Energy Demands of 6G Networks: New Paper Models Synthetic Biology-Based Fuel Cell-Powered Bio-Hybrid Networks as a Sustainable Alternative for Ultra-Dense Small-Cell Base Stations

6G Networks: High-Density Networks Require More Energy and Better Energy Management

      Mobile communication networks are notoriously power-hungry. Future 6G networks will be “a complex ecosystem of densely deployed software and hardware components,” according to a 2023 German whitepaper. This will include the incorporation of AI capabilities. Of specific concern are the energy consumption and energy efficiency of 6G networks.

     Radio access networks (RAN) account for most of the 6G energy requirements, 73% according to the German whitepaper. Power costs account for between 20% and 40% of the operating expenses of network operators. The newer data-heavy networks make lowering energy costs the prime driver of innovation, which was not the case for previous networks. It is simply that higher data consumption means higher energy consumption and higher operational costs. 3G and 4G networks focused more on enhancing user experience through faster speeds and broader coverage. 5G networks began to address energy consumption, but there is much more to be done. Energy efficiency needs to be embedded from the outset.

     According to an article in ICT Networks:

“Despite technological advancements such as improved power amplifiers and faster base station wake-up times, the annual growth in data demand—estimated at around 2.8%—continues to outpace efficiency gains. This imbalance means that even incremental improvements in hardware and software are insufficient to curb overall power usage. For 6G, this reality serves as a wake-up call, pushing standardization bodies like 3GPP and industry leaders to treat energy as a core design constraint.”

     The need for computational power and dense network deployments in more sophisticated modern applications means higher power use is a given. This has created a tension between performance and energy consumption, which needs to be addressed. Autonomous systems and AI processing require ultra-low latency, massive connectivity, and high reliability. There is a need to develop smarter algorithms and hardware optimizations that prioritize efficiency. IOT and smart grids require dense networks that can adapt dynamically, and doing that while maintaining energy efficiency is challenging. Thus, scaling up these 6G networks without much higher energy consumption is a hurdle that must be overcome.

     Emerging solutions include technological innovations across network architecture. The article in ITC Networks gives four strategies: technological innovations, industry and academic collaborations, embedding efficiency from the outset, and reflecting on past efforts to address their energy efficiency failures. Regarding technological innovation, it is noted:

“Strategies such as lean network designs aim to eliminate unnecessary transmissions across time, spatial, and frequency domains, while energy-efficient air interfaces and waveforms are being developed to optimize signal transmission. Additionally, user equipment (UE)-assisted algorithms for power saving, synchronized sleep modes for downlink (DL) and uplink (UL), and dynamic resource allocation are gaining traction. The integration of AI and ML into network operations further enhances efficiency by enabling predictive management of resources, ensuring that energy is used only when and where it is needed.”

     Standardization bodies like 3GPP can play an important role in industry/academic collaborations by setting up frameworks that prioritize efficiency.

“Industry stakeholders focus on practical implementations, such as base station sleep modes and cost-effective infrastructure upgrades, driven by the need to reduce total cost of ownership. Meanwhile, academia explores cutting-edge concepts like novel waveforms and advanced interference management, pushing the boundaries of what’s possible. This synergy ensures a comprehensive approach, embedding energy-conscious principles into every aspect of 6G development.”

     Embedding efficiency from the outset is a firm requirement. However, it may require redesigning some system elements.

     Past efficiency failures involved the inability to predict the level of future data demands. This must be avoided in designing the new networks. Setting up pilot projects and standardization of power-saving protocols will be needed to test 6G networks.

     5G networks incorporated some energy-saving features for both user equipment (UE) and base stations (BSs), but many were added later, after the networks were deployed. 5G energy saving innovations include introducing specific low-power modes during idle times, including idle mode signaling reduction and discontinuous reception (DRX). The other 5G power saving innovations are described below from a Samsung blog article:

“5G introduced both short and long DRX cycles to strike a balance between latency and energy efficiency. Complementing DRX, Discontinuous Transmission (DTX) enables BSs to skip transmissions during periods of low or no traffic, further conserving energy. Additionally, Carrier Aggregation allows for the selective activation or deactivation of secondary carriers, optimizing energy use by ensuring resources are only utilized when necessary. Together, these mechanisms collectively contribute to significant improvements in energy efficiency across 5G networks.”

     Below, they list more power-saving features of later releases of 5G networks.

