Taking the helm: Michael Kratsios will become Donald Trump’s science advisor while Lynne Parker has been nominated to a new position as executive director of the President’s Council on Advisors on Science and Technology (courtesy: the White House and the University of Tennessee) Incoming US President Donald Trump has selected Silicon Valley executive Michael Kratsios as…
The Charter of Strategic Partnership signed between the United States and Armenia outlines the fundamental principles of bilateral cooperation, covering a broad range of areas—from economic collaboration to regional security matters.The preamble of the document emphasizes that the partnership between the two democratic nations is founded on shared values and mutual interests, including the promotion of democracy and economic freedom, the protection of sovereignty and territorial integrity, the strengthening of the rule of law, and the safeguarding of fundamental human rights.Special attention is given to regional security. The United States reaffirms its support for the peaceful resolution of conflicts between Armenia and Azerbaijan, including the border delimitation process based on the 1991 Alma-Ata Declaration. Washington also advocates for the unblocking of regional transportation links in the South Caucasus, ensuring respect for the sovereignty and jurisdiction of all countries involved.In the economic section of the Charter, the two sides agreed to enhance cooperation to stimulate job creation and economic growth, support market reforms, and promote economic liberalization. Particular emphasis is placed on the development of the energy sector, including civilian nuclear energy in compliance with safety and non-proliferation standards, as well as increasing the share of renewable energy sources.Recognizing Armenia’s landlocked status, the United States aims to deepen cooperation to integrate Armenia into broader regional transportation networks, specifically by supporting Armenia’s “Crossroads of the World” project. Additionally, the Charter includes plans to establish a working group to strengthen export controls on dual-use goods and to expand access for Armenian companies to U.S.-regulated technologies.
Open this photo in gallery:New UBC catalyst removes ‘forever chemicals’ from water supplies before they can cause lasting harm. Researchers left to right: Dr. Raphaell Moreira, Pani Rostami and Dr. Johan Foster.UBC Applied Science/Paul JosephHave you worn a waterproof garment recently or used a piece of non-stick cookware? Chances are that those items were made with the help of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, also known as PFAS.“PFAS compounds are wonderful at what they do, but they last forever and that’s the problem,” explains Johan Foster, an associate professor of chemical and biological engineering at the University of British Columbia. “They don’t break down in nature and they’re soluble in water, so they accumulate in the human body.”These properties are what give PFAS the nickname of ‘forever chemicals’.PFAS are favoured for their ability to resist water, heat, grease and oil. However, tiny amounts of PFAS can cause serious health issues, including hormonal imbalances, developmental delays and increased risks of cancer in humans.The eradication solutions available, like heating PFAS-contaminated water to a high temperature, are expensive, consume a lot of energy and are impractical for large-scale use. There are also existing filtration systems that can trap PFAS but they don’t eliminate the substance.“That’s not a long-term option,” Foster explains. “You’re just kicking the can down the road.”The lightbulb momentIn 2022, while discussing PFAS with his colleague Madjid Mohseni, another UBC professor of chemical and biological engineering, Foster began brainstorming a scalable, economical and environmentally friendly way to not only trap but also break down the substance.Mohseni suggested looking into iron salts, which are known to break down the ultrastrong carbon-fluorine bonds in PFAS. This sparked an idea for Foster, who had already been experimenting with biochar in his lab – wood chips burned into charcoal, known for their high absorbency.“I figured, why can’t I just combine these two things: get iron salts onto wood and burn them,” Foster says.The first version of their PFAS biochar solution was created with the use of a blowtorch. Then, water contaminated with PFAS would be filtered through the treated granules of biochar, working similarly to a Brita filter.“It absorbs the PFAS, then the [iron salt] catalyst on there starts to break it down.” After their initial discovery, Foster’s lab continued experimenting with the solution.Refining the solution“We changed the salt concentrations, how we made them and the temperature we burn them at,” he explains, eventually landing on a product that was both effective, cheap and scalable. They even found ways to hasten the filtration process. “It is a photocatalyst, so if you shine a light on it, that will speed things up,” Foster says.Foster is currently working on developing a PFAS filtration system for homes and small businesses that would be affordable, costing between $50 to $200.“In the U.S., a lot of homes have a three or four-stage active charcoal water purification system,” Foster explains. “This is a new version of an activated charcoal filter that could also destroy PFAS.”Looking aheadSome time in 2025, Foster hopes to have a home filtration solution ready to buy. His next goal after that is to get municipalities on board to incorporate PFAS filtration into the water treatment systems for a city or town.“Activated carbon is already used in a lot of [municipalities] as one step in a water purification process,” he says. “At a municipal level, we can drop in our solution in an already existing system.”But seeing his solution used by municipalities could take years.“It’s very difficult to get into municipalities just because a lot of politics are involved,” he says. “But we are in talks with engineering firms that are experienced in creating solutions for municipalities.”PFAS are ubiquitous nowadays, and they play a critical safety role in safety applications, such as their use in fire retardants. But Foster’s solution offers hope for a future where water can be safely and permanently treated for PFAS on a wider level.“We’re trying to scale this up and prove that it works at all of these scales.”
