is a well-known brand in the power station space, and for good reason. Its versatile power stations consistently rank among our best products, thanks to the enormous power these devices provide and their flexibility in setup, especially in a camping scenario.Steve Conaway, the director of CNET Test Labs, at our sister site, has tested dozens of power stations and said the Jackery is one of his top picks. "The versatility of modularity is what makes this power station so impressive," Conaway said. "You can choose to take just the one unit for regular camping, but if you wanted a bigger setup to power a cabin, you could easily add on more units."Review: This portable battery station can power your home for 2 weeksAnd the great thing about this unit is that if you need more power storage capacity, you can add on the PackPlus E2000 Plus battery pack for an additional 2042.8Wh of electrical storage capacity to the system.Jackery has a long track record of building quality, durable, and long-lasting power stations -- which is exactly what you need if you are spending the big bucks on a power station.Remember that the more additions you add to this setup, the heavier it will be. On its own, it weighs 41.9 pounds but can reach well over 100 pounds with more units. Despite the weight, Reddit users note that the solar additions, in particular, have been useful in camping and outdoor situations.Jackery Explorer 2000 Plus specs: Watts/hr: 2042.8W | Continuous watts: 3000W | Surge watts: 6000W | Solar input (W): 1400 | Ports: 2 USB-A, 2 USB-C, 4 AC | Weight: 61.5 pounds Read More Show Expert Take Show less Show less Camping takes all sorts of forms, and there's a power station to suit everyone. For those who head outdoors in an RV or to a remote cabin, the EcoFlow Delta Pro Ultra (DPU) is a powerful option. EcoFlow debuted the Delta Pro Ultra at CES this year, and compared to the EcoFlow Delta Pro model, the Ultra has double the power and charges, a dedicated 4G LTE modem port to access the app in remote areas with weak Wi-Fi signals, and a 32-minute faster recharge time.ZDNET editor Maria Diaz went hands-on with this unit and called it the "Swiss Army Knife of home backup systems," and its impressive specs back that claim up. The single unit has a 6kWh capacity, 7200W output, and 5.6kW solar input, allowing it to run an entire RV or cabin, especially when stacked with other units for increased capacity.This great power packs a lot of weight,186.4 pounds, to be exact. However, it can be divided into two pieces: the inverter, the top portion, is 70 pounds, and the battery, the bottom portion, is 116 pounds. Diaz noted that her family experienced a power outage recently, and her husband was able to transport the battery part much more easily by separating the pieces.EcoFlow Delta Pro Ultra specs: Watts/hr. 7200W | Continuous watts: 6kWh | Surge watts: 10.8 kW | Solar input (W): 5.6kW | Ports: 2×USB-A, 2×USB-C (100W), 6×AC Output, 1×DC output | Weight: 186.4 pounds AC outputs 9 Total capacity 10 Expansion ready 10 USB ports 9 Max output 10 Pros Expandable to up to 90kWh Consumption insights in EcoFlow app Modular design Cons Expensive Heavy EcoFlow Delta Pro Ultra Best portable power station for RV camping 4.8 / 5 Score Camping takes all sorts of forms, and there's a power station to suit everyone. For those who head outdoors in an RV or to a remote cabin, the EcoFlow Delta Pro Ultra (DPU) is a powerful option. EcoFlow debuted the Delta Pro Ultra at CES this year, and compared to the EcoFlow Delta Pro model, the Ultra has double the power and charges, a dedicated 4G LTE modem port to access the app in remote areas with weak Wi-Fi signals, and a 32-minute faster recharge time.ZDNET editor Maria Diaz went hands-on with this unit and called it the "Swiss Army Knife of home backup systems," and its impressive specs back that claim up. The single unit has a 6kWh capacity, 7200W output, and 5.6kW solar input, allowing it to run an entire RV or cabin, especially when stacked with other units for increased capacity.This great power packs a lot of weight,186.4 pounds, to be exact. However, it can be divided into two pieces: the inverter, the top portion, is 70 pounds, and the battery, the bottom portion, is 116 pounds. Diaz noted that her family experienced a power outage recently, and her husband was able to transport the battery part much more easily by separating the pieces.EcoFlow Delta Pro Ultra specs: Watts/hr. 7200W | Continuous watts: 6kWh | Surge watts: 10.8 kW | Solar input (W): 5.6kW | Ports: 2×USB-A, 2×USB-C (100W), 6×AC Output, 1×DC output | Weight: 186.4 pounds Read More Show Expert Take Show less Show less Looking for something more compact for overnight camping or hiking? The EcoFlow River 2 Max 500 weighs just 13.1 pounds but has a battery capacity of 500Wh. In addition, you can recharge the unit using one of four methods: AC, solar, 12V in-car, or USB-C. If you choose AC, the unit can go from zero to 100% in an hour, which means you can leave charging to the last minute while camping.The company claims that one full charge of the River 2 Max can charge an iPhone 41 times, a drone 10 times, and an electric blanket eight times.ZDNET's Adrian Kingsley-Hughes tested this unit and called it "compact enough to be portable, big enough to be practical." "If you want to go totally off-grid, EcoFlow offers a 160W solar panel that can recharge the River 2 Max in about four hours," he wrote. "The panel is durable and waterproof to IP68, so it's the perfect adventure companion for the River 2 Max 500."Verified Amazon customers note that this compact unit has been helpful for everything from camping festivals to powering a CPAP machine in primitive areas.EcoFlow River 2 Max specs: Watts/hr: 500W | Continuous watts: 500W | Surge watts: 1000W | Solar input (W): 220W | Ports: 3 USB-A, 1 USB-C, 4 AC | Weight: 13.14 pounds Pros Compact and lightweight Durable build Inexpensive Cons More limited ports and power Looking for something more compact for overnight camping or hiking? The EcoFlow River 2 Max 500 weighs just 13.1 pounds but has a battery capacity of 500Wh. In addition, you can recharge the unit using one of four methods: AC, solar, 12V in-car, or USB-C. If you choose AC, the unit can go from zero to 100% in an hour, which means you can leave charging to the last minute while camping.The company claims that one full charge of the River 2 Max can charge an iPhone 41 times, a drone 10 times, and an electric blanket eight times.ZDNET's Adrian Kingsley-Hughes tested this unit and called it "compact enough to be portable, big enough to be practical." "If you want to go totally off-grid, EcoFlow offers a 160W solar panel that can recharge the River 2 Max in about four hours," he wrote. "The panel is durable and waterproof to IP68, so it's the perfect adventure companion for the River 2 Max 500."Verified Amazon customers note that this compact unit has been helpful for everything from camping festivals to powering a CPAP machine in primitive areas.EcoFlow River 2 Max specs: Watts/hr: 500W | Continuous watts: 500W | Surge watts: 1000W | Solar input (W): 220W | Ports: 3 USB-A, 1 USB-C, 4 AC | Weight: 13.14 pounds Read More Show Expert Take Show less Show less View now at Amazon Portable power stations can get pretty pricey, but this one from Bluetti currently retails at only $359 for Amazon Prime members, making it a great budget pick. Plus, it charges quickly, especially when utilizing its turbocharging feature. Kingsley-Hughes also tested this model and praised it for delivering enough power to energy-intensive devices during a road trip. "It has enough capacity to meet the needs of a small group for several days," he wrote, adding, "I've relied on the power station to charge my smartphone, cameras, drones, and laptops efficiently."In his testing, he also found that charging the station from a car's 12V outlet is particularly efficient for keeping the unit charged, as long as the battery is not drained too much.Verified customers praised the AC70 on Bluetti's website, with most of the reviewers saying they bought it for camping and were pleased with the experience of using it for this purpose. Bluetti AC70 specs: Watts/hr: 768W | Continuous watts: 1000W | Surge watts: 2000W | Solar input (W): 500W | Ports: 2 USB-A, 2 USB-C, 2 AC | Weight: 22.5 pounds Pros Turbocharge feature Affordable price Cons Some of the better features are only available by using the app Portable power stations can get pretty pricey, but this one from Bluetti currently retails at only $359 for Amazon Prime members, making it a great budget pick. Plus, it charges quickly, especially when utilizing its turbocharging feature. Kingsley-Hughes also tested this model and praised it for delivering enough power to energy-intensive devices during a road trip. "It has enough capacity to meet the needs of a small group for several days," he wrote, adding, "I've relied on the power station to charge my smartphone, cameras, drones, and laptops efficiently."In his testing, he also found that charging the station