Year

China had not updated its EREV standards for nine years. Now that they sell a million a year, they are going to catch up

by

The EREV (extended range electric vehicles, for its acronym in English), are beginning to have a lot of prominence in China. So much so, that in the country they have changed the regulations, publishing a complete review of their technical standard. This new revision, QC/T1086-2026, replaces a 2017 regulatory framework and will come into force on November 1. And it is that with more than 1 million units sold Every year in the country, the Chinese market begins to assimilate this type of vehicle that, outside of this region, is still relatively unknown to us. Why does it matter? The previous standard, in force since 2017, described the requirements in a mostly qualitative way, since the manufacturer defined its own specifications and the regulatory framework barely provided specific figures. Nine years later, the market has changed a lot. And according to industry data collected by CarNewsChinasales of EREVs in China exceeded one million units in 2024 and reached 1.2 million in 2025. So with those figures, it is logical to think that the regulations had to be revised. What the change consists of. Until now, the rules were somewhat vague, so this regulation aims to take a closer look at some EREV specifications and standardize them. An example is how much energy the gasoline engine delivers in each millisecond. And to give us an idea, now in the smallest generators (up to 67 HP), the maximum margin of error that will be allowed when delivering energy will be just 1.5 kW. For the most powerful engines, the deviation may not exceed 3%. That is, the motor must deliver energy to the battery more precisely and efficiently. According to CarNewsChinathe thresholds have been set based on real production data from manufacturers and suppliers, with the aim that all major manufacturers on the market can meet them without difficulty, but that lower-performance designs are left out of the standard. EMC and noise. One of the most relevant new features of the standard is the introduction of specific electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) and noise and vibration (NVH) tests. The first extended range cars were basically standby generators that started when the battery was depleted. Today’s systems now have integrated energy management components that work in constant coordination with the battery, electric motors and vehicle control systems. This greater integration requires more demanding standards in electromagnetic interference and acoustic comfort. In fact, more recent models like the Aito M9which HIMA launched last May with up to 890 HP, or the IM Motors LS8 EREV, with 430 km of electric range, already reflect these changes, and are examples that have served to develop this new regulation. Durability for long term use. The standard also introduces two durability tests: a test of 750 hours with alternating load and another of 100,000 start-stop cycles. Both were developed with real-world usage data and damage equivalence models, and are designed to simulate approximately 300,000 kilometers of real-world driving, including urban conditions with frequent starts. Who is driving the market. The ecosystem of manufacturers that has driven this revision in the regulations includes both established brands and newer manufacturers. Li Auto, Seres, Deepal and Leapmotor have expanded their EREV offerings, while premium models such as the Aito M9 have helped position the technology in high-priced segments. Zeekr, Geely’s electric brandhas gone even further with the Zeekr 9X and 8X, since the former exceeded 50,000 accumulated deliveries in a few months after its launch and is scheduled to be exported to the Middle East, Central Asia and Europe during 2026. Cover image | HIMA In Xataka | This Aston Martin DB9 was sold for $57,000, but the craziest thing is not its price: it is the two flamethrowers it hides

China manufactured more solar panels in one year than the planet can absorb. Now the market is devouring itself

