The first US hub for experimental medical treatments is coming

Stay Ahead, Stay ONMINE

The first US hub for experimental medical treatments is coming

A bill that allows medical clinics to sell unproven treatments has been passed in Montana. Under the legislation, doctors can apply for a license to open an experimental treatment clinic and recommend and sell therapies not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to their patients. Once it’s signed by the governor, the law will be the most expansive in the country in allowing access to drugs that have not been fully tested. The bill allows for any drug produced in the state to be sold in it, providing it has been through phase I clinical trials—the initial, generally small, first-in-human studies that are designed to check that a new treatment is not harmful. These trials do not determine if the drug is effective. The bill, which was passed by the state legislature on April 29 and is expected to be signed by Governor Greg Gianforte, essentially expands on existing Right to Try legislation in the state. But while that law was originally designed to allow terminally ill people to access experimental drugs, the new bill was drafted and lobbied for by people interested in extending human lifespans—a group of longevity enthusiasts that includes scientists, libertarians, and influencers. These longevity enthusiasts are hoping Montana will serve as a test bed for opening up access to experimental drugs. “I see no reason why it couldn’t be adopted by most of the other states,” said Todd White, speaking to an audience of policymakers and others interested in longevity at an event late last month in Washington, DC. White, who helped develop the bill and directs a research organization focused on aging, added that “there are some things that can be done at the federal level to allow Right to Try laws to proliferate more readily.” Supporters of the bill say it gives individuals the freedom to make choices about their own bodies. At the same event, bioethicist Jessica Flanigan of the University of Richmond said she was “optimistic” about the measure, because “it’s great any time anybody is trying to give people back their medical autonomy.” Ultimately, they hope that the new law will enable people to try unproven drugs that might help them live longer, make it easier for Americans to try experimental treatments without having to travel abroad, and potentially turn Montana into a medical tourism hub. But ethicists and legal scholars aren’t as optimistic. “I hate it,” bioethicist Alison Bateman-House of New York University says of the bill. She and others are worried about the ethics of promoting and selling unproven treatments—and the risks of harm should something go wrong. Easy access? No drugs have been approved to treat human aging. Some in the longevity field believe that regulation has held back the development of such drugs. In the US, federal law requires that drugs be shown to be both safe and effective before they can be sold. That requirement was made law in the 1960s following the thalidomide tragedy, in which women who took the drug for morning sickness had babies with sometimes severe disabilities. Since then, the FDA has been responsible for the approval of new drugs. Typically, new drugs are put through a series of human trials. Phase I trials generally involve between 20 and 100 volunteers and are designed to check that the drug is safe for humans. If it is, the drug is then tested in larger groups of hundreds, and then thousands, of volunteers to assess the dose and whether it actually works. Once a drug is approved, people who are prescribed it are monitored for side effects. The entire process is slow, and it can last more than a decade—a particular pain point for people who are acutely aware of their own aging. But some exceptions have been made for people who are terminally ill under Right to Try laws. Those laws allow certain individuals to apply for access to experimental treatments that have been through phase I clinical trials but have not received FDA approval. Montana first passed a Right to Try law in 2015 (a federal law was passed around three years later). Then in 2023, the state expanded the law to include all patients there, not just those with terminal illnesses—meaning that any person in Montana could, in theory, take a drug that had been through only a phase I trial. At the time, this was cheered by many longevity enthusiasts—some of whom had helped craft the expanded measure. But practically, the change hasn’t worked out as they envisioned. “There was no licensing, no processing, no registration” for clinics that might want to offer those drugs, says White. “There needed to be another bill that provided regulatory clarity for service providers.” So the new legislation addresses “how clinics can set up shop in Montana,” says Dylan Livingston, founder and CEO of the Alliance for Longevity Initiatives, which hosted the DC event. Livingston built A4LI, as it’s known, a few years ago, as a lobbying group for the science of human aging and longevity. Livingston, who is exploring multiple approaches to improve both funding for scientific research and to change drug regulation, helped develop and push the 2023 bill in Montana with the support of State Senator Kenneth Bogner, he says. “I gave [Bogner] a menu of things that could be done at the state level … and he loved the idea” of turning Montana into a medical tourism hub, he says. After all, as things stand, plenty of Americans travel abroad to receive experimental treatments that cannot legally be sold in the US, including expensive, unproven stem cell and gene therapies, says Livingston. “If you’re going to go and get an experimental gene therapy, you might as well keep it in the country,” he says. Livingston has suggested that others might be interested in trying a novel drug designed to clear aged “senescent” cells from the body, which is currently entering phase II trials for an eye condition caused by diabetes. “One: let’s keep the money in the country, and two: if I was a millionaire getting an experimental gene therapy, I’d rather be in Montana than Honduras.” “Los Alamos for longevity” Honduras, in particular, has become something of a home base for longevity experiments. The island of Roatán is home to the Global Alliance for Regenerative Medicine clinic, which, along with various stem cell products, sells a controversial unproven “anti-aging” gene therapy for around $20,000 to customers including wealthy longevity influencer Bryan Johnson. Tech entrepreneur and longevity enthusiast Niklas Anzinger has also founded the city of Infinita in the region’s special economic zone of Próspera, a private city where residents are able to make their own suggestions for medical regulations. It’s the second time he’s built a community there as part of his effort to build a “Los Alamos for longevity” on the island, a place where biotech companies can develop therapies that slow or reverse human aging “at warp speed,” and where individuals are free to take those experimental treatments. (The first community, Vitalia, featured a biohacking lab, but came to an end following a disagreement between the two founders.) Anzinger collaborated with White, the longevity enthusiast who spoke at the A4LI event (and is an advisor to Infinita VC, Anzinger’s investment company), to help put together the new Montana bill. “He asked if I would help him try to advance the new bill, so