     Energy and network management for 6G has been deemed “energy performance,” according to an Ericson white paper, and such innovations often require a new generation format.

“Some solutions, such as those related to UE idle-mode functions like system-information broadcast, random-access, and paging can only be changed when a new generation is introduced.”  

“For 6G, we need to ensure that we can benefit, in terms of reduced network energy consumption, from deployment architectures where RAN processing is more centralized.”

     They also note that lean design features have been successful in 5G NR and should be further developed in 6G networks.

“The introduction of lean design in 5G NR, which focuses on minimizing transmissions not related to data transfer, has been a tremendous success enabling large network energy savings due to micro-sleep between transmissions. For 6G, we should continue to build on the lean design success story and do more of what has proven to work well in 5G.”

     As shown below, lean design can be incorporated in the time, space, and frequency domains into new 6G networks.

     They note that the lean design features of 5G NR were very successful and can be further developed in 6G.

 

New Paper Models Synthetic Biology-Based Fuel Cell-Powered Bio-Hybrid Networks as a Sustainable Alternative for Ultra-Dense Small-Cell Base Stations

     A December 2025 paper published in the journal Scientific Reports explores the possibility of synthetic biology-based fuel cell-powered networks as a sustainable alternative for ultra-dense small-cell base stations. As noted in the abstract:

“Simulation results indicate that bio-hybrid systems can achieve reliable energy autonomy, significantly reducing reliance on centralized power grids while simultaneously lowering emissions.”

     Incorporating these biohybrid systems into ultra-dense networks has some security and ethical challenges. These include cyber–physical vulnerabilities and public acceptance. The microbial bioreactors need to be free of tampering concerns.

     AI-driven power balancing is incorporated into these systems. Control and optimization frameworks employ model predictive control, described below:

“Model Predictive Control (MPC) provides an anticipatory mechanism by leveraging system dynamics to optimize inputs such as substrate feeding and storage switching over a finite horizon, making it particularly effective under fluctuating microbial performance and forecasted load conditions. Adaptive neural controllers, including deep recurrent architectures like LSTMs, capture temporal dependencies in bioenergy generation and predict short-term variations, enabling proactive energy balancing. In addition, hybrid rule-based and AI frameworks combine hard-coded safety constraints, such as minimum biofilm health thresholds, with data-driven optimization, ensuring interpretability without sacrificing adaptability.”

     Below are some graphs from the paper that show that the increased energy demands of 6G networks consist of their total transmission and computational needs, which are based on the number of devices.

     As noted in the paper’s conclusions below, these systems are powered by “microbial fuel cells and enzyme-driven energy systems.” However, at present, they only exist as simulations. Field trials and experimental validation will be the next step.

 

 

References:

 

Bio-hybrid 6G networks with synthetic biology-enabled base stations for energy-autonomous telecommunications. Abdulrahman Al Ayidh, Mohammed M. Alammar, Mohamed Abbas, Muneer Parayangat & Abdullah Alharthi. Scientific Reports volume 15, Article number: 43784 (December 15, 2025). Bio-hybrid 6G networks with synthetic biology-enabled base stations for energy-autonomous telecommunications | Scientific Reports

How Will 6G Networks Balance Energy and Innovation? ITC Network. June 6, 2025. ITCnetwork publications

Energy Performance of 6G Radio Access Networks: A once in a decade opportunity. Ericsson. White PaperGFTL-24:001335. November 2024. 6g-energy-performance.pdf

Energy Saving for 6G Network: Part I. July 8, 2025. Hyoungju Ji, Younbum Kim, Hongbo Si, and Aris Papasakellariou. Samsung. Blog. BLOG | Samsung Research

Sustainability of 6G: Ways to Reduce Energy Consumption. Hecker, Artur, Bernardos, Carlos Jesus Gavras, Anastasius Schörner, Karsten Bou Rouphael, Rony AL-Naday, Mays, Lombardo, Chiara, Ghoraishi, Mir. Zenodo. 6G Infrastructure Association. October 24, 2024. Sustainability of 6G: Ways to Reduce Energy Consumption

6G Energy Efficiency and Sustainability. Fraunhoffer IIS. 6G Platform Germany. January 2023. Whitepaper6GSustainability.pdf