by

In early 2026, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz shook energy markets. Consumers, frightened by the volatility of fossil fuels, looked in all directions for alternatives. What they found was a disconcerting paradox: the planet had—has—a historic surplus of clean, cheap energy. There was no shortage of solar panels. There were plenty of them. And no one really knew what to do with them. Economist Adam Tooze summed it up bluntly in his column Financial Times: “Clean energy, on a scale that would have seemed utopian at the time of the Paris Agreement in 2015, is now within our reach. The price of solar panels has plummeted. And yet factories are paralyzed.” It’s not rhetoric. It’s a diagnosis. After a huge increase in investment since 2020, Chinese companies reached a production capacity of 1,000 gigawatts of solar panels per year. To get an idea: in 2023 global demand was only 451 GW, according to Energy News. Chinese production of solar cells that year—588 GW—already doubled international demand. And they continued building. The result was what economists call “involution”: a spiral of destructive competition where companies destroy each other with none winning. More than 40 Chinese manufacturers have gone bankrupt, been acquired or delisted. A third of the staff of the surviving big five were laid off. JinkoSolar, the world’s largest supplier, registered in 2025 a drop in revenue of 29%, a drop in gross profit of 86% and net losses of 4.45 billion yuan. In this way, in June of last year, more than 30 manufacturers They agreed to an OPEC-style pact to stabilize prices and curb supply. Six months later, the result was a disaster: far from stabilizing, production reached historic highs, installations tripled and losses continued to accumulate. “Since when are solar panels just another commodity? They are a technological miracle. They make us cultivators of the sun,” details Adam Tooze in his column. And in all that time, the price of a solar module fell to $0.10 per watt, according to EnkiAI —well below the $0.16/W production cost of the most advanced TOPCon modules. It is, strictly speaking, the largest climate technology sell-off in history. This is not a steel crisis. It’s something else When economists talk about Chinese overproduction, the debate usually revolves around steel, cement or electric cars. But Tooze makes a distinction worth hearing: Solar panels are no ordinary commodity. They are the result of half a century of research—from NASA spinoff programs in the 1970s to the big energy push of the Carter era—and, along with batteries, they are the master key to a sustainable future. Wasting that surplus is not just an economic problem. It is a civilizational irrationality. According to the OECD, China invested less than $18 billion in sector support over 15 years to build an industry capable of providing more clean energy than the world can easily absorb. That figure is less than the cost of building a medium-sized international airport in Europe, or what the US spent on a single Gerald Ford-class aircraft carrier. The concentration of power in the supply chain is also unprecedented in the history of energy. China controls more than 80% of the entire global solar production chaindirect result of the plan Made in China 2025 with which Beijing decided to stop being the world’s cheap factory and become its technological supplier. By the end of 2025, its operational module capacity exceeded 900 GW, several times the total global demand. The five largest Chinese manufacturers concentrate more than 50% of the market. LONGi Green Energy alone shipped more than 45 GW in 2025 – more than the entire US domestic manufacturing capacity (73 GW). Never in the history of energy has a single nation so completely dominated a key technology for the decarbonization of the planet. Not even oil at its peak. And the climate paradox is painful: since the Paris Agreement of 2015, a scale of deployment like the current one would have seemed like science fiction. The goal was to stop global warming. The instruments to do so are manufactured and stacked in warehouses. What fails, Tooze points out, is coordination: what Keynes would call a global “chaos,” a catastrophe of collective planning. The global bet Chaos has its own correction mechanisms, even if they are painful. In China, the crisis has already forced the Government to act a few months ago, Beijing called for ‘concerted efforts’ to end price war. The proposed measures include capacity control, minimum guideline prices, mergers and acquisitions, and intellectual property protection “to promote the high-quality development of the photovoltaic industry.” In practice: the Chinese State orchestrating an orderly rescue of the sector that it itself encouraged to grow without limits. The consolidation had already started before. In August of last year, several players in the sector launched a plan for large manufacturers to jointly invest $7 billion in buying and closing the least efficient facilities, according to OilPrice.com. In practice, a cartel to stop the bleeding. Prices already reflect the shift. According to ABC SolutionsChinese modules have risen between 10% and 20% in 2026 due to the adjustment of overproduction and new logistics tariffs. Wood Mackenzie forecasts a further rise of 9%. The window for the big bargain is closing, although prices remain historically low. The critical variable for 2027 is how the surplus is resolved: through orderly consolidation or through new business disruptions. Meanwhile, Chinese foreign business continues to boom. As Tooze points out in the FTexports of Chinese solar technology to virtually every country except the United States are skyrocketing. And manufacturers have evolved: they now integrate batteries into systems to offer greater stability to the grid, pushing the product towards the complete solution instead of the isolated module. Storage batteries, which They have also reached historical lows in cost Pushed by the same dynamic of overproduction, they thus complete the package: panel plus storage, at a knockdown price. Domestic demand will also recover. China exceeded 1,230 GW of installed solar capacity … Read more

“Neither jogging nor walking fast, just taking a grandpa walk five days a week will burn 78,000 calories a year”