Students from St Mary’s Secondary School Mallow emerged triumphant at the 2025 BT Young Scientist with the Teagasc Special Award.Alvy Fitzgerald, Anna Duggan and Leah O’Sullivan also won the first junior group in the biological and ecological category for their outstanding scientific achievements.The winning project was titled ‘An Investigation into using Total Leaf-Area as a predictive tool for determining below-ground biomass at all stages in the growth of selected Root-Crop Plants’.
Three undocumented Salvadoran immigrants have shared stories of their journey from their former homeland to Somerville. By Jeffrey Shwom Somerville has been a Sanctuary City since 1987, and, per resolution, strives to “protect the safety, dignity, and rights of immigrants, migrants, asylum seekers, asylees, and refugees” by limiting its cooperation with the Federal government in…
By The Malketeer“Cars today aren’t just steel on wheels—they’re computers,” US Commerce Secretary Gina RaimondoThe United States’ decision to bar Chinese technology from its automotive market is not just a political or economic maneuver—it’s a seismic event with far-reaching implications for global marketing, branding, and consumer trust.With connected vehicles increasingly viewed as rolling data hubs, the move underscores rising anxieties over data sovereignty and supply chain integrity.As the curtain falls on President Joe Biden’s tenure, this policy cements a legacy of technology decoupling that marketers and brands worldwide cannot afford to ignore.Rebooting National Security Through Tech Exclusions“Cars today aren’t just steel on wheels—they’re computers,” remarked Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo when announcing the ban.This statement encapsulates the evolving nature of automobiles, which now straddle the domains of mobility and digital connectivity.From GPS systems to voice assistants and autonomous driving algorithms, connected vehicles represent the convergence of hardware and software—a convergence that leaves open a backdoor for potential interference or misuse of sensitive data.For the US, this isn’t just about individual consumer safety; it’s about protecting critical infrastructure from perceived adversaries.As a result, global automakers, from Tesla to Toyota, will be forced to reevaluate their sourcing strategies.Any component linked to China or Russia could become a liability, not just in regulatory terms but also in public perception.The Branding Fallout: Who Wins, Who Loses?Branding experts should prepare for a world where “made with Chinese tech” may become synonymous with distrust in Western markets.Tech-savvy consumers increasingly scrutinise the ethical and security implications of their purchases.For brands relying heavily on Chinese suppliers or technology partners, this could mean a significant image overhaul to align with new consumer expectations.But not everyone stands to lose.Western tech giants like Google and Apple, already investing in automotive tech, may find an expanded market for their offerings.European automakers with less dependency on Chinese technology could reposition themselves as the “safe” alternative, leveraging this geopolitical shift to capture anxious consumers.Meanwhile, Chinese brands eyeing international expansion—like BYD and Geely—may need to double down on emerging markets outside the US.The challenge lies in maintaining global growth while avoiding the “banned in America” stigma, which could spill over into other regions.Navigating the New Global Tech EcosystemThe US ban on Chinese automotive tech serves as a bellwether for broader decoupling trends.Drones, telecommunications, and even consumer electronics may soon face similar scrutiny.Marketers must adapt by pivoting from globalised supply chains to more regionalised, secure alternatives—a shift likely to be both costly and complex.Messaging will also need recalibration.Brands should focus on transparency, emphasising how their technologies meet stringent security standards and align with local regulations.For instance, marketing campaigns that highlight “data security” and “sovereignty-compliant” features could resonate strongly in a climate of heightened awareness about tech risks.A Marketing Revolution in the MakingThis ban is not just a policy shift—it’s a wake-up call for global marketers to rethink how they position technology in the age of geopolitical fractures.The rise of connected vehicles symbolises the intertwining of mobility, data, and consumer trust, making it a pivotal frontier for brands worldwide.Those who navigate this challenge deftly—balancing innovation, security, and market perceptions—will not only survive but thrive in this new era.MARKETING Magazine is not responsible for the content of external sites.