From Efficiency to Sustainability: Exploring the Potential of 6G for a Greener Future. Rohit Kumar, Saurav Kumar Gupta, Hwang-Cheng Wang, C. Shyamala Kumari, and Sai Srinivas Vara Prasad Korlam. Sustainability. 2023, 15(23), 16387. November 27, 2023. From Efficiency to Sustainability: Exploring the Potential of 6G for a Greener Future | MDPI

Pennsylvania DEP Study Indicates Radioactivity from Shale Drilling Waste Landfill Leachate is Not Dangerous

    

     A study by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection found that the liquid runoff, or leachate, from Pennsylvania landfills that receive solid oil and gas waste poses no “significant” threat to the public from radioactive materials found in that waste. The DEP sampled leachate at 49 landfills. The results indicate that most were below federal drinking water guidelines of 5 picocuries per liter, and that none of the results were over a much higher standard of 600 pCi/L established by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for wastewater sent to treatment plants from facilities like nuclear power plants. 

     DEP notes:

 “DEP did not identify any levels of radiation associated with the landfill radium leachate investigation that raised concern for environmental protection or public health and safety. No results were observed that would require landfill action or suggest changes to engineering or operational controls.”

     I would say that this result was expected. Over a decade ago, I attended a talk by West Virginia water resources expert Paul Ziemkiewicz that explored research he and his students had done to characterize the leachate from landfilled oil and gas waste, including drill cuttings. He concluded that the risk was small for pollutants, although they did not go into detail about radioactivity. Previous studies of releasing untreated oil and gas wastewater into rivers, which was done for the first few years of Pennsylvania’s shale gas revolution until 2011, when the practice was stopped. Those studies did find that radium increased in those downstream waters and sediments after the wastewater was released.

     According to an article by the environmental group Allegheny Front, some other scientists who study radioactivity were underwhelmed. A previous study, published in 2023 in the journal Ecological Indicators, found that radium levels in sediment downstream municipal water treatment plants receiving such leachate were two to four times the background level of radium upstream of the plants. Those researchers believe that radium levels can accumulate and increase over time and become more toxic. A 2016 DEP study also found that the risks from radioactivity were not significant for workers or nearby residents. However, in 2021, they did recommend further study of landfill leachates. Tracy Pawelski, a spokesperson for the Pennsylvania Waste Industries Association, which represents the state’s landfills, noted in 2023:

“Pennsylvania landfills have long been equipped with sophisticated radiation detection equipment that monitors every load of waste entering the facility,” Pawelski said. “Any load with unacceptable radiation levels, regardless of its source, are managed pursuant to radiation waste management plans approved by the DEP.”

     Nathaniel Warner, associate professor in civil and environmental engineering at Penn State, criticized the current study as inadequate due to how radium levels were calculated and where samples were collected.

“The state didn’t collect, or didn’t appear to collect, a single sample of the water actually leaving either the sewage treatment plants or the leachate treatment plants of the facilities,” he said. “To conclude that there’s no risk seemed like a stretch because they didn’t test the sediment or the water at the discharge.”    

     The Marcellus Shale, source of most of the oil & gas waste, contains higher than usual amounts of radioactive material due to the shale’s uranium and thorium content, which decays into radium. The current DEP study included two ways to measure radium levels. The first way, which is less precise but also less expensive, yielded higher radium levels between 308 and 540 picocuries per liter. The second method, more precise but also more expensive, yielded much lower radium levels of between 1.43 and 122.731 picocuries per liter.

“In the more accurate radiochemistry test, only 11 landfills had radium levels above the federal drinking water guidelines of 5 picocuries per liter. And of those 11, only four landfills had “reportedly” accepted oil and gas waste between 2015 and 2024.”

“DEP found no correlation between radium levels above 5 pCi/L and the acceptance of oil and gas waste at the landfill,” the report said.

     Thus, as can be seen, some of the landfills sampled that had radium levels above 5pCi/L did not even accept oil & gas waste. This shows that there are likely other sources of radium. One might be runoff from exposed shale outcrops, but I am just speculating here.

     The DEP noted that results were similar to its 2016 TENORM study. The report explained landfill leachate containment and treatment in the state:

“Landfills are designed with a leachate collection system to ensure leachate does not enter the groundwater and is collected for treatment. Collected leachate must be subsequently treated by a permitted wastewater treatment operation.  Upon meeting National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) water quality standards, the treated leachate may be discharged to a receiving body of water. Some landfills operate onsite treatment systems while others are connected to local publicly owned treatment works (POTWs), which treat landfill leachate prior to discharge. Because landfills accept oil and gas industry wastes, such as drill cuttings and treatment sludge that may contain TENORM, there is a potential for leachate from those facilities to also contain TENORM.”

