Trump's 2026 budget cuts would force the world's most powerful solar telescope to close

When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission.
ANCHORAGE, AK — There was a pindrop silence in the room on Tuesday (June 10), as Christoph Keller, director of the National Solar Observatory, spoke on stage here at the 246th American Astronomical Society meeting.
Standing in front of a giant projected bar graph, he solemnly explained the possible fate of the world's most powerful eye on the sun: the Daniel K. Inouye Solar Telescope (DKIST). If Congress enacts President Donald Trump's fiscal year 2026 budget request — allocating just $13 million or so for DKIST — the telescope won't be able to continue on, Keller said. For context, this year alone, the federally funded National Solar Observatory (NSO) expects to spend about $30 million on the facility.
"To put it bluntly," Keller said, "for DKIST, at $13 million, we cannot operate. There's no way for us to operate such a complex facility."
The graph behind Keller spoke for itself. On the left, a bar represented the actual money the NSO spent in 2024, one in the middle represented what the NSO plans to spend in 2025, and one on the right depicted Trump's FY26 budget request. Each individual bar was divided into two colors: one representing money required for DKIST (a strong majority of each bar) and one representing money required for all other NSO facilities.
"If you actually looked at what this means," Keller said. "Between this year and the request for next year, it's a 54% budget cut."
The hit to DKIST would be unfortunate, as scientists made clear during the talk, particularly seeing as the telescope only captured its first image in 2020 after over 25 years of effort. Not only is it the world's most powerful solar telescope, it's also the largest. Built with about 150 tons of steel, it sits atop the 10,000-foot-high (3,048-meter) summit of the volcanic mountain. Haleakalā, which translates to "the house of the sun," on the Hawaiian island of Maui.
"It's a really nice site," David Boboltz, associate director for DKIST, said during the meeting. "It's got low light scattering; it's got good seeing."
"It is literally the greatest leap in humanity's ability to study the sun from the ground since Galileo's time. It's a big deal," Jeff Kuhn, a professor at the University of Hawaii at Mānoa's Institute for Astronomy (IfA) who worked on DKIST, previously said in a statement.
Indeed, the details of our sun that DKIST is able to capture are astounding. In the image below, for instance (DKIST's first image of the sun), each cell-like structure is about the size of Texas. This is the highest-resolution image of our star that's ever been captured.
What's extra mind-blowing here is how small of a solar region the image actually represents:
Another more recent image from DKIST reveals what appear to be magnetic "curtains" on our star's surface, in reference to what are called "photospheric striations" shaped by the sun's magnetic field. In still another, an area above the sun's atmosphere looks like it has the texture of one of those rubber spike balls you can get at Chuck E. Cheese. The list goes on in terms of awesome DKIST data, and that's with only a few years of time online.
But DKIST wouldn't be the only at-risk NSO facility, as Keller explained. If Trump's FY26 budget proposal goes through, just $4 million would be available for all other NSO equipment. "We can maybe operate three ground stations," he said, suggesting this would eradicate all of helioseismology. There may only be some room for space weather forecasting initiatives, Keller said.
"If something goes wrong; if something really fails, we won't have the money to fix it," he added.
"Congress can fix it, and all citizens here, you know what to do."

