News

ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA — Richard Andre Newman thought he would live the rest of his life in his quiet, leafy neighborhood in suburban Virginia. He was born and raised in Bren Mar Park, where children ride their bikes and neighbors wave hello.

But now, as he’s approaching 60, he’s considering selling his Fairfax County home and moving away. That’s because he’s getting a new neighbor: Plaza 500, a 466,000-square-foot data center and an adjacent electrical substation to be built a few hundred feet from townhomes, playgrounds and a community center.

Newman feels helpless to stop it.

“I planned on staying here until I died,” he said, “until this came up.”

The sprawling, windowless warehouses that hold rows of high-speed servers powering almost everything the world does on phones and computers are increasingly becoming fixtures of the American landscape, popping up in towns, cities and suburbs across the United States.

Demand for data centers ballooned in recent years due to the rapid growth of cloud computing and artificial intelligence, and local governments are competing for lucrative deals with big tech companies. But as data centers begin to move into more densely populated areas, abutting homes and schools, parks and recreation centers, some residents are pushing back against the world’s most powerful corporations over concerns about the economic, social and environmental health of their communities.

Tyler Ray, a vocal critic of data centers and leader in the fight against the Virginia project, said the incentives offered are not enough to counteract the consequences of building a facility so close to homes.

“All that we are asking for is, as the county is trying to bring in this data center income, that they are doing it in a way that doesn’t run residents away from their homes,” he said.

Dotting the hills in Northern Virginia

In Northern Virginia, more than 300 data centers dot the rolling hills of the area’s westernmost counties. Cyclists who ride the popular Washington & Old Dominion trail are at times flanked by data centers, and the thousands of commuters who head into the nation’s capital each day can see them in the distance from the Metro.

Plaza 500, one of the latest proposals in the area, is encroaching on neighborhoods like never before, said Newman, who heads a homeowners association in the community.

The pitch from Starwood Capital Group, the private investment firm founded by billionaire Barry Sternlicht, to Fairfax County officials promised a significant property tax boost and, in addition to permanent positions in the data center itself, hundreds of temporary construction and electrical jobs to build the facility.

Tyler Ray and his husband moved to the Bren Pointe community in 2022, hoping to balance proximity to Washington with a desire for green space.

But shortly after the couple moved in, Starwood Capital began scoping out a commercial property near their new home as a possible location for the Plaza 500 project.

When Ray and his neighbors learned of the proposal, they held protests, attended regular county meetings and drew media attention to their concerns to try and stop the development. But their efforts were largely unsuccessful: the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors in September said all newly proposed data centers must adhere to stricter zoning rules, but the Plaza 500 project would be grandfathered in under the old rules.

Ray worries that more data centers in the area could compromise the already stressed power grid: Over 25% of all power produced in Virginia in 2023 went to data centers, a figure that could rise as high as 46% by 2030 if data center growth continues at its current pace. Some estimates also show a mid-sized data center commands the same water usage every day as 1,000 households, prompting concerns over the cost of water. Ray also frets over air quality, as the massive diesel generators that help power the data centers’ hardware send plumes of toxic pollutants into the atmosphere.

A spokesperson for the firm declined to respond to questions for this story.

“I don’t know how a general resident, even someone who has been engaging intently on an issue,” Ray said, “has any chance to go up against the data center industry.”

Local leaders say data centers a financial boon

For local governments, attracting data centers to their municipalities means a financial boon: Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin said in 2024 that Virginia’s existing data centers brought in $1 billion in tax revenue, more than the $750 million in tax breaks given to the tech companies that own them in 2023.

For average-sized facilities, data centers offer a small number of direct jobs — often fewer than 100 positions. Google announced recently that its two data centers in Loudoun County, which has about 440,000 residents, created only around 150 direct jobs. But data center advocates argue that the number of indirect jobs like construction, technology support and electrical work make the projects worthwhile. In that same announcement, Google said their investment spurred 2,730 indirect jobs.

Kathy Smith, the vice chair of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, voted in favor of the Plaza 500 proposal because, in her estimation, data center growth is inevitable in the region, and Fairfax County should reap the benefits.

