Analysis – Page 549 – MIL Submissions Engine

July 16, 2025

Sudan’s war is an economic disaster: here’s how bad it could get

Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Khalid Siddig, Senior Research Fellow and Program Leader for the Sudan Strategy Support Program, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)

Since April 2023, Sudan has been engulfed in a devastating war between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces. What began as a struggle for power has turned into a national catastrophe. More than 14 million people have been displaced. Health and education systems have collapsed and food insecurity threatens over half the population of about 50 million.

The war has disrupted key sectors, triggering severe economic contractions, and worsening poverty and unemployment levels.

Sudan’s finance minister reported in November 2023 that the war had resulted in economic losses exceeding US$26 billion – or more than half the value of the country’s economy a year earlier. The industrial sector, which includes manufacturing and oil refining, has lost over 50% of its value. Employment has fallen by 4.6 million jobs over the period of the conflict. More than 7 million more people have been pushed into poverty. The agrifood system alone has shrunk by 33.6%. These estimates exclude informal economy losses.

My research applies economy-wide models to understand how conflict affects national development. In a recent study, my colleagues and I used this approach to answer the question: what will happen to Sudan’s economy and poverty levels if the war continues through 2025?

To assess the economic impact of the conflict, we used a Social Accounting Matrix multiplier model. This is a tool that captures how shocks affect different sectors and other agents of the economy, such as firms, government and households.

Based on our modelling, the answer is devastating: the conflict could shrink the size of Sudan’s economy by over 40% from 2022 levels, plunging millions more into poverty.

We modelled two scenarios to capture the potential trajectories of Sudan’s economy.

The extreme scenario assumes a sharp initial collapse, with a 29.5% contraction in the size of the economy in 2023 and 12.2% in 2024, followed by a 7% decline in 2025, reflecting some stabilisation over time.

The moderate scenario, based on World Bank projections, applies a 20.1% contraction in 2023 and a 15.1% drop in 2024, also followed by a 7% reduction in 2025, indicating a slower but more prolonged deterioration.

We estimated the annual figures and report only the aggregate impacts through 2025 for clarity.

We found that if the conflict endures, the value of Sudan’s economy will contract by up to 42% from US$56.3 billion in 2022 (pre-conflict) to US$32.4 billion by the end of 2025. The backbone of livelihoods – agriculture – will be crippled. And the social fabric of the country will continue to fray.

How we did it

Our Social Accounting Matrix multiplier model used data from various national and international sources to show the impact of conflict on the value of the economy, its sectors and household welfare.

We connected this to government and World Bank data to reflect Sudan’s current conditions.

This allowed us to simulate how conflict-driven disruptions affect the value of the economy, its sectors and household welfare.

What we found

Under the extreme scenario, we found:

Gross domestic product collapse: Gross domestic product (GDP) measures the total value of all goods and services produced in a country within a year. It’s a key indicator of economic health. We found that the value of Sudan’s economy could contract by up to 42%. This means the country would be producing less than 60% of what it did before the conflict. This would affect incomes, jobs, government revenues and public services. The industrial sector – heavily concentrated in Khartoum – would be hardest hit, with output shrinking by over 50%. The value of services like education, health, transport and trade would fall by 40%, and agriculture by more than 35%.
Job losses: nearly 4.6 million jobs – about half of all employment – could disappear. Urban areas and non-farm sectors would be worst affected, with over 700,000 farming jobs at risk.
Incomes plummet: household incomes would decline across all groups – rich and poor, rural and urban – by up to 42%. Rural and less-educated households suffer the most.
Poverty spikes: up to 7.5 million more people could fall into poverty, adding to the 61.1% poverty level in 2022. In rural areas, the poverty rate could jump by 32.5 percentage points from the already high rural poverty rate pre-conflict (67.6% of the rural population). Women, especially in rural communities, are hit particularly hard. Urban poverty, which was at 48.8% pre-conflict, increases by 11.6 percentage points.
The agrifood system – which includes farming, food processing, trade and food services – would lose a third of its value under the extreme scenario.

Why these findings matter

Sudan was already in a fragile state before the war. It was reeling from decades of underinvestment, international sanctions and institutional breakdown.

The war has reversed hard-won gains in poverty reduction. It is also dismantling key productive sectors – from agriculture to manufacturing – which will be essential for recovery once the conflict ends. Every month of continued fighting adds to the damage and raises the cost of rebuilding.

Our projections already show major economic collapse, yet they don’t include the full extent of the damage. This includes losses in the informal economy or the strain on household coping strategies. The real situation could be even worse than what the data suggests.

What needs to be done

First and foremost, peace is essential. Without an end to the fighting, recovery will be impossible.

Second, even as conflict continues, urgent action is needed to stabilise livelihoods. This means:

supporting agriculture in areas that remain relatively safe. Food production must be sustained to prevent famine.
restoring critical services where possible – particularly transport, trade and retail – to keep local economies functioning
protecting the most vulnerable, such as women in rural areas and the elderly, through expanded social protection and targeted cash assistance.

Third, prepare for recovery. The international community – donors, development banks and NGOs – must begin laying the groundwork for post-conflict reconstruction now. This includes investment in public infrastructure, rebuilding institutions and re-integrating displaced populations.

The bottom line

Sudan’s war is more than a political crisis. It is an economic catastrophe unfolding in real time. One that is deepening poverty, destroying livelihoods and erasing years of progress.

Our research provides hard numbers to describe what Sudanese families are already experiencing every day.

The country’s economy is bleeding. Without a shift in the trajectory of the conflict, recovery could take decades – if it happens at all.

Khalid Siddig does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Sudan’s war is an economic disaster: here’s how bad it could get – https://theconversation.com/sudans-war-is-an-economic-disaster-heres-how-bad-it-could-get-260609

July 16, 2025

‘Alligator Alcatraz’ showcases Donald Trump’s penchant for visual cruelty

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Marycarmen Lara Villanueva, PhD Candidate, Department of Social Justice Education, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto

The United States government recently announced the opening of a massive immigrant detention facility built deep within the Florida Everglades that’s been dubbed “Alligator Alcatraz.” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said during a media briefing that “there is only one road leading in … and the only way out is a one-way flight.”

For some taking in her remarks, the moment felt dystopian. According to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, the facility is surrounded by swamps and alligators and is equipped with more than 200 security cameras, 8,500 metres of barbed wire and a security force of 400 personnel.

