Germany

Germany has a plan to lead the world in nuclear fusion. And it has committed to doing so in the 2030s

by

Germany is very serious about nuclear fusion. The state of Bavaria, the company specialized in the development of type nuclear fusion reactors stellarator Proxima Fusion, the energy company RWE AG and the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (IPP) have agreed to collaborate in the development and implementation of the first fusion power plant of type stellarator of Europe. And, presumably, the world. Its strategy seeks to bring this facility into operation in the 2030s with the purpose of demonstrating a net energy gain. This simply means that the reactor should be able to produce more energy than it consumes. Alpha, which is what this demonstration fusion reactor will be called, will be built in Garching, very close to the IPP facilities. However, this is not all. And Alpha will be used to test the technological solutions that will later allow the construction of Stellaris, the first commercial plant of stellarator type fusion energy. The latter will be hosted in the town of Gundremmingen. If the organizations involved in this project achieve their goal over the next decade, Germany will consolidate itself as a world power in fusion energy. Germany firmly believes in ‘stellarator’ fusion reactors Experimental nuclear fusion reactors stellarator They represent a very solid alternative to tokamakas ITER either JET. And they are not exactly the result of recent research. In fact, both designs were designed during the 1950s. He stellarator It was designed by the American physicist Lyman Spitzer and served as the foundation on which the plasma physics laboratory at Princeton University (USA) was built. The design tokamakHowever, it was devised by the Soviet physicists Igor Yevgenyevich Tamm and Andrei Dmítrievich Sakharov based on ideas proposed a few years earlier by their colleague Oleg Lavrentiev. Both reactors were designed with the purpose of confining very high temperature plasmaand, curiously, during the 50s and 60s the design stellarator received great support from the scientific community in the West due to its enormous potential. ‘Tokamaks’ require that magnetic fields be generated by coils and induced by the plasma itself However, when Soviet and American scientists published their results and compared them, they realized that tokamak design performance was one or two orders of magnitude better than that of the stellarator. From that moment on, this latter design was largely marginalized. The most obvious difference between one and the other lies in their geometry, but it is enough to investigate a little about both to realize that the reactors stellarator they still have a lot to say. type reactors tokamak They are shaped like a toroid (or donut), and stellarator They have a more complex geometry that resembles a donut twisted on itself. However, the fundamental difference that exists between these two designs is that the reactors tokamak require that the magnetic fields that confine the plasma be generated by coils and induced by the plasma itself, while in reactors stellarator everything is done with coils. There is no current within the plasma. This means, in short, that the latter are more complex and difficult to build. In Europe we have a type fusion reactor stellarator extraordinarily promising: Wendelstein 7-X. It is installed in one of the buildings of the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics in Greifswald (Germany), and its construction was completed in 2015. The first tests carried out in this fusion reactor between 2015 and 2018 went as planned, so in November of this last year an important moment arrived in its itinerary: it was necessary to modify it to install a water cooling system that was capable of more effectively evacuating the residual thermal energy from the walls. of the vacuum chamber, as well as a system that would allow the plasma to reach a higher temperature. The work that required these modifications was successfully completed in August 2022. And in February 2023, the Wendelstein 7-X reactor reached an important milestone: it managed to confine and stabilize the plasma for 8 uninterrupted minutes in which it delivered a total energy of 1.3 gigajoules. During the last two years everything learned in the development and the first tests carried out on this machine has been used by Proxima Fusion. In fact, its founders come from the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics. If Alpha goes well, commercial fusion energy will be a reality before the end of the next decade. This is the true purpose of Proxima Fusion. Image | Generated by Xataka with Gemini More information | Interesting Engineering In Xataka | An alternative to ITER in nuclear fusion is being cooked in France: a commercial ‘stellarator’ reactor

The blockade of ingredients to Nazi Germany led Coca Cola to throw away whey and apple pulp