by

He has put words to it Hector Leiro in it podcast from ADH Fitness Talks, but the numbers are clear and solid. It is true that caloric expenditure is somewhat inflated and that the annual count somewhat distorts its real impact. However, the underlying message is good: in exercise, consistency is better than intensity. So we’ve asked ourselves, are we valuing walking less than we should? What do the coaches say? Leiro’s message was quite clear and sensible: “I’m not saying jogging or walking fast, but taking a grandpa walk five days a week (…) that translates into 78,000 calories a year, or what is the same, ten kilos of fat.” “The important thing is to build the habit. Not (…) a superhuman effort, it is a habit.” In the same line, insisted the fitness instructor Susane Pata in Infobae that “walking 30 minutes seven days a week generates 700–1,400 kcal per week.” And what do the figures say? To begin with, the accounts are a little inflated if we take into account that energy expenditure not only takes into account intensity and time, but also weight. The more weight, the more expense. This, translated into manageable figures, means that for a 70 kilo person, an hour of “grandfather’s walk” produces an expenditure of between 140 and 200 calories. It is far from the 300-350 that Leiro manages to reach 78,000. To achieve that we would have to go at a more intense pace or weigh more (about 120 kilos). These are estimates, of course, but it allows us to get an idea of ​​what exactly we are talking about. But let’s admit 78,000 calories, what does that mean? Not too much, really. If we look at it in perspective, we are talking about something like three pieces of fruit a day. By “annualizing” it, the expense appears larger than it really is. It is not a problem in itself, of course: as with the famous milestone of 10,000 steps a day, they are ’round’ figures that help guide goals (as long as we know that they are not ‘exactly’ true). Okay, but 78,000 calories are 78,000 calories. “We’ll lose some weight, right?” And the answer is curious. The problem is that the body is not a piggy bank. The Hadza, an indigenous people of about 1,300 people living in northern Tanzania, They do not burn more calories than any Western office worker despite walking 12 km a day. It is a good example because they are one of the last hunter-gatherer societies left in the world and they allow us to get a different idea of ​​what we are talking about. 78,000 calories a year continuously does not translate into 10 kilos of fat. It is true that in certain contexts it could happen, of course. But stating it cheerfully can generate excessive expectations. So, why walk daily? Because weight is not the only (nor the most important) thing that is gained through the practice of andurrear. And walking daily improves cardiovascular health, glycemic control, bone density, mood and reduces mortality. As I said at the beginning, consistency matters more than intensity. And that is an excellent message. Image | Juliane Liebermann In Xataka | Twenty years ago, researchers got a group of young women to walk together. And they discovered something unexpected

Uber is going to put robotaxis in Madrid this year. The DGT’s response: we’ll see

by

Robotaxis will arrive in Madrid before the end of the year. That is the headline you can read in the vast majority of media outlets. This is what Uber has made known, that has published the advertisement on your own website. There’s just one small problem: very few things are clear. The advertisement. With a press release that you can read on their own website. This is how Uber has announced that its robotaxis, in collaboration with WeRide and Avomo, will arrive in Madrid. In their press release they talk about collaboration with the regional government and the intention to launch the service before the end of the year. And little else. The information provided by the company about the project is, basically, that. It is barely mentioned that this is a pilot project and that they are willing to add “hundreds of robotaxis” as “key performance milestones are met” to “expand the commercial driverless taxi service to all urban areas.” many doubts. However, in the information that has been published there are many doubts that remain unresolved. In Xataka We have contacted Uber and WeRide but as of this writing we have not received answers to the following questions: How many cars will be available in the first phase? Will it be a service open to the entire city or will it be limited to specific neighborhoods in Madrid? Do Uber and WeRide already have permission to operate cars without a person on board? Will anyone be able to request a driverless vehicle to reach their destination? What the DGT says. The one who has answered our questions is the DGT. The organization assures us that they have no evidence that Uber or any other company associated with this project has requested permission to carry out tests of autonomous driverless cars. They also emphasize that, at this time, the companies in charge can only operate in “Test Mode” and, of course, “as long as they have been authorized to do so.” The latter, according to the DGT, has not occurred. What are the deadlines approved by the DGT? In its statement, Uber only mentions driverless vehicles but the DGT It refers us to the phases already approved to be able to carry out this type of tests. In these phases the most important points are the following: Controlled phase: no more than three autonomous cars and always with a safety operator behind the wheel. Extensive phase: no more than 10 vehicles and always with an operator behind the wheel. Pre-deployment phase: the limit of 10 vehicles is eliminated and the operator behind the wheel is optional but always has to supervise a remote operator. Right now, the only company that is in the “pre-deployment” phase is Tesla that is carrying out the tests of their FSD with 30 vehicles and have freedom of movement throughout the national territory. In collaboration with the Community of Madrid. In the text published by Uber it is mentioned that the arrival of the robotaxis to Madrid will be carried out “in collaboration with the Government of the Community of Madrid.” In Xataka We have tried to contact this party but have not received a response either. And, let’s talk about roads of regional or municipal ownership, the DGT has to give the go-ahead to be able to carry out this type of tests on Spanish soil. At first, from Expansion It was pointed out that two other municipalities, in addition to Madrid, would join the arrival of the aforementioned robotaxis and that companies such as Cabify or Bolt have also shown interest. At the moment, there is no more news on this. Europe. While in the United States and China the use of robotaxis is beginning to be normalized, Europe continues to be a forbidden field for them. Tesla has been pushing for some time your FSD is approvedpublishing videos collected in their tests in spaces as complicated to manage as Paris, Rome… or Madrid. The other test that had caught attention is the pilot project that is taking place in Zagrev (Croatia). There, 10 Arcfox Alpha T5 cars from the Chinese manufacturer BAIC offer commercial driverless taxi services, powered by the Chinese artificial intelligence company Pony.AI. Beyond. In China, as we say, the use of robotaxis is beginning to be widespread. Baidu’s Apollo Go, WeRide and Pony.AI have driverless vehicles that offer commercial services in cities such as Wuhan, Beijing, Shenzhen or Shanghai. However, the Chinese government itself is slowing down the arrival of automation in private passenger cars, especially after accidents involving some cars that had driving assistance functions active. In the United States, San Francisco and Texas or Los Angeles are the big places where autonomous taxis are tested. However, as the DGT suggests, the tests there began with humans at the wheel. And in some cases the service is limited in space and does not reach the entire city. Some doubts. The robotaxis service is one of the sectors that has moved and leveraged the most money in recent years. Also the one who has frustrated the most promises and money has burned. Billions of euros later and after a decade of intensive developmentits availability remains exceptional. Furthermore, robotaxis continue to generate doubts in the user. Transversal doubts from the moral dilemma to the purely practical debate. And in cities like San Francisco, the service is seen by many as an enemy not only for its ability to eliminate human jobs, but also for the problems that arise on a daily basis in case of facing an unforeseen event or, simply, if a blackout occurs. And in China they have also verified What happens when a system failure occurs and a hundred robotaxis are frozen in the middle of traffic. Some, frozen in the middle of a road with traffic on both sides. Photo | Jordi Moncasi and Uber In Xataka | Waymo’s self-driving cars have started honking at each other. At 4 in the morning