from a car's 12V outlet is particularly efficient for keeping the unit charged, as long as the battery is not drained too much.Verified customers praised the AC70 on Bluetti's website, with most of the reviewers saying they bought it for camping and were pleased with the experience of using it for this purpose. Bluetti AC70 specs: Watts/hr: 768W | Continuous watts: 1000W | Surge watts: 2000W | Solar input (W): 500W | Ports: 2 USB-A, 2 USB-C, 2 AC | Weight: 22.5 pounds Read More Show Expert Take Show less Show less What makes this portable power station so versatile for camping is the amount of power and port options. There's a 100W and 60W USB-C port on the front, along with four USB-A ports, so all your devices are covered. There is also a 12V car socket capable of outputting 120W of power and six AC outputs, each capable of 1500W or 2400W in a power surge.Kingsley-Hughes tested this unit and said in his review that the Anker 757 Powerhouse is "well thought out, not overly complicated, built with ergonomics in mind, and packs quite a lot of power." Review: Anker 757 PowerhouseAnker is a company that has been in the portable power market for many years, starting out with chargers and power banks, and then later making the leap to power stations. That long heritage is obvious when looking at the overall build quality of the Anker 757.Customer reviews note that adding portable solar panels allows for greater battery charge retention, especially while camping. Kingsley-Hughes said that while he wouldn't carry this 43.9- pound unit too far, the ergonomic handles distribute the weight well, so it's well built for moving from the garage to a truck or RV.Anker 757 Powerhouse specs: Watts/hr: 1229W | Continuous watts: 1500 | Surge watts: 2400 | Solar input (W): 600W | Ports: 4 USB-A, 2 USB-C, 6 AC | Weight: 43.9 pounds Pros Ergonomic design Lots of ports Large display Cons Solar charging could be better What makes this portable power station so versatile for camping is the amount of power and port options. There's a 100W and 60W USB-C port on the front, along with four USB-A ports, so all your devices are covered. There is also a 12V car socket capable of outputting 120W of power and six AC outputs, each capable of 1500W or 2400W in a power surge.Kingsley-Hughes tested this unit and said in his review that the Anker 757 Powerhouse is "well thought out, not overly complicated, built with ergonomics in mind, and packs quite a lot of power." Review: Anker 757 PowerhouseAnker is a company that has been in the portable power market for many years, starting out with chargers and power banks, and then later making the leap to power stations. That long heritage is obvious when looking at the overall build quality of the Anker 757.Customer reviews note that adding portable solar panels allows for greater battery charge retention, especially while camping. Kingsley-Hughes said that while he wouldn't carry this 43.9- pound unit too far, the ergonomic handles distribute the weight well, so it's well built for moving from the garage to a truck or RV.Anker 757 Powerhouse specs: Watts/hr: 1229W | Continuous watts: 1500 | Surge watts: 2400 | Solar input (W): 600W | Ports: 4 USB-A, 2 USB-C, 6 AC | Weight: 43.9 pounds Read More Show Expert Take Show less What is the best portable power station for camping? Based on our hands-on experience and in-lab testing, the Jackery Explorer 2000 Plus is the best portable power station for camping. Its modularity makes it a versatile option for all types of camping. Show more Which portable power station for camping is right for you? It depends on the type of camping you prefer before you choose which portable power station will fit your needs. Consider what devices you want to bring with you and keep powered and whether you will be staying in an RV or cabin vs. a tent. Choose this portable power station for camping... If you want... Jackery Explorer 2000 Plus The best overall option. It packs a lot of power at 3000 continuous watts, and its modularity makes it versatile for camping. EcoFlow Delta Pro Ultra A powerful portable power station best for RV camping. It can run an entire RV or cabin, especially when stacked with other units for increased capacity. EcoFlow River 2 Max 500A compact portable power station for camping. It weighs just 13.4 pounds and features 60 minute fast charging. Bluetti AC70 A budget-friendly portable power station for camping. This unit also has 2,000W surge capability and a turbocharging feature, which allows for super fast charging