by

When you open a Fanta, you hardly think about World War II. However, this fruit-flavored drink was born in 1940 within Nazi Germany. It was a solution from Coca-Cola, owner of the brand, to the blockade of ingredients that the allies imposed on the country. Quite a commercial turn that would result in one of the company’s most popular drinks. To block. In September 1939, when Germany invaded Poland and the United Kingdom and France declared war on the Third Reich, the economic consequences spread far beyond the battle fronts. American multinationals that maintained industrial ties with German territory saw communication with their subsidiaries interrupted. The British naval blockade closed the ports; Trade with the United States, which had grown throughout the previous decade, stopped. The Coca-Cola situation. The company had been operating in Germany since 1929. Max Keith was a German manager who had assumed control of the subsidiary and built a giant infrastructure from scratch with bottling plants and distribution networks. He had even managed to produce on his own seven of the nine secret ingredients. But the concentrated syrup traveled to Germany from Atlanta, headquarters of Coca-Cola. When the embargo cut off that supply, the plants ground to a halt. The alternative was closure, but Keith did not give in. The remains. What he did was look for substitutes in what he had at hand, waste from other food industries. How did I count? expert Mark Pendergrast“what was left of what was left”: whey, a byproduct of cheese making; leftover apple pulp from cider presses; fruit peels; beet sugar, because cane sugar was a luxury… the resulting liquid was a brownish yellow, much less sweet than any modern soft drink, and its flavor changed from batch to batch depending on what ingredients were available. A name. Keith gathered his team to name the drink. He asked them to use their imagination, Fantasy. And from there the name came directly, with the advantage that it worked in almost any language without the need for translation or phonetic adaptation. It was an immediate success: in 1943 Coca-Cola sold approximately three million cases of Fanta in Germany. AND although the soft drink never had a direct connection with the NazisKeith did manage to integrate his advertising into the regime’s events, including the 1936 Berlin Olympics. In fact, he could have registered Fanta in his own name, but he did not do so. A success. Fanta was not drunk solely as a soft drink. Sugar rationing was so severe in wartime Germany that in many German homes it was used for sweeten soups and stews. Keith had obtained a partial exemption from sugar rationing in 1941, making it not only a soft drink, but also an accessible sweetener. It was not an isolated case. Fanta was not a rarity. The World War II food industry reformulated several products forced by embargoes and rationing. Nescafé, launched in 1938arose from the need to dispose of surplus Brazilian coffee at a time of commercial crisis: its soluble format allowed it to be distributed under difficult logistical conditions, and it became a standard supply for the American army. Margarine was a substitute for butter in times of Napoleonic shortages, and experienced a second massive expansion in Europe in the 1940s because butter was rationed. Post-war. When Coca-Cola relaunched Fanta in Naples in April 1955 with an orange formula made from local citrus, the name was the only thing connecting it to post-war Germany. The Italian company SNIBEG had developed the recipe on its own and Coca-Cola bought itgiving it the name of the one who already had the intellectual property. From there it grew: it arrived in the United States in 1958 and expanded globally throughout the 1960s and 1970s. Conflictive spot. However, the drink’s German past loomed large over the brand in 2015, when Coca-Cola launched a special edition in Germany for Fanta’s 75th anniversary. It was a reissue of the original recipe, with 30% whey and apple extract, distributed in glass bottles that evoked the design of the 1940s. He video campaign was especially inappropriatesince he only talked about ingenuity in times of scarcity and ignored the reason for that ingenuity: war embargoes against Nazi Germany. He concluded by inviting viewers to recover “the feeling of the good old days.” The video was removed after frontal rejection by the public and press. It was inevitable then to remember brands like Volkswagenwhose name directly alludes to the Nazi regime’s automotive program and whose plants used forced labor during the war; or like Hugo Bosswhich made military uniforms for the SS and Wehrmacht; or as the German subsidiary of IBM, Dehomagwhich provided the regime with punch card technology that allowed entire populations to be censused, classified, and tracked with a speed that manual methods made impossible. Origins that are sometimes murky due to the context, but that leave a few questions in the air about the inhumane role of any industry. Which includes the sparks of life. Header | Wikipedia

Germany wanted to see if working four days a week was efficient. 70% of companies think so

by

The four-day work week started in Germany as an experiment to search for the maximum productivity of companies without having an impact on an exhausted workforce and without the ability to reconcile family life. Two years after the start of this test, the data confirms that for the companies that participated it was not a simple test, but rather it has materialized in a change in the way of working that many companies have decided to consolidate. Now the monitoring report prepared by researchers from the University of Münster together with the consulting firm 4 Day Week Global. It analyzes what happened after the pilot test that began in 2024 and what subsequent effects it has had. The main conclusion is that around 70% of the companies that participated in that test continue to apply some model of reduction of working hours a year later. A known formula and a varied sample. The original four-day week project in Germany was built around to the 100-80-100 model: 100% of salary, 80% of time and 100% of productivity. This model of reduction of working hours is the same one that was carried out in Valencia in 2023, Portugal either United Kingdom. In the initial phase, 45 companies from different sectors participated, dedicated to manufacturing, insurance, technology, media, commerce or education. Furthermore, to be as representative as possible of the German industrial fabric, companies of different sizes were chosen: from micro-businesses with 1 to 9 employees, to large companies with more than 250 employees. The first data already gave clues. Researchers have been collecting data from participating companies and their employees since day one. A few months after starting the test, the companies were delighted with the results, to the point that in preliminary results73% said they would not return to the traditional five-day week. The new report provides the perspective that time gives and whether that initial impetus has been consolidated. Two years after the start of the test, seven out of ten companies that participated in the test not only maintain the four-day workdaybut they have integrated it into their normal operation. More than four days: flexible reduction of working time. One of the most interesting findings from the monitoring is that the four-day workweek model has evolved and every organization has implemented it adapting it to your needs. Not all companies have opted for a Monday to Thursday work week. Around 22% of the participating companies have adapted the initial scheme towards more flexible formulas: reduction of annual hours, alternate weeks or internal adjustments according to workload. The report itself speaks less of a “four-day week” and more of “reduction of work time“. The label matters less than the redesign of the work day and the elimination of superfluous tasks, fewer unnecessary meetings and greater autonomy of the teams. No impact on profits or productivity. In business terms, the German test has been a success since, despite having maintained 80% of the initial day, there have been no drops in either the level of profits or in productivity or slightly improved with respect to the starting point. That is, they have managed to do the same thing in less time. What it did have a strong impact on was the well-being of employees, where 90% reported improvements in the balance between personal and professional life. As a result of this improvement, employees reported feeling less stress and greater commitment to the company. 38% of companies indicated that sick leave and absenteeism of their employees had been reduced, while 56% claimed to have detected no changes. Lights and shadows in the reduction of working hours. Progress was also observed in job satisfaction and in the perception of the company as an attractive place to work. The study indicates that 87% of companies detected improvements in talent retention. For their part, 75% claimed that their companies now had a greater capacity to attract talent in selection processes. This, in a scenario of labor shortagerepresents a competitive advantage. However, as happened in other tests of the four-day work week, not all companies have followed the same evolution. About 30% stopped applying the initial scheme or returned to the traditional five-day week. The main reasons were operational, difficulties in coordinate with your clientswork peaks that are difficult to absorb or inflexible internal structures. In Xataka | Employees in Spain clear up doubts: working fewer days is better than working fewer hours, according to a survey In Xataka | Spain already has its first municipality with a four-day work week. It is not in Madrid or Barcelona, ​​but in a corner of Cádiz Image | Unsplash (Gonzalo Leon Jasin, Josue Isai Ramos Figueroa)

