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

Remember the banana peels, apple cores, and leftover pizza you recently threw in the garbage? Today, your food waste—and your neighbors’—is emitting climate-warming greenhouse gases as it decomposes in a nearby municipal landfill. Buried food scraps and yard waste at 51 dumps across Colorado generate an amount of methane equivalent to driving 1 million gasoline-powered cars for a year. About 80 times as potent as carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas over a period of 20 years, methane accounts for 11% of global emissions that scientists say are warming the atmosphere and contributing to more intense and severe weather, wildfires, and drought. Landfills are the third-largest source of methane pollution in Colorado, after agriculture and fossil fuel extraction. Draft methane rules released last month by the state’s Department of Public Health and Environment would, for the first time, require some dump operators to measure and quantify methane releases and to fix leaks. The proposal mandates that waste managers install a gas collection system if their dump generates a certain amount of the climate-warming gas.  It also addresses loopholes in federal law that allow waste to sit for five years before such systems are required—even though science has shown that half of all food waste decays within about three and a half years. The draft rule surpasses U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards in the amount of landfill area operators must monitor for emissions. It’s set to be heard by the state’s Air Quality Control Commission in August. Proposed regulations require the elimination of open gas flares—burning emissions directly into the atmosphere—and urge the use of biocovers and biofilters, which rely on bacteria to break down gases. The 70-page draft also calls for more routine and thorough monitoring of a dump surface with advanced technologies like satellites, which recently recorded large plumes of methane escaping from a Denver-area landfill. “We’ve had our eyes opened thanks to technology that has made the invisible, visible—now we know the extent of the problem, which is much greater than what estimates have portrayed,” said Katherine Blauvelt, circular economy director at Industrious Labs, a nonprofit working to decarbonize industry.  “When landfill operators fail to control leaks, we know harmful pollutants are coming along for the ride.” Cancer-causing volatile organic compounds, such as benzene and toluene, escape with methane leaching from landfills. These chemicals also contribute to the formation of lung-damaging ozone pollution, an increasing problem for the 3.6 million people who live in the greater Denver metropolitan area. Indeed, the region along the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains ranked sixth in the nation for the most polluted air—with unhealthy ozone levels reported on one out of every 10 days, on average, according to the American Lung Association’s 2025 “State of the Air” report. The state is also woefully behind in its compliance with federal air quality standards. State officials and environmental advocates agree that reducing methane emissions from landfills, which are easier to mitigate than cow burps, for example, is one of the quickest and most efficient ways to slow warming in the short term. “Waste deposited in landfills continues producing methane for decades as it breaks down—and it’s one sector where Colorado has yet to directly take action to reduce these greenhouse gases,” said Tim Taylor, a supervisor in the state’s air pollution control division, in an online hearing last February on the proposed landfill methane rules. Colorado’s draft regulations are similar to those in California, Oregon, Maryland, and Washington, he added. More than 10 landfills in the state are already required under federal rules to have gas collection and control systems. Yet even with such technology in place, disposal facilities routinely exceed federal methane emissions caps. The state’s health department has also identified a dozen municipal solid waste landfills, based on a preliminary analysis, that would be required to put such systems in place under the proposed rules, Zachary Aedo, an agency spokesman, said in an email to Capital & Main. Many of these facilities are operated by counties, some of which expressed concerns about their ability to pay for such systems. “We are a small rural county, and a multimillion-dollar containment system is going to be more than we can build,” testified Delta County Commissioner Craig Fuller at the February hearing. “The financial equation of this whole thing is absolutely mind-boggling—we are struggling as it is to provide health and human services.” Other county officials embraced the proposed tightening of rules. “Landfills across Colorado, including in Eagle County, are leading sources of methane pollution,” said Eagle County Commissioner Matt Scherr in a March 6 statement. “As a local elected official I support a robust rule that embraces advanced technologies to cut pollution, protect public health and help the methane mitigation industry thrive.” For larger landfill