that’s what we did for the last few months,” says White, who trained as an electrical engineer but left his career in telecommunications to work with an organization that uses blockchain to fund research into extending human lifespans. “Right to Try has always been this thing [for people] who are terminal[ly ill] and trying a Hail Mary approach to solving these things; now Right to Try laws are being used to allow you to access treatments earlier,” White told the audience at the A4LI event. “Making it so that people can use longevity medicines earlier is, I think, a very important thing.” The new bill largely sets out the “infrastructure” for clinics that want to sell experimental treatments, says White. It states that clinics will need to have a license, for example, and that this must be renewed on an annual basis. “Now somebody who actually wants to deliver drugs under the Right to Try law will be able to do so,” he says. The new legislation also protects prescribing doctors from disciplinary action. And it sets out requirements for informed consent that go further than those of existing Right to Try laws. Before a person takes an experimental drug under the new law, they will be required to provide a written consent that includes a list of approved alternative drugs and a description of the worst potential outcome. On the safe side “In the Montana law, we explicitly enhanced the requirements for informed consent,” Anzinger told an audience at the same A4LI event. This, along with the fact that the treatments will have been through phase I clinical trials, will help to keep people safe, he argued. “We have to treat this with a very large degree of responsibility,” he added. “We obviously don’t want to be killing people,” says Livingston. But he also adds that he, personally, won’t be signing up for any experimental treatments. “I want to be the 10 millionth, or even the 50 millionth, person to get the gene therapy,” he says. “I’m not that adventurous … I’ll let other people go first.” Others are indeed concerned that, for the “adventurous” people, these experimental treatments won’t necessarily be safe. Phase I trials are typically tiny, and they often involve less than 50 people, all of whom are typically in good health. A trial like that won’t tell you much about side effects that only show up in 5% of people, for example, or about interactions the drug might have with other medicines. Around 90% of drug candidates in clinical trials fail. And around 17% of drugs fail late-stage clinical trials because of safety concerns. Even those that make it all the way through clinical trials and get approved by the FDA can still end up being withdrawn from the market when rare but serious side effects show up. Between 1992 and 2023, 23 drugs that were given accelerated approval for cancer indications were later withdrawn from the market. And between 1950 and 2013, the reason for the withdrawal of 95 drugs was “death.” “It’s disturbing that they want to make drugs available after phase I testing,” says Sharona Hoffman, professor of law and bioethics at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. “This could endanger patients.” “Famously, the doctor’s first obligation is to first do no harm,” says Bateman-House. “If [a drug] has not been through clinical trials, how do you have any standing on which to think it isn’t going to do any harm?” But supporters of the bill argue that individuals can make their own decisions about risk. When speaking at the A4LI event, Flanigan introduced herself as a bioethicist before adding “but don’t hold it against me; we’re not all so bad.” She argued that current drug regulations impose a “massive amount of restrictions on your bodily rights and your medical freedom.” Why should public officials be the ones making decisions about what’s safe for people? Individuals, she argued, should be empowered to make those judgments themselves. Other ethicists counter that this isn’t an issue of people’s rights. There are lots of generally accepted laws about when we can access drugs, says Hoffman; people aren’t allowed to drink and drive because they might kill someone. “So, no, you don’t have a right to ingest everything you want if there are risks associated with it.” The idea that individuals have a right to access experimental treatments has in fact failed in US courts in the past, says Carl Coleman, a bioethicist and legal scholar at Seton Hall in New Jersey. He points to a case from 20 years ago: In the early 2000s, Frank Burroughs founded the Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs. His daughter, Abigail Burroughs, had head and neck cancer, and she had tried and failed to access experimental drugs. In 2003, about two years after Abigail’s death, the group sued the FDA, arguing that people with terminal cancer have a constitutionally protected right to access experimental, unapproved treatments, once those treatments have been through phase I trials. In 2007, however, a court rejected that argument, determining that terminally ill individuals do not have a constitutional right to experimental drugs. Bateman-House also questions a provision in the Montana bill that claims to make treatments more equitable. It states that “experimental treatment centers” should allocate 2% of their net annual profits “to support access to experimental treatments and healthcare for qualifying Montana residents.” Bateman-House says she’s never seen that kind of language in a bill before. It may sound positive, but it could in practice introduce even more risk to the local community. “On the one hand, I like equity,” she says. “On the other hand, I don’t like equity to snake oil.” After all, the doctors prescribing these drugs won’t know if they will work. It is never ethical to make somebody pay for a treatment when you don’t have any idea whether it will work, Bateman-House adds. “That’s how the US system has been structured: There’s no profit without evidence of safety and efficacy.” The clinics are coming Any clinics that offer experimental treatments in Montana will only be allowed to sell drugs that have been made within the state, says Coleman. “Federal law requires any drug that is going to be distributed in interstate commerce to have FDA approval,” he says. White isn’t too worried about that. Montana already has manufacturing facilities for biotech and pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer. “That was one of the specific advantages [of focusing] on Montana, because everything can be done in state,” he says. He also believes that the current administration is “predisposed” to change federal laws around interstate drug manufacturing. (FDA commissioner Marty Makary has been a vocal critic of the agency and the pace at which it approves new drugs.) At any rate, the clinics are coming to Montana, says Livingston. “We have half a dozen that are interested, and maybe two or three that are definitively going to set up shop out there.” He won’t name names, but he says some of the interested clinicians already have clinics in the US, while others are abroad. Mac Davis—founder and CEO of Minicircle, the company that developed the controversial “anti-aging” gene therapy—told MIT Technology Review he was “looking into it.” “I think this can be an opportunity for America and Montana to really kind of corner the market when it comes to medical tourism,” says Livingston. “There is no other place in the world with this sort of regulatory environment.”