     The radiochemistry results, more accurate than the gamma spectroscopy results, were also much lower, with few exceeding drinking water limits, which, after further dilution in the environment, would drop considerably before affecting drinking water supplies, if at all. As noted in the study’s conclusions below, the DEP recommends a year of further study of these landfills to collect more radiochemistry samples. The bottom line is that radioactivity from the most radioactive organic shales, such as the Marcellus, is not likely to be of concern to the environment or public health, but it should still be monitored.

 

 

References:

 

PA DEP says ‘no risk’ to the public from radioactive materials in oil and gas waste sent to landfills. Reid Frazier. The Allegheny Front. March 20, 2026. PA DEP says ‘no risk’ from radioactive materials in fracking waste sent to landfills - The Allegheny Front

DEP Study Shows No Radiation Risk from Leachate in Pennsylvania's Landfills. Pennsylvania DEP. March 13, 2026. DEP Study Shows No Radiation Risk from Leachate in Pennsylvania's Landfills | Department of Environmental Protection | Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Landfill Leachate Study. Pennsylvania DEP. Landfill Leachate Study | Department of Environmental Protection | Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

RADIUM IN UNTREATED LANDFILL LEACHATE INVESTIGATION. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. January 2026. PA DEP Final Radium Leachate Report.pdf

Study finds radioactive materials in waterways near treatment plants associated with fracking waste. Reid Frazier. The Allegheny Front. July 20, 2023. Study finds radioactive materials in waterways near treatment plants associated with fracking waste

 

 

German Study Finds That Solar Panel Efficiency Degrades by 0.52–0.61% Annually, About Half of Previous Estimates: This Means Better Economics, Higher Levelized Cost of Electricity, and Longer Life

     

      A large German study of solar panel degradation was recently published in the journal Energy Economics. A million solar PV systems owners were surveyed about solar installations as old as 16 years for the study, which is a much bigger study and longer time period than other studies, the biggest of which included about 4200 installations over a 2-to-7-year time period. The results indicate that solar panel degradation rates are much lower than predicted by nearly half. This means that the panels can provide more power for longer, improving their overall economic performance a little bit. A lower degradation rate also means that the panels can last longer before becoming uneconomical. Some other interesting observations come from the study. One is that degradation rates are often higher early in the panels’ lives and slow down when they get older. The study also measured the effects of things that commonly temporarily degrade panel efficiency, including heat, cold, precipitation, and particulate air pollution. The new study suggests that previous modeling overestimated degradation rates by between 20% to 50%.

“Back of the envelope,” the authors admit, “the estimated cost of degradation would decrease, compared to previous findings, by about €638 million per year to maintain installed capacity in 2040.”

     Germany has deployed about 60GW of solar since 2006. The new study involved scientists from Brandenburg University of Technology and a collaborator from University College London, and about 1.25 million large and small solar installations across Germany, totaling 34 gigawatts of capacity. Annual degradation rates of 0.52–0.61%, roughly half the average reported in prior studies. The finding that degradation rates slow through time and that larger installations degrade more quickly than smaller ones was confirmed. This is likely due to higher failure risks in central inverters and complex setups. 

     Andy Corbley of Good News Network summarizes the different variables that affect solar panel degradation at different parts of their lifespan:

“Frost, extreme heat, and air pollution affect PV panels differently at different stages of their lifespan. Extreme heat tends to reduce the efficiency of older panels more than newer ones, even though for frost and air pollution, it’s the opposite.’

     The results indicate a 4.8% reduction in the levelized cost of electricity from solar panels. This also means that less than half as much new generation needs to be installed annually to keep up the nameplate capacity.  

“Solar is growing fast and aging better than many people thought,” the research's corresponding author, Diego Prieto Melo, told pv magazine. “Looking at more than a million real-world PV systems, we found that output declines by about 0.59% per year on average, which is lower than many previous assumptions.”

“The dataset included detailed information on energy production, installed capacity, tilt, azimuth, and location. System efficiency over time was measured using performance ratios (PR) calculated according to IEC standards. Specific yield was derived from energy output divided by nominal capacity, while reference yield was based on incident solar radiation.”