2026 will be a historic year for smartphones. The worst year in history, specifically

by

The smartphone market is touched. That of technology, in general, with the brands themselves warning months ago about what was coming and encouraging us to anticipate technological purchases in the coming years as soon as possible. The rise of artificial intelligence and the Big Tech fever for building data centers has broken the consumer market with increasingly expensive computers, inaccessible components and the disappearance of the “cheap mobile”. Because 2026 is not being a good year to buy technology to the point that there is already talk of the worst year in history for smartphones. Disaster in sight. We already knew that 2026 was going to be bad, but now the analyst firm Counterpoint Research has revised their forecasts to point out something interesting: it will be worse than we expected. If in February they pointed to a drop in the year-on-year volume of smartphone shipments this year of 12.4%, they have now revised those forecasts to go a little further: up to 13.9%. This implies that this year some 1,080 million mobile phones will be shipped, which seems like a lot, but it represents 174 million fewer devices than in 2025. The translation is that it will be the lowest annual volume since 2013, when everything was field, experimentation and the newest smartphones continued to coexist with strange proposals and ‘dumb phones’. No options. The reason is the persistence of the component crisis, mainly storage and RAM memory. The acceleration of Big Tech to build more AI infrastructure is causing himcomponent production lines For the consumer sector (in which mobile phones are found) it does not have components or has to buy them much more expensively. This, evidently, causes the sales price of the device to increase. The impact is there because the memory represented 20% of the manufacturing invoice for an entry mobile. Now that percentage rises to 40% or more and, although everything increases in price or does not improve as it should from one generation to the next to cushion the impact, manufacturers really do not have many more options. The calculations are there and they make the new mobile phones less attractive. In the entry range – increments of 30 dollars per unit. In the mid range – from 60 to 80 dollars per unit. In the premium – 100 and 150 dollars per unit. Strategy. These manufacturers have two options on the table. Or they don’t launch new devices this year, something that some industry giants have already targetedensuring that the situation will cause some companies to fall by the wayside because their business depends directly on the devices… or they launch new models, but without better specifications and more expensive. It is estimated that smartphone prices worldwide increased by 14% during the first quarter of this year, with a shortage hitting the entry and mid-range segment harder than that of more premium mobile phones. The reason is that in the mid-range the margins are tighter and in the premium it is other components that raise the bill (cameras or screens, for example), in addition to having wider margins. In figures. It is affordable mobile phones that are bearing the brunt, with a 46% drop in shipments in this first quarter due to the reduction in the supply of LPDDR4 memory. In fact, Samsung is one of the largest on the market and already pointed out weeks ago that they were going to abandon the LPDDR4 to focus on the LPDDR5 which is better, but also more expensive. An example with first and last names is Galaxy A57a mobile that exemplifies this price increase in the mid-range because one GB of RAM is already worth twice as much as three months ago. To contextualize this, let’s go with some figures: Apple (premium segment) – stable shipments. Samsung (all segments, but strong presence in premium) – 4% drop. Xiaomi (all segments, but more in the mid-range) – 20% drop. Honor (all segments, but more in the mid-range) – 28% drop. Transsion (especially entry range) – 32% drop. No recovery on the horizon. The good news? Really, there is no good news. Coaunterresearch Point is just one source, but a forecast Parallel to IDC, which also contemplates this drop in shipments of 13.9%, points to an additional 1.1% of 1.1%. It is in 2028 when the situation is expected to begin to improve, but without returning to the state we had just two years ago. It will be a slow recovery and the market will suffer more in those areas where there is a greater concentration of mobile phones that move around 200 euros. It is, as we said months ago, the disappearance of the cheap mobile in favor of a more resilient high-end and premium because of what we commented about sales margins. But hey, in the end, it is a situation that we are seeing in all consumer devices. Apple is discontinuing options for its Macs with certain memory combinations, the Steam Deck just went up 300 euros suddenly, The Raspberry Pi has increased tremendously and it is not known when they will come out Steam MachinePS6 or Xbox Project Helix because no one wants to compromise. The only thing we know about the new Xbox is what its new CEO said: It will be expensive due to the component crisis. In Xataka | Samsung is doing so well that its workers threatened to strike if it didn’t distribute benefits. And they have won