Accounts from some of the first detainees at the facility have shed light on the inhumane conditions. They’ve described limited access to water and fresh air, saying they received only one meal a day and that the lights are on 24/7.

Apparently designed to be an immigration deterrence and a display of cruelty, Alligator Alcatraz is much more than infrastructure. It is visual policy aimed to stage terror as a message while making Trump’s authoritarian and fascist politics a material reality.

Contributing to this fascist visual apparatus, AI-generated images of alligators wearing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) hats have circulated widely on social media. Some have questioned whether these images were satire or state propaganda.

An AI-generated image shows alligators wearing ICE caps outside a heavily fortified facility with barbed wire fences and a watch tower. — A screenshot of a June 2025 Homeland Security post on X, formerly Twitter.

Surveillance, migration, debilitation

In a moment of growing right-wing rhetoric and support for anti-immigrant violence, understanding how visual regimes operate, and what they attempt to normalize, is important.

Surveillance and deterrence technologies used along the U.S.–Mexico border for decades were intentionally designed to restrict the movement of undocumented migrants. According to Human Rights Watch, this has resulted in more than 10,000 deaths.

Since 1994, U.S. Border Patrol has been accused of directing migrants away from urban crossings along the southern border, intentionally funnelling them into harsh and inhospitable terrain like the Sonora Desert.

The desert serves as a deterrent to prevent immigrants from reaching their destiny. American theorist Jasbir Puar’s concept of debility is useful in making sense of the strategic process whereby the state works not to kill, but to weaken, as a form of slow violence that wears people down over time. The desired outcome is deterrence.

On the southern U.S. border, severe dehydration and kidney failure can be outcomes of this debilitating process, potentially resulting in disability or death.

Infrastructures of violence

Sarah Lopez, a built environment historian and migration scholar in the U.S., describes the architecture of migrant immobilization as existing on a continuum with prison design. She’s highlighted the increasingly punitive conditions of immigration detention facilities, such as small dark cells or the absence of natural light.

French architect and writer Léopold Lambert explains that architecture isn’t just about buildings, but about how space is used to organize and control people. He coined and developed the term weaponized architecture to describe how spaces are designed to serve the political goals of those in power.

Colonialism, capitalism and modernity are closely connected, and architecture has played a key role in making them possible. Alligator Alcatraz sits at the intersection of all three, intentionally created to invoke danger and isolation. In other words, it’s cruel by design.

As Leavitt put it, the facility is “isolated and surrounded by dangerous wildlife and unforgiving terrain.” The Trump administration has essentially transformed land into infrastructure and migrants into disposable threats.

Terrorizing the marginalized

State-sanctioned “unforgiving terrains” are not new, and the use of alligators to terrorize people of colour isn’t new either.

The grotesque history of Black children being used as “alligator bait” in Jim Crow-era imagery is well-documented.

So when Trump publicly fantasized about alligators eating immigrants trying to escape the new detention centre, it came as no surprise to those familiar with the long racist visual history linking alligators to representations of Black people.

This logic is redeployed in the form of a racial terror that is made visible, marketable and even humorous in mainstream political discourse.

Visuality and migration

“Visuality” is a key term in the field of visual and cultural studies, originally coined by Scottish historian Thomas Carlyle and reintroduced in the early 2000s by American cultural theorist Nicholas Mirzoeff. It can be understood as the socially, historically and culturally constructed ways of seeing and understanding the visual world.

Visual systems have historically been used to justify western imperial and colonial rule by controlling how people see and understand the world.

While Alligator Alcatraz is a brand-new detention facility, it draws from a longer visual and spatial history of domination.

The AI-generated images of alligators wearing ICE hats can be seen as part of a broader visual system that makes racialized violence seem normal, justified and even funny. In this absurd transformation, the alligator is reimagined as a legitimate symbol of border enforcement.

Migrant death by water

The spectacle of Alligator Alcatraz, with its swampy inhospitable landscape, cannot be divorced from the long visual history of migrant death by water that’s relied on the circulation of images to provoke outrage — and sometimes state action.

Examples include the iconic image of Aylan Kurdi, the Syrian child whose lifeless body washed ashore in Turkey in 2015, and the devastating photo of Oscar Alberto Martínez Ramírez and his two-year-old daughter who both drowned crossing the Rio Grande in 2019.

These images sparked global concern, but they also reinforced the idea that migrant lives only matter when they end in death — as if borders only become visible when they cause deaths.

Alligator Alcatraz was built in eight days. The fact that a detention camp — or what some have called a concentration camp — can be assembled almost overnight, while basic human needs like clean drinking water or emergency warning systems go unmet for years, speaks volumes about where political will and government priorities lie.

Marycarmen Lara Villanueva does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. ‘Alligator Alcatraz’ showcases Donald Trump’s penchant for visual cruelty – https://theconversation.com/alligator-alcatraz-showcases-donald-trumps-penchant-for-visual-cruelty-260566

July 16, 2025

How rising living costs are changing the way we date, live and love

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Melise Panetta, Lecturer of Marketing in the Lazaridis School of Business and Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University

Young adults in their 20s and 30s face an altered social landscape where financial realities influence their relationships. (Rene Ranisch/Unsplash)

If it feels like rising prices are affecting your dating life or friendships, you’re not imagining it. Around the world, economic pressures are taking a significant toll on personal relationships.

From strained romantic partnerships to postponed life milestones, financial uncertainty is changing the way people connect and relate to with one another.

Young adults in their 20s and 30s, in particular, are facing an altered social landscape where even the most fundamental aspects of relationships are being influenced by financial realities.

Dating today can feel like a mix of endless swipes, red flags and shifting expectations. From decoding mixed signals to balancing independence with intimacy, relationships in your 20s and 30s come with unique challenges. Love IRL is the latest series from Quarter Life that explores it all.

These research-backed articles break down the complexities of modern love to help you build meaningful connections, no matter your relationship status.

Financial stress and relationship strain

Money has long been one of the biggest sources of conflict in relationships, but today’s economic landscape has made financial stress an even greater burden.

In Canada, a staggering 77 per cent of couples report financial strain, and 62 per cent say they argue over money. The rising cost of rent, food and everyday expenses has forced many couples to make difficult financial decisions, sometimes at the expense of their relationship.