     The study focused on four key variables: hot days, frost days, precipitation, and air pollution. Hot days, defined as days exceeding 30 C, can reduce PV efficiency. Frost days, defined as days below 0 C, can cause mechanical stress or delamination under extreme conditions. Precipitation has mixed effects: it can cool panels and clean dust, but may also scatter light and reduce efficiency depending on incidence angles. Air pollution affects performance through the accumulation of particulate matter and dust on solar panels. Where particulate matter is heavy, such as in deserts where sand and dust accumulate and in areas of heavy air pollution, the overall efficiency depends on whether and how much maintenance is done to clean off the panels. Precipitation was shown to have the least effect of the four variables. Heat stress on panels was found to worsen with age, whereas frost and pollution impacts diminish over time.

     The bottom line of the study supports PV solar as a viable energy generation source, which can now be seen as slightly less degrading, longer lasting, and with slightly lower cost than previous modeling.

 

 

 

References:

 

Scientists Were Wrong About How Fast Solar Panels Degrade – They May Last Twice as Long. Andy Corbley. Good News Network. March 26, 2026. Scientists Were Wrong About How Fast Solar Panels Degrade - They May Last Twice as Long

From shine to decline: Degradation of over 1 million solar photovoltaic systems in Germany. Diego Alejandro Prieto Melo, Christin Hoffmann, Iain Staffell, and Felix Müsgens. Energy Economics. Volume 157, May 2026, 109282. From shine to decline: Degradation of over 1 million solar photovoltaic systems in Germany - ScienceDirect

Survey reveals PV systems in Germany outperform lifespan expectations. Emiliano Bellini. PC Magazine. March 18, 2026. Survey reveals PV systems in Germany outperform lifespan expectations – pv magazine International

 

Prediction Markets: Should Betting on Events Be Allowed or Encouraged? There are Ethical Concerns and Security Concerns

 

     Prediction markets are a form of betting that involves betting in favor of or against events occurring. When this is applied to things like wars, assassinations, and human injuries and deaths, many ethical questions arise. To bet on such things seems decadent and seems to make light of such heavy events. It seems like a dystopian view of the future where basic human compassion is set aside for selfish personal goals. I can imagine such markets being elevated in some dystopian novel or movie.  

     According to Wikipedia:

“Prediction markets, also known as betting markets, information markets, decision markets, idea futures, or event derivatives, are open markets that enable the prediction of specific outcomes using financial incentives (gambling on real world events). They are exchange-traded markets established for trading bets in the outcome of various events.”

     Political betting has been around for a long time. One historical instance is betting on who would become the new pope in 1503, but it goes back way farther than that.

“Prediction markets are based on the theory that individuals with financial stakes in an outcome can collectively predict it more accurately than any single expert. Even if participants are not highly informed, the collective wisdom emerges from their shared incentive to avoid financial loss. Eric Zitzewitz, an economics professor at Dartmouth, explains "Financial markets are generally pretty efficient, and the evidence suggests that the same is true of prediction markets. There’s no virtue-signaling in an anonymous market when you’re betting", and that "what you’re seeing with the market is some average of all of those different opinions, weighted by their willingness to put their money where their mouth is."

     Prediction markets essentially forecast future events, something commodities traders also do with futures markets, which makes them similar. One could say that prediction markets are a kind of futures market, usually based on events more so than future prices. As noted by Investopedia, online prediction markets began in 1988 with Iowa Electronic Markets, which predicts the winners of presidential elections.

     Successful prediction of future events can enable business advantages. Utilization of existing available data can be optimized by AI and improve success rates theoretically, so AI-enabled forecasting can improve results. Investopedia explains below how prediction markets are a kind of “crowdsourcing.”

“Prediction markets can be thought of as belonging to the more general concept of crowdsourcing. Crowdsourcing is specifically designed to aggregate information on particular topics of interest. The main purpose of prediction markets is eliciting aggregating beliefs over an unknown future outcome. Traders with different beliefs trade on contracts whose payoffs are related to the unknown future outcome; the market prices of the contracts are considered as the aggregated belief.”

     The Investopedia article goes on to explain the different types of prediction markets. Some are very similar to sports betting. Indeed, they are a form of crowdsourced gambling. Gambling has its own addiction concerns. For an understanding of habit, which includes the societal problem of habitual gambling, I would recommend Charles Duhigg’s 2012 book, The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do In Life and Business, which details the nature of habit as a form of conditioning that involves the habit loop consisting of cue, routine, and reward.