A bill that allows medical clinics to sell unproven treatments has been passed in Montana.

Under the legislation, doctors can apply for a license to open an experimental treatment clinic and recommend and sell therapies not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to their patients. Once it’s signed by the governor, the law will be the most expansive in the country in allowing access to drugs that have not been fully tested.

The bill allows for any drug produced in the state to be sold in it, providing it has been through phase I clinical trials—the initial, generally small, first-in-human studies that are designed to check that a new treatment is not harmful. These trials do not determine if the drug is effective.

The bill, which was passed by the state legislature on April 29 and is expected to be signed by Governor Greg Gianforte, essentially expands on existing Right to Try legislation in the state. But while that law was originally designed to allow terminally ill people to access experimental drugs, the new bill was drafted and lobbied for by people interested in extending human lifespans—a group of longevity enthusiasts that includes scientists, libertarians, and influencers.

These longevity enthusiasts are hoping Montana will serve as a test bed for opening up access to experimental drugs. “I see no reason why it couldn’t be adopted by most of the other states,” said Todd White, speaking to an audience of policymakers and others interested in longevity at an event late last month in Washington, DC. White, who helped develop the bill and directs a research organization focused on aging, added that “there are some things that can be done at the federal level to allow Right to Try laws to proliferate more readily.”

Supporters of the bill say it gives individuals the freedom to make choices about their own bodies. At the same event, bioethicist Jessica Flanigan of the University of Richmond said she was “optimistic” about the measure, because “it’s great any time anybody is trying to give people back their medical autonomy.”

Ultimately, they hope that the new law will enable people to try unproven drugs that might help them live longer, make it easier for Americans to try experimental treatments without having to travel abroad, and potentially turn Montana into a medical tourism hub.

But ethicists and legal scholars aren’t as optimistic. “I hate it,” bioethicist Alison Bateman-House of New York University says of the bill. She and others are worried about the ethics of promoting and selling unproven treatments—and the risks of harm should something go wrong.

Easy access?

No drugs have been approved to treat human aging. Some in the longevity field believe that regulation has held back the development of such drugs. In the US, federal law requires that drugs be shown to be both safe and effective before they can be sold. That requirement was made law in the 1960s following the thalidomide tragedy, in which women who took the drug for morning sickness had babies with sometimes severe disabilities. Since then, the FDA has been responsible for the approval of new drugs.

Typically, new drugs are put through a series of human trials. Phase I trials generally involve between 20 and 100 volunteers and are designed to check that the drug is safe for humans. If it is, the drug is then tested in larger groups of hundreds, and then thousands, of volunteers to assess the dose and whether it actually works. Once a drug is approved, people who are prescribed it are monitored for side effects. The entire process is slow, and it can last more than a decade—a particular pain point for people who are acutely aware of their own aging.

But some exceptions have been made for people who are terminally ill under Right to Try laws. Those laws allow certain individuals to apply for access to experimental treatments that have been through phase I clinical trials but have not received FDA approval.

Montana first passed a Right to Try law in 2015 (a federal law was passed around three years later). Then in 2023, the state expanded the law to include all patients there, not just those with terminal illnesses—meaning that any person in Montana could, in theory, take a drug that had been through only a phase I trial.

At the time, this was cheered by many longevity enthusiasts—some of whom had helped craft the expanded measure.

But practically, the change hasn’t worked out as they envisioned. “There was no licensing, no processing, no registration” for clinics that might want to offer those drugs, says White. “There needed to be another bill that provided regulatory clarity for service providers.”

So the new legislation addresses “how clinics can set up shop in Montana,” says Dylan Livingston, founder and CEO of the Alliance for Longevity Initiatives, which hosted the DC event. Livingston built A4LI, as it’s known, a few years ago, as a lobbying group for the science of human aging and longevity.

Livingston, who is exploring multiple approaches to improve both funding for scientific research and to change drug regulation, helped develop and push the 2023 bill in Montana with the support of State Senator Kenneth Bogner, he says. “I gave [Bogner] a menu of things that could be done at the state level … and he loved the idea” of turning Montana into a medical tourism hub, he says.

After all, as things stand, plenty of Americans travel abroad to receive experimental treatments that cannot legally be sold in the US, including expensive, unproven stem cell and gene therapies, says Livingston.

“If you’re going to go and get an experimental gene therapy, you might as well keep it in the country,” he says. Livingston has suggested that others might be interested in trying a novel drug designed to clear aged “senescent” cells from the body, which is currently entering phase II trials for an eye condition caused by diabetes. “One: let’s keep the money in the country, and two: if I was a millionaire getting an experimental gene therapy, I’d rather be in Montana than Honduras.”

“Los Alamos for longevity”

Honduras, in particular, has become something of a home base for longevity experiments. The island of Roatán is home to the Global Alliance for Regenerative Medicine clinic, which, along with various stem cell products, sells a controversial unproven “anti-aging” gene therapy for around $20,000 to customers including wealthy longevity influencer Bryan Johnson.

Tech entrepreneur and longevity enthusiast Niklas Anzinger has also founded the city of Infinita in the region’s special economic zone of Próspera, a private city where residents are able to make their own suggestions for medical regulations. It’s the second time he’s built a community there as part of his effort to build a “Los Alamos for longevity” on the island, a place where biotech companies can develop therapies that slow or reverse human aging “at warp speed,” and where individuals are free to take those experimental treatments. (The first community, Vitalia, featured a biohacking lab, but came to an end following a disagreement between the two founders.)

Anzinger collaborated with White, the longevity enthusiast who spoke at the A4LI event (and is an advisor to Infinita VC, Anzinger’s investment company), to help put together the new Montana bill. “He asked if I would help him try to advance the new bill, so that’s what we did for the last few months,” says White, who trained as an electrical engineer but left his career in telecommunications to work with an organization that uses blockchain to fund research into extending human lifespans.

“Right to Try has always been this thing [for people] who are terminal[ly ill] and trying a Hail Mary approach to solving these things; now Right to Try laws are being used to allow you to access treatments earlier,” White told the audience at the A4LI event. “Making it so that people can use longevity medicines earlier is, I think, a very important thing.”

The new bill largely sets out the “infrastructure” for clinics that want to sell experimental treatments, says White. It states that clinics will need to have a license, for example, and that this must be renewed on an annual basis.

“Now somebody who actually wants to deliver drugs under the Right to Try law will be able to do so,” he says. The new legislation also protects prescribing doctors from disciplinary action.