that can take it from flat to 80% in 45 minutes. Anker 757 Powerhouse  A versatile portable power station for camping with lots of ports. It also has an ergonomic build, making it easier to carry despite its weight. Show more Factors to consider when choosing the best portable power station for camping: Power stations are a significant investment, but they can ultimately upgrade your camping experience to allow for power off-grid. Before making our top picks, we considered several factors.Weight: Bigger isn't always better, especially when it comes to camping. Will the portable power station be wheeled down a paved trail, or will you be moving it from your vehicle to your camp? Do you want something you could carry in a backpack for a day? Battery capacity: If you plan to power an RV or bigger devices from your power station, you want as much battery capacity as you can afford, but for off-grid adventures, it's important to bear in mind that there's a penalty here in the form of weight.Cost: Some units cost several thousand dollars, while others cost a couple hundred. Plus, add-ons like battery packs and solar panels also increase the price.Charging: How do you plan on charging your power station? Are you mostly going to use AC power from an outlet, or do you want the independence of solar?Battery Chemistry: Lithium-ion (Li-ion) is the traditional battery technology, but the newer lithium iron phosphate batteries (LiFePO4) are safer and have a much longer lifespan. Show more How did we test these portable power stations for camping? Over the past few years, we've tested well over 100 different portable power stations to find out which are the best of the best. To do this efficiently, because it takes days to do properly, we've developed a comprehensive testing structure. This not only ensures that manufacturers aren't playing fast and loose with their spec sheet data but also checks whether the units are safe and reliable. Here's an overview of how we test portable power stations.Unboxing and visual inspectionCapacity testsLoad testingUPS capability testingThermal testsSafety testsReal-world usageFor more detailed information on how these tests are carried out, check out this post, where we explore the process more thoroughly.  Show more FAQs on portable power stations How long will a power station last while camping based on its watts? To figure this out, you're going to need to get a pencil and do some back of the envelope calculations.  You're going to need a couple of bits of information.First, you need to know what devices you are going to power. List them all, because forgetting that coffee pot or heated blanket could make the difference between the power station lasting all day, or giving up the ghost on you before the day is over.Specifically, you want to know how much power, in watts, each device draws. This information is usually found on a label on the device. For example, a heater might draw 1,000W, while a CPAP machine might draw 60W. This figure represents the maximum power consumption, and you will find that the power consumption of some devices, such as CPAP machines, fluctuates greatly, while for other devices, like the heater, the power consumption remains quite stable.Next, you need to know how long you plan on running your devices during a day, or between recharges of your power station. Your heater might run for two hours, while the CPAP machine could run for eight hours.Power station capacities are measured in watt-hours (Wh). A device drawing 1,000W running for one hour uses 1,000Wh. Therefore, the same device running for two hours will need 2,000Wh. Heaters are some of the most power-hungry devices that people find themselves needing to run.Similarly, a CPAP machine that uses 60W will consume 60Wh per hour, so running it for eight hours would consume 480Wh.Your total energy usage over 24 hours would then be 2,480Wh.Based on this, you might think that a 2,500Wh capacity power station would be sufficient. However, in reality, nothing is perfect, and there are energy losses in the system. The rule of thumb is to add 20% to your total and then round up to the next highest capacity available. So, you'd be looking at a power station with a capacity of around 3,000Wh to ensure you have enough stored power for the day. Show more How can I make my power station run longer? Simple: Find your biggest power draws and replace them with more energy efficient alternatives. For example, you might find that you can replace that 1,000W heater with a heated throw that only takes 100W to power. That quilt would run for 10 hours on the power that the heater would use in an hour!Another big power hog is incandescent lights. Swapping these out for LEDs will result in huge power savings and dramatically boost your power station's runtime.   