     Advocates for prediction markets argue that crowdsourced prediction enables better accuracy, which has been borne out by experiment. Crowdsourcing forecasts often perform better than forecasts by single predictors.  One might say prediction markets harness the power of “collective intelligence.”

     An article in Crypto News considers prediction markets to be like a stock market for questions. The article describes two systemic dangers of prediction markets: oracle manipulation and smart contract vulnerabilities. Oracle manipulation involves blockchain oracles being tricked due to false data. They note a 2025 Polymarket case where data was manipulated, then voted on with a payable outcome different from what actually occurred. This outraged others. Smart contract vulnerabilities and liquidity traps refer to the details of the question and how results are interpreted. An example given was bets on an invasion of Venezuela in January. The smart contract apparently did not consider the extraction of Maduro as an invasion, which outraged some who disagreed.

     One of the biggest concerns about prediction markets is insider trading or otherwise leveraging insider information for advantage. Below are examples from the Crypto News article of controversial predictions that have been suspected of being influenced by insider information. One concerning issue is that the anonymity of the online process gives a kind of immunity to being detected, which can lead to more widespread market manipulation. This is due to the decentralization of these markets. With decentralization and anonymity, insiders can bet without detection. (And once again, cryptocurrencies enable manipulation and support, and protect criminal behavior).

“Decentralization makes cheating harder to punish because it removes the identity layer. On traditional exchanges, suspicious trades can be investigated and tied to real people who face legal consequences.”

“On decentralized prediction markets, trades happen through anonymous crypto wallets, often with no KYC checks. Everyone can see that a wallet made a fortune on a well-timed bet. Proving who controls that wallet is the hard part.”

“So far, enforcement agencies have not prosecuted a crypto prediction market insider case. They would need to prove both identity and misuse of confidential information. That bar is high. In practice, it is the honor system, and there is a lot of money on the table.”

     Below, they list some red flags that suggest possible market manipulation.

     They get into the psychology of gambling as well, noting that prediction markets can be as addictive or even more addictive than other forms of gambling since the element of skill produces an illusion of control. Prediction is a part of life and an important part of business. As an economic geologist, I had the job of predicting where the best places to drill oil & gas wells would be. To do this, I relied on geological data. If successful, I was rewarded by getting to keep my job or a raise in pay. The article notes that prediction markets can be more addictive because they feel more like conducting research rather than betting. With decentralization and anonymity, insiders can bet.

     With prediction markets, there are also ethical concerns when betting on situations that involve human tragedy, such as wars, assassinations, coups, calamities, and death. The Crypto News article goes on to suggest that desensitization and the gamification of reality can be dangerous. That is why some prediction market platforms are more regulated than others. Below is a list and some examples, followed by a comparison of regulated and unregulated prediction markets.

     Regulations for prediction markets are likely on the horizon. Congress is considering them, as are some states. Businesses are also concerned about prediction markets. Below are some recommendations for public companies from law firm Morrison Foerster.

    An article in MEXC describes the U.S. legislation proposed in January 2026 regarding prediction markets:

“On January 10, 2026, a bill titled the Public Integrity in Financial Prediction Markets Act of 2026 was introduced in the House. The measure, sponsored by Representative Ritchie Torres and co-sponsored by a group of Democrats, would prohibit federal elected officials, political appointees, executive-branch employees, and congressional staff from betting on government policy, official actions, or political outcomes in situations where they might possess material non-public information.”

“Proponents argue the bill aims to remove perverse incentives and restore public trust in both government and market mechanisms. Critics of existing prediction-market activity assert that without targeted regulation, a small group of well-informed actors could gain unfair advantages or even influence policy for personal profit.”

     After the Iran war predictions on prediction markets, Congressional Democrats are leaning heavily into restricting such markets. Below is some information about how prediction markets are growing quickly and, in some cases, replacing sports betting.

     On March 12, 2026, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission called for public comment ahead of a regulatory proposal that would require government oversight of prediction markets. The public comment period is for six weeks.

     It was recently reported that an Israeli reporter has been subjected to Polymarket blackmail and death threats tied to his Iran War coverage. This is quite concerning.

“When an Israeli journalist wrote about an Iranian missile strike, he was deluged with threatening messages from online bettors demanding he alter his reporting. 'It wouldn't surprise me' if there are more Polymarket-related influence attempts on journalism than previously thought, he tells Haaretz.”