These concerns are not unique to Canadian couples. A study in the United Kingdom found that 38 per cent of people in a relationship admit to having a secret account or “money stashed away” that their partner doesn’t know about. And in the United States, couples surveyed reported having 58 money-related arguments per year.

A woman sits on a couch with her head in her hands while another person, only seen from the neck down, sits beside her with their arms crossed — Money has long been one of the biggest sources of conflict in relationships.
(Shutterstock)

Even more concerning, financial instability is affecting how long relationships last. A recent RBC poll found 55 per cent of Canadians feel they need to be in a relationship to afford their lifestyle.

The economic barriers to independence are particularly pronounced for those contemplating separation or divorce. Traditionally, a breakup meant one partner moving out, but now more divorced and separated couples are finding themselves cohabitating simply because they can’t afford to live alone.

Understanding how to maintain a healthy relationship when facing financial troubles is essential for couples to navigate these difficult times.

Postponing major life decisions

The cost-of-living crisis is also delaying key life milestones for young adults worldwide. A Statistics Canada survey found that 38 per cent of young adults have postponed moving out due to economic uncertainty, an increase from 32 per cent in 2018.

This issue is not only delaying the journey to independent adulthood, it is also reversing it. For example, in the United Kingdom, one in five young adults who moved out have had to move back into their family home due to the cost of living crisis.

Housing affordability plays a major role in these delays. With housing prices soaring in Canada, the U.S., the U.K. and elsewhere, home ownership feels out of reach for many. For instance, 55 per cent of young Canadians report the housing crisis is fuelling their decision to delay starting a family.

Several real estate for sale signs seen on a lawn — The cost-of-living crisis is also delaying key life milestones for young adults worldwide. Real estate signs seen in Calgary in May 2023.
(Shutterstock)

These delays have cascading effects on individuals and on broader societal trends, including lower fertility rates and shifts toward smaller families.

Dating in a cost-conscious era

One side effect of the rising cost of living is that couples are moving in together sooner than they might have otherwise in order to split living expenses. Others are adopting a more pragmatic approach to dating and bringing up topics like financial stability, job security and housing much earlier in their relationships.

A dating trend known as “future-proofing” is also spreading. According to Bumble’s annual trend report, 95 per cent of singles say their worries about the future are impacting who they date and how they approach relationships. Top concerns include finances, job security, housing and climate change.

At the same time, financial strain is leading to simpler and cheaper date nights. More than half of Canadians say the rising cost of living is affecting dating. Many people are opting for budget-friendly activities like coffee dates, picnics or home-cooked meals instead of expensive dinners or weekend getaways.

In the U.K., inflation and other day-to-day expenses have also made 33 per cent of the nation’s young singles less likely to go on dates. Around one-quarter of them say it has made them less likely to seek out a romantic partner altogether.

Two people knock their glasses of red wine together over a candlelit table — Financial strain is leading fewer people to go on expensive, extravagent date nights.
(Shutterstock)

These costs are forcing single Americans to adjust their dating plans. With 44 per cent of single Americans reporting adjusting a date for financial reasons, and 27 per cent outright cancelling plans due to financial pressures, it is clear that the cost of living is fundamentally changing how Americans date.

Also, with 38 per cent of dating Canadians saying the costs associated with dating have negatively impacted their ability to reach their financial goals, some are even skipping dating altogether.

The cost of friendship

Friendships, too, are feeling the pinch. Gone are the days of casually grabbing dinner or catching a concert on the weekend. Nearly 40 per cent of Canadians, 42 per cent of Britons and 37 per cent of Americans have cut back on social outings due to financial constraints.

While this may seem like a small sacrifice, the decline in social interactions carries serious consequences. Regular social engagement is critical for mental health, resilience and career development. The more social activities are reduced, the greater the risk of loneliness and isolation — two factors that can significantly impact emotional well-being.

For many, socializing now means opting for budget-friendly alternatives. However, even with creative adjustments, financial pressures are making it harder to maintain strong social ties.

The changing landscape of connection

If you’re in your 20s or 30s, you’ve probably felt the way the economic realities of today are reshaping what relationships look like. Rising costs are influencing everything, from who you live with, how you date and when — or if — you take major life steps.

Maybe you’ve moved in with a partner sooner than planned to split rent, swapped nights out for budget-friendly hangs or put off milestones like starting a family. You’re not alone. Financial pressures are redefining how we connect with each other.

Finding ways to maintain strong relationships under economic stress is essential. Research shows providing emotional support to your partner, employing positive problem-solving skills and engaging in open communication are key maintaining high-quality relationships.

Melise Panetta does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How rising living costs are changing the way we date, live and love – https://theconversation.com/how-rising-living-costs-are-changing-the-way-we-date-live-and-love-252709

July 16, 2025

Biology is complex and diverse, so scientific research approaches need to be too

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Thomas Merritt, Professor, Chemistry and Biochemistry, Laurentian University

The beautiful, fascinating and often perplexing world around us grows from intricate and convoluted interactions of millions of pieces. As scientists, we work to understand and describe the parts and interactions of these systems.

Scientific understanding is only as good as the questions we ask. Observing the world from a variety of viewpoints and asking questions from a diversity of perspectives helps us recognize and understand biological complexity. Science, and our own experience, tells us that diverse collaborations lead to better questions and more innovative solutions — but diversity in research is under threat.

A major advancement in modern biology, specifically in the world of modern genetics that our research team works in, has been the realization that genes are far more complicated than we thought 20 years ago. When the human genome was first sequenced in 2001, scientists realized that each person’s DNA contained around 20,000 genes. Earlier estimates had been between 80,000 and 100,000.

This drastic downsize may seem like a step back in complexity, but the reduced number means genes must be more complex in order to fulfil multiple roles and functions. There are fewer genes, but each gene has a complicated set of multiple functions modulated through intricate, interconnected and interactive gene-regulation mechanisms.

Model species, surprising discoveries

Our research group studies gene regulation using the fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster) as a model species — a non-human species studied extensively to reveal more about other organisms. Flies, like humans, have two copies of each chromosome, each copy with a full set of genes. Typically, regulation of each copy has been assumed to be independent.

a close up of a fruit fly — Flies, like humans, have two copies of each chromosome.
(Mr.checker/Wikimedia)

Unexpectedly, our research has found that in fruit flies, the copies on separate chromosomes physically interact to modulate each other’s regulation. This means that the chromosomes aren’t independent: they co-regulate in a way that depends on genome structure, or what we call chromosome architecture.