Show more What is the difference between a power station and a power bank? The main difference between portable power stations and portable power banks is the amount of power and what they can charge. Power stations have AC outlets and allow you to charge more and bigger devices, including life-saving ones like a CPAP machine, a cooler, or a floodlight for the campsite while going off-grid.Power banks are much smaller and are best for charging devices like phones, headphones, and smartwatches.  Show more Other portable power stations we've tested Further ZDNET Tech Coverage Smartphones Smartwatches Tablets Laptops TVs Other Tech Resources ZDNET Recommends

European tech leaders are pushing back against high-profile VCs urging founders to work seven days a week — slamming the grindset mentality as everything from “toxic” to “childish.”  “Calling on founders to work insane hours nonstop is just bad advice,” Suranga Chandratillake, general partner at Balderton Capital and former CEO of video search engine Blinkx, told TNW. “Even sprinters don’t sprint all the time — rest and reflection is just as important as putting in the work.” His comments follow a LinkedIn post on Saturday by Harry Stebbings, podcast host and 28-year-old founder of London-based venture firm 20VC. “What European founders need to realise [is that] 7 days a week is the required velocity to win right now,” he wrote, implying that they need to match the infamous grind culture of Silicon Valley.       Martin Mignot, a partner at New York-based Index Ventures, rallied behind Stebbings. In a LinkedIn post of his own, he applauded the 9am-9pm, six days a week (illegal) work culture adopted by some tech firms in China. “Forget 9 to 5, 996 is the new startup standard,” he said.  While some echoed their views, many European tech founders and investors weren’t happy with the rhetoric. Amelia Miller, co-founder of return-to-work platform Ivee, called Stebbings’ post “unbelievably toxic.” Register Now “Only bad founders work 7 days non-stop,” she wrote. “It’s poor time management and a fast track to burnout.” Miller also said she thinks that working such long hours unfairly discriminates against parents and those with responsibilities outside the office.   Chandratillake also warned against taking advice from VCs without experience of starting and running a company. “If you’re a CEO, don’t listen to a jumped-up finance bro in a hoodie who has never done your job telling you how to do it!” he said.  The lively debate comes amid a broader conversation in European tech over whether workplace culture is holding the region back compared to the US or China.  In a podcast interview in March, Revolut boss Nik Storonsky criticised European startup entrepreneurs, saying they weren’t working hard enough and valued work-life balance too highly. Those comments followed another lively social media debate earlier this year about whether French founders lacked the “grindset” to succeed.   However, a recent survey of 128 European founders by early-stage VC firm Antler found that three-quarters of them work more than 60 hours weekly. Almost 20% of them exceeded 80 hours, challenging the notion that European founders don’t hustle.  Chandratillake said he believes that scrutinising work hours overlooks some of the real challenges founders face in Europe, such as access to late-stage financing. That said, the investor thinks there is a time and a place for the grind. “Sometimes founders have to work extremely hard and long hours, but that’s not sustainable all the time,” he said. “Building a successful company is a marathon, it takes endurance.”  European startup founders are the lifeblood of TNW Conference — and we want you there too. The tech festival takes place on June 19-20 in Amsterdam. Use the code TNWXMEDIA2025 at the ticket checkout to get 30% off. Story by Siôn Geschwindt Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehic (show all) Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehicles, he's happiest sourcing a scoop, investigating the impact of emerging technologies, and even putting them to the test. He has five years of journalism experience and holds a dual degree in media and environmental science from the University of Cape Town, South Africa. When he's not writing, you can probably find Siôn out hiking, surfing, playing the drums or catering to his moderate caffeine addiction. You can contact him at: sion.geschwindt [at] protonmail [dot] com Get the TNW newsletter Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week. Also tagged with