     At issue was whether the strike at Beit Shemesh in Israel was from an Iranian missile or from an Israeli interceptor strike on the missile, with the falling debris causing the damage. The terms of the bet were that an interceptor strike would not count as a missile hit. The issue here is also insider trading and market manipulation, and shows another good reason to avoid and regulate prediction markets. It was reported in February that two people, including an IDF reservist, had been charged with using classified information to place bets on Polymarket during the June 2025 war between Israel and Iran. Thus, we see that there is temptation provided by prediction markets for insider trading among those with inside information.

  

References:

 

US Democrats working on bill to rein in prediction markets after Iran bets. Michelle Price. Reuters. March 5, 2026. US Democrats working on bill to rein in prediction markets after Iran bets

Prediction Markets Explained: Types, Uses, and Real-World Examples. Katelyn Peters. Investopedia. Updated January 27, 2026. Reviewed by Robert C. Kelly. Prediction Markets Explained: Types, Uses, and Real-World Examples

Polymarket. Polymarket | The World's Largest Prediction Market™

Kalshi's $2.2 million Iran mess exposes prediction markets' fine-print problem. Jack Newsham, Business Insider. March 5, 2026. Kalshi Amends Rules Amid Khamenei 'Death Market' Controversy - Business Insider

Prediction market. Wikipedia. Prediction market - Wikipedia

Prediction Market Risks (2026): A Guide to Security, Ethics, and Addiction. Crypto Content Editor (SEO). Camila Karam. Fact Checked by Ines S. Tavares. Last updated: February 4, 2026. Crypto News. Prediction Market Risks (2026): A Guide to Security, Ethics, & Legal Issues

Prediction Markets and the Law of Insider Trading: A Practical Guide. Morrison Foerster. March 3, 2026. Prediction Markets and the Law of Insider Trading: A Practical Guide | Morrison Foerster

Prediction Markets Spark Ethics and Regulation Debate.  MEXC Blog. January 12, 2026. Prediction Markets Spark Ethics And Regulation Debate | MEXC

Democratic senator says 'we need to ban' certain prediction markets, but CFTC chairman Selig has other ideas. Daragh Thomas. Benzinga. March 5, 2026. Democratic senator says 'we need to ban' certain prediction markets, but CFTC chairman Selig has other ideas

US commodity regulator kicks off rulemaking for prediction markets. Reuters. March 12, 2026. US commodity regulator kicks off rulemaking for prediction markets

Israeli reporter on Polymarket blackmail and death threats tied to his Iran war coverage. Ben Kroll. Haaretz. March 18, 2026. Israeli reporter on Polymarket blackmail and death threats tied to his Iran war coverage

Energy Information Administration Releases International Energy Consumption Data Set Sorted by Fuel and End-Use Sector

     The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) just released a new data set that sorts international energy consumption by fuel and end-use sector. The data is through 2023. The end-use sectors are subdivided into 34 end-use sub-sectors. The data includes most countries in the world. End-use consumption by region, country, fuel, sector, and sub-sector in which the energy is consumed is included. Below, they explain the reason for the data and its organization:

“Our new end-use data fulfill the requirement under Section 40416 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, to provide “detail on energy consumption by fuel, economic sector, and end use within countries for which data are available.” We will update this new international end-use dataset annually.”

“We designed the end-use dataset to align with the World Energy Projection System (WEPS). In our end-use data, we assigned energy sources into one of six groups (petroleum, coking coal, natural gas, other energy for power and heat, steam coal, and electricity) to align with design of the WEPS demand modules as shown in the figure below. Electricity is distinct from the other categories because it is created as a secondary energy source in one of the power plant sub-sectors, after which it flows to final consumption in other end-use sectors.”

     As can be seen below, they differentiated types of consumption into three categories: direct, heat and power, or non-energy. Then they differentiated it into sectors and sub-sectors.

     In its announcement, EIA provided two example graphs. The first is of fuels used in European chemical manufacturing from 2010 through 2023, as seen in the first graph below, and the second is Europe’s annual petroleum consumption by sector and sub-sector for 2023, as seen in the second graph below.

 

   

References:

 

EIA releases new international consumption data sorted by end-use sector and fuel. EIA. March 24, 2026. EIA releases new international consumption data sorted by end-use sector and fuel - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)