This form of inter-chromosomal gene regulation, called transvection, was originally described in the 1950s, but is largely unknown. Its potential role to drive biological complexity is underappreciated because its effects are often (but not always) subtle and generally overshadowed by “typical” mechanisms of gene regulation along a single chromosome, cis-regulation.

Complex genetic interactions

Our transvection research focuses on subtle differences between individuals and environments. Too often, biology assumes that phenomena are simple, uniform and discreet.

A classic example, taught in high school biology classes, demonstrates this thinking. Austrian biologist Gregor Mendel studied genetics in pea plants to propose dominant and recessive hereditary traits. His data was a little too clean, too good to be true: Mendel’s peas were either wrinkled or round, yellow or green.

Genetics is works in more complex ways: think of eye colour. Our eyes are not a dichotomous brown or blue. Colour varies in a spectrum of shades of blues, greens, grays, hazels and browns.

Similarly, we have shown that transvection, itself an unexpected twist, varies subtly and substantially, in unexpected ways. Recognizing that inter-chomosomal regulation was even possible, let alone could itself be modulated and variable, meant looking at our results from a non-typical view point, a different perspective.

Our research into stress biology has drawn similar conclusions; diverse responses are the norm and appreciating this variability is absolutely fundamental to understanding the system.

Differences between male and female biologies

In our research into metabolism, we have repeatedly found significant and substantial differences between male and females. For example, in recent unpublished data, we find that differences between male and female fruit fly responses to metal toxicity were as large as we would have expected to occur between different species.

Past conventional wisdom in the field assumed that the biology in the two sexes was interchangeable, with females essentially being just hypervariable males, although recent research in our lab and others is broadly pushing back against this misconception.

The male and female responses are similar but distinct, and this is an important point. To understand biology, our research indicates, we need to identify, appreciate and study these subtle differences in order to produce more thorough scientific investigations.

Unexpected complexity

Our research regularly reveals unexpected biological complexity and, not coincidentally, the studies listed above were all collaborations. The technical complexity of research often requires involving experts in multiple disciplines.

A typical project can involve half a dozen or more experiments and methods, ranging from biochemistry to genetics to life history, and techniques from enzyme kinetic assays to mass spectrometry and DNA sequencing.

We are part of a genetics research group at Laurentian University whose diversity has greatly strengthened the quality and originality of contributions we have made to the field. In our experience, diverse collaborations combining different perspectives and viewpoints lead to innovative conclusions.

The literature bears this out: a series of large-scale studies involving millions of researchers and publications repeatedly show that diverse groups of scientists ask more interesting, perceptive and innovative questions and pose more interesting solutions.

Diversity and innovation

But this diversity-innovation connection is under attack in the current social and political climate. This has been most visible under the current political regime in the United States, but is also present here in Canada.

If successful, these attacks will narrow the perspective of scientific research and cripple scientific advances. Current diversity is the result of decades of programs fighting generations of systematic discrimination. Many researchers have been making research a more diverse and inclusive place.

Sustainability is essential to the long-term health of scientific research. The research, and our own experiences, clearly shows that diverse groups of researchers conduct more creative, innovative and impactful science. Visibility in scientific research is important to ensure its sustainability. More young students will pursue careers in research if they can see themselves in that role.

Our hope is that a broader appreciation of the importance of diversity in research, will lead to greater community and political, support for research programs that recognize the fundamental importance of diversity, equity and inclusion.

The biological world is a beautifully diverse and complex place. To truly understand that world, the research laboratory must to be, too.

Thomas Merritt receives funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council.

Allie Hutchings does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Biology is complex and diverse, so scientific research approaches need to be too – https://theconversation.com/biology-is-complex-and-diverse-so-scientific-research-approaches-need-to-be-too-260696

July 16, 2025

Examining mushrooms under microscopes can help engineers design stronger materials

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Mohamed Khalil Elhachimi, PhD Student in Mechanical Engineering, Binghamton University, State University of New York

White button mushrooms are one of the types studied to inform stronger materials. DigiPub/Moment via Getty Images

Pick up a button mushroom from the supermarket and it squishes easily between your fingers. Snap a woody bracket mushroom off a tree trunk and you’ll struggle to break it. Both extremes grow from the same microscopic building blocks: hyphae – hair-thin tubes made mostly of the natural polymer chitin, a tough compound also found in crab shells.

As those tubes branch and weave, they form a lightweight but surprisingly strong network called mycelium. Engineers are beginning to investigate this network for use in eco-friendly materials.

A diagram showing a mushroom with hyphae filaments labeled, as well as the mycelium filaments underground. — Filaments called hyphae are a mushroom’s support structures both above and below ground, and the mycelium network links multiple mushrooms together.
Milkwood.net/Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA

Yet even within a single mushroom family, the strength of a mycelium network can vary widely. Scientists have long suspected that how the hyphae are arranged – not just what they’re made of – holds the key to understanding, and ultimately controlling, their strength. But until recently, measurements that directly link microscopic arrangement to macroscopic strength have been scarce.

I’m a mechanical engineering Ph.D. student at Binghamton University who studies bio-inspired structures. In our latest research, my colleagues and I asked a simple question: Can we tune the strength of a mushroomlike material just by changing the angle of its filaments, without adding any tougher ingredients? The answer, it turns out, is yes.

2 edible species, many tiny tests

In our study, my team compared two familiar fungi. The first was the white button mushroom, whose tissue uses only thin filaments called generative filaments. The second was the maitake, also called hen-of-the-woods, whose tissue mixes in a second, thicker type of hyphae called skeletal filaments. These skeletal filaments are arranged roughly in parallel, like bundles of cables.

A diagram showing two electron microscope images of long, thin filaments. On the right, the filaments are arranged in parallel. — The two types of mushrooms used in the study: The white button mushroom is monomitic, shown on the left, meaning it has only one type of hyphae. The maitake is shown on the right, and is dimitic, meaning it has two types of hyphae.
Mohamed Khalil Elhachimi

After gently drying the caps and stems to remove any water, which can soften the material and skew the results, we zoomed in with scanning electron microscopes and tested the samples at two very different scales.

First, we tested macro-scale compression. A motor-driven piston slowly squashed each mushroom while sensors recorded how hard the sample pushed back – the same way you might squeeze a marshmallow, only with laboratory precision.

Then we pressed a diamond tip thinner than a human hair into individual filaments to measure their stiffness.