It’s the billions of cigarettes a year that pay for everything else.

by

In the midst of Xi Jinping’s anti-corruption campaign in 2013, the Chinese Government came to officially ban that at banquets and public events of officials there would be cigarettes on the table. The detail seemed symbolic, but it reflected the extent to which tobacco was embedded in the political and economic culture of the country. The silent business that sustains too much. When talking about the Chinese economy, the conversation usually revolves around of electric cars, solar panels, batteries either rare earth. However, one of the most important financial pillars of the Chinese State remains much older, less glamorous and much more profitable: tobacco. I counted this week the new york times that China consumes about half of all cigarettes on the planet and sells about 2.4 billion units a year, a figure so gigantic that it turns the country into a global anomaly. While much of the world reduces tobacco consumption, China has gone in the opposite direction. And it is not just a cultural or health issue. Behind it there is an immense economic and political machinery: the state tobacco monopoly generates around 244 billion dollars annually in benefits and taxes, an amount equivalent to about 7% of all Chinese central government revenue and comparable to the country’s official defense budget. The personal contradiction of the “boss”. The paradox is even more striking because Xi Jinping stopped smoking years ago and, according to reported the Timesto people present in private conversations, went so far as to describe smoking as a serious problem for China. Plus: during his first years in power there seemed to be a certain political will to tighten restrictions, even banned smoking for officials during official events and Beijing adopted limitations in indoor spaces, in addition, in 2015 taxes on tobacco were raised. Even Peng Liyuan, the Chinese first lady, publicly participated in anti-smoking campaigns with Bill Gates. But the momentum quickly faded. The reason seems obvious: the Chinese State depends too much of cigarette money. The same government that promotes futuristic industries and constantly talks about technological modernization continue financing part of its stability thanks to millions of people smoking cheap three-dollar packs. The most powerful monopoly in the country. The heart of the entire system is the State Tobacco Monopoly Administrationan extraordinary structure even by Chinese standards because it regulates the sector and at the same time controls the dominant company that makes virtually all of the country’s cigarettes. That is, the regulator and the business are the same thing. Its economic power has translated into direct political influence. The heads of the organization have a rank equivalent to that of vice minister and several Chinese academic investigations have openly pointed out that the monopoly has blocked or diluted many important health initiatives. The clearest example came around 2017, when an attempt was stopped to implement a national ban on indoor smoking and moved the responsibility to local governmentswhere restrictions are usually weak or barely applied. Financing much more than tobacco. The most revealing thing is that tobacco money is no longer just supports local budgetsbut also some of the great strategic priorities by Xi Jinping. The monopoly has invested more than 1 billion of dollars to strengthen the Chinese financial system and has also participated in the giant national semiconductor fund valued in about 100,000 million. In practice, part of China’s commitment to chips, high technology and industrial independence is being financed thanks to smokers. In producing provinces like Yunnan, tobacco taxes represent more than half of the municipal budget. That explains why so many local governments resist even to moderate measures against smoking: restricting consumption means opening huge holes in finances already weakened by the real estate crisis and the economic slowdown. The great world exception. The Chinese case also breaks several global trends. While in many countries vaping has reduced part of traditional consumption, in China the State hardened quickly regulations on electronic cigarettes and limited flavors and points of sale, preventing them from eroding too much of the classic business. There are also no aggressive health warnings like in the West: Chinese packages still show national symbols and discreet messages instead of shocking images about diseases. Although the smoking rate has dropped slightly Because fewer young people are getting into the habit, the total sales volume continues to grow. Partly because China still has hundreds of millions of smokers and partly because tobacco also functions as a social valve in a context of growing economic pressure. A battle that you don’t want to win at all. The result is a deeply contradictory situation. China officially recognizes that tobacco It is a health problem gigantic and maintains public objectives to reduce the number of smokers, but at the same time financially dependent that millions of people continue to buy cigarettes every day. The Chinese political system itself has created a perverse incentive where really combating smoking would involve hitting a fundamental source of income for local governments, banks, strategic investments and even part of the national technological project. That is why China’s big hidden business is not only in the battery factories or rare earths that dominate international headlines. It is also in a state monopoly that sells almost half of cigarettes on the planet and whose revenue helps support much of everything else. Image | SoQ錫濛譙, Steve Evans In Xataka | It’s never too late to quit smoking: the lungs have an incredible capacity to regenerate In Xataka | Fertility rates have plummeted around the world. There is an unnoticed suspect: tobacco