“I have a responsibility to step back from what we do and look at the big picture,” Smith said. “Data centers are not going away.”

Amazon data centers welcomed by some in Oregon 

On the other side of the country, in Morrow County, Oregon, Amazon Web Services has built at least five data centers surrounding the 4,200-person town of Boardman, nestled among vast stretches of farmland flecked with mint patches and wind turbines, next to the Columbia river.

Last year, AWS, which is owned by Amazon, paid roughly $34 million in property taxes and fees stipulated in the agreements after receiving a $66 million tax break. The company also paid out $10 million total in two, one-time payments to a community development fund and spent another $1.7 million in charitable donations in the community in 2023.

That money has been instrumental in updating infrastructure and bolstering services for the roughly 12,000-person county, going toward a new ladder fire engine, a school resource officer, police body cameras, and $5,000 grants for homebuyers among other things.

Still, some residents are skeptical of the scale of tax break deals. Suspicions started years ago, when three formerly elected officials allegedly helped approve data center deals while owning a stake in a company that contracted with AWS to provide fiber optic cables for the data centers. In June, they each paid $2,000 to settle an ethics complaint against them.

Those officials are no longer in office. But some remain wary of the relationships between the company and local officials, and raised eyebrows at one of the latest data center deals which gives AWS an estimated $1 billion in tax breaks spread over the 15 years to build five new data centers.

Former county commissioner Jim Doherty described a meeting with AWS officials soon after he was elected to office at an upscale restaurant in Boardman, where large windows opened onto the Columbia River.

The AWS representatives asked what Doherty wanted to accomplish as a commissioner. “They said, ‘Tell us what your dreams are. Tell us what you need. Tell us what we can do for you,'” Doherty recalled. Other former officials have described similar interactions. Doherty said AWS didn’t ask for anything in return, but the exchange left him uneasy.

“We engage with stakeholders in every community where we operate around the world, and part of that outreach is to better understand a community’s goals,” said Kevin Miller, AWS’ Vice President of global data centers. “This helps AWS be a catalyst for communities to achieve those goals, and reflects our ongoing commitment to being good neighbors.”

Doherty and another former county commissioner Melissa Lindsay said they pushed unsuccessfully in 2022 for AWS to pay more in taxes in new data center negotiations. They also lobbied to hire outside counsel to negotiate on their behalf, feeling outgunned by the phalanx of AWS-suited lawyers.

“We didn’t want to blow it up. We didn’t want to run them off,” said Lindsay. “But there were better deals to be made.”

Boardman Mayor Paul Keefer and Police Chief Rick Stokoe say their direct line to AWS allows them to get the most out of the company.

“This road right here? Wouldn’t happen if it wasn’t for AWS,” said Keefer, riding in the passenger seat of Stokoe’s cruiser, pointing out the window at construction workers shifting dirt and laying pavement. Both Keefer and Stokoe have been in positions to vote on whether to authorize tax breaks for AWS.

“These companies would not be here if they weren’t getting some kind of incentive,” Stokoe said. “There wouldn’t be any money to talk about.”
…

WASHINGTON — The U.S. House of Representatives is set to vote next week on an annual defense bill that includes just over $3 billion for U.S. telecom companies to remove equipment made by Chinese telecoms firms Huawei and ZTE 000063.SZ from American wireless networks to address security risks.

The 1,800-page text was released late Saturday and includes other provisions aimed at China, including requiring a report on Chinese efforts to evade U.S. national security regulations and an intelligence assessment of the current status of China’s biotechnology capabilities.

The Federal Communications Commission has said removing the insecure equipment is estimated to cost $4.98 billion but Congress previously only approved $1.9 billion for the “rip and replace” program.

Washington has aggressively urged U.S. allies to purge Huawei and other Chinese gear from their wireless networks.

FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel last week again called on the U.S. Congress to provide urgent additional funding, saying the program to replace equipment in the networks of 126 carriers faces a $3.08 billion shortfall “putting both our national security and the connectivity of rural consumers who depend on these networks at risk.”

She has warned the lack of funding could result in some rural networks shutting down, which “could eliminate the only provider in some regions” and could threaten 911 service.