The white mushroom filaments behaved like rubber bands, averaging about 18 megapascals in stiffness – similar to natural rubber. The thicker skeletal filaments in maitake measured around 560 megapascals, more than 30 times stiffer and approaching the stiffness of high-density polyethylene – the rigid plastic used in cutting boards and some water pipes.

Two mushroom photos, the left is a bracket mushroom with many leaflike structures attached together, the right is button mushrooms which are spherical caps with conical stems. — The two mushrooms tested include the maitake, left, and the button mushroom.
Lance Cheung/USDA and edenpictures/Flickr, CC BY

But chemistry is only half the story. When we squeezed entire chunks, the direction we squeezed in mattered even more for the maitake. Pressing in line with its parallel skeletal filaments made the block 30 times stiffer than pressing across the grain. By contrast, the tangled filaments in white mushrooms felt equally soft from every angle.

A digital mushroom and twisting the threads

To separate geometry from chemistry, we converted snapshots from the microscope into a computer model using a 3D Voronoi network – a pattern that mimics the walls between bubbles in a foam. Think of ping-pong balls crammed in a box: Each ball is a cell, and the walls between cells become our simulated filaments.

We assigned those filaments by the stiffness values measured in the lab, then virtually rotated the whole network to angles of 0 degrees, 30 degrees, 60 degrees, 90 degrees and completely random.

Horizontal (0 degrees) filaments flexed like a spring mattress. Vertical (90 degrees) filaments supported weight almost as firmly as dense wood. Simply tilting the network to 60 degrees nearly doubled its stiffness compared with 0 degrees – all without changing a single chemical ingredient.

A diagram showing five arrangements of fibers, where the fibers are tilted different degrees. — The researchers modeled structures with different fiber orientations to see which are the strongest: (a) represents a horizontal fiber orientation, (b) a 30-degree fiber orientation, (c) a 60-degree fiber orientation, (d) a vertical fiber orientation, and (e) a random fiber orientation.
Mohamed Khalil Elhachimi

Basically, we found that orientation alone could turn a mushy sponge into something that stands up to serious pressure. That suggests manufacturers could make strong, lightweight, biodegradable parts – such as shoe insoles, protective packaging and even interior panels for cars – simply by guiding how a fungus grows rather than by mixing in harder additives.

Greener materials – and beyond

Startups already grow “leather” made from mycelium – the threadlike fungal network – for handbags, and mycelium foam as a Styrofoam replacement.

Guiding fungi to lay their filaments in strategic directions could push performance much higher, opening doors in sectors where strength-to-weight ratio is king: think sporting goods cores, building-insulation panels or lightweight fillers inside aircraft panels.

The same digital tool kit also works for metal or polymer lattices printed layer by layer. Swap the filament properties in the model, let the algorithm pick the best angles, and then feed that layout into a 3D printer.

One day, engineers might dial up an app that says something like, “I need a panel that’s stiff north-south but flexible east-west,” and the program could spit out a filament map inspired by the humble maitake.

Our next step is to feed thousands of these virtual networks into a machine learning model so it can predict – or even invent – filament layouts that hit a targeted stiffness in any direction.

Meanwhile, biologists are exploring low-energy ways to coax real fungi to grow in neat rows, from steering nutrients toward one side of a petri dish to applying gentle electric fields that encourage filaments to align.

This study taught us that you don’t always need exotic chemistry to make a better material. Sometimes it’s all about how you line up the same old threads – just ask a mushroom.

Mohamed Khalil Elhachimi does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Examining mushrooms under microscopes can help engineers design stronger materials – https://theconversation.com/examining-mushrooms-under-microscopes-can-help-engineers-design-stronger-materials-260477

July 16, 2025

What is peer review? The role anonymous experts play in scrutinizing research before it gets published

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joshua Winowiecki, Assistant Professor of Nursing, Michigan State University

Reviewer 1: “This manuscript is a timely and important contribution to the field, with clear methodology and compelling results. I recommend publication with only minor revisions.”

Reviewer 2: “This manuscript is deeply flawed. The authors’ conclusions are not supported by data, and key literature is ignored. Major revisions are required before it can be considered.”

These lines could be pulled from almost any editorial decision letter in the world of academic publishing, sent from a journal to a researcher. One review praises the work, while another sees nothing but problems. For scholars, this kind of contradiction is common. Reviewer 2, in particular, has become something of a meme: an anonymous figure often blamed for delays, rejections or cryptic critiques that seem to miss the point.

But those disagreements are part of the peer-review process.

a robot holds a manuscript and says 'No. No. I don't like the font.' — A world of memes – like this one shared on Reddit – has sprung up about the ridiculous feedback provided by a mythical Reviewer #2.
Reddit/r/medicalschool

As a clinical nurse specialist, educator and scholar who reviews studies in nursing and health care and teaches others to do so critically as well, I’ve seen how peer review shapes not just what gets published, but what ultimately influences practice.

Peer review is the checkpoint where scientific claims are validated before they are shared with the world. Researchers and scholars submit their findings to academic journals, which invite other scholars with similar expertise – those are the peers – to assess the work. Reviewers look at the way the scholar designed the project, the methods they used and whether their conclusions stand up.

The point of peer review

This process isn’t new. Versions of peer review have been around for centuries. But the modern form – anonymous, structured and managed by journal editors – took hold after World War II. Today, it is central to how scientific publishing works, and nowhere more so than health, nursing and medicine. Research that survives review is more likely to be trusted and acted upon by health care practitioners and their patients.

Millions of research papers move through this process annually, and the number grows every year. The sheer volume means that peer review isn’t just quality control, it’s become a bottleneck, a filter of sorts, and a kind of collective judgment about what counts as credible.

In clinical fields, peer review also has a protective role. Before a study about a new medication, procedure or care model gains traction, it is typically evaluated by others in the field. The point isn’t to punish the authors – it’s to slow things down just enough to critically evaluate the work, catch mistakes, question assumptions and raise red flags. The reviewer’s work doesn’t always get credit, but it often changes what ends up in print.

So, even if you’ve never submitted a paper or read a scientific journal, peer-reviewed science still shows up in your life. It helps shape what treatments are available, what protocols and guidelines your nurse practitioner or physician uses, and what public health advice gets passed along on the news.