The fires have already grown by 218% so far this year and summer has not yet arrived

by

While announcing “the largest deployment of the State”, the Government of Spain has given a disturbing piece of information: the number of fires has skyrocketed by 218% so far this year. And yes, May isn’t over yet. The fine print, however, is interesting. The data, as I say, refers to the number of reported fires, but does not directly correspond to the burned area. In fact, despite to the enormous ‘boom’ of fire outbreaksthe burned land is still below the average of the last decade. In this sense, what is truly interesting is the paradoxThat with reservoirs at historic highs and no signs predicting an upcoming drought, the risk of fire has not stopped. In fact, it has skyrocketed. Clarifying the data on the fire boom. Indeed, between January 1 and May 15, 2026, 127 fires were reported, compared to 40 in the same period in 2025. That is a growth of 218%. And it’s true that “tripling” the fires sounds like a lot: but of those 127 fires, only three were large forest fires and only six required major intervention. The key fact, as we can see, is none of that. During the quarter, 12,946.66 hectares have burned; that is, 2.2 times more than in the same period of 2025 (5,822.12). But it is still 29.6 less than the average for the decade. The key fact is that we have improved a lot in preparing for and putting out fires, but this year the situation is very complicated. The three ways we have of counting fires (Civil Protection, MITECO and EFFIS/Copernicus) say that the year is getting complicated at a forced pace. Above all, because 2025 was a very bad year: three times as many hectares as average were burned. Where is really the problem? In the concentration of damage. According to Greenpeace, less than 1% of fires They already concentrate 86% of the surface burned and the average size of the large fire has gone from 1,500 hectares to more than 6,000. In this context, having more fires means having a greater chance of one of them becoming a superfire. And the countdown has already begun: the fire season is at the door and, despite the grandiose declarations of the administrations, we are not prepared. Image | Marcus Kauffman In Xataka | The satellite that detects fires before firefighters has a problem: it has to avoid space debris and is leaving blind spots on the map

Blue Origin had a plan of 12 launches for this year. A fireball at Cape Canaveral just changed everything

