IO+ EN

Largest deep tech round: €330 million Nearfield Instruments

Mon, 22 Jun 2026 14:21:40 GMT

The Rotterdam-based deep tech company Nearfield Instruments has raised €330 million. This makes it the largest deep tech investment ever in the Netherlands. The funding round values the company at more than €1 billion, placing Nearfield among the first Dutch deep tech unicorns.

Both new and existing investors are participating in the funding round. Among others, Fidelity Investments and the Qatar Investment Authority are joining, alongside existing investors such as Temasek, Walden Catalyst Ventures, Innovation Industries, M&G, TNO, and ING.

Measurement and inspection systems

Nearfield Instruments develops advanced measurement and inspection systems for the production of the latest generation of chips. This technology makes it possible to accurately monitor extremely small and complex chip structures during the manufacturing process. This is essential for the continued development of artificial intelligence, data centers, and digital infrastructure, which require increasingly powerful and energy-efficient chips.

'Highly succesful funding round'

“This highly successful funding round marks a defining moment in our journey and reflects the growing strategic importance of metrology and inspection in the era of AI-driven semiconductor innovation” says Dr. Hamed Sadeghian, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer of Nearfield Instruments. “We are proud to welcome the continued support of existing investors and the confidence of new global investors who understand both the scale of the opportunity ahead and the critical role Nearfield is positioned to play in the semiconductor ecosystem.”

“With this investment, we have one clear vision: to serve our customers with the highest execution, reliability, and speed while delivering breakthrough metrology and inspection solutions for the next generation of semiconductor devices. Nearfield is no longer an emerging player—we’re building a global technology company that’s here to stay, scale, and lead.”

Tech leaders demand swift of establishment NADI innovation agency

Mon, 22 Jun 2026 08:27:04 GMT

The Netherlands ranks among the world’s leaders in scientific research. Yet we are not doing enough to turn this knowledge into thriving companies. Promising technologies often fail in the early stages of development. This gap is known as the “Valley of Death.” A broad coalition of universities, investors, and major technology companies is now calling for action 🔗︎. In an open letter to the House of Representatives, they advocate for the rapid establishment of the National Agency for Disruptive Innovation (NADI) 🔗︎. This agency is intended to ensure that groundbreaking inventions no longer remain on the back burner or are lost to other countries 🔗︎. The coalition promises to participate immediately and invest its own funds if the government steps up 🔗︎.

The gap between the lab and the market

The fundamental problem in the Dutch innovation chain is the lack of venture capital for early-stage, unproven technologies. Universities produce excellent research. However, funding for this research stops as soon as the theory has been proven. For private investors, the step toward a commercial product is still far too risky at this stage. This creates a yawning gap in which promising ideas are lost. Sometimes foreign parties acquire the technology. As a result, the Dutch economy does not benefit from its own public investments. The signatories of the open letter now want to break this pattern 🔗︎. Among them are ASML CEO Peter Wennink and various university presidents 🔗︎. They see NADI as the missing link that dares to shoulder this technological risk 🔗︎. By investing precisely during this vulnerable phase, the Netherlands can begin building and scaling up its own inventions 🔗︎.

The proven ARPA model

The concept behind NADI is not new, but is based on successful international examples 🔗︎. The U.S. agency DARPA has been known for decades for its revolutionary breakthroughs, such as the internet, GPS, and mRNA technology 🔗︎. The United Kingdom, with ARIA, and Germany, with SPRIND, also operate according to this philosophy 🔗︎. This approach differs significantly from traditional grant processes. Within these agencies, a single program manager is given full authority over a specific societal problem 🔗︎. This manager receives a generous budget and the freedom to fund multiple potential solutions simultaneously 🔗︎. Projects that show results quickly receive additional funding 🔗︎. Projects that stall are immediately shut down 🔗︎. This agile and rapid approach ensures that innovations reach the market in record time 🔗︎.

Debate over budget

A major sticking point in the plans is funding. In its coalition agreement, the current cabinet has set aside 500 million euros for the agency 🔗︎. However, this amount is earmarked as revolving capital 🔗︎. This means the money must ultimately pay for itself. The innovation sector and various experts have strongly criticized this. The Institute for Public Economics argues that this requirement undermines the agency’s effectiveness. After all, disruptive innovation, by definition, entails significant risks. Many projects will fail. The requirement for a financial return has a paralyzing effect at this early stage. The influential Wennink report therefore recommends a different model 🔗︎. This report advocates for an initial capital of at least 300 million euros, supplemented by 150 million euros per year 🔗︎. According to the experts, a total of 1.5 to 2 billion euros in direct funding is needed to make a real impact 🔗︎.

Independence as a success factor

In addition to a sufficient budget, political independence is crucial to NADI’s success 🔗︎. In its draft plan, the NADI Exploration Project Group emphasizes that the agency must operate outside the political issues of the day 🔗︎. Civil servants and politicians must not interfere with the day-to-day decisions of the program leaders. The legal framework for this autonomy is currently still under development 🔗︎. The Ministry of Economic Affairs is seeking a balance between public accountability and operational freedom 🔗︎. The legislation must ensure that NADI can act quickly and flexibly, just like its foreign counterparts. If the agency is hampered by slow bureaucracy and complex rules, it will lose its effectiveness. The House of Representatives will debate the exact legal status of the new organization in the coming months.

Collaboration within the ecosystem

NADI will not operate in isolation but must integrate seamlessly into the existing Dutch ecosystem 🔗︎. The plans call for close collaboration with the national investment agency Invest-NL 🔗︎. The roles of both organizations are strictly separate but complementary. While NADI focuses on the early, high-risk research phase, Invest-NL focuses on the later scaling-up phase 🔗︎. As soon as a technology from a NADI program proves viable, Invest-NL can step in with growth capital. Private investors and regional development agencies are also ready to take on this role 🔗︎. This value-chain approach prevents innovations from ultimately failing after the initial research has been completed. The collaboration is intended to ensure that capital is deployed efficiently and that promising technologies remain in Dutch hands.

Looking to the future

The establishment of NADI is now in a decisive phase. The Ministry of Economic Affairs is currently working on further elaborating the mission and operating procedures 🔗︎. New policy letters are expected before the summer of 2026 to provide greater clarity.

Droppie raises €4.2 million to expand its recycling stores

Mon, 22 Jun 2026 08:13:18 GMT

The Dutch startup Droppie has raised €4.2 million in growth capital to significantly expand its network of recycling stores. The company aims to grow from 13 to 70 locations in major cities throughout the Netherlands. Droppie operates a one-stop recycling store where consumers can drop off items such as textiles, returnable packaging, old appliances, and cooking oil.

Rewarding consumers directly

Droppie focuses on encouraging better waste separation by directly rewarding consumers for turning in materials such as plastic packaging, textiles, and small electronics. In the stores, this is done via the so-called Dropbot: an AI-powered drop-off machine that recognizes the material, weighs it, and automatically issues a reward through the Droppie app.