Competitive Carriers Association CEO Tim Donovan on Saturday praised the announcement, saying “funding is desperately needed to fulfill the mandate to remove and replace covered equipment and services while maintaining connectivity for tens of millions of Americans.”

In 2019, Congress told the FCC to require U.S. telecoms carriers that receive federal subsidies to purge their networks of Chinese telecoms equipment. The White House in 2023 asked for $3.1 billion for the program.

Senate Commerce Committee chair Maria Cantwell said funding for the program and up to $500 million for regional tech hubs will be covered by funds generated from a one-time spectrum auction by the FCC for advanced wireless spectrum in the band known as AWS-3 to help meet rising spectrum demands of wireless consumers. 
…

A federal appeals court in Washington on Friday upheld a law requiring the wildly popular social media app TikTok to be sold to a non-Chinese owner or face closure in the United States by next month. The court cited “persuasive” and “compelling” arguments presented by the federal government that TikTok poses a risk to national security.

The ruling could leave the 170 million Americans who regularly use TikTok without access to a social media platform that has enjoyed explosive global growth in recent years. It could also mean that the millions of Americans who create content for TikTok — some of whom rely on monetizing that content for their livelihood — could be cut off from their audiences.

The government has argued that TikTok presents a unique danger to national security because it collects vast amounts of information about its users, and because the Chinese government ultimately exercises control over its parent company, ByteDance, and over the algorithm that determines what content TikTok users see.

Because ByteDance is in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) it is subject to that country’s laws, including measures requiring private companies to cooperate with government intelligence agencies.

The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that the government has a compelling interest in taking steps “to counter the PRC’s efforts to collect great quantities of data about tens of millions of Americans” and “to limit the PRC’s ability to manipulate content covertly on the TikTok platform.”

TikTok signals an appeal

TikTok immediately signaled that it would appeal the circuit court’s ruling to the Supreme Court.

In a statement posted to its website, the company said, “The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue.”

The company said that the law underlying the case “was conceived and pushed through based on inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people,” and warned that it “will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the U.S. and around the world.”

The Supreme Court is not obligated to hear the company’s appeal, and it was not immediately clear that it would do so. If the high court accepts the case, it is possible that it would block the government from enforcing the law until the case is decided.

President-elect Donald Trump, who once supported a TikTok ban before changing his mind during the recent presidential election, has suggested that he will act to save the app when he takes office. However, it is unclear what options he might have for doing that.

Lack of trust

In April, President Joe Biden signed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act into law. The measure gave TikTok 270 days to find a way to separate itself from ByteDance before a ban on the application would kick in on January 19, 2025.

The federal government made it clear that the only kind of divestiture that it would accept was a complete separation of TikTok from its Chinese parent. The company offered alternatives, and established TikTok U.S. Data Security Inc. (TTUSDS) as a subsidiary in Delaware, to wall off U.S. user data from ByteDance.

However, the government cited instances in which U.S. user data that the company claimed to have shielded from the PRC was, in fact, accessible to ByteDance employees in mainland China. It told the court that it lacked “the requisite trust” that “ByteDance and TTUSDS would comply in good faith” with any arrangement other than complete separation of TikTok and ByteDance.

In Friday’s ruling, the judges wrote, “The court can neither fault nor second-guess the government on these crucial points.”

First Amendment concerns

TikTok and its supporters have claimed that severing TikTok from ByteDance is both practically impossible for technological reasons and legally impossible because the Chinese government will block the sale of the company. Therefore, they claim, the law constitutes a de facto ban and a violation of the guarantee of free speech enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution.

In a sign of how seriously the court took the First Amendment arguments, the panel of judges agreed that the law should be subject to “heightened scrutiny,” which the Supreme Court has applied to measures restricting fundamental rights.

In the end, the panel determined that the law satisfies even the most stringent form of “strict scrutiny,” which requires that the government “prove that the restriction furthers a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.”

Free speech advocates respond

The decision came under immediate criticism from free speech advocates.

“Although we’re still analyzing the decision, we find it deeply disappointing,” David Greene, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said in a statement emailed to VOA. “The court appropriately applied strict scrutiny as we have urged it to. But the strict-scrutiny analysis is lacking, relying heavily on speculation about possible future harms.