Tesla’s enormous problem in Germany has an alarming figure and a clear person responsible: Elon Musk

by

Three out of four potential buyers of an electric car reject the idea of ​​buying a Tesla. The study points to the German market, which is the first electric car market in Europe by sales volume, and explains an important part of Tesla’s failure in Europe during 2025. Three out of four. 75% of potential buyers of an electric car in Germany do not value the idea of ​​buying a Tesla car, according to a study by the German Institute of Economics in collaboration with the Technical University of Dresden. The figure, which in itself is bad, has even more meaning. And that 75% is made up of potential customers who believe it is unlikely to buy a Tesla (15%) and those who completely reject buying a vehicle from this brand (60%). The reason, as we could imagine, is not a question of competition or price. The disaster. Last year, 545,142 electric cars were sold in Germany. It was, by far, the strongest electric car market in Europe. The growth was 43.2% compared to 2024, the year in which just over 380,000 electric cars were sold. Its market share reached 19.1%, above the European average, according to ACEA. For Tesla, however, it was not a great year. In Europe, 150,504 electric vehicles from Elon Musk’s company were sold, 37.9% less than the previous year when 242,436 registrations were registered. The most problematic thing is that the company had achieved a market share of 2.3% (a good bite to eat on the electric car pie, which in 2024 was only 13.6% in the European Union. That is, almost two out of every 10 electric cars sold in Europe were from Tesla. The drop was even more pronounced in Germany. There, the drop was 48.4%, as recorded Reuters at the beginning of the year. And, with everything, It has not been its strongest percentage drop in European countries but the damage in volume is more than evident. The politics. The decision by which the Germans seem to completely reject Tesla is evident to the creators of the study: Elon Musk’s political positioning. According to the authors, political positioning influences the purchase of a car more than sociodemographic characteristics. They point out that young people, those with a higher level of education and those who live in urban areas are more inclined to purchase an electric car. In political terms, Green supporters are the most open to acquiring this technology and AfD (German far-right) voters are the least enthusiastic. On average, they say, the potential customer for an electric car has grown by over 40% and those who reject it outright have also fallen. But the problem for Tesla is that it is not attractive to either group. Among the Greens, only 10.8% value the purchase of a Tesla as their first option and the percentage grows among AfD followers to 15.2% but it must be taken into account that these voters are also less in favor of buying a car of this type. Just lose. The study concludes with a statement: Elon Musk has lost support for buying cars among progressive groups (those who buy the most electric cars or are willing to buy) and has not attracted enough conservative groups to alleviate this disadvantage. The result is a direct consequence of a year 2025 that began with Elon Musk doing a Nazi salute during Donald Trump’s takeover of the United States and which continued with a explicit support of the company’s head for AfD and other far-right parties in Europe. It must be taken into account that this type of political positioning in Germany is much more delicate than in other countries. In Germany the Nazi salute is a crime punished with a fine in minor cases but which can be grounds for imprisonment in more serious cases. Study on preferences when buying an electric car in Germany segmented by political parties. Source: German Institute of Economics The worst option almost always. The image above shows the predisposition of Germans to the type of electric car they want to buy, segmented by their origin and the political parties that these potential customers vote for. According to this data, Tesla is the last option in four of the six political parties studied, even behind Chinese cars as the first option. The latter always surpass him except among CDU and SPD voters (although in both cases a greater percentage considers it possible to buy a Chinese car over a Tesla if we add the second level of predisposition). Tesla reaps the worst results among the Greens and Linke (The Left) and the absolute rejection is greater among the supporters of the latter political party. Chinese cars are, in all cases, the second option chosen when considering those who are willing to buy an electric car and those who value it as a possible purchase. The Germans are the ones who obtain the most support and the first option in all cases, with the greatest support among Green voters and with the AfD as the party with the greatest reluctance to buy it. Photo | Elon Musk in X and German Institute of Economics In Xataka | Tesla is discovering in real time that the most difficult thing was not to build a car brand from scratch: it was to maintain it