High-quality recycling

According to the company, cleaner collection is essential for high-quality recycling. Many waste streams in the Netherlands are currently contaminated, making it difficult to reuse materials. By collecting waste directly from consumers and linking it to a digital system, a more traceable and cleaner flow of raw materials is created.

This development is part of a broader context. Europe aims to reduce its dependence on imported raw materials and, through legislation such as the PPWR, is increasingly prioritizing the use of recycled materials. At the same time, recycled materials often remain more expensive and scarcer than newly produced materials, partly due to inefficient collection.

Jobs for people facing barriers to employment

In addition to its environmental impact, Droppie also has a social mission. With support from investors such as the Amsterdam Climate and Energy Fund and the Social Impact Fund, the company is creating jobs for people facing barriers to employment.

Collecting data

With the new funding, Droppie aims to further roll out its technology and collect data on waste streams, so that manufacturers can better demonstrate which recycled materials they use. In this way, the company hopes to become a key link in the Netherlands’ circular economy.

This is how Europe can become sovereign in payment tech

Mon, 22 Jun 2026 04:30:00 GMT

Among Europe's many dependencies is the payment system. American companies, chiefly Visa and Mastercard, handle 61% of the euro-area card transactions. Can Europe become sovereign in payment technology, and if so, how?

The topic was the center of the discussion of the "Strengthening Europe's Financial Resilience: Building Competitive and Secure Payment Systems" session, part of the EU Digital Summit, which took place in Brussels on June 9.

A panel of experts delved into the topic, underscoring that, rather than a clear roadmap, embarking on this journey would entail a series of trade-offs the bloc would have to confront.

The infrastructure exists

However dependent, Europe doesn’t have to start from scratch to build its payment system. EBA Clearing’s head of Legal, Regulatory and Corporate Shared Services, Jessica Ramos, put it plainly: “It's not about the infrastructure — the infrastructure components are already there. It's more about what we're going to do on the front end.”

EBA Clearing is a provider of a pan-European payment infrastructure, with the main European banks as its shareholders. According to Ramos, the system processes 33 billion transactions a year with a value of €75 trillion, reaching nearly 5,000 participants across Europe.

The incoming digital euro

The consumer-facing solutions built on top of the existing infrastructure will ultimately make a difference. Géraldine Mahieu, representing the European Commission's economic policy directorate, underlined how the forthcoming digital euro initiative is another step in this direction. The proposed central bank currency would be a digital form of cash, complementing banknotes and coins.

The deputy director general made it clear that the digital euro is being designed to work with the private sector rather than against it — and that the Commission has "no intention to favor one solution over another." The goal, she said, is simply to "enrich the choice for the consumer — that's the only thing we want, and the more diversity, the better off we are."

Martina Weimert, CEO of EPI — the company behind the pan-European wallet Wero — backed this approach and underlined how her company would integrate the digital euro as soon as it is ready.

However, she also argued that the public sector could be of great help if it opened up acceptance infrastructure — such as Wero – rather than duplicate what private players are already building: "The public sector can support this by opening up the acceptance network, rather than just providing the digital euro itself. I think that way we can make quicker progress towards our shared goal."

An existing industrial policy gap

Weimert also argued that Europe is missing something more fundamental than infrastructure: "In payments, what we've been missing is a real industrial policy. We have one for transport and one for energy. Why don't we have one for payments? Payments are so crucial — without payments, there's no commerce; without commerce, there's no economy."

Her critique was that Brussels is currently running too many parallel initiatives — instant payments rollout, the digital euro, digital identity — without aligning timelines: "It can't be that we line up so many initiatives in one period. It's unbearable for the private sector to implement." The result, she warned, is that the EU risks losing ground to stablecoins, to which "we have no answer," while industry scrambles to keep up. Her conclusion: "We're challengers — so we need to work together, not compete with each other."

Ramos offered a partial counter: regulation, while sometimes excessive, has also been what actually drives adoption. "Instant payments have existed since 2017 — but sometimes regulatory innovation is absolutely necessary to make things happen." The Instant Payments Regulation, she argued, was what finally moved the needle — suggesting that for sovereignty goals to translate into real usage, mandates may be unavoidable.

European payments model: vision or reality?

Overall, the panel outlined a version of payments sovereignty that better connects what already exists. The digital euro as a shared infrastructure rather than a competitor, and interoperable wallets are some of them.

Questions remain. How fast will the digital euro’s legal framework be finalized, and whether the EU can align its overlapping initiatives, and whether a diversity of providers can reduce EU dependence on foreign tech are points still to be addressed. Defining these aspects will clarify whether the vision of a European payments infrastructure will become a reality or yet another entry in a long list of unfinished ambitions.

Irish lasers help build the internet in space

Sun, 21 Jun 2026 11:00:00 GMT

The space industry is on the verge of a revolution in data communications. Traditional radio signals are reaching their physical limits as demand for data grows explosively. Laser-driven optical communication offers a solution. Irish company Mbryonics is taking a major step by selecting the laser technology of fellow Irish company Pilot Photonics 🔗︎. Together, they will develop the next generation of optical transceivers. This technology is expected to enable an unprecedentedly fast and stable network beyond Earth’s atmosphere 🔗︎.

Flashes of light instead of radio waves

Satellites still mainly transmit data via radio waves. This method is reliable, but its bandwidth is limited. Meanwhile, the amount of data collected in space is growing exponentially. Optical communication using lasers offers a way forward. With this technology, satellites can transmit data through directed beams of light. This enables much higher data speeds. Mbryonics is playing a key role in this transition with its StarCom product line 🔗︎.

The company works closely with the European Space Agency (ESA) through the ambitious HydRON project 🔗︎. The project aims to build a fully optical network in space 🔗︎. This network is intended to connect different satellites in various Earth orbits seamlessly 🔗︎. Mbryonics’ transceivers form the crucial link in this infrastructure 🔗︎. They convert electronic data into light signals and back again. By switching to laser technology, the capacity of satellite links could increase to as much as one hundred terabits per second 🔗︎. This opens the door to a true internet in space 🔗︎.

Pilot Photonics’ technological breakthrough

Reliable laser communication in space requires extremely precise equipment. Mbryonics has therefore chosen Pilot Photonics’ advanced laser sources 🔗︎. These lasers are not only highly compact, but can also be tuned extremely quickly 🔗︎. They use so-called nanosecond tuning 🔗︎. This is a crucial specification for communication between moving satellites. Satellites travel at enormous speeds relative to one another, causing the Doppler effect, in which the frequency of light shifts.