by

Bad news for Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos’ space company. And his New Glenn rocket It exploded this morning into a huge fireball while conducting a ground test at Cape Canaveral, Florida. The accident, which fortunately left no injuries, is a good blow for the company in his race to compete with SpaceXjust when this was going to be his definitive breakout year. That has passed. Around 9:00 p.m. local time (3:00 a.m. on Friday on the Spanish peninsula), the New Glenn exploded during a ‘hotfire’, a test in which the rocket engines are turned on while the vehicle remains anchored to the platform, without taking off. The objective of this test is to check the operation of the engines before a launch. Blue Origin itself He spoke on his X account of an “anomaly” and confirmed that all personnel were located and safe. According to collect The Guardian, the fireball destroyed the platform and the orange glow was seen more than 180 kilometers away, while residents of nearby towns noticed tremors in their homes. A year that was going to be the year of takeoff. The blow is especially hard because of the moment it arrives. Blue Origin had marked 2026 as the year to finally gain pace. Its CEO, Dave Limp, even stated in an interview with Ars Technica that the company could reach double digits in launches this year, until matching its production rate of 12 rockets, and even considering reaching 24 if manufacturing continued to improve. They also mentioned the 12 launches in their request to the FAA to operate from Cape Canaveral. The problem is that it was more of an ambitious goal than a realistic forecast, since the New Glenn has started the year without having flown again since November and experiencing several setbacks. The explosion has now turned that goal into a chimera. Bezos’ reaction. The founder of Blue Origin took the drama out of the matter, counting in Elon Musk also reacted to the event briefly: “Very unfortunate. Rockets are difficult.” Why it is important. The New Glenn It is the key piece with which the company wants to confront the dominance of SpaceX, and it is also called to play a central role in NASA’s Artemis programwhich seeks to return astronauts to the Moon. Just a few days before the explosion, the agency had awarded Blue Origin a contract to participate in the construction of a lunar base. The moment could not have been worse. A streak of setbacks. Blue Origin has accumulated a series of catastrophic misfortunes. On its third flight, in April, the rocket managed to land its reusable booster on a barge at sea, but its upper stage failed and failed to place the satellite it was transporting for AST SpaceMobile into orbit, which ended up falling and disintegrating in the atmosphere. That failure sparked an investigation by the FAA, the US air regulator, which just last week had given the rocket the green light to fly again. Thursday’s test was precisely the preparation of its fourth mission, in which it was going to deploy satellites of the network Leo from Amazona direct competitor to SpaceX’s Starlink. Amazon clarified that none of those satellites were on board at the time of the explosion. Damage assessment. Both the FAA and NASA spoke out quickly. The regulator pointed out that the test was outside the activities it licenses and that it did not affect air traffic. NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman, on the other hand counted that “spaceflight is unforgiving, and developing a new heavy-lift capability is extraordinarily difficult.” The agency promised to support a thorough investigation and, above all, to evaluate how what happened affects its lunar programs. And now what. What we will now see is how Blue Origin rewrites its calendar. NASA was counting on New Glenn to launch the first missions to its lunar base this year, and the agency itself has acknowledged that they still do not know how this accident will affect the mission with Artemis. On the other hand, SpaceX has its own problems with the Starship, also under review by the FAAwhile preparing a historic IPO. The terrain is quite hot. Cover image | NASA Space Flight In Xataka | SpaceX seemed unreachable in its race to the Moon. Blue Origin is proving that anything is possible

put an astronaut to “live” a year in orbit

by

The Shenzhou 23 mission has been a success on its journey to Tiangongaccording to various Chinese media reports. In these, this milestone is noted as a great step forward in China’s race to the Moon. Certainly, each of these advances brings the Asian country closer to our satellite. However, it should be noted that the milestones achieved with this latest mission are rather achievements of the Chinese space race in general, and not so specific to lunar exploration. It is also worth noting that several records have been broken or are expected to be broken, but again these are particular records for this nation, not worldwide. All this indicates that they have the capacity of the great space powers, although much of what they are doing has already been done before. Three new taikonauts in space. This May 24, three taikonauts (the name by which Chinese astronauts are known in the West) they left with the help of a Long March rocket heading to the Tiangong space station. Docking with one of the station’s ports was carried out without problems 3.5 hours later. Two of the ship’s three crew members are expected to spend around 6 months in these facilities. The normal thing in these missions. However, one of them, which has not yet been specified, will break the record for spending a year in space. Background. There have already been other astronauts who have spent about a year in space. At NASA, the record is held by astronaut Frank Rubio, who spent 371 days aboard the International Space Station. Before him, at the top of the US space agency was Mark Vande Hei, with 355 days. However, both are far short of the 437 days Russian cosmonaut Valeri Polyakov spent at the Russian Mir station. The crew. The three crew members of this Chinese mission are Zhu Yangzhu, Zhang Zhiyuan and Li Jiaying. The latter is the fourth female taikonaut and the first person from Hong Kong to travel to space. Before, she was a police inspector. More first times. The next mission to Tiangong will have a Pakistani astronaut on board, so firsts will continue to be achieved. Future experiments. The astronauts who have now arrived at the Chinese space station will carry out various experiments, related to medicine, materials science, fluid physics, biology and medicine. Highlights include those carried out by the crew member who will extend his stay up to a year, since he will be the one in charge of studying how it affects microgravity to the human body in long stays. It will also focus on the psychological effects of confinement and, in general, everything that could affect the health of the next lunar colonists. Target: the Moon. Of course China has its sights set on the Moon. In fact, with their Chang’e missions, they have done a very exhaustive study of our satellite. They have managed to map it, land on your hidden side and collect samples and return them to Earth for analysis. Even has been made to germinate a seed in a simulated biosphere, within the selenite territory. The Chinese Academy of Sciences has sufficient knowledge about the Moon and has also proven to have more than competent technologies. Their goal is to land on the moon in 2030. NASA’s is set for 2028, but everything can change. At the moment, China is advancing at a good pace in its space race and that, without a doubt, is great news. At the end of the day, we should see the space race as a goal of humanity, not so much as a race between countries. Images | CMSA In Xataka | The space race between the United States and China is, above all, a race to see who can spend the most money