Spain agreed with Germany and France to bypass the US. And it will end with a fleet of F-35s because of a French name

by

Since the end of the Cold War, Europe has tried several times to build large joint military programs capable of rivaling those of the United States, almost always clashing with national interests, different industrial cultures and, of course, technological egos that are difficult to fit into. Each generation of fighters has promised more integration and less external dependence. Few have managed to fulfill it, and now it was not going to be less. The surprise that was not. He FCAS was born as a high-caliber strategic ambition: France, Germany and Spain agreed to promote a new generation combat air system to get ahead of the United States and reduce European dependence of American fighters, with the ubiquitous F-35 in all pools. It was an explicit attempt to surprise technological, industrial and political in front of Washington. Today, that project more than 100,000 million of euros staggers to the point of threatening the opposite result: that Europe will continue buying F-35s and that Spain will end up reinforcing a US fleet just when it had opted for its own alternative. Dassault, the constant. Here comes an actor with a name of his own who has turned everything upside down. The main blockade does not come from Berlin or Madrid, but from a historical constant in the French military industry: Dassault Aviation. The Financial Times recalled this morning that the company, controlled by the Dassault family for generations, has demonstrated time and time again that its priority is maintain absolute control of the design and production of French fighters. He already did it in the eighties abandoning the Eurofighterand today he repeats the pattern at the FCAS, refusing to give up technical leadership or accept a shared governance with Airbus. Dassault Rafale A project broken from within. Furthermore, the FCAS was designed as an integrated system: a manned fighter, drone swarms, advanced weapons and communication networks, with Dassault leading the aircraft and Airbus the rest. That balance was blown up when disputes began on specifications, distribution of work and industrial control. France wanted a plane lighter and navalizableGermany another heavier and more versatile one. The technical differences masked a possibly deeper clash: who is really in charge at the heart of the system. France does not rule as much as it seems. Here another crux appears to understand the mess: although the French State is Dassault’s main client and controls exports, its real capacity to impose decisions is limited. Yes, the company has survived nationalization attempts, political pressures and merger projects for decades, always prioritizing independence and control. Hence, presidents have passed and ministers have changed, but Dassault remains the same. President Emmanuel Macron has tried rescue the FCAS in multiple diplomatic rounds, but his room for maneuver has narrowed as he nears the end of his term. Spain, trapped in collateral damage. The Spanish nation entered the FCAS as a partner convinced that the project would allow it break the dependency technology of the United States. That agreement with Germany and France meant resigning in the short term to the American F-35 in exchange for their own European future. If now the FCAS ends up failing as it seems and Spain ends up resorting again to American fighters, the irony is bitter: because the fault would not be in Washington, but in “home” of an ally. The outcome that no one wanted to admit. As we counted yesterdaywith the project running aground, Germany is already slipping that it could go on your own or look for other partners, while France protects to their national champion. From that perspective, the FCAS has become the closest thing to a failed test of European credibility in common defense. For Spain, the risk is now double: losing years betting on a blocked program of billions of euros and being forced to knock on Washington’s door again, although now with less political margin and worse conditions. He surprise European will have to wait and for now it is diluted, and the old Atlantic balance is imposed again, this time not due to lack of ambition, but because of excess control. Image | José Luis Celada Euba In Xataka | Spain, France and Germany could not depend on the “button” of the F-35. So the future European fighter aims for something else In Xataka | If the question is where is the 100 billion European fighter, the answer is simple: stuck on a dead-end runway