Pilot Photonics’ lasers can adjust their wavelength within nanoseconds to compensate for this shift 🔗︎. In addition, the lasers have a very narrow linewidth. This means that the light is extremely pure, preventing noise on the link. Thanks to these characteristics, the transceivers can maintain stable and coherent connections across vast distances in space. The technology has been specifically designed to withstand the extreme conditions beyond Earth’s atmosphere, including intense cosmic radiation and major temperature fluctuations. The components are therefore “rad-hard by design”, ensuring a long operational life.

Scaling up to mass production

Demand for optical terminals for satellites is growing rapidly. Mbryonics is therefore preparing for a substantial production scale-up. The company currently uses the Photon-1 facility in Galway, Ireland 🔗︎. To meet future demand, it is building a new production facility in Shannon called Photon-2 🔗︎. This state-of-the-art plant is expected to be fully operational by 2027 🔗︎. The goal is to produce thousands of optical terminals per year there 🔗︎. Volume production of the transceivers is expected to start as early as the second quarter of 2025 🔗︎.

By keeping production in-house and in Ireland, Mbryonics retains full control over quality and the supply chain. The collaboration with Pilot Photonics strengthens that position. The two companies complement each other perfectly through their specialist expertise. The short physical distance between the Irish partners also facilitates rapid prototyping and hardware testing. This is essential for keeping the time to market for these complex systems as short as possible.

Global standards and interoperability

One major bottleneck in today’s space industry is that systems from different manufacturers often cannot communicate with each other. Mbryonics wants to break down this barrier. The company is pursuing full interoperability between different satellite constellations. To achieve this, Mbryonics is working not only with Pilot Photonics, but has also entered into a strategic partnership with Japanese telecom giant NTT 🔗︎. Together, they are integrating advanced DSP chips into the optical transceivers 🔗︎. These chips process digital signals and allow the transceivers to switch flexibly between different communication standards 🔗︎.

Mbryonics is also actively involved in the US DARPA Space-BACN programme. This programme is specifically aimed at connecting different commercial and military satellite networks. By meeting these demanding international standards, Mbryonics’ transceivers become attractive to a very broad market. Satellite operators can then expand their networks easily, without having to worry about compatibility issues. This clears the way for a global, optical space network.

European autonomy in the chip sector

The collaboration between the two Irish technology companies also has an important geopolitical dimension. Europe wants to become less dependent on technology from other parts of the world, especially in semiconductors and photonics. The Mbryonics–Pilot Photonics project fits this ambition perfectly. Development is partly supported by the EU Chips Joint Undertaking project, which has a budget of €110 million 🔗︎. This initiative focuses on strengthening Europe’s strategic autonomy in silicon photonics.

By developing and manufacturing this technology in Europe, the European Union is safeguarding its own access to space. The success of this collaboration shows that Europe has the expertise needed to take the lead in the next phase of space exploration. The combination of Irish innovative strength and European financial support provides a solid foundation for the future. In the years ahead, the integration of photonics into space technology will only increase, with Mbryonics and Pilot Photonics at the forefront.

A patent is only valuable if you do something with it

Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:00:00 GMT

A patent can give you a monopoly. That sounds like hitting the jackpot: twenty years of protection, competitors kept at bay, and exclusive rights to a technology. But a monopoly without a strategy can be surprisingly worthless. The question isn’t just whether you can protect something, but above all what you do with that protection afterward.

Take FDM 3D printing. Today, we know it as the technique in which a printer builds an object layer by layer from molten plastic. The basis for this was patented in 1989 by Stratasys. Technically, it was very well designed. On paper, the company had exactly what many entrepreneurs want: a strong position around a technology that could transform an entire industry.

Yet real growth didn’t come until much later. When the basic patent expired in 2009, the market exploded. MakerBot emerged, the RepRap project grew rapidly, and universities, startups, and hobbyists began experimenting en masse with FDM printers. What had been protected for years suddenly became the foundation of an entire industry.

But what if Stratasys had opted for a different strategy earlier on? For example, through licensing, partnerships, or an ecosystem in which others could contribute in a controlled manner? After all, a patent doesn’t just give you the right to exclude others. It also gives you the ability to admit others under certain conditions.

Lock or Key?

A patent can act as a lock on the door. But sometimes it’s actually a key. You can shield a technology, but you can also use it to accelerate market growth. When more parties work with your technology, it often creates greater demand for materials, services, knowledge, and follow-up innovations. Sometimes a larger ecosystem is ultimately more valuable than a completely closed market.

That doesn’t mean protection is wrong. On the contrary. Without a patent, Stratasys might never have had the time and space to bring FDM printing to technical maturity. The patent provided protection, focus, and a head start. But it does show that protection in and of itself is not a business model.

The Real Thinking

A patent is therefore not an endpoint. It is a strategic starting point. The real thinking only begins after the application is filed. Will you manufacture the product yourself? Will you sell licenses? Are you looking for partners? Do you want to set a standard? Or will you use the patent primarily to keep competitors at bay?

The value of a patent lies not only in owning it, but also in how you use it. Sometimes that means protecting it vigorously. Other times, it means sharing it, licensing it, or deliberately allowing the market to grow.

A monopoly is nice. But the strategy determines what it actually yields.

The IO+ Week: From strategy to execution, this is Dutch High Tech

Sun, 21 Jun 2026 05:30:00 GMT

At the Holland High Tech Networking Event in The Hague, one question kept returning: how can the Netherlands turn its scientific strength and promising technology ecosystems into industrial and strategic power? As media partner, IO+ was there to follow the conversations between entrepreneurs, researchers, policymakers and defence leaders. We recorded three podcasts during the day, which will be published soon. Until then, three stories from the event offer a clear impression of the urgency and ambition in the room.

One of the strongest messages came from the world of robotics. AI is moving off the screen and into factories, warehouses, energy sites and logistics systems. Cognitive robotics promises machines that can recognise, learn and adapt, but the real breakthrough will depend on much more than impressive demos. It requires industrial data, safe and reliable systems, skilled integrators and people who can translate decades of manufacturing craftsmanship into a new generation of automation.

And now we're talking about the (mega)watts that matter in AI... The same challenge runs through the future of compute. The Netherlands has exceptional strengths in semiconductors, quantum, photonics and advanced systems, yet scientific excellence alone will not secure a strategic position. As demand for computing power rises, energy becomes scarcer and geopolitical dependencies deepen, the task is to connect the full stack: chips, sensors, cables, software, manufacturing capacity and talent. The conclusion of Holland High Tech’s event was as practical as it was ambitious: stop adding new layers of strategy and start scaling what already exists.