“Restricting the free flow of information, even from foreign adversaries, is fundamentally undemocratic,” Greene said. “Until now, the U.S. has championed the free flow of information and called out other nations when they have shut down internet access or banned online communications tools like social media apps.”

George Wang, a staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, told VOA that the court accorded “a shocking amount of deference” to the government’s claims about the danger TikTok poses to national security.

“We should be really wary whenever we allow the government to use vague national security arguments as a justification to shut down speech,” Wang said. “That’s a tactic of authoritarian regimes, not democracies. It’s usually the job of courts to stand up to the government when it infringes on the constitutional rights of millions of Americans, and I think the D.C. Circuit really didn’t do that today.”

‘A victory for the American people’

Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi, the senior Democrat on the House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party, and one of the original sponsors of the law requiring TikTok’s divestiture or ban, released a statement Friday praising the court’s decision.

“With today’s opinion, all three branches of government have reached the same conclusion: ByteDance is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, and TikTok’s ownership by ByteDance is a national security threat that cannot be mitigated through any other means than divestiture,” Krishnamoorthi said.

“Every day that TikTok remains under the Chinese Communist Party’s control is a day that our security is at risk,” Krishnamoorthi added.

Representative John Moolenaar, the committee’s Republican chairman, said in a statement that the ruling was “a victory for the American people and TikTok users, and a loss for the Chinese Communist Party, which will no longer be able to exploit ByteDance’s control over TikTok to undermine our sovereignty, surveil our citizens and threaten our national security.”

Moolenaar also held out hope to the app’s users that access to it may, in the end, be preserved under a Trump presidency.

“I am optimistic that President Trump will facilitate an American takeover of TikTok to allow its continued use in the United States and I look forward to welcoming the app in America under new ownership,” Moolenaar said.
…

Using sailing ships to move cargo may be making a comeback. These days, eco-friendly watercraft are equipped with the latest technology. Elena Wolf has the story, narrated by Anna Rice. Camera: Max Avloshenko 
…

WASHINGTON — Amid widespread protests in Kenya this summer over a controversial finance bill, the country’s Communications Authority announced it did not intend to shut down internet access. The next day, however, Kenya experienced a countrywide loss in internet connectivity. 

The main internet service providers said the outage on June 25 was caused by an issue with undersea cables. But the incident caught the attention of digital rights groups, who said the timing of the outage “strongly suggests” an intentional action. Various governments have used such shutdowns to maintain control, these groups say. 

Many governments justify the shutdowns as moves to promote public order and safety, Nompilo Simanje, Africa advocacy and partnerships lead at the International Press Institute, told VOA. 

“The key reasons really are to restrict communication, restrict free expression, restrict online mobilization, restrict online freedom of assembly and association, and also restrict access to information,” she said. 

Access ‘could be about life and death’

Digital watchdogs have documented several cases across the African continent in recent months where access to the internet or social media was blocked or cut off at crucial moments. It isn’t always clear if the cases are the result of a direct order, but the timing often suggests it is, analysts say. 

Within the past year, digital rights group Access Now has documented shutdowns in Kenya, Mozambique, Tanzania, Mauritius and Equatorial Guinea. Nearly all take place alongside events such as protests or elections. 

But these shutdowns can be harmful to the country’s residents, Felicia Anthonio, campaign manager at Access Now, told VOA. 

“It not only disrupts the flow of information, it also makes it impossible for people to access information in a timely manner,” Anthonio said. “When we are talking about crisis situations, information can be like a lifeline, and so, disrupting access could be about life and death in conflict situations.”  

Governments that restrict internet access in one instance are likely to do so again, Anthonio said. 

Before the June incident in Kenya, access to the messaging app Telegram was blocked in November 2023 during national examinations. At the time, the move was presented as a way to prevent cheating during exams.  

Access to Telegram was stifled again last month during national examinations, which lasted over three weeks and extended into the week after examinations finished, according to James Wamathai, advocacy director for the Bloggers Association of Kenya.  