And it sets out requirements for informed consent that go further than those of existing Right to Try laws. Before a person takes an experimental drug under the new law, they will be required to provide a written consent that includes a list of approved alternative drugs and a description of the worst potential outcome.

On the safe side

“In the Montana law, we explicitly enhanced the requirements for informed consent,” Anzinger told an audience at the same A4LI event. This, along with the fact that the treatments will have been through phase I clinical trials, will help to keep people safe, he argued. “We have to treat this with a very large degree of responsibility,” he added.

“We obviously don’t want to be killing people,” says Livingston.

But he also adds that he, personally, won’t be signing up for any experimental treatments. “I want to be the 10 millionth, or even the 50 millionth, person to get the gene therapy,” he says. “I’m not that adventurous … I’ll let other people go first.”

Others are indeed concerned that, for the “adventurous” people, these experimental treatments won’t necessarily be safe. Phase I trials are typically tiny, and they often involve less than 50 people, all of whom are typically in good health. A trial like that won’t tell you much about side effects that only show up in 5% of people, for example, or about interactions the drug might have with other medicines.

Around 90% of drug candidates in clinical trials fail. And around 17% of drugs fail late-stage clinical trials because of safety concerns. Even those that make it all the way through clinical trials and get approved by the FDA can still end up being withdrawn from the market when rare but serious side effects show up. Between 1992 and 2023, 23 drugs that were given accelerated approval for cancer indications were later withdrawn from the market. And between 1950 and 2013, the reason for the withdrawal of 95 drugs was “death.”

“It’s disturbing that they want to make drugs available after phase I testing,” says Sharona Hoffman, professor of law and bioethics at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. “This could endanger patients.”

“Famously, the doctor’s first obligation is to first do no harm,” says Bateman-House. “If [a drug] has not been through clinical trials, how do you have any standing on which to think it isn’t going to do any harm?”

But supporters of the bill argue that individuals can make their own decisions about risk. When speaking at the A4LI event, Flanigan introduced herself as a bioethicist before adding “but don’t hold it against me; we’re not all so bad.” She argued that current drug regulations impose a “massive amount of restrictions on your bodily rights and your medical freedom.” Why should public officials be the ones making decisions about what’s safe for people? Individuals, she argued, should be empowered to make those judgments themselves.

Other ethicists counter that this isn’t an issue of people’s rights. There are lots of generally accepted laws about when we can access drugs, says Hoffman; people aren’t allowed to drink and drive because they might kill someone. “So, no, you don’t have a right to ingest everything you want if there are risks associated with it.”

The idea that individuals have a right to access experimental treatments has in fact failed in US courts in the past, says Carl Coleman, a bioethicist and legal scholar at Seton Hall in New Jersey.

He points to a case from 20 years ago: In the early 2000s, Frank Burroughs founded the Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs. His daughter, Abigail Burroughs, had head and neck cancer, and she had tried and failed to access experimental drugs. In 2003, about two years after Abigail’s death, the group sued the FDA, arguing that people with terminal cancer have a constitutionally protected right to access experimental, unapproved treatments, once those treatments have been through phase I trials. In 2007, however, a court rejected that argument, determining that terminally ill individuals do not have a constitutional right to experimental drugs.

Bateman-House also questions a provision in the Montana bill that claims to make treatments more equitable. It states that “experimental treatment centers” should allocate 2% of their net annual profits “to support access to experimental treatments and healthcare for qualifying Montana residents.” Bateman-House says she’s never seen that kind of language in a bill before. It may sound positive, but it could in practice introduce even more risk to the local community. “On the one hand, I like equity,” she says. “On the other hand, I don’t like equity to snake oil.”

After all, the doctors prescribing these drugs won’t know if they will work. It is never ethical to make somebody pay for a treatment when you don’t have any idea whether it will work, Bateman-House adds. “That’s how the US system has been structured: There’s no profit without evidence of safety and efficacy.”

The clinics are coming

Any clinics that offer experimental treatments in Montana will only be allowed to sell drugs that have been made within the state, says Coleman. “Federal law requires any drug that is going to be distributed in interstate commerce to have FDA approval,” he says.

White isn’t too worried about that. Montana already has manufacturing facilities for biotech and pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer. “That was one of the specific advantages [of focusing] on Montana, because everything can be done in state,” he says. He also believes that the current administration is “predisposed” to change federal laws around interstate drug manufacturing. (FDA commissioner Marty Makary has been a vocal critic of the agency and the pace at which it approves new drugs.)

At any rate, the clinics are coming to Montana, says Livingston. “We have half a dozen that are interested, and maybe two or three that are definitively going to set up shop out there.” He won’t name names, but he says some of the interested clinicians already have clinics in the US, while others are abroad.

Mac Davis—founder and CEO of Minicircle, the company that developed the controversial “anti-aging” gene therapy—told MIT Technology Review he was “looking into it.”

“I think this can be an opportunity for America and Montana to really kind of corner the market when it comes to medical tourism,” says Livingston. “There is no other place in the world with this sort of regulatory environment.”

Stay Ahead

Explore More Insights

Stay ahead with more perspectives on cutting-edge power, infrastructure, energy, bitcoin and AI solutions. Explore these articles to uncover strategies and insights shaping the future of industries.