Read our first stories from the event (and watch this space for the podcasts!):

Holland High Tech wants acceleration: from strategy to execution

The future of compute is a scaling challenge

AI gets a body: why Robotics 2.0 starts now

But, as always, there was much more to enjoy:

Social media is not the whole misinformation story

Social media can help misinformation spread, but it does not explain on its own why people come to believe it. New research from the Rathenau Institute shows that trust in science is also shaped by personal experience, conversations with family and friends, confidence in institutions, media habits and existing beliefs. The lesson is clear: effective responses must go beyond platforms and fact-checking alone.https://ioplus.nl/en/posts/social-media-not-the-only-factor-for-belief-in-misinformation

Two cities, one technology story

Bangalore-born, Eindhoven-based entrepreneur Vishwanath NG sees striking parallels between the two cities: both grew around strong technological anchors, attracted global talent and developed ecosystems that compound their strengths over time. His personal perspective adds depth to the emerging Netherlands–Karnataka collaboration in semiconductors, AI, photonics, quantum and cybersecurity.https://ioplus.nl/en/posts/two-cities-one-vision-why-this-tech-alliance-feels-personal

American capital, Dutch control

Dutch deep-tech companies often face their toughest funding challenge when they move beyond the early stage and need serious growth capital. An Invest-NL report explores how American investors can help companies access capital, customers and global markets, while intellectual property, research capacity and talent remain anchored in the Netherlands.https://ioplus.nl/en/posts/how-us-capital-can-scale-dutch-deep-tech-safely

Patents as part of the wind-energy journey

For TouchWind founder and CEO Rikus van de Klippe, patents are not an end in themselves. They are part of building a company around a new approach to floating wind turbines, with angled blades designed to work like a kite and to withstand extreme weather. The story shows how technology development, financing and intellectual-property strategy must evolve together.https://ioplus.nl/en/posts/touchwind-ceo-patents-arent-a-goal-but-a-means-to-innovation

Designing solar panels for a second life

Solar panels have become a cornerstone of the energy transition, but their end-of-life challenge is growing rapidly. At TU Delft, researcher Urvashi Bothra is working on a design that can be taken apart more easily, recover valuable materials and potentially reuse solar cells. Her liquid-filled module concept points toward a more circular solar industry.https://ioplus.nl/en/posts/a-solar-panel-you-can-take-apart-and-reuse

Eight European choices for email sovereignty

Email remains one of the most important—and often overlooked—parts of the digital infrastructure on which organisations depend. This overview of eight European alternatives to Outlook and Gmail examines the growing importance of local data storage, privacy, encryption, legal certainty and digital sovereignty in a world increasingly shaped by cybersecurity requirements and geopolitical tension.https://ioplus.nl/en/posts/8-european-alternatives-to-outlook-and-gmail

Next week: Holst Centre Innovation Day

The conversation continues on Wednesday, 24 June, when Holst Centre celebrates its twentieth anniversary with a special edition of Innovation Day at the Evoluon in Eindhoven. The programme brings together industry, government and research around open innovation, integrated photonics, chip design and packaging, MedTech and the question of how technological breakthroughs can create new industries. IO+ will be reporting from the event, bringing you the stories, people and ideas that shape the next chapter.

A Daily Podcast

Or do you prefer to listen? A new episode of our daily podcast is ready for you every weekday at 6:30 AM. In it, our AI colleagues Oliver and Shelby discuss the two most interesting stories of the day. That makes IO+ Daily the perfect way to start your morning with optimistic news from the world of innovation and technology. See you tomorrow.

Our Other Newsletters

Thank you for reading this newsletter. But there’s more. Subscribing is easy — via the options on the IO+ homepage or simply by clicking one of the newsletters below:

IO+ Daily (1,200 subscribers)
Mauro’s Green Corner (monthly, 13,800 subscribers)
Elcke’s Saturday Data Dive (monthly, 20,550 subscribers)
Elcke en Mauro’s BIO+ Bites (monthly, 29,300 subscribers)
Bart’s Saturday CHIPS (monthly, 16,300 subscribers)

Enjoy your Sunday, and don’t forget: a new episode of IO+ Daily will be waiting for you tomorrow morning at 6:30. Be prepared before you hop on your bike! 🚲

Enjoy your week!

EPFL launches the world's first fully open medical LLMs

Sat, 20 Jun 2026 10:30:00 GMT

Medical large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in clinical settings. For example, AI is helping doctors in emergency rooms to flag diagnoses or support decisions. The problem is that most of these systems are proprietary: their training data, design choices, and decision-making processes are hidden from view, making independent review virtually impossible.

In response, researchers from EPFL’s Laboratory for Intelligent Global Health & Humanitarian Response Technologies (LiGHT) in the School of Computer and Communication Sciences have released MeditronFO (Fully Open), a framework they used to “medicalize” several fully open base models, including OLMo, EuroLLM and Apertus, Switzerland’s model developed by EPFL and ETH Zurich.

“Building on Meditron, first released in 2023, MeditronFO is a pipeline to create a medical version of any open large language model,” explains Xavier Theimer-Lienhard, a PhD student leading Meditron at LiGHT. “We would never trust a clinician whose training can’t be verified, and the same standard should apply to AI in healthcare. MeditronFO makes every stage of development publicly available, from the data used to train the models to the code, training procedures, and evaluation methods.”

Many AI models marketed as “open” are only partially transparent. They release the trained model itself, but not the datasets, data-processing methods or training pipelines used to create it. This makes independent auditing difficult and limits the ability of clinicians, hospitals and regulators to understand how medical AI systems arrive at their recommendations.

From the ground up

MeditronFO was built with clinicians in the room, not as consumers of the end-product, but as participants contributing throughout the process, from curating training data to validating model outputs and highlighting potential safety concerns.

Through MOOVE (Massive Open Online Validation and Evaluations), clinicians participate directly in the ongoing evaluation and improvement of models, helping ensure that development remains grounded in real-world clinical practice. This includes auditing training materials and validated model outputs. The development process also included safeguards.

The framework combines publicly available medical datasets with clinician-reviewed synthetic data derived from medical examinations, clinical guidelines and realistic patient cases. All datasets, processing steps and training procedures are openly documented. The researchers combined a unique set of expert-curated clinical datasets drawn from more than 46,000 clinical practice guidelines.

“Our findings show that competitive medical AI models can be built through the active involvement of clinicians and communities with data and evaluations that reflect the settings where they will ultimately be used. This creates a pathway for health systems and communities to retain greater ownership of these technologies, rather than relying solely on external proprietary systems whose priorities may not always align with local needs,” says Professor Mary-Anne Hartley, medical doctor and Director of LiGHT.

Real-world testing begins

Every MeditronFO model outperformed its original base model. The strongest results came from Apertus-70B-MeditronFO, which improved performance on medical exams by 6.6 percentage points over the underlying model.

“Our results have shown that fully open medical models are achievable and competitive. In medicine, where transparency is a prerequisite and where the stakes are people’s lives, this matters,” says Theimer-Lienhard.

The launch of MeditronFO is an important milestone in the continuation of a broader research program. The team is preparing clinical trials across multiple sites, from Switzerland to Tanzania, to evaluate how doctors use AI in real healthcare settings. These studies will examine whether clinicians follow or reject AI-generated recommendations and how those decisions affect patient care.