“It was really a huge inconvenience,” Wamathai, who lives in the capital, Nairobi, told VOA.  

Local media reported that Kenya’s Communications Authority had ordered the block to prevent cheating. 

Many people were unable to contact friends or relatives who lived in countries that had banned WhatsApp.  

Kenyans do not have a lot of experience with internet shutdowns, Wamathai told VOA, and many residents do not know how to install workarounds like virtual private networks or VPNs. The current government under President William Ruto is the first to enact such restrictions, he said.  

Kenya is a part of the Freedom Online Coalition, a group of 42 countries that advocate for online freedom around the world. Anthonio said it is “depressing and sad” to see a member of the coalition engage in such practices. 

The Kenyan Embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment.  

Anthonio said democratic and repressive regimes alike have enforced restrictions similar to those experienced in Kenya. 

“It’s really hard to tell what the motivation is, aside from the fact that the government just wants to exert control to show that they are in authority and can restrict people’s rights when they please,” Anthonio said. 

Mauritius for example, planned to impose an internet shutdown for 10 days ahead of its November election.  

Authorities said the block was an effort to control illegal publications that may “threaten national security and public safety,” Anthonio said. She added that this rationale is just “jargon” that governments use to justify shutdowns.  

The shutdown in Mauritius came as a direct order from the government. After protests from media and opposition parties, the ban was lifted after 24 hours. 

The ban was troubling to rights groups. Simanje of IPI said Mauritius “has generally had a very good track record of internet access, online safety and promotion of digital rights.”  

Periodic outages

Other African countries have experienced shutdowns on several occasions.  

In Tanzania, Access Now has documented several internet and social media outages or blocks. Access to the social media platform X was blocked in late August, around the same time that online activists began a campaign highlighting murders, kidnappings and disappearances within the country. This suggested the block was an official order, Access Now reported at the time. 

Tanzania’s embassy in Washington refutes that claim.  

“We would like to assure you that this information is false,” a spokesperson told VOA via email. 

In July and August, the island of Annobon in Equatorial Guinea experienced a total internet shutdown, leaving its residents “completely cut off from the world,” according to Access Now. This came as a response to protests against the deterioration of the country’s environment due to mining activities, Anthonio said. 

Similarly in late October, Mozambique experienced internet connectivity problems after national election results were announced. These shutdowns took place in the middle of violent protests against the reelection of the party in power, which left at least 11 people dead, according to a report by Al Jazeera. 

The Equatorial Guinea, Mozambique and Mauritius embassies in Washington did not respond to VOA’s requests for comment.    
…

WASHINGTON — U.S. government agencies held a classified briefing for all senators on Wednesday on China’s alleged efforts known as Salt Typhoon to burrow deep into American telecommunications companies and steal data about U.S. calls. 

The FBI, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, Federal Communications Commission Chair Jessica Rosenworcel, the National Security Council and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency were among the participants in the closed-door briefing, officials told Reuters.  

Democratic Senator Ron Wyden told reporters after the briefing he was working to draft legislation on this issue, while Senator Bob Casey said he had “great concern” about the breach and added it may not be until next year before Congress can address the issue. 

Republican Senator Rick Scott expressed frustration with the briefing. 

“They have not told us why they didn’t catch it; what they could have done to prevent it,” he said. 

Chinese officials have previously described the allegations as disinformation and said Beijing “firmly opposes and combats cyberattacks and cyber theft in all forms.” 

Separately, a Senate Commerce subcommittee will hold a December 11 hearing on Salt Typhoon and how “security threats pose risks to our communications networks and review best practices.” The hearing will include Competitive Carriers Association CEO Tim Donovan. 

There is growing concern about the size and scope of the reported Chinese hacking into U.S. telecommunications networks and questions about when companies and the government can assure Americans over the matter. 

A U.S. official told reporters a large number of Americans’ metadata has been stolen in the sweeping cyber espionage campaign, adding that dozens of companies across the world had been hit by the hackers, including at least eight telecommunications and telecom infrastructure firms in the United States. 

“The extent and depth and breadth of Chinese hacking is absolutely mind-boggling — that we would permit as much as has happened in just the last year is terrifying,” Senator Richard Blumenthal said. 