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Medscape

19 minutes ago

• Medscape

Once-Weekly Efsitora Noninferior to Daily Insulin in T2D

CHICAGO — The investigational once-weekly basal insulin analog efsitora alfa lowered A1c as effectively as daily basal insulins in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who require insulin, showed three trials from the QWINT global phase 3 clinical trial program. However, two of the trials showed increased mild hypoglycemia in patients treated with efsitora, which some experts say is a concern. The QWINT-1 trial compared the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose regimen of efsitora with once-daily glargine for 52 weeks in insulin-naive people with T2D; QWINT-3 compared efsitora with daily degludec for 78 weeks in adults already taking basal insulin; and QWINT-4 compared efsitora with daily glargine for 26 weeks in adults with T2D taking both basal and pre-meal bolus insulin. Results from the three trials were presented on June 22 during a single symposium here at the American Diabetes Association (ADA) 85th Scientific Sessions and simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine (QWINT-1) and The Lancet (QWINT-3 and QWINT-4). QWINT-1: Fixed-Dose Efsitora QWINT-1 was an open-label trial of 795 adults with T2D who had not previously taken insulin. Participants were randomized to weekly efsitora delivered by a single-use auto-injector or daily injected insulin glargine. Efsitora was titrated to four fixed doses at 4-week intervals, as needed for blood glucose control. At week 52, efsitora had reduced A1c from 8.20% at baseline to 7.05% (–1.19 percentage points), compared with 8.28% to 7.08% with glargine (–1.16 percentage points), confirming noninferiority. "The novel fixed-dose regimen used in QWINT-1 for once-weekly efsitora, with titration options of only four different doses, can facilitate and substantially simplify initiating and escalating insulin therapy, potentially changing the insulin management paradigm in type 2 diabetes," lead investigator Julio Rosenstock, MD, senior scientific advisor for Velocity Clinical Research and clinical professor of medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, said during a press briefing held at the meeting. In addition, the rate of combined clinically significant hypoglycemia (< 54 mg/dL) or severe hypoglycemia (requiring assistance for treatment) was significantly lower with efsitora than glargine (0.50 vs 0.88 events per participant-year of exposure with glargine [estimated rate ratio, 0.57]). In an editorial accompanying QWINT-1, NEJM Deputy Editor Julie R. Ingelfinger, MD, and Clifford J. Rosen, MD, director of clinical and translational research and a senior scientist at Maine Medical Center's Research Institute, Scarborough, write: "The present trial of efsitora potentially offers a ready-made and possibly straightforward algorithm for dose escalation. If packaged at a widely affordable price, efsitora would most likely simplify glycemic control for many persons with type 2 diabetes." However, limitations of QWINT-1 include the open-label design and lack of use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), Ingelfinger and Rosen note. QWINT-3 and QWINT-4 In both QWINT-3 and QWINT-4, efsitora was administered using traditional insulin dosing with adjustments based on each patient's glucose level. In QWINT-3, 986 adults with T2D who had already been treated with basal insulin and other noninsulin glucose-lowering medications, were randomized 2:1 to weekly efsitora or daily degludec. At week 26, A1c decreased by 0.81 percentage points with efsitora versus 0.72 with degludec, also meeting the noninferiority margin. Combined level 2 and 3 hypoglycemia from baseline to week 78 was similar in the efsitora and degludec groups, at 0.84 versus 0.74 events per patient-year, respectively. However, level 1 (mild) hypoglycemia was significantly more common with efsitora (8.34 vs 6.05; P = .0005). Nine deaths occurred during the trial but none were related to study treatment. In QWINT-4, 730 participants with T2D who had been treated with both basal and prandial insulin and up to three noninsulin glucose-lowering agents were randomized to efsitora or glargine U100, both with premeal insulin lispro. Mean baseline A1c was 8.18%. At 26 weeks, mean A1c was 7.17% in