NOAA stops tracking cost of extreme weather and climate disasters

Dive Brief: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced Thursday its National Centers for Environmental Information would stop tracking the cost of extreme weather and climate disasters in its Billion Dollar Weather and Climate Disaster database. The product is being retired “in alignment with evolving priorities, statutory mandates, and staffing

Network data hygiene: The critical first step to effective AI agents

Many network teams manage some 15 to 30 different dashboards to track data across all the components in an environment, struggling to cobble together relevant information across domains and spending hours troubleshooting a single incident. In short, they are drowning in data. Artificial intelligence tools—and specifically AI agents—promise to ease

Key takeaways from IBM Think partner event

The first week of May means flowers from April showers and that it’s time for IBM Think in Boston. The first day of the event has historically been the Partner Plus day, which is devoted to content for IBM partners, which include ISVs, technology partners and resellers. The 2025 keynote

LandBridge Posts Higher Revenue

LandBridge Company LLC has reported $44 million in revenue for the first quarter of 2025, up from $36.5 million for the fourth quarter of 2024 and $19 million for the corresponding quarter a year prior. The company attributed the sequential increase to increases in surface use royalties of $6.8 million,

Amid record demand rise, efficiency and demand response can lower Texas power bills: Aurora

Expanded use of energy efficiency and demand response could help lower Texas power bills while also boosting grid reliability, according to a May 6 paper from Aurora Energy Research. Electrification, data centers and industrial growth are driving energy demand higher across the U.S., and the trend is particularly evident in Texas. In April, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas published a load forecast that predicted nearly 60 GW of new peak summer demand by 2031. Electricity supplied by the grid is expected to rise from 486 TWh this year to 1,038 TWh in 2031. Retrieved from Electric Reliability Council of Texas. “Texas’s economic momentum is driving a sharp rise in electricity demand, creating both a challenge and an opportunity,” Olivier Beaufils, head of USA Central for Aurora, said in a statement. “For the average Texas household, converting to a heat pump instead of resistance heat can decrease the yearly cost of electricity by $424, approximately 45%,” the Aurora report found. “Increased demand response participation can save industrial consumers $1.9M/yr and residential consumers $225 per year.” If 7.7 GW of demand side response capacity, including both residential and industrial consumers, is added to the ERCOT system by 2040, it would reduce the need for new gas-fired generation by 1 GW, the report said. Texas has been trying to build more gas plants through a state backed loan program, but the Texas Energy Fund has seen 35% of its proposed dispatchable capacity canceled or withdrawn amid escalating project costs and supply chain challenges. “Energy efficiency and demand response programs provide critical additional levers for Texas to keep pace with the demand while cutting costs for consumers and strengthening the reliability of the grid,” Beaufils said.

Lawmakers spar over IRA credits in budget hearings

Dive Brief: As Republicans work to advance budget legislation that would make deep cuts to the Inflation Reduction Act, members of the House are debating the issue in committee markup hearings, with Democrats arguing that early phaseouts of IRA credits would harm developers and raise energy bills. The IRA is anticipated to cost taxpayers between $780 billion and $2 trillion over its first ten years, making it an appealing target for Republicans looking to reduce federal spending. However, a large portion of IRA spending has so far benefited Republican districts, and some Republicans have advocated for careful cuts to the legislation – including Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., who warned against a wind down of the 45U nuclear production tax credit during the House Ways and Means Committee markup Tuesday. Dive Insight: “Nuclear power represents nearly a quarter of New York’s electrical supply, and my district in Western and Central New York is home to all four of New York’s reactors,” Tenney said. “Those reactors are critical to the baseload power of our region and our state and should be considered separately from our conversations on renewable energy.” In the House Energy and Commerce Committee markup on Tuesday, Rep. Kathy Castor, D-Fla., proposed an amendment to the committee’s budget that would “delay any provisions in this bill from taking effect until the Energy Information Administration studies the impact of the bill and the actions taken so far by the Trump administration.” “People need to know about this,” she said. “You can’t rush a bill like this, with such a large impact, through without people understanding.” Rep. Bob Latta, R-Ohio, opposed the amendment, saying the “best way to lower energy prices is to expand use of America’s abundant energy resources — gas, oil, coal, hydropower — that provide affordable reliable power and fuels, and

IFMA adds its name to Energy Star fight

The International Facility Management Association last week called on Congress to step in and stop the Trump administration from ending Energy Star, the federal government’s program for encouraging the manufacture of energy efficient appliances and systems. “Consumers and businesses alike rely on Energy Star ratings when making informed decisions about appliances and equipment,” Dean Stanberry, immediate past chair of IFMA, said in a statement May 8. “Eliminating this publicly funded resource without consulting the industries and individuals who depend on it is shortsighted and irresponsible.” The administration hasn’t said it wants to eliminate the program, but in its fiscal year 2026 budget request for the Environmental Protection Agency, it proposes to eliminate all funding for the Atmospheric Protection Program, which administers Energy Star. “The Atmospheric Protection Program is an overreach of Government authority that imposes unnecessary and radical climate change regulations on businesses and stifles economic growth,” the administration says in its budget proposal. “By prioritizing climate change over job creation and energy independence, the program has burdened American industries with costly mandates, ultimately hurting consumers and taxpayers. This program is eliminated in the 2026 Budget.” In response to news organizations’ request for clarification on the plan, EPA was noncommittal. “The EPA is delivering organizational improvements to the personnel structure that will directly benefit the American people and better advance the agency’s core mission, while Powering the Great American Comeback,” the agency told CBS News in an email. The Competitive Enterprise Institute, an anti-regulation organization, says the issue isn’t the program’s effectiveness but whether its energy-saving mission is within the proper scope of government. “Green purchasing programs assume the federal government needs to meddle in the marketplace by providing its seal of approval on what it deems to be environmentally satisfactory products,” the organization says in a white paper. “If

USA DOE Announces 1st Step in its ‘Largest Deregulatory Effort in History’

In a statement posted on its website this week, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced “the first step in the Energy Department’s largest deregulatory effort in history, proposing the elimination or reduction of 47 regulations”. The statement highlighted that these actions are in accordance with U.S. President Donald Trump’s Executive Order “Zero-Based Regulation to Unleash American Energy”. Once finalized, these actions will cut more than 125,000 words from the Code of Federal Regulations, the statement noted. “While it would normally take years for the Department of Energy to remove just a handful of regulations, the Trump Administration assembled a team working around the clock to reduce costs and deliver results for the American people in just over 110 days,” U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said in the statement. The 47 deregulatory actions include “streamlining administrative procedures with respect to the import and export of natural gas”, “streamlining applications for authorization to transmit electric energy to a foreign country”, and “rescinding reporting requirements, certification, independent verification, and DOE review for voluntary greenhouse gas reporting”, the DOE statement showed. They also include “rescinding the renewable energy production incentive”, “delaying [the] compliance date for federal agencies to meet the clean energy federal building rule”, and “streamlining the procedures for acquisition of petroleum for the strategic petroleum reserve (SPR)”, the statement highlighted. In a statement posted on its site last month, the DOE announced that Strategic Storage Partners LLC had secured a $1.4 billion contract to manage and operate the SPR. In that statement, the DOE noted that the SPR’s mission is to safeguard the United States from significant petroleum supply disruptions through the acquisition, storage, distribution, and management of emergency petroleum stocks, fulfilling U.S. obligations under the International Energy Program. A “Zero-Based Regulatory Budgeting to Unleash American Energy” Executive Order was