This doesn’t mean peer review always works. Plenty of papers get published despite serious limitations. And some of these flawed studies do real harm. But even scholars who complain about the system often still believe in it. In one international survey of medical researchers, a clear majority said they trusted peer-reviewed science, despite frustrations with how slow or inconsistent the process can be.

What actually happens when a paper is reviewed?

Before a manuscript lands in the hands of reviewers, it begins with the researchers themselves. Scientists investigate a question, gather and analyze their data and write up their findings, often with a particular journal in mind that publishes new work in their discipline. Once they submit their paper to the journal, the editorial process begins.

At this point, journal editors send it out to two or three reviewers who have relevant expertise. Reviewers read for clarity, accuracy, originality and usefulness. They offer comments about what’s missing, what needs to be explained more carefully, and whether the findings seem valid. Sometimes the feedback is collegial and helpful. Sometimes it’s not.

high angle of woman marking papers with laptop in background — Peer reviewers’ comments can help researchers revise and strengthen their work.
AJ_Watt/E+ via Getty Images

Here is where Reviewer 2 enters the lore of academic life. This is the critic who seems especially hard to please, who misreads the argument, or demands rewrites that would reshape the entire project. But even these kinds of reviews serve a purpose. They show how work might be received more broadly. And many times they flag weaknesses the author hadn’t seen.

Review is slow. Most reviewers aren’t paid, with nearly 75% reporting they receive no compensation or formal recognition for their efforts. They do this work on top of their regular clinical, teaching or research responsibilities. And not every editor has the time or capacity to sort through conflicting feedback or to moderate tone. The result is a process that can feel uneven, opaque, and, at times, unfair.

It doesn’t always catch what it is supposed to. Peer review is better at catching sloppy thinking than it is at detecting fraud. If data is fabricated or manipulated, a reviewer may not have the tools, or the time, to figure that out. In recent years, a growing number of published papers have been retracted after concerns about plagiarism or faked results. That trend has shaken confidence in the system and raised questions about what more journals should be doing before publication.

Imperfect but indispensable

Even though the current peer-review system has its shortcomings, most researchers would argue that science is better off than it would be without the level of scrutiny peer review provides. The challenge now is how to make peer review better.

Some journals are experimenting with publishing reviewer comments alongside articles. Other are trying systems where feedback continues after publication. There are also proposals to use artificial intelligence to help flag inconsistencies or potential errors before human reviewers even begin.

These efforts are promising but still in the early stages of development and adoption. For most fields, peer review remains a basic requirement for legitimacy, while some, such as law and high-energy physics, have alternate methods of communicating their findings. Peer review assures a reader that a journal article’s claim has been tested, scrutinized and revised.

Peer review doesn’t guarantee truth. But it does invite challenge, foster transparency, offer reflection and force revision. That’s often where the real work of science begins.

Even if Reviewer 2 still has notes.

Joshua Winowiecki does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What is peer review? The role anonymous experts play in scrutinizing research before it gets published – https://theconversation.com/what-is-peer-review-the-role-anonymous-experts-play-in-scrutinizing-research-before-it-gets-published-258255

July 16, 2025

Love IRL: a new Quarter Life series on modern dating from The Conversation

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Anna Walker, Senior Arts + Culture Editor

None of the cultural love stories of the 2000s started with a swipe. Friends taught us that your social circle could double as a dating pool. The Office proved that love could blossom by the water cooler, and in High School Musical the perfect match could be the new girl at school.

But in the years since, apps have changed the way we date. The old-fashioned meet-cute was replaced by swipes, and slow-burn feelings were forgotten in favour of instant digital chemistry. It came with some benefits. Gone were the days when your romantic options were limited to bad set-ups, overly flirty colleagues, or trying to catch the eye of the hottie reading on the train. And introverts could pursue connections without the anxiety of approaching someone in a noisy bar or making the first move with a friend. But there were losses too.

While the convenience of dating apps expanded our horizons, they also stripped away some of the spontaneity and authenticity of in-person connections. The rush of emotions tied to real-life interactions – the spark of chemistry when eyes meet across a room or the thrill of an unexpected conversation – has become less frequent. Swiping left and right creates a kind of detachment, where it’s easier to dismiss someone with a flick of the thumb than to take a moment to truly get to know them. What we gained in options, we lost in meaningful connections.

Now another love revolution is on the horizon as algorithms and AI start to play an ever-growing role in how we form and navigate our relationships. Whether you’re single, dating, married or somewhere in between, our love lives are increasingly mediated by technology.

This is especially true for those of us in our 20s and 30s, who grew up with the promise of finding romance in real life but came of age as the dating app revolution began in earnest. Which is where Love IRL, a new Quarter Life series from The Conversation, comes in. These research-backed articles break down the complexities of modern love, from decoding mixed signals to balancing independence with intimacy. Along the way we’ll help you navigate the ghosts, love-bombers, breadcrumbers and catfishers and strive for more meaningful connections – offline and on.

Some of the topics you’ll read about include how ditching the wishlists can help you find meaningful romantic relationships, how AI wingmen are influencing online dating, and how rising living costs are changing the way we date, live and love.

Thoughts? Relationship woes? Get in touch at quarterlife@theconversation.com

These research-backed articles break down the complexities of modern love to help you build meaningful connections, no matter your relationship status.

– ref. Love IRL: a new Quarter Life series on modern dating from The Conversation – https://theconversation.com/love-irl-a-new-quarter-life-series-on-modern-dating-from-the-conversation-259474

July 16, 2025

Looking for meaningful romantic relationships? Start by diversifying your friendships and forgetting your wishlist

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mariko Visserman, Assistant Professor in Psychology, University of Sussex

When you’re looking for a relationship, chances are you’ll start off with a wishlist for your ideal partner. Maybe someone who is attractive or wealthy, someone who likes the same movies and the outdoors. Seems like a solid starting point, right? The problem is that in the real world, these wishlists are rarely helpful. And how realistic is the idea that one person can fulfil all our needs in the first place?

In 2017, researchers conducted a large speed-dating study. They wanted to see how well the preferences people indicated for a potential partner predicted who they wanted to see again after the event.

The researchers were left with nothing: people’s wishlists did not predict who they actually liked. Instead, they suggested that the best predictor of whether you like someone is seeing how they make you feel when you interact with them. Do you feel comfortable in their presence? Do they make you laugh?

The scientific evidence suggests that you have to meet people in the flesh if you want to find your match.