This multi-year trial project, called MED.USE, also aims to understand how AI can improve healthcare quality while reducing unnecessary treatments and interventions. “It is important to get real-world feedback based on patient outcomes,” explains Hartley.

Why openness matters

The launch of MeditronFO reflects a broader debate over the future of AI in medicine, centred on transparency and accountability, as well as data sovereignty and fears of growing dependence on proprietary AI platforms. The results demonstrate that fully open approaches can produce medical AI systems that are both transparent and highly competitive.

“The question is not whether AI will become part of healthcare; it already is. The question is what kind of AI ecosystem we want to build. We believe that transparency, scientific scrutiny, and meaningful participation from clinicians and patients should remain central. MeditronFO shows that openness and performance do not have to be competing priorities, and that there is a viable path toward medical AI that is both innovative and accountable,” Hartley concludes.

The development of MeditronFO was supported by the Swiss AI Initiative (a collaborative effort between EPFL, ETH Zurich, and CSCS), which provided computing infrastructure and funding to enable large-scale model training, evaluation, and open release.

(Text by Tanya Petersen, EPFL)

The future of compute is a scaling challenge

Sat, 20 Jun 2026 08:00:00 GMT

Freeke Heijman-te Paske did not present the future of compute as a distant, abstract horizon. She brought it back to a very concrete experience from the Delft quantum ecosystem. She arrives there in her electric car, wants to charge it, and sometimes cannot. Why? Because the power is needed for quantum. It was a small anecdote, but it captured the larger point of her contribution to the Holland High Tech Networking Event: the demand for compute power is growing dramatically, and that growth will not be solved by more of the same.

The future of compute, in her framing, is about new architectures and paradigms: quantum computing, advanced semiconductors, integrated photonics, neuromorphic approaches, and the broader stack around them. These are not fashionable labels. They are responses to a structural problem. AI, digitalisation, simulation, defence, industry and science all require more computing capacity. At the same time, energy use is becoming a limiting factor. “The demand for compute power increases dramatically,” she said. “So we need to innovate to make sure that we can deliver this.”

That makes compute both an economic and a strategic issue. The Netherlands already has a world-class control point in the global semiconductor value chain: ASML. Heijman-te Paske explicitly called that “fantastic” because it gives the country leverage. But one control point is not enough. For the next phase, she argued, the Netherlands needs more technical and strategic positions in the value chain. Compute is not just about chips; it is about the full set of enabling technologies, components, systems, sensors, software and integration capabilities that determine who can build, scale and control the next generation of digital infrastructure.

Growing fast

Her message was therefore not one of concern only. It was also an optimistic assessment of what is already present. The Dutch ecosystem in this field is stronger than it often dares to say out loud. Heijman-te Paske referred to research into a cohort of 65 companies active in areas such as quantum, photonics, neuromorphic computing and advanced semiconductors. These startups and scale-ups are growing fast. She mentioned QuantWare’s recent large Series B round as one visible example of that momentum. The capital attracted by this group is significant, she said, and its share within European tech capital is also growing. “We have something here.”

That sentence could serve as the hinge of her story. The Netherlands has something here: knowledge, companies, talent, infrastructure, and a high-tech ecosystem that already contains many parts of the future compute stack. But having something is not the same as turning it into industrial power. The gap Heijman-te Paske identified is familiar in Dutch deep tech: the early phase works relatively well. Starting companies out of strong research environments is possible. The policy instruments, networks and entrepreneurial culture have improved. But the scaling phase is harder. “From lab to fab, we need to step up our game,” she said.

That phrase gives the story its urgency. Future compute is not waiting for another strategy document. It needs execution. Asked whether she was optimistic that the Netherlands could close the gap, Heijman-te Paske pointed to the growing sense of urgency, the National Technology Strategy and the agendas now being put in place. The direction is clearer than before. The next step, she argued, is to act. Her goal, she said, would be “to stop writing papers” and start executing.

In that sense, her contribution fitted neatly into the broader tone of the Holland High Tech event. Many speakers spoke about acceleration, strategic autonomy and public-private collaboration. Heijman-te Paske translated those themes into the compute domain. If computing is becoming the engine under AI, industry, defence and scientific discovery, then the Netherlands cannot afford to treat quantum, photonics, advanced semiconductors and neuromorphic computing as separate islands. The value lies in the connections.

That was also her final point to the high-tech community in the room. The ecosystem already contains many of the necessary elements. The task is to connect them better. “We need the cables, we need the sensors, AI, the stack,” she said. The call to action is not necessarily to build a new institution, foundation or instrument. It is to “take out the walls” between existing initiatives and create the interconnect.

That is a pragmatic message, but also a demanding one. It asks researchers to think beyond the lab, startups to prepare for industrialisation, established companies to open their supply chains, and policymakers to design instruments that do not stop at the moment a company is founded. Future compute requires more than scientific excellence. It requires manufacturing capacity, energy awareness, supply-chain positioning, system integration and a willingness to scale.

The importance of Heijman-te Paske’s intervention is that she made compute tangible. It is not an invisible layer somewhere behind AI applications. It is the electricity that may prevent a car from charging. It is the ASML-like control point that may or may not exist in the next generation of technology. It is the group of 65 companies that could become a new industrial cluster or remain a promising collection of startups. It is the difference between being good at invention and being strong in production.

For the Netherlands, that difference matters. In a world where computing power becomes a strategic resource, future compute is not just a technology agenda. It is an economic sovereignty agenda. The country has the ingredients, Heijman-te Paske made clear. Now it has to connect them, scale them, and show them. The future of compute will not be won by those who only understand the science. It will be won by those who can turn that science into a working, energy-conscious, strategically relevant industrial ecosystem.

AI gets a body: why Robotics 2.0 starts now

Fri, 19 Jun 2026 10:30:00 GMT

Lukas M. Ziegler likes to call himself a robotics evangelist. Not because robots are a fun toy, but because he is convinced that the next major AI wave will not take place on a screen, but in the physical world. Artificial intelligence can now write texts, generate code, plan trips and accelerate research. But the real breakthrough, he argued during the Holland High Tech Networking Event, will come when AI gets a body. “Physical AI”, or embodied AI, is no longer a hobby topic for technical nerds, but a strategic field for young engineers, companies and institutions. Because "Labour is becoming scarce, demand for production and logistics keeps rising, and robots are no longer merely executing tasks - they are beginning to understand them."

Ziegler started his talk with a simple question: why robotics, and why now? His answer was not primarily technological, but societal. Europe is facing a demographic shift that is unfolding slowly, yet is already being felt everywhere. Demand for production, logistics and services continues to rise, while labour is becoming scarcer. “For the first time in history, human labour is truly becoming a luxury,” he said. We do not want to order less, produce less or wait longer for our parcels. On the contrary: the expectation remains that everything should be delivered tomorrow. “Something has to fill that gap. I believe that something is robotics.”