Germany does not want to depend on Elon Musk for war. So the largest weapons factory in Europe wants a “military Starlink”

by

For decades, European security has rested on critical infrastructure controlled from the United States. But with the war back on the continent and space communications becoming a decisive military assetGermany is beginning to assume that it cannot afford depend on Elon Musk nor from Washington for something as basic as talking and fighting in case of conflict. A “military Starlink”. Rheinmetall and OHB are in preliminary talks to present a joint offer to create a satellite communications network in low orbit for the Bundeswehr, a system that in Berlin already is openly described as a “Starlink for the German army”. The initiative aims to capture part of the ambitious German plan for invest 35,000 million euros in military space technology, with the aim of providing a secure, sovereign infrastructure specifically designed for military use, reducing dependence on US services such as Starlink, owned by SpaceX. Technological sovereignty. The background of the project will be one of the great themes of this 2026, and it is both strategic and political, since the war in Ukraine has shown to what extent satellite communications in low orbit can be decisive when terrestrial networks are destroyed or degraded. Although Starlink (and its military version Starshield) became in a key asset for kyiv, many European countries distrust to base critical capabilities on a foreign private provider, which has accelerated plans to build national or European networks under state control. The weight of Germany. With this program, Germany aims to become the third largest investor world in space technology, only behind the United States and China, according to the consulting firm Novaspace. German military authorities have already defined the technical specifications and are preparing the tender, prioritizing coverage of NATO’s eastern flank, where Berlin deploys a permanent brigade of 5,000 soldiers in Lithuania as part of its defensive reinforcement. From armored to space. Traditionally associated with tanks, artillery and ammunitionRheinmetall is rapidly expanding its presence into new domains in the heat of German rearmament. At the end of last year it obtained its first major space contract, up to 2,000 million eurosto develop together with Iceye a constellation of radar satellites capable of operating at night and in bad weatherwhich puts it in a solid position to now aspire to a military communications system in low orbit. HBO and opportunity. For HBOthird largest European satellite manufacturer and navigation system supplier Galileothe project represents a key opportunity to strengthen its military business. The company faces the possible creation of a European space giant as a result of the merger of the divisions from Airbus, Thales and Leonardoan operation that its CEO considers potentially anti-competitive and that could leave OHB at a disadvantage if it does not expand its scale and capabilities. Boiling market. The simple announcement of the talks has OHB price skyrocketedreflecting the extent to which the sector perceives German military space spending as a catalyst for opportunity. That said, the project is still in an early phase, with no official comments from the companies or the Ministry of Defense, and is part of a growing competition for multi-million dollar contracts that will define who controls future critical military communications infrastructure in Europe. Image | Support Forces of Ukraine Command In Xataka | Germany is experiencing a new “industrial miracle” that it already experienced 90 years ago: that of weapons In Xataka | Europe’s largest arms factory faces an unexpected problem: earning an indecent amount of money

For centuries Germany has boasted the oldest abbey beer in the world. The alcohol crisis has forced it to be sold

by

Germany is the birthplace of Oktoberfest, the lagerthe saint Hildegard of Bingen and hundreds and hundreds of artisanal wineries dedicated to beer. The refreshing amber liquid is not at its best there, however. As the young lose interest for the drink and consumption falls per national beer capita, Germany finds itself with news like the one that has shaken the sector at the beginning of 2026: the oldest monastic brewery in the world, a 976-year-old icon, just sold suffocated by the economic context. It seems like a simple sale, but it says a lot about the industry. What has happened? That Germany is preparing for one of those business transactions that, due to their enormous symbolic value, transcend the pages of the salmon press to tell us about the cultural and social changes of a country. The Bavarian brewer Schneider Weisse has just reached an agreement to acquire the Bischofshof and Weltenburger brands, linked to Bischofshof GmbH & Co. Said like this, it could seem like a simple commercial procedure, material for the German BORME, but the agreement implies that Schneider Weisse takes charge of the brewery of the Weltenburg Abbey and that is something out of the ordinary. The reason? The brewing history of the monastery dates back to 1050, which is why it is considered the abbey brewery. oldestalthough if we talk about beer in general there is another previous one in Weihenstephan (Freising), brewed since 1040. What have they agreed? The truth is that not too many details have emerged. For example, the companies have not wanted to disclose how much the operation will cost. What yes have slipped is that the agreement will become effective in January 2027 and that Scheneider Weisse will continue to operate the Weltenburg Abbey Brewery. Not only that. He will also take over the logistics part of the Bischofshof, which includes 21 employees. Part of the business, located in Regensburg, will close at the end of this year and the idea is that in the medium term the production of the different brands will be concentrated in the headquarters that Schneider Weisse already has in Kelheim and the Weltenburg Abbey. Are they important companies? At least they are companies with a reputation. Although Weltenburg Abbey beer stands out on the world stage for its long history, which can date back to 1050, in reality the three names involved in the agreement have a long tradition. The Bischofshof brewery was founded mid 17th century in Regensburg and has been in charge of the production of Weltenburg since 1973. As for the house Schneider Weissebased in Kelheim, was also launched more than a century and a half ago, in 1872. “Our goal is to create a portfolio of traditional brands. We combine our brewing tradition of more than 150 years with the almost 380 years of history of the Bischofshof brand and the brewing tradition of the oldest monastic brewery in the world, dating back to 1050,” celebrates Georg SchneiderCEO of Schneider Weisse. “This creates a range of beers steeped in history and tradition, a unique offering from a single global supplier.” Why is it important? Weltenburg is relevant enough for any operation that affects him to generate interest, but if this operation has raised expectations (even beyond Germany) is because of its context. The companies acknowledge that the maneuver attempts to adapt to “the continued weakness” of the German beer market. “The reality is that, on our own and despite all our efforts and the measures adopted in recent months, it was no longer economically viable to continue operating the brands,” recognizes Till Hedrichthe general director of the firm Bischofshof and Weltenburger. “The evolution of the market has marked us too much.” Hedrich has also defended that the operation with Schneider, a firm based in Kelheim (Bavaria) is the most advantageous for the secular Abadian winery. “The looming threat of a total closure or dismantling by an investor with no connection to the region or its history can be avoided with the ‘Bavarian solution’ being implemented with Schneider Weisse.” Has the market changed that much? It seems so. From the collective itself is spoken of a “drastic drop in sales” of German breweries in the country. The BR24 program remember that in the last ten years alone, the German beer industry has lost almost 14 million hectoliters, almost 14% of its sales. And although the complete picture is somewhat more complex (the latest data from the Bavarian sector they are not bad), the overall trend is far from ideal for the industry in its own home. If at the beginning of the 80s the per capita consumption In the country it was around 145.9 liters of beer, right now it is below 90. Is there more data? Yes. Two years ago the Berlin journalist Nicholas Potter I slipped an interesting one in Guardian. “The decline can be seen at the Oktoberfest itself. In 2019, 6.3 million visitors drank 7.3 million liters. Last year attendance was about 7.2 million people, a record number, but they consumed only 6.5 million liters.” As a backdrop, the fall in consumption, the increase of the production of non-alcoholic beer and the loss of interest of members of generation Z for beer or wine. In April the Deursche Welle channel contributed another brushstroke that completes the picture. It is not only that the consumption of German beer has fallen in the country itself, it is that sales abroad have not evolved as the industry would like. According to Destatis data, 1,450 million liters of German beer were exported in 2024, significantly below the 1,540 in 2014. Images | Bernt Rostad (Flickr) 1 and 2 and Frank Mago (Flickr) In Xataka | If the alcohol sector thought it had a problem with Gen Z, it is because it did not see its stock: 22,000 million in bottles that no one wants