In a few weeks, cinemas will receive the most nostalgic fantasy of the year

by

Today many speak of it as one of the most anticipated releases of the summer, perhaps as a familiar and colorful contrast to denser proposals such as ‘The Odyssey‘. And yet, ‘Masters of the Universe’ has a history of war of rights, box office failures and various confrontations behind it that has turned it into a feat worthy of one of its most tumultuous adventures that, four decades after its creation, this Conan in space reaches the screens. Failure after failure until the final victory. In August 1987. Cannon Films, the Israeli-American production company that had built its reputation on low-budget action films in franchises such as ‘The American Warrior’ or ‘Missing in Action’, bet heavily on ‘Masters of the Universe’ as an entry ticket to the Hollywood of the big studios. With a budget of $22 million (huge by Cannon standards) and ambitious marketing campaigns that presented it as capable of rubbing shoulders with ‘Star Wars’, the result was a resounding commercial failure: only 17.3 million in collection, which contributed to the collapse of the company. Fans of the very popular animated series that served as an advertisement for the new releases of the toy line protested against the most discussed decision in the movie: Instead of showing the fantastical world of Eternia, most of the story took place on Earth, far from the magical creatures and epic battles that had fueled the spectacular illustrations on the action figure boxes. The reason for that decision was strictly economic: Eternia was very difficult to bring to life on the screen with the budget Cannon had at his disposal. 39 years of waiting. What came next was one of the longest sagas of frustrated development in modern cinema. The rights to the franchise passed successively through Warner Bros. (2007), Columbia Pictures (2009), Netflix (2022) and finally Amazon MGM Studios. Multiple names were linked to creative teams and cast, such as Jon M. Chu, McG or John Woo, and Noah Centineo was in talks for the lead role. Already with Amazon, Travis Knight was announced as director and Chris Butler as screenwriter. Was the first time in almost four decades that a ‘Masters of the Universe’ completed its production. FBarbie actor. The film comes in a very specific context for Mattel: the company has been trying to become a generator of successful franchises for Hollywood for two years. ‘Barbie’ raised more than $1.4 billion worldwide and won an Oscar, becoming the benchmark for Mattel’s entire film strategy. Since then, the company has more than fifteen announced projects including adaptations of Hot Wheels or Polly Pocket. The comparison with ‘Barbie’, however, falls apart in some respects. They are essentially different franchises and possibly very different films (‘Masters of the Universe’, quite possibly, has nothing of that intelligent pop feminism capealthough it very possibly has the same ironic approach to characters who, without humor, would not support an updated review). The toys are not the same either: Barbie is a ubiquitous brand in global culture, while He-Man is niche generational nostalgia. A nostalgic artifact. Travis Knight’s debut was ‘Bumblebee’, the excellent spin-off of ‘Transformers’ that bathed in adventurous simplicity what in Michael Bay’s installments had been a crazy epic. From his ‘Masters of the Universe’ has said that “we are not making a cartoon, we are making a live-action fantasy film” The cast is one of the strong points of the project: Nicholas Galitzine is He-Man, Camila Mendes is Teela, Alison Brie is Evil-Lyn, Morena Baccarin is the Sorceress, Idris Elba is Man-At-Arms and Jared Leto is Skeletor. Travis Knight is very aware of the responsibility he has to the franchise’s fans: “When we started envisioning this world, we wanted to do the fans justice,” Knight said, adding that “watching them come to life on the big screen makes you a little emotional.” The challenge. The first box office forecasts They place the domestic opening between 25 and 35 million dollars for the weekend of June 5. With an estimated budget of between 170 and 200 million dollars, they are clearly insufficient. Can the movie get young audiences interested in He-Man, Skeletor, and Eternia in 2026? Without a doubt, a pertinent question, because it can guarantee continuity for other toy franchises or the lock for Castle Greyskull for another four decades. In Xataka | The toys of the future will include AIs to be able to interact with us: Barbie and OpenAI are already taking steps in that direction

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.