These research-backed articles break down the complexities of modern love to help you build meaningful connections, no matter your relationship status.

People used to find their romantic partner by tapping into their social networks – through friends, family, or the people they met in their daily lives. Nowadays, we often look for a romantic partner using online dating platforms, which allow us to access a larger network of potential romantic partners than ever before.

This apparent abundance may encourage a critical comparison with your wishlist and you may spend a lot of time swiping through profiles of potential partners, without initiating meeting them.

Research suggests that doing so can leave you feeling paralysed by an overload of choice and less optimistic about your chances. Research also shows that people tend to have fewer matches as the number of profiles on offer increases.

The researchers of this paradox suggest that you may be wise to put yourself on a dating diet: only looking at a limited number of profiles each day and exploring them with a curious mind. Then, when contact is established and you feel positive about the initial interaction, the real experiment begins.

When you spend a long time interacting online you may construct an idealised version of your potential partner and what you hope they’re like. That leaves you all the more likely to be disappointed when meeting them in person, as it’s easy for them to fall short of your expectations.

Woman smiling at her phone — When you spend long time interacting online you may construct an idealised version of your potential partner.
dodotone/Shutterstock

A better strategy would be to meet them in the flesh with a curious mind, before becoming overly invested in an online persona that is not a fair representation of what the other person may be like.

Taking it offline

Whether you will go on to have a satisfying relationship in the long run depends more than anything on your relationship expectations and behaviour.

Being kind and attentive to each other’s goals and needs ensures each partner’s happiness and will help weather any challenge, small or large, that couples inevitably face. But here too, technology may disrupt your mindful awareness of others – for example being on your phone in the presence of your partner – posing a risk to enjoying relationships.

Couples today also seem to have historically high expectations for their partner to help them fulfil all their goals and needs. You may want a partner to be a passionate lover, your best friend, your motivational coach and help you achieve personal growth.

In other words, people’s wishlists people carry into relationships too, as we long for a partner to fulfil all our needs.

Girl and boy feeding each other crisps — Diversifying your friendships can put less pressure on your romantic connection.
Dupe/Daniel Bughiu

Demanding all of this from one partner can place too much pressure on the relationships, rather than satisfying your needs. You may be left with a dissatisfying relationship that falls short of your expectations.

In some ways, we may all benefit from adopting lower expectations when looking for a partner and when being with them long term. This may help us appreciate them instead of taking their support and kind acts for granted.

It’s also a good idea to diversify your relationships. Having other important close (and even less close) relationships can help fulfil some needs your partner may not be best suited to meet, such as friends who like the same movies you do or who like to explore the outdoors together.

Research has shown that a greater diversity of relationships benefits happiness, as different relationships can serve different roles in fulfilling your needs, which may take some pressure off “the one” fulfilling all your needs.

Putting some brakes on your expectations for a romantic partner, when looking for a partner and when sharing your life with them, may help you to see more clearly who they are and appreciate what they contribute to your life.

Mariko Visserman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Looking for meaningful romantic relationships? Start by diversifying your friendships and forgetting your wishlist – https://theconversation.com/looking-for-meaningful-romantic-relationships-start-by-diversifying-your-friendships-and-forgetting-your-wishlist-254022

July 16, 2025

AI can be your wingman when online dating – but should you let it?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natasha McKeever, Lecturer in Applied Ethics, University of Leeds

Many dating app companies are enthusiastic about incorporating generative AI into their products. Whitney Wolfe Herd, founder of dating app Bumble, wants gen-AI to “help create more healthy and equitable relationships”. In her vision of the near future, people will have AI dating concierges who could “date” other people’s dating concierges for them, to find out which pairings were most compatible.

Dating app Grindr is developing an AI wingman, which it hopes to be up and running by 2027. Match Group, owner of popular dating apps including Tinder, Hinge and OK Cupid, have also expressed keen interest in using gen-AI in their products, believing recent advances in AI technology “have the power to be transformational, making it more seamless and engaging for users to participate in dating apps”. One of the ways they think gen-AI can do this is by enhancing “the authenticity of human connections”.

Use of gen-AI in online dating is not just some futuristic possibility, though. It’s already here.

Want to enhance your photos or present yourself in a different style? There are plenty of online tools for that. Similarly, if you want AI to help “craft the perfect, attention-grabbing bio” for you, it can do that. AI can even help you with making conversation, by analysing your chat history and suggesting ways to reply.

Extra help

It isn’t just dating app companies who are enthusiastic about AI use in dating apps either. A recent survey carried out by Cosmopolitan magazine and Bumble of 5,000 gen-Zers and millennials found that 69% of respondents were excited about “the ways AI could make dating easier and more efficient”.

An even higher proportion (86%) “believe it could help solve pervasive dating fatigue”. A surprising 86% of men and 77% of the women surveyed would share their message history with AI to help guide their dating app conversations.

Dating today can feel like a mix of endless swipes, red flags and shifting expectations. From decoding mixed signals to balancing independence with intimacy, relationships in your 20s and 30s come with unique challenges.Love IRL is the latest series from Quarter Life that explores it all.

These research-backed articles break down the complexities of modern love to help you build meaningful connections, no matter your relationship status.

It’s not hard to see why AI is so appealing for dating app users and providers. Dating apps seem to be losing their novelty: many users are reportedly abandoning them due to so-called “dating app fatigue” – feeling bored and burnt out with dating apps.

Apps and users might be hopeful that gen-AI can make dating apps fun again, or if not fun, then at least that it will make them actually lead to dates. Some AI dating companions claim to get you ten times more dates and better dates at that. Given that men tend to get fewer matches on dating apps than women, it’s also not surprising that we’re seeing more enthusiasm from men than women about the possibilities AI could bring.

Talk of gen-AI in connection to online dating gives rise to many ethical concerns. We at the Ethical Dating Online Network, an international network of over 30 multi-disciplinary academics interested in how online dating could be more ethical, think that dating app companies need to convincingly answer these worries before rushing new products to market. Here are a few standout issues.

Pitfalls of AI dating

Technology companies correctly identify some contemporary social issues, such as loneliness, anxiety at social interactions, and concerns about dating culture, as hindering people’s dating lives.

But turning to more technology to solve these issues puts us at risk of losing the skills we need to make close relationships work. The more we can reach for gen-AI to guide our interactions, the less we might be tempted to practise on our own, or to take accountability for what we communicate. After all, an AI “wingman” is of little use when meeting in person.