Germany is experiencing a new “industrial miracle” that it already experienced 90 years ago: that of weapons

by

Germany has been living a transformation silent but very deep. The country that saw the birth of the industrial miracle of the automobile is seeing something similar again, but from a perspective completely different: rearmament, which until recently was a political taboo and a social discomfort, has become a great industrial and labor accelerator. War as a driving force. The country, pushed by the russian invasion of Ukraine and the feeling that the American umbrella is already It’s not so automatic As before, it has been shifting its center of gravity towards defense with a mix of strategic urgency and productive ambition. And that mutation is measured in something very specific: employment, factories, supply chains and a demand that is no longer described as temporary, but as a new normal that promises to last for years, with orders that come in like a wave and companies that prepare to produce at scale, with war economy rhythms without the need to call it that. Mass hiring. German defense contractors have entered into a veritable hiring feverincreasing its workforce by nearly a third in just four years. The data provided by a representative group of large companies and start-ups shows a jump from around 63,000 workers in 2021 to almost 83,000 today Within its defense-focused divisions, a 30% growth which reflects the extent to which the industry is expanding at real speed. I remembered the financial times that, although these figures do not cover the entire sector and there are large companies that did not participate, the portrait is enough to understand the direction of the country: Germany not only buys more weapons, but is rearming its industrial muscle to manufacture, sustain and modernize them, with a labor market that is beginning to reorganize itself around this new priority. Rheinmetall Panther KF51 The budget turn. The great fuel for this expansion is public money converted into contracts. Since 2022, the German Ministry of Defense has signed arms deals worth of 207,000 million eurosand last year alone it concentrated 83,000 million, a figure that contrasts with the 23,000 million in 2021 and that summarizes the break with the previous stage. The most significant thing is that the trend does not aim to stop: Chancellor Merz, in office since May, has relaxed the strict debt rules to allow the level of spending needed in defense, a message that, beyond politics, works as an industrial signal: there will be stable demand, continuity and visibility, just what companies need to invest, expand capacity, hire and plan for the long term without fear that everything will freeze with the next electoral cycle. The real size of the sector. Even with this boom, the German defense industry remains a relatively modest player in terms of employment when compared to the country’s historical giant: the automobile. The Ministry of Economy itself cited around 105,000 jobs direct in defense in 2022, and although the figure will have risen since then, it remains far from the approximately 700,000 workers in the automotive sector, today hit by layoffscompetitive pressure and technological transition. This comparison is important because it cuts to the root a repeated idea: that rearmament can “replace” the car as a great work cushion. Defense can grow a lot, even draw on industry and attract talent, but due to volume it does not seem capable of absorbing the size in the short term. of the engine crisisat least not quickly or massively. Airbus and Reinmetall. Within the employment map, Airbus stands out as the largest employer, with around 38,000 people working in defense worldwide and just over half in Germany, manufacturing key pieces of European military architecture such as the Eurofighter Typhoon and the transport plane A400M. right behind Rheinmetall appearswhich has become the most visible symbol of the boom: the producer of tanks, artillery and ammunition has grown from about 15,400 employees in 2021 at 23,500 todaythe greatest absolute leap among the companies analyzed, and its CEO, Armin Papperger, has even projected a target of 70,000 employees in three years. In parallel, Rheinmetall has begun to experience something that in Germany is a cultural indicator: social attractiveness. He speaks of hundreds of thousands of applications in a single year, as if defense had stopped being a dark or secondary sector to suddenly become a bet for the future for engineers, technicians and industrial profiles. Military startups. The big relative surprise is in the new scene of military start-upsyoung companies focused on surveillance systems or weapons not always publicly detailed, that are raising hundreds of millions in financing and growing at a rate almost unthinkable a decade ago. The most striking case It’s Helsing.which makes armed drones and whose workforce has grown 18-fold in four years after evolving from an artificial intelligence software approach to hardware productiona leap that involves going from selling algorithms to build real objects with parts, assembly lines, logistics and maintenance. This movement is, in itself, a statement: European defense no longer wants to depend only on digital innovation, it wants to convert innovation in physical and deployable systemsand for that you need companies capable of manufacturing and scaling, not just programming. The State accelerates. From within the sector, the discourse is one of sustained takeoff. The BDSV employers’ association, in the voice of Hans Christoph Atzpodien, insists that growth will accelerate because Germany has streamlined processes purchase and has given more visibility on future demand, which allows capacity planning with less uncertainty. The phrase is almost industrially literal: now everything is placed so that large orders “arrive at the doors” of manufacturers. If you want and how do we countthe scenario describes a change of era: for years Europe talked about spending more on defense, but it did so with administrative slowness, political doubts and eternal programs; now the feeling is that the system is being reconfigured to buy and produce urgently, because the threat is perceived to be close and the margin for improvisation has been exhausted. The great temptation: “steal” the car. … Read more