companies, like Waste Management, which operates 283 active disposal sites nationwide, figuring out which technology works to best monitor emissions from a dump’s surface is proving a complex challenge. The company is testing technologies at facilities with different topographies and climate fluctuations to understand what causes emissions releases, said Amy Banister, Waste Management senior director of air programs. “Landfills are complicated, emissions vary over time, and we have emissions 24/7,” said Banister at an online meeting last September of a technical group created by Colorado health department officials. “Drones produced a lot of false positives—and we need more work understanding how fixed sensors can be applied in a landfill environment.” State health officials suggested municipalities could offset the costs of installing gas collection systems at disposal sites by converting methane into energy. Several landfill operations in Colorado currently have such waste-to-energy systems—which send power they generate to the state’s power grid. “We are mindful of the costs of complying with this rule and how tipping fees may be impacted,” said Taylor, an air quality supervisor, at the February hearing. “Analyses conducted in other states of their landfill methane rules found there wasn’t an increase in tipping fees as a result of regulations over time.” Tipping fees are paid by those who dispose of waste in a landfill. If operators passed on compliance costs to households, a state analysis found, the yearly average annual fee would increase $22.90 per household. Colorado’s push comes as the EPA issued an enforcement alert in September that found “recurring Clean Air Act compliance issues” at municipal solid waste landfills that led to the “significant release of methane,” based on 100 inspections conducted over three years.  Such violations included improper design and installation of gas collection and control systems, failure to maintain adequate “cover integrity,” and improper monitoring of facilities for emissions. To address gaps in federal regulations, which require operators to measure emissions four times a year by walking in a grid pattern across the face of the landfill with a handheld sensor, Colorado’s draft rules require third-party monitoring. Such measurements must be conducted offsite by an entity approved by the state’s air pollution control division that uses a satellite, aircraft or mobile monitoring platform. The infrequency of such grid walks—which skip spots that operators deem dangerous—contributes to the undercounting of methane emissions from landfills, according to a satellite-based analysis. An international team of scientists estimated potent greenhouse gas emissions from landfills are 50% higher than EPA estimates. Satellites like one operated by nonprofit Carbon Mapper found large methane plumes outside the quarterly monitoring periods over the Tower Landfill in Commerce City, northeast of Denver. The satellite allowed scientists to see parts of the landfill not accessible with traditional monitoring—measurements that found that such landfills are underreporting their methane emissions to state regulators, said Tia Scarpelli, a research scientist and waste sector lead at Carbon Mapper. “Landfill emissions tend to be quite persistent—if a landfill is emitting when it’s first observed, it’s likely to be emitting later on,” she added. Scarpelli cautioned that it’s important for regulators to investigate with operators what was happening on the landfill surface at the time the leak was measured. Tower Landfill’s operator, Allied Waste Systems of Colorado, provided reasons for such large methane releases in a January 2024 report to the state’s health department, including equipment malfunctions. The fix for about 22 emissions events over the federal methane limits detected in August 2023 by surface monitoring: “Soil added as cover maintenance.” Like many dumps across Colorado and the nation, the Tower Landfill is located near a community that’s already disproportionately impacted by emissions from industrial activities. “These landfills are not only driving climate change, they are also driving a public health crisis in our community,” said Guadalupe Solis, director of environmental justice programs at Cultivando, a nonprofit led by Latina and Indigenous women in northern Denver. “The Tower Landfill is near nursing homes, clinics, near schools with majority Hispanic students.” Physicians in the state warned that those who live the closest to dumps suffer the worst health effects from pollutants like benzene and hydrogen sulfide, which are linked to cancer, heart, and other health conditions. “People living near landfills, like myself, my family and my patients, experience higher exposure to air pollution,” testified Dr. Nikita Habermehl, a specialist in pediatric emergency medicine who lives near a landfill in Larimer County, at the February 26 public hearing, “leading to increased rates of respiratory issues and headaches and asthma worsened by poor air quality.” —By Jennifer Oldham, Capital & Main This piece was originally published by Capital & Main, which reports from California on economic, political, and social issues.