The report, Europe’s Moonshot Moment, found that the continent has over 280 software companies generating more than €100 million in annual recurring revenue (ARR). These scaleups include the likes of Spotify, Revolut, Adyen, and Vinted. However, European software businesses that reach the €100 million ARR threshold take 15 years on average to get there. That’s five years longer than their US peers, the report found. Europe also lags in birthing software giants. While 5–10% of US firms reaching €100 million in ARR subsequently scale to €1 billion, fewer than 3% of their European peers reach that milestone. The report highlighted some of the reasons for this stalled growth: fragmented markets, conservative corporate norms, and a slower flow of late-stage capital relative to early-stage investment. Turning point? Register Now Despite the hurdles, the report’s authors are confident that all the ingredients for Europe’s success in software are now in place. “Europe already holds the essentials to create the world’s next generation of software champions: deep talent pools, vibrant founder networks, and a rapidly maturing capital base,” said Ruben Schaubroeck, senior partner at McKinsey. While Europe lost out to Silicon Valley firms like Google and Microsoft in the early internet era, emerging technologies like AI may offer a new opening for the region’s tech startups. Geopolitical shifts could also drive governments to invest in local tech ecosystems and rethink digital sovereignty, said the report. “There’s no denying that European tech has faced structural barriers, but we’re at a genuine inflection point,” Phill Robinson, CEO and co-founder at Boardwave, told TNW. “New technology arenas, geopolitics, and an evolving operating environment are creating a unique opportunity for Europe to boost innovation.” Now Europe must turn that potential into profits, the report argues. To that end, it suggests five key interventions to boost Europe’s software ecosystem: Expand late-stage funding Encourage experienced founders to start new companies Make it easier for sales and marketing teams to work across borders and help startups grow faster Encourage more large firms in Europe to buy software from European startups by offering government support or financial incentives Strengthen public-private partnerships to de-risk new technologies Scaling up European tech The McKinsey/Boardwave report comes hot on the heels of the EU’s landmark Startup and Scaleup Strategy, launched last week. The plan set out several reforms designed to remove barriers to growth for the bloc’s early-stage companies. “If implemented boldly, and most importantly quickly, it can help Europe move from fragmented success stories to systemic, continent-wide scale; otherwise, we risk being left behind,” said Robinson, commenting on the new strategy. The EU’s proposal includes provisions for a long-awaited “28th regime,” which would allow companies to operate under a single set of rules across the 27 member states. It is intended to reduce headaches around taxes, employment rules, and insolvency. Robinson said he believes the EU’s new strategy will strengthen Europe’s software ecosystem by making it easier to operate across borders. “We need to act as one innovation ecosystem, not 27 different ones,” he said. “That’s what makes this Europe’s moonshot moment. If we connect and act now, we can lead. And not just in Europe, but globally.” Story by Siôn Geschwindt Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehic (show all) Siôn is a freelance science and technology reporter, specialising in climate and energy. From nuclear fusion breakthroughs to electric vehicles, he's happiest sourcing a scoop, investigating the impact of emerging technologies, and even putting them to the test. He has five years of journalism experience and holds a dual degree in media and environmental science from the University of Cape Town, South Africa. When he's not writing, you can probably find Siôn out hiking, surfing, playing the drums or catering to his moderate caffeine addiction. You can contact him at: sion.geschwindt [at] protonmail [dot] com Get the TNW newsletter Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week. Also tagged with