There is a reason why Germany allows driving at 300 km/h and it is not history or politics: it is the asphalt

by

If you like to step on the accelerator, you will have already seen firsthand that cornering at 100 km/h is better than at 130 km/h. I don’t need to remind you that the maximum speed allowed on state roads is 120 km/h. Although there are quite a few countries within the European Union with higher limits, Germany is the only state where there are sections without speed limit. 300 km/h without breaking a sweat. Obviously, this poses a danger to driving as cars such as a Porsche at 322 km/h. At these speeds, the risk of the car jumping or losing control is notable. But the “recipe” for manufacturing the German Autobahn has its particularities that allow it to offer enviable flatness and a road surface with high load capacity. And it can be found in the regulations and standards of the FGSV (Research Society for Highways and Transportation) and the BASt (German Federal Authority for Road Safety and Traffic). Blessed sandwich. While in Spain Flexible or semi-rigid pavement predominates with thicknesses of 40 to 60 centimeters. In Germany they use a standardized layer system called RStO 12 (Guidelines for the Standardization of Pavement Structures). That is, with a total thickness of between 70 and 90 centimeters with an antifreeze base composed of highly permeable gravel and sand so that water does not remain trapped (in case of freezing, it would generate large cracks as a result of expansion). About this, layers of gravel mixed with concrete or asphalt to provide sufficient rigidity to prevent collapse under the passage of heavy trucks. cwhen concrete and when asphalt. In the intermediate section the Germans use two materials, highlighting the concrete for those stretches of free speed and high truck traffic thanks to its rigidity and durability. In more detail: The 25 to 30 centimeter high-resistance concrete pavements longitudinally integrate plastic-coated steel bars. Thus, they allow some thermal expansion but do not allow them to move independently, causing steps. The transition between the concrete slabs is barely noticeable. Asphalt with stone matrix (S.M.A.), a combination with crushed stone and cellulose to offer extreme resistance to deformation and maximize the tire’s grip. The “superstructure” of German roads. Von Susan from Bielefeld, Deutschland – Straße, CC BY 2.0 Extreme plain for safety and by law. If you hit a speed bump at a certain speed, your car will go away. If you go 300 km/h in a sports car, the loss of aerodynamic load is such that it could be fatal. So Germany takes the plain very seriously by regulations: the maximum allowable deviation three millimeters in four meters. They achieve it with controlled pavers by global navigation and laser sensor systems. Auf wiedersehen, aquaplaning. Once the risk of steps, cracks and unevenness has been minimized, there remains another staunch enemy for speed: water on the asphalt. And they fight it in two ways. For starters, autobahns have a slope of at least 2.5% on the sides to evacuate the water as soon as possible. For concrete pavements, it is used waschbeton or washed concrete, a technique that brushes the surface to expose the aggregates, thus creating a rough, non-slip area that breaks up any water film that may form. In Xataka | Germany, Austria and Switzerland have plenty of roads. So they have started covering them with solar panels In Xataka | The Autobahn are the only roads in Europe without a speed limit. More and more Germans want to end them Cover | Wes Tindel and Nick Fewings