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology. OpenAI: The power and the pride OpenAI’s release of ChatGPT 3.5 set in motion an AI arms race that has changed the world. How that turns out for humanity is something we are still reckoning with and may be for quite some time. But a pair of recent books both attempt to get their arms around it.In Empire of AI: Dreams and Nightmares in Sam Altman’s OpenAI, Karen Hao tells the story of the company’s rise to power and its far-reaching impact all over the world. Meanwhile, The Optimist: Sam Altman, OpenAI, and the Race to Invent the Future, by the Wall Street Journal’s Keach Hagey, homes in more on Altman’s personal life, from his childhood through the present day, in order to tell the story of OpenAI.  Both paint complex pictures and show Altman in particular as a brilliantly effective yet deeply flawed creature of Silicon Valley—someone capable of always getting what he wants, but often by manipulating others. Read the full review.—Mat Honan This startup wants to make more climate-friendly metal in the US The news: A California-based company called Magrathea just turned on a new electrolyzer that can make magnesium metal from seawater. The technology has the potential to produce the material, which is used in vehicles and defense applications, with net-zero greenhouse-gas emissions. Why it matters: Today, China dominates production of magnesium, and the most common method generates a lot of the emissions that cause climate change. If Magrathea can scale up its process, it could help provide an alternative source of the metal and clean up industries that rely on it, including automotive manufacturing. Read the full story. —Casey Crownhart A new sodium metal fuel cell could help clean up transportation A new type of fuel cell that runs on sodium metal could one day help clean up sectors where it’s difficult to replace fossil fuels, like rail, regional aviation, and short-distance shipping. The device represents a departure from technologies like lithium-based batteries and is more similar conceptually to hydrogen fuel cell systems. The sodium-air fuel cell has a higher energy density than lithium-ion batteries and doesn’t require the super-cold temperatures or high pressures that hydrogen does, making it potentially more practical for transport. Read the full story. —Casey Crownhart The must-reads I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology. 1 The US state department is considering vetting foreign students’ social mediaAfter ordering US embassies to suspend international students’ visa appointments. (Politico)+ Applicants’ posts, shares and comments could be assessed. (The Guardian)+ The Trump administration also wants to cut off Harvard’s funding. (NYT $) 2 SpaceX’s rocket exploded during its test flight It’s the third consecutive explosion the company has suffered this year. (CNBC)+ It was the first significant attempt to reuse Starship hardware. (Space)+ Elon Musk is fairly confident the problem with the engine bay has been resolved. (Ars Technica)3 The age of AI layoffs is hereAnd it’s taking place in conference rooms, not on factory floors. (Quartz)+ People are worried that AI will take everyone’s jobs. We’ve been here before. (MIT Technology Review)4 Thousands of IVF embryos in Gaza were destroyed by Israeli strikesAn attack destroyed the fertility clinic where they were housed. (BBC)+ Inside the strange limbo facing millions of IVF embryos. (MIT Technology Review) 5 China’s overall greenhouse gas emissions have fallen for the first timeEven as energy demand has risen. (Vox)+ China’s complicated role in climate change. (MIT Technology Review) 6 The sun is damaging Starlink’s satellitesIts eruptions are reducing the satellite’s lifespans. (New Scientist $)+ Apple’s satellite connectivity dreams are being thwarted by Musk. (The Information $) 7 European companies are struggling to do business in ChinaEven the ones that have operated there for decades. (NYT $)+ The country’s economic slowdown is making things tough. (Bloomberg $) 8 US hospitals are embracing helpful robotsThey’re delivering medications and supplies so nurses don’t have to. (FT $)+ Will we ever trust robots? (MIT Technology Review) 9 Meet the people who write the text messages on your favorite show They try to make messages as realistic, and intriguing, as possible. (The Guardian) 10 Robot dogs are delivering parcels in AustinWell, over 100 yard distances at least. (TechCrunch) Quote of the day “I wouldn’t say there’s hope. I wouldn’t bet on that.” —Michael Roll, a partner at law firm Roll & Harris, explains to Wired why businesses shouldn’t get their hopes up over obtaining refunds for Donald Trump’s tariff price hikes. One more thing Is the digital dollar dead?In 2020, digital currencies were one of the hottest topics in town. China was well on its way to launching its own central bank digital currency, or CBDC, and many other countries launched CBDC research projects, including the US.How things change. The digital dollar—even though it doesn’t exist—has now become political red meat, as some politicians label it a dystopian tool for surveillance. So is the dream of the digital dollar dead? Read the full story. —Mike Orcutt We can still have nice things A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line or skeet ’em at me.) + Recently returned from vacation? Here’s how to cope with coming back to reality.+ Reconnecting with friends is one of life’s great joys.+ A new Parisian cocktail bar has done away with ice entirely in a bid to be more sustainable.+ Why being bored is good for you—no, really.