According to Ziegler, there is a second layer to this: if robots are to play a larger role, a solid technical foundation is needed to maintain, service and safely operate them. Robotisation therefore does not simply mean less manual labour; it also creates a new demand for technical talent. The third factor is the sheer scale of the economy behind logistics. Ziegler referred to the global e-commerce market, which he said is heading towards 7 trillion dollars. “Every dollar of that represents a package that needs to be checked, sorted, shipped and delivered.” Automation, he argued, prevents the system from collapsing under its own weight.

Unimate

Yet his story did not begin with humanoids or AI models, but with Unimate, the classic industrial robot that carried out repetitive tasks at General Motors. That first robot revolution revolved around precision, repeatability and fixed programmes. Robots were strong, reliable and predictable, but also inflexible. Ziegler contrasted that with Robotics 2.0: robots that learn from data, recognise patterns, adapt and are able to work with intention. “In Robotics 1.0, we taught the robot what to do. In Robotics 2.0, we expect the robot to learn by itself.”

According to Ziegler, we are no longer standing at the edge of a new era. We have already entered it. “We are no longer approaching Robotics 2.0,” he said, “we have entered a new era.” The difference is not only better hardware, but above all, data. Companies are building world models, collecting images, movements, and actions, and training robots to handle variation. This also changes the role of system integrators. They no longer merely install and maintain robots; they are close to the customer, the production environment and the industrial data needed to make robots truly smart.

Ziegler showed that cognitive robotics is already visible in many different settings. In oil, gas, chemicals and energy, autonomous or tele-operated robots can inspect dangerous installations. Quadrupeds such as Anybotics’ ATEX-certified robots can enter environments where humans would be at risk, collect data and detect anomalies. In other examples, the value lies less in legs or arms and more in software: robots that translate inspection data into business insights, or autonomous security systems that patrol sites, checking for open gates, intruders, licence plates or holes in fences. The underlying message: robots are not only hardware; they are also software.

Tetris

He then broadened the picture to robot arms, logistics and recycling. Robots can load trucks as if they were playing Tetris, building walls of boxes in real time and using space more efficiently. In recycling, vision systems turn images of waste streams into data, after which materials such as metal, cardboard or aluminium can be classified. Even a robot chef from Cambridge fitted into his story: a system that analyses videos of chefs, derives recipes and tries to reproduce their actions. The example was partly light-hearted, but the lesson was serious: video is valuable training material. Robots can learn from images how the physical world works.

The most charged part of the presentation concerned humanoids. Ziegler acknowledged the hype, but did not avoid the critical question: why should robots look like humans at all? He is sceptical about domestic use. Who wants a 60-kilogram machine in the house that cannot yet be fully trusted? In industry too, he said, the business case is often still weak today. During the Q&A, he was explicit: at the moment, he sees “no real payback” for humanoids in many industrial applications. Sometimes they are mainly a PR instrument, a way for companies to show that they are innovating.

Still, he did not dismiss humanoids. His advice: do not start with the dream of a single robot that can do everything, but with one task. Successful companies often begin with a narrow application, such as moving totes in logistics or welding in a shipyard. Only then do they expand horizontally to similar tasks. The promise of a general-purpose robot that can wash dishes, weld, sort goods and work in warehouses is attractive, but the road towards it is far more complex. Hype can even be useful, Ziegler added later: robotics has long struggled to attract capital and talent. Humanoids open the door to more attention, more investment and more young people choosing robotics.

Cross-embodiment

Three technological breakthroughs could further accelerate the field, according to Ziegler. The first is cross-embodiment: one type of robot brain capable of controlling different forms, from a robot arm to a robot dog or a humanoid. The second is dexterous manipulation: the combination of hardware and software that enables robots to learn fine motor tasks that are obvious to humans but extremely complex for machines. The third is sim-to-real: reducing the gap between simulation and reality, so that robots can learn to deal with scenarios in virtual environments before being deployed physically.

So what is needed to scale robotics for real? Ziegler named four conditions: industrial data, reliability, edge models and integration. There are enough demos and enough lab data, but real production data is often missing. Safety and reliability engineering are crucial if robots are to enter the factory floor. Edge AI is needed because robots cannot always wait for the cloud; they must be able to respond locally, quickly and safely. And integration ultimately determines whether a robot becomes useful in an existing production environment.

For Europe and the Netherlands, Ziegler sees opportunities precisely because of the strong industrial knowledge, system integration and manufacturing base already present here. Dependence on Chinese robot components, actuators and supply chains is increasingly being discussed internationally. European companies can play a role in components, production, integration and safe applications. But that requires talent. His closing message to the hightech audience was therefore strikingly simple: lower the barrier to robotics, start early, and make the field visible and attractive. “Make manufacturing and robotics sexy again,” he said. Not because robots will simply replace people, but because the next industrial wave requires people who can give AI a body.

ASML denies selling advanced chip machine to China

Fri, 19 Jun 2026 08:56:59 GMT

U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has told Dutch chip-equipment maker ASML that Washington fears one of its top-tier chipmaking machines may have ended up in China. That would violate U.S.-led export restrictions, Bloomberg News reported on Thursday. Lutnick raised concerns over ASML's extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography systems with the company's senior leadership during a series of meetings, according to the report.

EUV machines are the only tools in the world capable of printing the smallest, most advanced circuit patterns onto silicon, making them essential for producing cutting-edge chips, including processors used in AI hardware. Their export to China has been banned for years.

ASML's denial

ASML pushed back firmly. In an emailed statement to Reuters, the company said it has never shipped an EUV machine to China, nor any component, module or equipment specially designed for use in one. It also noted that its most advanced EUV systems are roughly the size of a school bus and weigh 180 tons, making covert transport implausible. The U.S. Commerce Department and the White House did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment outside business hours.

The episode follows an April proposal in Washington to require U.S. allies to align with U.S. export controls aimed at curbing China's ability to produce advanced semiconductors, with ASML's equipment specifically named in the bill. ASML said it has consistently challenged claims that it failed to comply with export rules, stating that it has adjusted its business to align with each new regulatory development.

Semiconductor tension

The renewed scrutiny also follows a Reuters report in December that Chinese scientists had built a prototype EUV machine with the help of a team of former ASML engineers, an undertaking some have likened to a Chinese equivalent of the Manhattan Project.

China still accounts for a significant share of ASML's revenue — roughly a third in 2025 — though that exposure is concentrated in older, permitted deep ultraviolet (DUV) systems rather than EUV equipment. For now, Washington has voiced suspicion rather than presented public evidence, but the allegation adds a fresh flashpoint to an already tense U.S.-China semiconductor standoff and raises new questions about how tightly the West can actually police its most critical chipmaking chokepoint.