Europe had few options in the face of the US threat in Greenland. Until Germany has remembered Russia with an unprecedented plan

by

Growing pressure from the United States to take over Greenland has transformed a hitherto latent issue into a problem political and strategic of the first order for Europe and NATO, by explicitly placing for the first time the risk of an internal clash between allies. It was known that there were a couple of options on the table as a defense. Germany has just presented another unprecedented one. An unprecedented crisis. The insistence of the US administration on presenting control of the island as a necessity of national security, accompanied by rhetoric increasingly harderhas forced European partners to react not only in defense of Denmark’s sovereignty and Greenland’s right to self-determination, but also to protect credibility of an alliance designed precisely to prevent force from prevailing among its members. The problem is not only territorial, but systemicbecause it raises the extent to which NATO can manage a crisis caused from within without eroding its own foundations. Germany and the allied response. Faced with the difficulty of directly confronting Washington, Berlin has emerged as the actor in charge of articulating a solution that combines political firmness and strategic containment. Germany has chosen to channel the response through NATO. As? proposing a joint mission in the Arctic that makes it possible to strengthen regional security without turning the conflict into a bilateral battle between the United States and Denmark. The initiative seeks to save time, reduce tensions and offer an institutional alternative that frames American concerns within a collective logic, while sending a clear signal that Greenlandic sovereignty is non-negotiable. This German role reflects a commitment to multilateral management of the conflict and to prevent the crisis from leading to an open fracture within the alliance. From the Baltic to the Arctic. The German proposal takes as a direct reference the operation Baltic Sentrylaunched to protect critical infrastructure in the Baltic Sea from sabotage and covert activities linked to Russia and its ghost fleet. The idea is to replicate this scheme in the Arctic through a hypothetical “Arctic Sentry” missionwhich would include Greenland and allow increased surveillance, naval presence and allied coordination in an increasingly disputed region. This approach has a double function: on the one hand, respond to the security concerns raised by Washington about the Russian and Chinese presence in the Arctic, and on the other, prevent those concerns from being used as a pretext for unilateral action. Turning the Arctic into a space of collective management seeks to deactivate the security vacuum narrative that fuels American aspirations. The shadow of Article 4. Although it has not yet been formally activated, the idea of invoke Article 4 of the NATO treaty, which provides for consultations when an ally perceives a threat to its territorial integrity or security, has gained weight in diplomatic debates. The mere possibility of Denmark resorting to this mechanism reflects the seriousness of the situation and the growing nervousness in European capitals. Invoking Article 4 would not imply an automatic military response, but it would force the alliance to address it head on. an internal crisis that many would prefer to manage in silence. The underlying fear is that, if not managed institutionally, the conflict sets a dangerous precedent that normalize pressure between allies and voids the founding principles of NATO. Diplomacy, deterrence and limits. Beyond the military dimension, the European Union has explored diplomatic and economic options to contain the United States, from the reinforcement of political dialogue to the theoretical threat of instruments commercial pressure. However, Europe’s dependence on the American technology, defense and security umbrella drastically reduces the credibility of these tools. Economic sanctions, although powerful on paper, are perceived as unrealistic in a context marked by the war in Ukraine and the need to keep Washington engaged with European security. This imbalance reinforces the idea that the most viable path is to offer shared security solutions, such as the proposed Arctic mission, rather than a direct confrontation that Europe could hardly sustain. Greenland as autonomy. The economic dimension It adds another layer of complexity to the conflict, as Greenland relies heavily on Danish transfers and warily watches American promises of massive investment. From Brussels we study increase financial support European to prevent the island from being trapped in a relationship of dependency with Washington, especially with the prospect of future independence. This effort not only seeks to counteract American economic influence, but also preserve the social and political model that the Greenlanders might want to keep. In this context, the crisis reveals that the battle for Greenland is not only fought in the military field, but also in that of investment, legitimacy and the projection of soft power. A stress test. Altogether, the American pressure over Greenland has exposed the internal tensions of a NATO designed to deter external threats, not manage territorial ambitions of one of its members. The german initiative of transferring the problem to the field of collective security, inspired by the Baltic model, is an attempt to preserve allied cohesion and avoid an existential crisis. However, the simple fact that mechanisms are being considered like Article 4 It demonstrates the extent to which the alliance faces an unprecedented scenario, one in which unity no longer depends only on stopping external adversaries, but on containing power impulses within its own ranks. Image | Program Executive Office Soldier, pathanMinistry of Defense of the Russian Federation In Xataka | After the Nazi occupation, Denmark signed a pact in 1951. Since then, the US can ask for whatever it wants in Greenland In Xataka | Greenland has become an obsession for the United States for a simple reason: they believe in global warming

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.