Incoming FCC Chair Brendan Carr said Wednesday he will work “with national security agencies through the transition and next year in an effort to root out the threat and secure our networks.” 

U.S. officials have previously alleged the hackers targeted Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Lumen and others and stole phone audio intercepts along with a large tranche of call record data. 

T-Mobile said it does not believe hackers got access to its customer information. Lumen said there is no evidence customer data was accessed on its network. 

Verizon CEO Hans Vestberg, AT&T CEO John Stankey, Lumen CEO Kate Johnson and T-Mobile took part in a November 22 White House meeting on the issue.  

Verizon said “several weeks ago, we became aware that a highly sophisticated, nation-state actor accessed several of the nation’s telecom company networks, including Verizon” adding the incident was focused on a very small subset of individuals in government and politics. 

AT&T said it is “working in close coordination with federal law enforcement, industry peers and cyber security experts to identify and remediate any impact on our networks.” 

CISA told reporters on Tuesday that it could not offer a timetable for ridding America’s telecom networks of all hackers. 

“It would be impossible for us to predict when we’ll have full eviction,” CISA official Jeff Greene said.
…

Australia’s competition watchdog said there was a need to revisit efforts to ensure greater choice for internet users, citing Google’s dominant search engine market share and its competitors’ failure to capitalize on the artificial intelligence boom.

A report by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission said that while the integration of generative AI tools into search engines is still nascent, Big Tech’s deep pockets and dominant presence give it an upper hand.

The commission said it was concerned Google and Microsoft could integrate generative AI into their search offerings, including through commercial deals, which raises concerns about the accuracy and reliability of search queries.

“While some consumers may find the generative AI search experience more useful and efficient, others may be concerned about the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated responses to search queries,” Commissioner Peter Crone said.

Google and Microsoft did not immediately respond to Reuters requests for comment.

Australia has intensified the spotlight on the tech giants, which are mostly domiciled in the U.S. It was the first country to make social media platforms pay media outlets royalties for sharing their content.

Last month, it passed a law that banned social media for children aged under 16, and proposed a law earlier this week that could impose fines of up to $32.28 million on tech giants if they suppress competition and prevent consumers from switching between services.

The Australian watchdog on Wednesday urged the use of service-specific codes that help prevent anti-competitive behavior, address data advantages and allow consumers to switch between services freely.

These proposed measures have been agreed to in principle by the government, ACCC said, and it will close its enquiry by next March.
…

In Kenya, tech entrepreneurs who had trouble accessing resources as simple as an internet connection are getting an assist from American libraries. The U.S. Embassy in Kenya is now operating six tech hubs, the newest of which opened in Nairobi last month. Victoria Amunga reports. Camera: Jimmy Makhulo
…

Bangkok — China announced Tuesday it is banning exports to the United States of gallium, germanium, antimony and other key high-tech materials with potential military applications, as a general principle, lashing back at U.S. limits on semiconductor-related exports.  

The Chinese Commerce Ministry announced the move after Washington expanded its list of Chinese companies subject to export controls on computer chip-making equipment, software and high-bandwidth memory chips. Such chips are needed for advanced applications.  

The ratcheting up of trade restrictions comes as President-elect Donald Trump has been threatening to sharply raise tariffs on imports from China and other countries, potentially intensifying simmering tensions over trade and technology.  

China’s Foreign Ministry also issued a vehement reproof.  

“China has lodged stern protests with the U.S. for its update of the semiconductor export control measures, sanctions against Chinese companies, and malicious suppression of China’s technological progress,” Lin Jian, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, said in a routine briefing Tuesday.  

“I want to reiterate that China firmly opposes the U.S. overstretching the concept of national security, abuse of export control measures, and illegal unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction against Chinese companies,” Lin said.  

Minerals sourced in China used in computer chips, cars

China said in July 2023 it would require exporters to apply for licenses to send to the U.S. the strategically important materials such as gallium and germanium.  

In August, the Chinese Commerce Ministry said it would restrict exports of antimony, which is used in a wide range of products from batteries to weapons, and impose tighter controls on exports of graphite.  