Photo Credit: Schmidt et al./NJIT/NSO/AURA/NSF New optics show coronal rain and strange plasma features in the sun’s outer atmosphere Highlights Ultr-detailed images reveal fine plasma structures in the sun’s corona Scientists observe a high-speed plasma ‘plasmoid’ racing across the sun Coronal rain threads seen in sharpest detail, just 12 miles in width Advertisement In a landmark achievement for solar astronomy, scientists have unveiled the most detailed view ever of the sun's corona — its superheated outer atmosphere — revealing bizarre, never-before-seen plasma features including delicate “raindrops” and a snaking, high-speed plasma stream. Captured using a cutting-edge adaptive optics system named Cona, installed at the Goode Solar Telescope (GST) in California, the new footage offers unmatched clarity of phenomena long obscured by Earth's turbulent atmosphere. The images, coloured to represent hydrogen-alpha light, show cooler plasma tracing the sun's magnetic fields in mesmerising loops and arcs.Sharpest Solar Views Yet Reveal Coronal Rain, Racing Plasmoid, and Twisting ProminencesAs per researchers at NJIT's Centre for Solar-Terrestrial Research, the adaptive optics allow the 1.6-metre telescope to reach its theoretical resolution limit of 63 kilometres. Among the findings is the sharpest view yet of coronal rain — narrow filaments of plasma falling back to the solar surface along magnetic field lines, some just 20 kilometres wide. Unlike Earth's rain, these plasma threads arc and loop in response to the sun's magnetism. Another striking discovery is the observation of a fast-moving ‘plasmoid' — a stream of plasma racing across the corona at nearly 100 kilometres per second.The footage also captured a rapidly reconfiguring solar prominence—plasma loops anchored to the sun's surface, twisting and dancing under magnetic tension. Scientists believe such observations could illuminate the mechanisms behind coronal mass ejections and solar flares, major drivers of space weather. Researchers note that the sun's surface appears soft and "fluffy" due to short-lived plasma jets called spicules, whose origins remain mysterious.The team's findings were published Tuesday, May 27, in the journal Nature.Study co-author Philip Goode mentioned that "This marks the beginning of a new era in solar astronomy." Researchers now hope to implement similar technology in larger instruments such as the Daniel K. Inouye Solar Telescope in Hawaiʻi.  For the latest tech news and reviews, follow Gadgets 360 on X, Facebook, WhatsApp, Threads and Google News. For the latest videos on gadgets and tech, subscribe to our YouTube channel. If you want to know everything about top influencers, follow our in-house Who'sThat360 on Instagram and YouTube. Further reading: sun's corona, plasma stream, coronal rain, solar telescope, space weather, solar prominence Gadgets 360 Staff The resident bot. If you email me, a human will respond. More

The $7.6 billion Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America, or HMGMA, is one of the newest and most technologically advanced car factories in the world.The plant, located near Savannah, Georgia, opened its doors in March and will be a key production facility for Hyundai's EVs and PHEVs, as well as those belonging to its Genesis luxury brand and sister company Kia.In a recent interview with Business Insider, Genesis North America COO Tedros Mengiste cited the investment as an example of Hyundai's track record for "visionary and strategic, and long-term thinking."I recently took a behind-the-scenes tour of Hyundai's new megafactory packed with autonomous robots and state-of-the-art tech. The Hyundai Metaplant is situated on a 3,000-acre campus in the south Georgia town of Ellabell. Hyundai's Metaplant America. Hyundai Located just 20 miles from the Port of Savannah, one of the busiest in the US, the plant not only gives Hyundai much-needed manufacturing capacity in the US to avoid import tariffs, but it also affords the company the flexibility to export vehicles abroad.It also gives Hyundai the production footprint to compete against rivals like Tesla, GM, and Rivian, which is also building a new factory in Georgia. Driving up to the factory, it's easy to be wowed by the sheer scale of the sprawling complex. The entryway to the Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America campus in Ellabell, Georgia. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider It's Hyundai Group's second car factory in the state. The company also operates a $3.2 billion, 2,200-acre facility in West Point, Georgia, that builds Kia EV and ICE SUVs. I drove to the factory in a new 2026 Hyundai Ioniq 9 EV SUV, which is one of the vehicles assembled at the Metaplant. Hyundai Ioniq 9 EVs are parked in front of the lobby at the Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America in Georgia. Hyundai The only other model assembled at the plant is the Hyundai Ioniq 5 EV. My tour began in the plant's modern main lobby. The Metaplant lobby is modern and pleasant. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider Hyundai broke ground on the facility in the fall of 2022 and took just two years to complete construction on the main production buildings. The Metaplant site consists of 11 buildings totalling 7.5 million square feet of space. A map of the Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America in Georgia. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider The Metaplant is a marvel of vertical integration, with the goal of having as many key components, ranging from battery packs to seats, made on-site. Here's a Hyundai XCIENT hydrogen fuel cell semi truck used to transport parts and supplies to the factory. A Hyundai XCIENT hydrogen fuel cell truck. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider It's one of 21 emission-free XCIENT trucks deployed around the Metaplant site. The production process starts in the stamping shop, where sheet metal is cut and stamped into parts that will make up the frame of the car. The stamping facility. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider The sheet metal is supplied by the on-site Hyundai Steel facility. Stamped parts are transported by automated guided vehicles, or AGVs. Autonomous robots are transporting stamped metal parts. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider The plant employs almost 300 AGVs to shuttle everything from spare parts to partially assembled cars. The stamped metal panels are then stored in these massive racks. Racks full of stamped metal sections of Ioniq 5 and Ioniq 9 EVs. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider The Metaplant was originally expected to produce up to 300,000 electrified vehicles annually. However, Hyundai announced at the plant's grand opening in March that its capacity will be expanded to 500,000 units in the coming years as part of a new $21 billion investment in US manufacturing. Here are parts of the Ioniq 9, Hyundai's new flagship three-row EV SUV. Parts of the Hyundai Ioniq 9 EV at the Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America in Georgia. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider The plant is expected to start production of its first Kia model next year. The next part of the tour is the welding shop. Ioniq 5 EVs at the welding facility at the Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America in Georgia. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider Here, the stamped metal pieces are welded together by robot to form the body of the vehicle. The work done by the welding robots is then inspected by the plant's human employees known as Meta Pros. The Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Ioniq 9 EVs are going through quality inspections in the welding shop. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider The Metplant employees more than 1,300 Meta Pros, nearly 90% of whom were hired locally. There are employee meeting and break areas located along the inspection and assembly areas. Employee break and meeting area at the welding shop. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider An employee cafeteria with remote ordering capability is located in the main assembly building. In addition to human eyes, the vehicles are also inspected by a pair of Boston Dynamics robot dogs called Spot. Boston Dynamics robot dogs inspecting Hyundai Ioniq 5 EVs. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider In 2021, Hyundai acquired an 80% stake in Boston Dynamics in a deal that valued the company at $1.1 billion. After the inspections are complete, a robot loads the partially assembled vehicles onto a conveyor system. Ioniq 5 EVs are about to be lifted onto the conveyor belt to the paint shop. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider Next stop, the paint shop. Unfortunately, my tour did not get access to the paint shop due to concerns that outside visitors may compromise the quality of the paint application. Hyundai EV bodies are moving from the paint shop to the assembly facility at the Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America in Georgia. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider After receiving a fresh coat of paint, the vehicles travel through a bridge to the assembly building. Here, the painted bodies are married with their battery packs and skateboard chassis. An Ioniq 5 on the assembly line. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider Hyundai Mobis produces the skateboard chassis in a building next door to the general assembly facility. The Metaplant's on-site battery factory, operated in a joint venture with LG, is expected to come online next year. The plant currently sources its batteries from Hyundai's other facilities, including one in North Georgia that's a joint venture with SK. The vehicles' interiors are then assembled by hand. The Metaplant assembly line, where human workers are joining in. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider The further along the production process, the more you see human workers on the assembly line. Partially assembled EVs are shuttled through from area to area by the automated robots. Ioniq 5 EVs at the Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America in Georgia. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider The entire facility was immaculately clean, quiet, and felt beautifully choreographed. Assembled vehicles are loaded onto different AGVs that navigate the facility by reading the QR codes embedded into the floor. Hyundai Ioniq 5 EVs after soak testing at the Hyundai Motor Group Metaplant America in Georgia. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider These AGVs shuttle the vehicles through the plant's various quality control tests. At the end of the assembly line, completed EVs are put through their paces at the on-site test track before being sent to the vehicle preparation center, or VPC, to get them ready for shipping. Completed Hyundai EVs are ready for a dealer's lot. Benjamin Zhang/Business Insider Vehicles destined for dealerships in the region are put on trucks, while those traveling more than 500 miles are shipped by rail at the Metplant's on-site train terminal.