US, Saudi Arabia Ink Energy, Critical Mineral Deals

Saudi Arabia and the United States have signed agreements on cooperation on energy – including through refined oil products trading and artificial intelligence (AI) – and critical minerals. The memorandum of understanding (MOU) on energy collaboration and the memorandum of cooperation (MOC) on critical minerals were executed during Donald Trump’s visit to the kingdom, in which the U.S. president secured $600 billion in investment commitments from the Saudis. The MOU was signed between U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman Al Saud while the MOC was signed by Wright and Saudi Industry and Mineral Resources Minister Bandar Alkhorayef. The MOU “explores the potential for innovation, development, deployment of energy infrastructure in the two countries, and providing access to clean cooking solutions in developing countries”, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) said in an online statement Tuesday. “The MOU also highlights the intent to collaborate in various fields including petroleum refining and refined products trading, electricity generation technologies and energy storage systems, and artificial intelligence projects to accelerate deployment of energy-driven innovations. “The two sides also outlined areas for cooperation on civil nuclear energy, including safety, security, and nonproliferation programs; vocational training and workforce development; U.S. Generation III+ advanced large reactor technologies and small modular reactors; uranium exploration, mining, and milling; and safe and secure nuclear waste disposal”. Meanwhile the MOC will create “a framework for cooperation to strengthen and secure supply chains for critical minerals mining and processing”, the DOE said. The two intend to explore joint ventures and investment opportunities, including in refining and processing facilities, and in workforce and research institutions that will ensure continued innovation related to mineral exploration, extraction, and processing”. The White House announced separately on Tuesday that Trump has secured investment pledges totaling $600 billion from Saudi partners. The investments are part of two-way deals that

Trump Favors $40-$50 Oil, Goldman Says After Sifting Posts

President Donald Trump appears to prefer US oil prices between $40 and $50 a barrel, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc., citing an in-house analysis of his social-media posts on the topic. Trump “has always been focused on oil and on US energy dominance, having posted nearly 900 times,” analysts including Daan Struyven said in a report. His “inferred preference for WTI appears to be around $40 to $50 a barrel, where his propensity to post about oil prices bottoms,” they said. Oil prices — both global crude benchmark Brent, as well as US counterpart West Texas Intermediate , or WTI — are often buffeted by the president’s prolific social-media commentary, which can reference everything from OPEC policy and US gasoline prices to sanctions against nations including Iran. His administration has favored increased domestic production, as well as a broad push for cheap energy to help bring down inflation. The US leader “tends to call for lower prices (or celebrate falling prices) when WTI is greater than $50,” the analysts said. “In contrast, President Trump has called for higher prices when prices are very low (WTI less than $30) often in the context of supporting US production.” WTI — which last traded just above $63 a barrel — has shed 12% so far this year, hurt by the fallout from Trump’s trade tariffs, as well as a decision by OPEC+ to loosen supply curbs at a faster-than-expected pace. Still, prices have recovered some ground after the US and China scaled back some levies for 90 days, rising from a four-year closing low seen earlier this month. The president’s “inferred preference for relatively low oil prices directionally supports our view that oil prices are likely to edge lower in 2025-2026,” the analysts said, while also noting upside risks to expectations given

HPE ‘morphs’ private cloud portfolio with improved virtualization, storage and data protection

What do you get when combining Morpheus with Aruba? As part of the extensible platform message that HPE is promoting with Morpheus, it’s also working in some capabilities from the broader HPE portfolio. One integration is with HPE Aruba for networking microsegmentation. Bhardwaj noted that a lot of HPE Morpheus users are looking for microsegmentation in order to make sure that the traffic between two virtual machines on a server is secure. “The traditional approach of doing that is on the hypervisor, but that costs cycles on the hypervisor,” Bhardwaj said. “Frankly, the way that’s being delivered today, customers have to pay extra cost on the server.” With the HPE Aruba plugin that now works with HPE Morpheus, the microsegmentation capability can be enabled at the switch level. Bhardwaj said that by doing the microsegmentation in the switch and not the hypervisor, costs can be lowered and performance can be increased. The integration brings additional capabilities, including the ability to support VPN and network address translation (NAT) in an integrated way between the switch and the hypervisor. VMware isn’t the only hypervisor supported by HPE The HPE Morpheus VM Essentials Hypervisor is another new element in the HPE cloud portfolio. The hypervisor is now being integrated into HPE’s private cloud offerings for both data center as well as edge deployments.

AMD targets hosting providers with affordable EPYC 4005 processors

According to Pinkesh Kotecha, chairman and MD of Ishan Technologies, AMD’s 4th Gen EPYC processors stood out because they offer the right combination of high performance, energy efficiency, and security. “Their high core density and ability to optimize performance per watt made them ideal for managing data-intensive operations like real-time analytics and high-frequency transactions. Additionally, AMD’s strong AI roadmap and growing portfolio of AI-optimised solutions position them as a forward-looking partner, ready to support our customers’ evolving AI and data needs. This alignment made AMD a clear choice over alternatives,” Kotecha said. By integrating AMD EPYC processors, Ishan Technologies’ Ishan Cloud plans to empower enterprises across BFSI, ITeS, and manufacturing industries, as well as global capability centers and government organizations, to meet India’s data localization requirements and drive AI-led digital transformation. “The AMD EPYC 4005 series’ price-to-performance ratio makes it an attractive option for cloud hosting and web services, where cost-efficient, always-on performance is essential,” said Manish Rawat, analyst, TechInsights. Prabhu Ram, VP for the industry research group at CMR, said EPYC 4005 processors deliver a compelling mix of performance-per-watt, higher core counts, and modern I/O support, positioning it as a strong alternative to Intel’s Xeon E-2400 and 6300P, particularly for edge deployments. Shah of Counterpoint added, “While ARM-based Ampere Altra promises higher power efficiencies and is ideally adopted in more cloud and hyperscale data centers, though performance is something where x86-based Zen 5 architecture excels and nicely balances the efficiencies with lower TDPs, better software compatibilities supported by a more mature ecosystem.”