Happy Wednesday! As the Supreme Court considers whether to uphold a “TikTok ban” set to take effect on Sunday, the app’s users have begun to flock to an alternative Chinese streaming platform: Xiaohongshu. The U.S. government is seeking to outlaw TikTok over its alleged ties to the Chinese Communist Party, but rest assured, Xiaohongshu—which translates…
My house in Altadena burned down in the wildfires on Wednesday. It all happened quickly. On Tuesday around 7pm, my wife and daughters went to a hotel as a precaution. I left the house with the dogs when the mandatory evacuation order came in around 3am. As best as I can put the timeline together, our home burned down around the same time that the sun came up, and I was able to drive in and see the damage around 2pm.Neighbors that went in after said it looked like a “war zone”. I have never been in a war zone thankfully, but I didn’t think so. There was nothing violent or chaotic about it. No one stopped me from driving in. There were no sirens. I stood alone – no one else around – in front of my house that was at that point just a fireplace and chimney. The house across the street was about halfway done with burning down, and the house behind ours had just started to burn.There were no attempts to fight any of it – no fire trucks that I saw. It was quiet and all very final. I don’t mean to minimize the devastation and loss that has been experienced by so many by describing it as peaceful, but it was a moment that will leave a mark on me not because of the extent of destruction but because of the calmness that I felt and experienced in the middle of it.My house is one of many that burned down. I can see that everyone is dealing with it in very different ways and at very different paces. I don’t have a special or unique perspective to share, mostly because the experience of the past 24 hours is not unique or special. These events – often much more devastating in terms of loss of life than this one – are happening everywhere and more often with every passing year. As a climate scientist looking at these events from a distance, there can be a reaction to nod and say: “Yes, this is what we expect to unfold and what our science shows.” That’s true, of course. This event, for me, has destroyed any boundary between my work and the rest of my life, my family, my friends. It causes me to reflect on whether the words we frequently use to talk about climate change are consistent with what I’d want to hear in this moment. I haven’t really had time to sit down and pause until right now, and I just have one reflection to share.Recently at work, I’ve been working with others to consider updates to an important guidance document for Nasa written in 2017 titled: Thriving on Our Changing Planet: A Decadal Strategy for Earth Observation from Space. It doesn’t really matter what the document is right now, but there have been discussions on how the framing should shift several years on. I feel like I am safe in saying that we are not thriving on our changing planet. And we will not thrive on our changing planet in the coming decades. But I’m not filled with despair or fatigue or ready to give up trying to help.Even if thriving isn’t possible (which I really don’t think it is), protecting what is most important to us, supporting vulnerable communities across the globe, and ensuring a decent life for our kids can be possible and is worth working towards as best as we can. We can be both realistic and hopeful of finding a positive solution – one that doesn’t accomplish everything, maybe, but one that does enough.My kids have now had their pre-school flooded by a hurricane and their house burned down by a wildfire in elementary school (OK, maybe I’m both a bad parent and a bad climate scientist … ). Hopefully they will not be so directly impacted, but the occurrence of these events will be the reality of their generation for quite a while. But maybe when they are my age, they’ll at least see a solution has been put into place and there is greater belief that we will be able to protect what is important to us.Many of you reading this are colleagues of mine working towards similar objectives. Thanks for all the work you do – it is important and matters. I say that not just in my work capacity, but also as a regular person dealing with something challenging right now.