the efsitora group and 7.18% in the glargine group, meeting noninferiority criteria. As in QWINT-3, rates of moderate/severe hypoglycemia in QWINT-4 did not differ between the efsitora and glargine groups (6.6 vs 5.9 events per patient-year; P = .44), but mild hypoglycemia was more common with efsitora (25.3 vs 19.0; P < .0004). Other adverse event rates were similar. Is Hypoglycemia a Problem With Weekly Insulin? These three new studies round out the QWINT program, as results from QWINT-5, in type 1 diabetes (T1D), and from QWINT-2, in insulin-naive adults with T2D, were presented at the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) 2024 Annual Meeting. Hypoglycemia emerged as a significant issue with efsitora compared with insulin degludec in adults with T1D in the QWINT-5 trial. Another once-weekly insulin analog, Novo-Nordisk's insulin Icodec, has been approved under the brand name Awiqli in the European Union, Canada, Australia, Japan, and Switzerland for T1D and T2D, and in China for T2D. However, the US Food and Drug Administration requested more data to address the concern about hypoglycemia in T1D. "The risk of hypoglycemia remains a crucial factor when evaluating the safety of novel insulin preparations with a long half-life, such as efsitora, which has a half-life of 17 days," wrote Edith WK Chow, MD, and Elaine Chow, MD, PhD, both of The Chinese University of Hong Kong, in an editorial accompanying QWINT-3 and QWINT-4. "In both trials, the efsitora group had higher rates of overall level 1 hypoglycemia. When stratified by study timeline, higher rates of hypoglycemia were observed within the first 12 weeks of the study in both trials," they point out. In addition, they note that because CGM use was only intermittent and masked for participants, "the actual rate of hypoglycemic events might be underestimated, especially in the presence of hypoglycemia unawareness, which has been reported to be as high as 40% of people with type 2 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring. Even asymptomatic episodes might be associated with increased cardiovascular risk." Asked about this at the press briefing, Rosenstock said that the increased mild hypoglycemia was "just little numerical imbalances. And the most important thing is that the number of events per patient per year are very low. It's less than one event per patient per year. I think that is something that we can take." Asked to comment on all three new QWINT studies, independent industry consultant Charles Alexander, MD, told Medscape Medical News : "Whether once-weekly insulin will be an advantage compared to once-daily insulin will depend upon factors like cost, convenience, and individual preference." Ingelfinger and Rosen agree with Alexander that the use of efsitora may depend on coverage, cost, and availability. "Long-term, formal government approval for efsitora is awaited, and uptake by patients is not yet known," they write. "The advent of newer or more effective noninsulin hypoglycemic drugs such as the GLP-1 receptor agonists, which simultaneously also produce weight loss, might ultimately be a more appealing option than efsitora and allow greater patient adherence than weekly insulin in some patients with type 2 diabetes." Despite these unknowns and caveats, the development of even longer-acting insulins now offers promising options for better glucose control in this disease," Ingelfinger and Rosen conclude. Rosenstock has reported receiving research grant support from, serving on advisory boards for, and/or receiving consulting fees honoraria from Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Biomea Fusion, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corcept, Eli Lilly, Hanmi, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Oramed, Pfizer, Regeneron, Regor Therapeutics, Roche, Sanofi, Structure Therapeutics, and Terns Pharmaceuticals. Ingelfinger is a licensee of St. Martin's Press. Edith WK Chow has reported receiving travel sponsorship from Boehringer Ingelheim. Elaine Chow has reported receiving speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Sinocare and institutional research grant support from Hua Medicine, Merck KGaA, and Medtronic Diabetes. All proceeds were donated to The Chinese University of Hong Kong for research purposes. Rosen and Alexander had no disclosures.