Also, AI tools risk entrenching much of dating culture that people find stressful. Norms around “banter”, attractiveness or flirting can make the search for intimacy seem like a competitive battleground. The way AI works – learning from existing conversations – means that it will reproduce these less desirable aspects.

Woman looking annoyed and upset at phone — Gen-AI may reproduce the negative elements of online dating culture.
fizkes/Shutterstock

Instead of embracing those norms and ideals, and trying to equip everyone with the tools to seemingly meet impossibly high standards, dating app companies could do more to “de-escalate” dating culture: make it calmer, more ordinary and help people be vulnerable. For example, they could rethink how they charge for their products, encourage a culture of honesty, and look at alternatives to the “swiping” interfaces.

The possibility of misrepresentation is another concern. People have always massaged the truth when it comes to dating, and the internet has made this easier. But the more we are encouraged to use AI tools, and as they are embedded in dating apps, bad actors can more simply take advantage of the vulnerable.

An AI-generated photo, or conversation, can lead to exchanges of bank details, grooming and sexual exploitation.

Stopping short of fraud, however, is the looming intimate authenticity crisis. Online dating awash with AI generated material risks becoming a murky experience. A sincere user might struggle to identify like-minded matches on apps where use of AI is common.

This interpretive burden is annoying for anyone, but it will exacerbate the existing frustrations women, more so than men, experience on dating apps as they navigate spaces full of with timewasting, abuse, harassment and unwanted sexualisation.

Indeed, women might worry that AI will turbo-charge the ability of some men to prove a nuisance online. Bots, automation, conversation-generating tools, can help some men to lay claim to the attention of many women simultaneously.

AI tools may seem like harmless fun, or a useful timesaver. Some people may even wholeheartedly accept that AI generated content is not “authentic” and love it anyway.

Without clear guardrails in place, however, and more effort by app companies to provide informed choices based on transparency about how their apps work, any potential benefits of AI will be obscured by the negative impact it has to intimacy online.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. AI can be your wingman when online dating – but should you let it? – https://theconversation.com/ai-can-be-your-wingman-when-online-dating-but-should-you-let-it-254666

July 16, 2025

Zonal pricing is dead – here’s how the UK should change its electricity system instead

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Cassandra Etter-Wenzel, DPhil Candidate in Energy Policy, University of Oxford

The UK government has decided against setting different prices for electricity based on the locations of consumers.

Zonal pricing would have categorised Britain into distinct zones, each with wholesale electricity prices that reflect how much power is generated locally, and how much demand there is for it. It would have raised prices in areas with lots of demand but low generation, like London, and lowered them where supply outstrips demand, such as in the turbine-rich Scottish Highlands.

This might have caused an immediate increase in the energy bills of already vulnerable households in some high-demand, low-generation areas, such as Tower Hamlets in London and Blackpool in north-west England.

But the idea was to encourage the construction of renewable energy to meet high demand in higher-priced zones, and prompt big electricity consumers to move to where electricity is cheaper. It was also intended to ease the need for new infrastructure to transmit electricity over long distances, like pylons. Australia, Norway and several EU nations already use this method.

The ultimate goal of zonal pricing was to make the price of electricity more accurately reflect generation and transmission costs. However, one thing has significantly inflated electricity prices in recent years, which this pricing method wouldn’t have addressed on its own: gas.

Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

Gas is expensive, even more so since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Britain’s electricity system operator brings power plants onto the system to meet demand in order of the lowest to highest marginal costs.

The point at which supply meets demand forms the wholesale price of electricity. Renewable sources, like wind and solar, have zero or very low marginal costs. But most of the time the wholesale price is set by gas plants, because they can readily fill a gap in supply but have high and erratic marginal costs (largely tied to what they pay for fuel).

We need another, cheaper technology to set the wholesale price of electricity. Batteries, which can store electricity over several hours, and options capable of storing energy for longer, such as compressed air and low-carbon hydrogen, could be just the thing.

The idea is simple: batteries can be charged at times when there is a lot of surplus electricity generation (on a bright, windy day, for example) and discharge it at times of peak demand (or when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow). This would entail grid operators (and ultimately, consumers) not having to pay gas plants to fire up when renewable generation cannot meet the shortfall.

Unfortunately, batteries comprised just 6% of Britain’s total electricity capacity in 2024. Investment in energy storage has lagged behind what the government forecasts is necessary to meet its 2030 clean power goals, but it is at least increasing.

Research shows that the more money that is invested in batteries, the more associated costs come down. If used instead of gas to stabilise the grid, energy storage could significantly lower the wholesale cost of the UK’s energy over time, and with the right balance of policies, household bills too. This would require subsidies to cover some of the cost of making and installing batteries, and planning mandates to build new renewables alongside new batteries.

Affordable and fair

The government could also try alternatives to zonal pricing. Wholesale electricity prices could reflect the “strike” price in renewable energy contracts. This is the price at which developers have agreed to build clean electricity generation projects, like wind farms. This would mean that gas no longer sets the wholesale price, but stable, predictable prices agreed years in advance, which would help to regulate the retail costs consumers pay.

Rows of solar panels in a rural area. — Solar arrays installed on farmland in Devon, southern England.
Pjhpix/Shutterstock

These types of reforms can help set efficient energy prices, which the government usually talks about as the price needed to encourage investment in new energy technologies. But just because prices are efficient, it doesn’t mean they’re fair. Some households struggle to afford their energy bills even when markets are working efficiently. So, when prices change to encourage cleaner energy, it can hit them harder.

The government should implement new policies and expand eligibility for existing measures to take the burden off energy-poor households. These include social tariffs, which offer discounted rates to vulnerable consumers, and discounts for blocks of electricity use when renewables are generating a lot of it.

Transition funds could help poorer households meet bills, while schemes to encourage home insulation and other improvements could see more homes with rooftop solar panels and battery storage.

This support, combined with increasing investment in energy storage and renewables, will lower the wholesale price of electricity over time – and make energy more affordable (and fair) for everyone.

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

Anupama Sen has previously received funding from the Quadrature Climate Foundation and Children’s Investment Fund Foundation.

Cassandra Etter-Wenzel and Sam Fankhauser do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Zonal pricing is dead – here’s how the UK should change its electricity system instead – https://theconversation.com/zonal-pricing-is-dead-heres-how-the-uk-should-change-its-electricity-system-instead-260985