Shell’s immersive cooling liquids the first to receive official certification from Intel

Along with the certification, Intel is offering a Xeon processor single-phase immersion warranty rider. This indicates Intel’s confidence in the durability and effectiveness of Shell’s fluids. Yates explained that the rider augments Intel’s standard warranty terms and is available to data center operators deploying 4th and 5th generation Xeon processors in Shell immersion fluids. The rider is intended to provide data center operators confidence that their investment is guaranteed when deployed correctly. Shell’s fluids are available globally and can be employed in retrofitted existing infrastructure or used in new builds. Cuts resource use, increases performance Data centers consume anywhere from 10 to 50 times more energy per square foot than traditional office buildings, and they are projected to drive more than 20% of the growth in electricity demand between now and 2030. Largely due to the explosion of AI, data center energy consumption is expected to double from 415 terawatt-hours in 2024 to around 945 TWh by 2030. There are several other technologies used for data center cooling, including air cooling, cold plate (direct-to-chip), and precision cooling (targeted to specific areas), but the use of immersion cooling has been growing, and is expected to account for 36% of data center thermal management revenue by 2028. With this method, servers and networking equipment are placed in cooling fluids that absorb and dissipate heat generated by the electronic equipment. These specialized fluids are thermally conductive but not electrically conductive (dielectric) thus making them safe for submerging electrical equipment.

Cisco joins AI infrastructure alliance

“The addition of Cisco reinforces AIP’s commitment to an open-architecture platform and fostering a broad ecosystem that supports a diverse range of partners on a non-exclusive basis, all working together to build a new kind of AI infrastructure,” the group said in a statement. Separately, Cisco announced AI initiatives centered in the Middle East region. Last week, Cisco CEO Chuck Robbins visited Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, and Bahrain. This week, Jeetu Patel, executive vice president and chief product officer, is in Saudi Arabia, where he is participating in President Trump’s state visit to the region, according to Cisco. Related new projects include: An initiative with HUMAIN, Saudi Arabia’s new AI enterprise to help build an open, scalable, resilient and cost-efficient AI infrastructure: “This landmark collaboration will set a new standard for how AI infrastructure is designed, secured and delivered – combining Cisco’s global expertise with the Kingdom’s bold AI ambitions. The multi-year initiative aims to position the country as a global leader in digital innovation,” Cisco stated. A collaboration with the UAE-basedG42 to co-develop a secure AI portfolio and AI-native services: Cisco and G42 will work together to assess the potential to co-develop and jointly deploy AI-powered cybersecurity packages, as well as a reference architecture that integrates Cisco’s networking, security, and infrastructure solutions specifically designed for high-performance computing. This collaboration aims to help customers build and secure AI-ready data centers and develop AI workloads effectively, according to the companies. Interest in Qatar’s digital transformation: Qatar’s Ministry of Interior and Cisco signed a letter of intent to collaborate on Qatar’s digital transformation, AI, infrastructure development and cybersecurity.

Cato Networks introduces AI-powered policy analysis engine

Cato Networks this week announced a new policy analysis engine for its cloud-based secure access service edge platform that the company says will optimize and improve SASE policies, reduce risk, simplify compliance, and reduce manual maintenance efforts. Cato Autonomous Policies is built into the Cato SASE Cloud Platform and can provide enterprises with AI-driven recommendations to eliminate security exposure, tighten access controls, and improve network performance. The first use case of the policy engine is designed for firewall as a service (FWaaS) environments in which “firewall rule bloat” is present, Cato explained in a statement. The bloat comes from organizations accumulating thousands of rules that were designed to protect the environment, but after becoming outdated or misconfigured, actually lead to increased risk. “Most enterprises rely on a mix of firewalls deployed in data centers, branch offices, and cloud environments. Over time, rule sets grow, become inconsistent, and are filled with redundant, outdated, or conflicting entries,” wrote Demetris Booth, product marketing director at Cato Networks, in a blog post on the product news. “As a result, security policies become hard to manage, even harder to audit, and often misaligned with zero-trust principles. AI-driven firewall policy management is necessary for modern enterprises to streamline and optimize security operations.”

Riverbed bolsters network acceleration for AI’s performance bottlenecks

“Enterprises are worried about bad actors capturing encrypted traffic and saving copies for when quantum computing advances can break the encryption, providing the bad actors with free access to data. It’s a real concern,” Frey explains. “Post-quantum cryptography is a way to get ahead of that now.” Riverbed also introduced the SteelHead 90 series of network acceleration appliances, which the company says will provide resilient network performance to customers. The series includes: SteelHead 8090, which delivers up to 60 Gbps of data movement over a WAN. It supports multiple 100 Gigabyte network interfaces to pull data from the LAN. SteelHead 6090, which delivers up to 20 Gbps of data movement over a WAN, targeted for mid-scale data centers. SteelHead 4090 and 2090, which support mid-sized data center and edge use cases, with 500 Mbps and 200 Mbps of accelerated traffic, as well as up to 10 Gbps of total traffic processing for quality of service (QoS) and application classification use cases. Riverbed SteelHead Virtual, is a software-only version designed for virtualization environments and private cloud deployments, which is compatible with VMWare ESXI, KVM, and Microsoft Hyper-V. “For customers that are familiar with Riverbed, this is a big change in performance. We’ve gone from moving one appliance at 30 Gbps to 60 Gbps. We want to make sure that whether it’s new AI projects or existing data projects, we have ubiquitous availability across clouds,” says Chalan Aras, senior vice president and general manager of Acceleration at Riverbed. “We’re making it less expensive to move data—we are about half the price of traditional data movement methods.” With this announcement, Riverbed also unveiled its Flex licensing subscription offering. According to Riverbed, Flex makes it possible for enterprises to transfer licenses from hardware to virtual to cloud devices at no cost. Enterprises can reassign