Social media not the only factor for belief in misinformation

Fri, 19 Jun 2026 07:30:00 GMT

New research by the Rathenau Institute adds nuance to the debate about science, trust, and social media: those who want to combat misinformation need to look beyond platforms and fact-checks.

Anyone concerned about misinformation is quick to point to social media. Videos, posts, and messages circulate there about vaccines, climate change, cultivated meat, or contraception that call the scientific consensus into question. The assumption is often: the more time people spend on social media, the greater the risk that their trust in science will be undermined.

But it is not that simple, according to the new Rathenau report Wikken en Weten. The institute examined the relationship between trust in science and belief in scientific misinformation on social media in the Netherlands. The central conclusion: social media matters, but they are not the only, or even decisive, factor. Misinformation only really takes hold when there is fertile ground for it, shaped by personal experiences, conversations with friends and family, trust in institutions, media use, and previous views about science.

The study combines a representative survey of 8,437 Dutch people with seven focus groups in which participants were presented with social media posts containing scientific claims. In doing so, the Rathenau Institute offers a rare Dutch perspective on a debate that is often conducted on the basis of American research.

More social media, more belief in misinformation, but not for everyone

One of the most striking findings is that there is indeed a link between time spent on social media and belief in scientific misinformation. According to the model, someone who spends less than one hour a day on social media has about a 22 per cent chance of believing at least one of the misinformation statements presented. For one to three hours a day, that rises to about 25 per cent; for more than three hours, to about 33 per cent.

Yet this is not a general effect that applies equally strongly to everyone. The link is particularly visible among people over the age of 45, people with vocational education, people with a lower level of scientific knowledge, people with little trust in science, and users who mainly use Facebook or X. For people under the age of 34, the researchers found no correlation between greater social media use and greater belief in misinformation.

In this respect, the report challenges an important cliché. According to this study, young people who spend a lot of time on TikTok or Instagram do not necessarily constitute the highest-risk group. It is precisely older users who appear more susceptible to the combination of heavy social media use and belief in scientific misinformation.

No evidence that social media undermines trust in science

Perhaps even more important is what the Rathenau Institute does not find. In the Netherlands, more time spent on social media is not associated with lower trust in science. The often-heard assumption that social media in themselves damage trust in science is therefore not supported by these results.

There is, however, a clear correlation between belief in misinformation and trust in science. People who more often believe scientific misinformation have, on average, less trust in science — both in specific scientific domains and in science as a whole. But the direction of that relationship cannot simply be established. It may be that misinformation damages trust, but it may also be that people with little trust are more inclined to believe misinformation. Above all, the study shows that the relationship is reciprocal and context-dependent.

For policymakers, that is a crucial nuance. Those who focus solely on removing or correcting online misinformation may be missing a large part of the problem.

The importance of a varied information diet

A second important finding concerns what the report calls the “scientific information diet”: the diversity of channels through which people encounter science. This includes newspapers, television, podcasts, popular science magazines, social media, but also conversations with family and friends.

The more diverse the information diet, the greater the trust in science. And because higher trust is linked to less belief in misinformation, people with a broader information diet also tend, on average, to believe scientific misinformation less often. When social media are the main channel for scientific information, this is associated with lower trust in science.

This makes the task of science communication broader than simply “explaining more”. It is not only about the content of individual messages, but also about the environment in which people encounter science. A message from a university, a conversation with a doctor, an explanatory article in a newspaper, and a podcast with a researcher can together mean more than a single fact-check under a viral post.

People weigh more than facts alone

The focus groups show how complex this assessment is in practice. People do not judge scientific claims on social media by using a fixed checklist. They pay attention to text and images, to the sender, to the platform, to the content of the message, and to whether they can verify the information. But at least as important is their own frame of reference: previous experiences, stories from people they know, basic attitudes towards science, and trust in institutions.

For example, a participant may find a message about health more reliable when it aligns with their own experience with a doctor or medicine. Another person may trust information sooner when it comes from an established institution such as the NVWA, the Consumers’ Association, or a general practitioner. At the same time, scientific information can appear less reliable once it becomes politically charged. During the focus groups, some participants distinguished between distrust of science and distrust of the political use of science.

That is an important lesson at a time when science increasingly plays a role in major social debates: climate, health, agriculture, AI, energy, and security. Scientific knowledge is never just information; it enters a landscape of interests, experiences, and trust.

Less alarmism, more connection

The Rathenau Institute also warns of a risk in the way misinformation is addressed. Alarmist communication about misinformation, including fact-checks, can backfire when it reinforces general distrust of information. Constantly stressing that people are being misled may unintentionally feed the feeling that nothing can be trusted anymore.

The options for action mentioned in the report are therefore broader. Healthcare providers and other professionals should be aware that beliefs do not arise only online. Policymakers, science journalists, and science communicators can work towards a more diverse information diet, especially among groups that are more susceptible to misinformation. The government could consider setting up a reporting point for harmful scientific misinformation. Social media platforms should give independent researchers better access to data, so that it becomes clearer how misinformation actually spreads.

The core message is therefore less technological than is often assumed. Of course algorithms, platforms, and online networks play a role. But trust also emerges — and disappears — at the kitchen table, in the consulting room, at work, in the newspaper, at school, and in conversations with neighbours, friends, and family.

Those who want to protect science from misinformation should therefore not look only at the screen. The real question is what happens before someone opens that screen.

Two cities, one vision: Why this tech alliance feels personal

Fri, 19 Jun 2026 04:30:00 GMT

By Vishwanath NG — IT Leader, Entrepreneur & Community Builder | Bangalore-born, Eindhoven-based

I have a habit of watching cities transform. I grew up in Bangalore when it was still called the Garden City: wide roads, cool weather, quiet neighbourhoods. Then the BPO wave arrived. Then the tech giants. Before we knew it, Bangalore had shed its garden and grown a new identity: India's Silicon City. The city didn't just grow; it burst beyond its original limits, absorbing surrounding rural areas into its ever-expanding orbit.

In 2016, I moved to Eindhoven, Netherlands. Back then, people would smile and say, "Oh, the Philips city." A mid-sized Dutch town, dominated by one company, surrounded by green. Quiet. Understated. Sound familiar? Today, Eindhoven is the fastest-growing municipality in North Brabant - absorbing neighbouring territory, building 3,000 new homes a year to keep pace, and firmly established as the High Tech City of the Netherlands. If Bangalore is India's Silicon City, Eindhoven is fast becoming its Dutch equivalent. I have watched both cities make that journey, which is why the recently announced Netherlands-Karnataka collaboration feels less like news and more like something long overdue.