Goodbye to start-stop systems – the EPA under Trump concludes that they are not worth it and could disappear from new models Goodbye to start-stop systems – the EPA under Trump concludes that they are not worth it and could disappear from new models The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) has spoken, and what was once an open secret now makes much more sense: stop-start systems in cars are useless. No, they’re not useful, they were supposedly designed to reduce fuel consumption when the car is idle but, let’s be honest, they’re pretty annoying.Now, the Trump administration has launched a crusade against these systems, which have been added to cars for more than 15 years. The EPA argues that they provide little or no real benefit in terms of emissions and that all they really do is wear down engine components. What stop-start systems were supposed to promise The idea was simple: eliminate fuel consumption during idling (when the car is stopped but still on, like at traffic lights or yield signs), especially in urban environments.This practice became popular in the early 2000s, when the U.S. Department of Energy and Argonne National Laboratory claimed that a car could consume up to half a gallon per hour while idling. They also claimed that automatically turning off the engine when the vehicle stops and turning it back on when it moves again could save between 4% and 10% of fuel in the city… far from reality.Included in every car Although it started as a premium feature, today 65% of cars sold in the USA have this system, compared to just 1% in 2012. In Europe and Japan, the number goes beyond 90%! And although it’s not legally required, manufacturers receive fuel economy credits for including it, and where there’s money, well, we know how that goes. The EPA hits the brakes Now, after years of research, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin stated that the system barely reduces emissions and causes premature wear on the starter motor (which makes sense, it starts more often, even several times within an hour). Although many tons of CO₂ savings have been estimated annually, the reality is that this system had many shortcomings, starting with the fact that it’s uncomfortable and annoying. And honestly… the fuel savings weren’t that great, estimated between 4% and 5%. Was it really that annoying? It was said that this system worked better in dense urban commutes, obviously, there are more stops than on a regular highway, where the system is irrelevant. Still, it’s annoying. Many drivers deactivate it due to discomfort or fear of it failing. The early versions were clunky and slow, and although they’ve improved, people still don’t like them. The future of stop-start: end of the road? It’s clear that brands started adding this system because of the incentives (not because they liked it) but now, if the EPA removes the credits that reward its use, brands will likely choose to eliminate it from future models. Especially now that we’re moving closer to an electric future, something that would make this system obsolete and unnecessary. Failed bet? At the time, they represented an attempt to reduce emissions, but now that electrification and hydrogen are just around the corner, we can say that these stop-start systems did their job and can now be put to rest (finally). What did the experts say? According to Consumer Reports, for example, it depended on the specific vehicle. They pointed out the pros and cons of the system but admitted that in many cases the system was inconsistent and, as we’ve said, very annoying. We’ll have to wait and see if this is a final goodbye (at least in our country, because Europe and China will probably continue using it) and whether we’ll miss it or feel relieved. And you, what do you think of the stop-start system? Did you find it annoying too?