Microsoft will invest $80B in AI data centers in fiscal 2025

And Microsoft isn’t the only one that is ramping up its investments into AI-enabled data centers. Rival cloud service providers are all investing in either upgrading or opening new data centers to capture a larger chunk of business from developers and users of large language models (LLMs). In a report published in October 2024, Bloomberg Intelligence estimated that demand for generative AI would push Microsoft, AWS, Google, Oracle, Meta, and Apple would between them devote $200 billion to capex in 2025, up from $110 billion in 2023. Microsoft is one of the biggest spenders, followed closely by Google and AWS, Bloomberg Intelligence said. Its estimate of Microsoft’s capital spending on AI, at $62.4 billion for calendar 2025, is lower than Smith’s claim that the company will invest $80 billion in the fiscal year to June 30, 2025. Both figures, though, are way higher than Microsoft’s 2020 capital expenditure of “just” $17.6 billion. The majority of the increased spending is tied to cloud services and the expansion of AI infrastructure needed to provide compute capacity for OpenAI workloads. Separately, last October Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said his company planned total capex spend of $75 billion in 2024 and even more in 2025, with much of it going to AWS, its cloud computing division.

John Deere unveils more autonomous farm machines to address skill labor shortage

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More Self-driving tractors might be the path to self-driving cars. John Deere has revealed a new line of autonomous machines and tech across agriculture, construction and commercial landscaping. The Moline, Illinois-based John Deere has been in business for 187 years, yet it’s been a regular as a non-tech company showing off technology at the big tech trade show in Las Vegas and is back at CES 2025 with more autonomous tractors and other vehicles. This is not something we usually cover, but John Deere has a lot of data that is interesting in the big picture of tech. The message from the company is that there aren’t enough skilled farm laborers to do the work that its customers need. It’s been a challenge for most of the last two decades, said Jahmy Hindman, CTO at John Deere, in a briefing. Much of the tech will come this fall and after that. He noted that the average farmer in the U.S. is over 58 and works 12 to 18 hours a day to grow food for us. And he said the American Farm Bureau Federation estimates there are roughly 2.4 million farm jobs that need to be filled annually; and the agricultural work force continues to shrink. (This is my hint to the anti-immigration crowd). John Deere’s autonomous 9RX Tractor. Farmers can oversee it using an app. While each of these industries experiences their own set of challenges, a commonality across all is skilled labor availability. In construction, about 80% percent of contractors struggle to find skilled labor. And in commercial landscaping, 86% of landscaping business owners can’t find labor to fill open positions, he said. “They have to figure out how to do

2025 playbook for enterprise AI success, from agents to evals

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More 2025 is poised to be a pivotal year for enterprise AI. The past year has seen rapid innovation, and this year will see the same. This has made it more critical than ever to revisit your AI strategy to stay competitive and create value for your customers. From scaling AI agents to optimizing costs, here are the five critical areas enterprises should prioritize for their AI strategy this year. 1. Agents: the next generation of automation AI agents are no longer theoretical. In 2025, they’re indispensable tools for enterprises looking to streamline operations and enhance customer interactions. Unlike traditional software, agents powered by large language models (LLMs) can make nuanced decisions, navigate complex multi-step tasks, and integrate seamlessly with tools and APIs. At the start of 2024, agents were not ready for prime time, making frustrating mistakes like hallucinating URLs. They started getting better as frontier large language models themselves improved. “Let me put it this way,” said Sam Witteveen, cofounder of Red Dragon, a company that develops agents for companies, and that recently reviewed the 48 agents it built last year. “Interestingly, the ones that we built at the start of the year, a lot of those worked way better at the end of the year just because the models got better.” Witteveen shared this in the video podcast we filmed to discuss these five big trends in detail. Models are getting better and hallucinating less, and they’re also being trained to do agentic tasks. Another feature that the model providers are researching is a way to use the LLM as a judge, and as models get cheaper (something we’ll cover below), companies can use three or more models to

OpenAI’s red teaming innovations define new essentials for security leaders in the AI era

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More OpenAI has taken a more aggressive approach to red teaming than its AI competitors, demonstrating its security teams’ advanced capabilities in two areas: multi-step reinforcement and external red teaming. OpenAI recently released two papers that set a new competitive standard for improving the quality, reliability and safety of AI models in these two techniques and more. The first paper, “OpenAI’s Approach to External Red Teaming for AI Models and Systems,” reports that specialized teams outside the company have proven effective in uncovering vulnerabilities that might otherwise have made it into a released model because in-house testing techniques may have missed them. In the second paper, “Diverse and Effective Red Teaming with Auto-Generated Rewards and Multi-Step Reinforcement Learning,” OpenAI introduces an automated framework that relies on iterative reinforcement learning to generate a broad spectrum of novel, wide-ranging attacks. Going all-in on red teaming pays practical, competitive dividends It’s encouraging to see competitive intensity in red teaming growing among AI companies. When Anthropic released its AI red team guidelines in June of last year, it joined AI providers including Google, Microsoft, Nvidia, OpenAI, and even the U.S.’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which all had released red teaming frameworks. Investing heavily in red teaming yields tangible benefits for security leaders in any organization. OpenAI’s paper on external red teaming provides a detailed analysis of how the company strives to create specialized external teams that include cybersecurity and subject matter experts. The goal is to see if knowledgeable external teams can defeat models’ security perimeters and find gaps in their security, biases and controls that prompt-based testing couldn’t find. What makes OpenAI’s recent papers noteworthy is how well they define using human-in-the-middle

Stay Ahead, Stay ONMINE