Benjamin Hamlington is a research scientist at Nasa Jet Propulsion Laboratory and a team lead at Nasa Sea Level Change team
My house in Altadena burned down in the wildfires on Wednesday. It all happened quickly. On Tuesday around 7pm, my wife and daughters went to a hotel as a precaution. I left the house with the dogs when the mandatory evacuation order came in around 3am. As best as I can put the timeline together, our home burned down around the same time that the sun came up, and I was able to drive in and see the damage around 2pm.Neighbors that went in after said it looked like a “war zone”. I have never been in a war zone thankfully, but I didn’t think so. There was nothing violent or chaotic about it. No one stopped me from driving in. There were no sirens. I stood alone – no one else around – in front of my house that was at that point just a fireplace and chimney. The house across the street was about halfway done with burning down, and the house behind ours had just started to burn.There were no attempts to fight any of it – no fire trucks that I saw. It was quiet and all very final. I don’t mean to minimize the devastation and loss that has been experienced by so many by describing it as peaceful, but it was a moment that will leave a mark on me not because of the extent of destruction but because of the calmness that I felt and experienced in the middle of it.My house is one of many that burned down. I can see that everyone is dealing with it in very different ways and at very different paces. I don’t have a special or unique perspective to share, mostly because the experience of the past 24 hours is not unique or special. These events – often much more devastating in terms of loss of life than this one – are happening everywhere and more often with every passing year. As a climate scientist looking at these events from a distance, there can be a reaction to nod and say: “Yes, this is what we expect to unfold and what our science shows.” That’s true, of course. This event, for me, has destroyed any boundary between my work and the rest of my life, my family, my friends. It causes me to reflect on whether the words we frequently use to talk about climate change are consistent with what I’d want to hear in this moment. I haven’t really had time to sit down and pause until right now, and I just have one reflection to share.Recently at work, I’ve been working with others to consider updates to an important guidance document for Nasa written in 2017 titled: Thriving on Our Changing Planet: A Decadal Strategy for Earth Observation from Space. It doesn’t really matter what the document is right now, but there have been discussions on how the framing should shift several years on. I feel like I am safe in saying that we are not thriving on our changing planet. And we will not thrive on our changing planet in the coming decades. But I’m not filled with despair or fatigue or ready to give up trying to help.Even if thriving isn’t possible (which I really don’t think it is), protecting what is most important to us, supporting vulnerable communities across the globe, and ensuring a decent life for our kids can be possible and is worth working towards as best as we can. We can be both realistic and hopeful of finding a positive solution – one that doesn’t accomplish everything, maybe, but one that does enough.My kids have now had their pre-school flooded by a hurricane and their house burned down by a wildfire in elementary school (OK, maybe I’m both a bad parent and a bad climate scientist … ). Hopefully they will not be so directly impacted, but the occurrence of these events will be the reality of their generation for quite a while. But maybe when they are my age, they’ll at least see a solution has been put into place and there is greater belief that we will be able to protect what is important to us.Many of you reading this are colleagues of mine working towards similar objectives. Thanks for all the work you do – it is important and matters. I say that not just in my work capacity, but also as a regular person dealing with something challenging right now.
Benjamin Hamlington is a research scientist at Nasa Jet Propulsion Laboratory and a team lead at Nasa Sea Level Change team
An Overview of Growth Opportunities and Technological Innovations in the Global Ethylene Carbonate Market, 2027 – Technology Today – EIN Presswire