Such minerals are considered critical for national security. China is a major producer of antimony, which is used in flame retardants, batteries, night-vision goggles and nuclear weapon production, according to a 2021 U.S. International Trade Commission report.  

The limits announced by Beijing on Tuesday also include exports of super-hard materials, such as diamonds and other synthetic materials that are not compressible and extremely dense. They are used in many industrial areas such as cutting tools, disc brakes and protective coatings. The licensing requirements that China announced in August also covered smelting and separation technology and machinery and other items related to such super-hard materials.  

China is the biggest global source of gallium and germanium, which are produced in small amounts but are needed to make computer chips for mobile phones, cars and other products, as well as solar panels and military technology.  

China says it’s protecting itself from US trade restrictions  

After the U.S. side announced it was adding 140 companies to a so-called “entity list” subject to strict export controls, China’s Commerce Ministry protested and said it would act to protect China’s “rights and interests.” Nearly all of the companies affected by Washington’s latest trade restrictions are based in China, though some are Chinese-owned businesses in Japan, South Korea and Singapore.  

Both governments say their respective export controls are needed for national security.  

China’s government has been frustrated by U.S. curbs on access to advanced processor chips and other technology on security grounds but had been cautious in retaliating, possibly to avoid disrupting China’s fledgling developers of chips, artificial intelligence and other technology.  

Various Chinese industry associations issued statements protesting the U.S. move to limit access to advanced chip-making technology.  

The China Association of Automobile Manufacturers said it opposed using national security as a grounds for export controls, “abuse of export control measures, and the malicious blockade and suppression of China.”

 “Such behavior seriously violates the laws of the market economy and the principle of fair competition, undermines the international economic and trade order, disrupts the stability of the global industrial chain, and ultimately harms the interests of all countries,” it said in a statement.  

The China Semiconductor Industry Association issued a similar statement, adding that such restrictions were disrupting supply chains and inflating costs for American companies.

 “U.S. chip products are no longer safe and reliable. China’s related industries will have to be cautious in purchasing U.S. chips,” it said.  

The U.S. gets about half its supply of both gallium and germanium metals directly from China, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. China exported about 23 metric tons (25 tons) of gallium in 2022 and produces about 600 metric tons (660 tons) of germanium per year. The U.S. has deposits of such minerals but has not been mining them, though some projects underway are exploring ways to tap those resources.

The export restrictions have had a mixed impact on prices for those critical minerals, with the price of antimony more than doubling this year to over $25,000 per ton. Prices for gallium, germanium and graphite also have mostly risen.
…

Most of the world’s airlines are not doing enough to switch to sustainable jet fuel, according to a study by Brussels-based advocacy group Transport and Environment, which also found too little investment by oil producers in the transition.

The airline sector is calling for more production of the fuel, which can be made from materials such as wood chips and used cooking oil.

“Unfortunately, airlines at the moment are not on the trajectory to have meaningful emissions reduction because they’re not buying enough sustainable aviation fuel,” Transport and Environment aviation policy manager Francesco Catte said.

As it stands, SAF makes up about 1% of aviation fuel use on the global market, which needs to increase for airlines to meet carbon emission reduction targets. The fuel can cost between two to five times more than regular jet fuel.

A lack of investment by major oil players, who have the capital to build SAF processing facilities, is hampering the market’s growth, the study says.

In its ranking, Transport and Environment pointed to Air France-KLM, United Airlines and Norwegian as some of the airlines that have taken tangible steps to buy sustainable jet fuel, particularly its synthetic, cleaner burning version.

But 87% are failing to make meaningful efforts, the ranking shows, and even those who are trying could miss their own targets without more investment.

Airlines such as Italy’s ITA Airways, the successor airline to bankrupt Alitalia, and Portugal’s TAP have done very little to secure SAF in the coming years, the ranking shows.

A TAP spokesperson said the airline was the first to fly in Portugal with SAF in July 2022, “and is committed to flying with 10% SAF in 2030.”

“While we would have liked to increase our investment in SAF, the low availability…and high costs…have limited our ability to do so, considering also our start up condition,” an ITA spokesperson said.
…