Bloomberg

23 minutes ago

• Bloomberg

Oil Surges, US Futures Drop After Strikes on Iran: Markets Wrap

Markets were jolted by the US launching strikes on Iran's nuclear sites over the weekend, a sharp escalation that sent oil prices surging and the dollar higher in early trading. West Texas Intermediate crude jumped as much as 4.6% and S&P 500 futures dropped. The dollar climbed against the euro and most major peers, while gold edged higher. Bitcoin earlier slid below $100,000 for the first time since May and Ether sank sharply as cryptocurrencies posted broad-based declines.

Gizmodo

24 minutes ago

• Gizmodo

Elon Musk's Trillion-Dollar Robotaxi Gamble Is Here

The wait is finally over. After years of promises from its eccentric CEO, Tesla debuted its highly anticipated robotaxi service on June 22 in Austin, Texas, a launch that is central to the company's entire future. This isn't just about a new feature; it's the cornerstone of Elon Musk's narrative that Tesla is not merely a car company but a world-changing AI and robotics powerhouse. As the automaker faces fierce competition from Chinese rivals like BYD, the success or failure of its autonomous vision could define its next chapter. 'The @Tesla_AI robotaxi launch begins in Austin this afternoon with customers paying a $4.20 flat fee!' Musk announced on X, followed by posts congratulating his teams. The @Tesla_AI robotaxi launch begins in Austin this afternoon with customers paying a $4.20 flat fee! — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 22, 2025The service kicked off with a small fleet of 10 to 20 Model Y SUVs navigating public roads. In a demo posted by Tesla, users within a specific 'geofenced' area in south Austin can hail a ride through a dedicated app. The concept is simple: a taxi with no human driver. However, the reality of this 'limited launch' is more cautious. The first rides were given to a select group of influencers and fans, and videos posted by the company show a 'safety monitor' sitting in the passenger seat, a detail at odds with the fully autonomous dream. — Tesla (@Tesla) June 22, 2025Musk himself admitted the company is being 'super paranoid about safety,' a sentiment that seems justified given a new Texas law requiring state permits for self-driving vehicles, set to take effect on September 1. Tentatively, June 22. We are being super paranoid about safety, so the date could shift. First Tesla that drives itself from factory end of line all the way to a customer house is June 28. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 11, 2025At its core, the robotaxi is a vehicle powered by the most advanced version of Tesla's Full Self-Driving (FSD) system and a suite of eight cameras. But unlike competitors, Tesla claims its system doesn't need expensive, pre-mapped service areas. 'It just works,' the company posted on X, promising future expansion to cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles. For Musk, this is the culmination of a long-standing promise. He envisions a future fleet, including a new 'Cybercab' and 'Robovan' with no steering wheels or pedals, that could boost Tesla's market value by an astonishing $5 trillion to $10 trillion. On June 20, Tesla was worth $1.04 trillion, the 11th most valuable company globally. By comparison, Microsoft ($3.54T), Nvidia ($3.50T), and Apple ($3.00T) top the leaderboard. Financial bulls share his optimism. 'My view is the golden age of autonomous vehicles starting on Sunday in Austin for Tesla,' said Wedbush analyst Dan Ives. 'I believe it's a trillion dollar valuation opportunity for Tesla.' Investor Cathie Wood's ARK Invest predicts robotaxis could account for 90% of Tesla's profits by 2029. If they are right, this weekend's launch was existential. 🚨BREAKING: Dan Ives says Tesla's biggest growth chapter starts Sunday with Robotaxis He calls it a $1 trillion opportunity — Muskonomy (@muskonomy) June 21, 2025But there's a huge problem: Tesla may be late to the party. Waymo, Google's self-driving unit and the current market leader, already operates in Austin with a larger service area, as well as in Phoenix, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. Zoox, backed by Amazon, is live in Las Vegas and San Francisco and is testing in several other cities. The question isn't whether Tesla's robotaxis will work. It's whether they'll work better and faster than everyone else's. This fierce competition has led skeptics to dismiss Musk's grand projections. They argue that Tesla is unlikely to dominate a market where established players already have a significant head start. 'What valuation will be attached to Tesla autonomy when it has to split the autonomous ride hailing market with others?' asks investor Gary Black, whose fund has sold all of its Tesla shares. The $TSLA debate is not about Tesla robotaxi vs Waymo or Zoox, or whether TSLA robotaxi will work at 99.99% efficacy. Of course it will work or Elon wouldn't be moving forward with the Austin robotaxi launch today. The question – which bulls painfully avoid – is when others… — Gary Black (@garyblack00) June 22, 2025This is the multi-trillion-dollar question. Is the Austin launch the dawn of Tesla's next great chapter, or is it a cautious, overhyped entry into a race it may have already lost?