Same playbook, different timezone

What NASSCOM and Electronic City did for Bangalore, Brainport Eindhoven is doing here: building an ecosystem where companies don't just survive, they compound. The High Tech Campus, home to 300+ companies and 12,500+ researchers from 85 nationalities, welcomes startups and global innovators with the infrastructure and intent to do so. Both regions share the same formula: anchor a world-class institution, build an ecosystem around it, and open the doors wide for talent and startups to follow.

That formula is now connecting the two.

The Alliance is taking shape

India and the Netherlands signed landmark agreements in late 2025, creating a Partnership in Semiconductors and Related Emerging Technologies, connecting the Dutch Semicon Competence Centre to India's Semiconductor Mission, and targeting collaboration in AI, photonics, quantum technologies, and cybersecurity. Karnataka is a natural anchor: Bengaluru is India's chip design capital, home to R&D centres of Intel, Qualcomm, AMD, and Synopsys, and in 2025 the state announced a new 200-acre semiconductor park near Bengaluru within a 5,000-acre R&D zone.

On the academic front, a Memorandum of Cooperation between Eindhoven University of Technology and the University of Twente with six leading Indian institutions - IISc Bangalore, IIT Bombay, IIT Delhi, IIT Gandhinagar, IIT Guwahati, and IIT Madras - creates a semiconductor brain bridge, backed by industry partners including ASML, NXP, and Tata. Crucially, IISc Bangalore, Karnataka's own premier research institution, sits at the heart of this academic alliance.

On MedTech, the Netherlands Enterprise Agency launched structured innovation missions to India, with Bengaluru as a key hub, focusing on AI-driven diagnostics, digital health, and co-creation between Dutch and Indian innovators.

Karnataka's own Startup Policy 2025–30, backed by ₹518 crore (almost 50M euros) and targeting 25,000 new startups, places international collaboration as one of its seven core pillars. The Dutch side matches that ambition: Brainport's ecosystem, the High Tech Campus, and organisations actively working to welcome international entrepreneurs make the Netherlands, and Eindhoven in particular, one of the most accessible innovation regions in Europe for startups looking to land and grow.

Why this matters beyond the headlines

Bilateral agreements often look impressive on paper and move slowly in practice. What makes this one different is that both sides are building from genuine complementarity, not just political goodwill. Karnataka brings scale, engineering depth, and cost-competitive innovation. The Netherlands brings precision manufacturing expertise, regulatory maturity, and a deeptech ecosystem built over four decades. Neither side is trying to replicate the other. They are filling each other's gaps.

The cities mirror this. Bengaluru and Eindhoven are not competing; they are converging. Both grew from a single industry. Both became something far larger. Both are now actively expanding to accommodate the growth that ambition creates.

A bridge worth building

As someone who has worked in technology as a Transition and Transformation IT Director, built businesses, and actively contributes to both ecosystems, I see immense opportunities ahead. Through NIEC (Netherlands International Entrepreneur Centre), we support entrepreneurs and companies seeking to establish and expand their presence in the Netherlands, particularly in the Brainport region. Through ICIN (Indian Centre in the Netherlands), we continue to strengthen connections between Indian and Dutch communities, professionals, and businesses. My involvement with the Brainport International Talent Sounding Board has further reinforced the importance of international collaboration in building the next generation of innovation ecosystems.

For me, Bengaluru will always be home, and Eindhoven has become my second home. Having witnessed the transformation of both cities firsthand, I believe the Karnataka–Netherlands partnership is not simply another international agreement. It is the coming together of two regions that understand the power of technology, talent, and entrepreneurship.

The future of innovation will be built through global collaboration. Looking at the journey of Bengaluru and Eindhoven, I believe this partnership is only the beginning.

Vishwanath NG is an IT Transition & Transformation Leader and Entrepreneur based in Eindhoven. Founder of NIEC (Netherlands International Entrepreneur Center), President of the Indian Center in Netherlands (ICIN), and a member of Brainport's International Talent Sounding Board.

New Amsterdam AI hub targets Europe sovereignty gap

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 08:53:21 GMT

A new AI hub is set to open in Amsterdam this September, positioning itself as Europe's answer to growing concerns about the continent's dependence on foreign AI technology.

Called The Stack, the initiative will occupy 4,500 square metres at Jacob Bontiusplaats 9 in the Oostenburg district. It is designed to bring together founders, investors, and corporate partners under one roof — with the explicit goal of building European AI capability rather than simply buying it from abroad.

"The news that Anthropic's latest AI models are now no longer available to Europe is a harsh wake-up call," said Esther Bisschop, The Stack's founding director, whose previous company, Th3rd, was acquired by Snap Inc. in 2022. "Our digital infrastructure still relies too heavily on players outside our continent. We are not here to celebrate European AI potential. We are here to make sure it stops being potential and starts being a product."

A home for AI founders

The Stack was co-founded by Dutch AI entrepreneurs Lennard Zwart (Ascending AI), Maarten Stolk (Deeploy, Enjins), and Philip Gast (AdamI, The AI Foundry), along with the Dutch startup accelerator Techleap. The project has raised more than €10 million in private capital, and counts global quantitative trading firm IMC as a founding partner. ABN AMRO, ClickHouse, Deloitte, Google, Miro, and Prosus round out the founding partner list, with backing from the City of Amsterdam.

Among the first confirmed tenants are Ubicloud, Dawnguard, and Iconic Works. The hub intends to house a curated group of the Netherlands' fastest-growing AI startups, providing not only office space but also labs, development programmes, and a purpose-built events venue for hackathons, investor days, and product demos.

The ambition extends well beyond a co-working space. By 2029, The Stack plans to expand to 12,000 square metres and accommodate more than 200 founders. It also aims to serve as a hub within a wider network of European tech clusters, reinforcing what organisers describe as the Eindhoven–Amsterdam corridor as a leading axis for AI innovation.

Notably, the founding partners include several American technology companies — a tension the founders address directly. "Sovereignty is not obtained by exclusion but through collaboration," the press release states, framing European and global partnerships as complementary rather than contradictory.

How US capital can scale Dutch deep tech safely

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 08:05:29 GMT

The Netherlands builds world-class science, but it struggles to scale its most promising innovations. While Dutch universities and labs produce breakthrough technologies, local companies often hit a wall when they need late-stage growth capital. A report by national investment arm Invest-NL reveals that American venture capital has become a vital catalyst for these firms.

Rather than a threat to national sovereignty, transatlantic capital offers a strategic bridge to global markets. However, this relationship requires active management. To maintain its competitive edge, the Netherlands must learn to welcome American dollars while keeping its core intellectual property, research, and talent firmly anchored at home.

The reality of the late-stage funding gap

The analysis underlines how funding disparity between Europe and the United States becomes starkly visible as technology companies mature. In the early stages, European investors fund up to 93% of deep tech rounds. However, when companies reach Series C and larger growth phases, they require deep capital pools that European markets currently lack.

According to recent data, American participation in Dutch funding rounds between €50 million and €100 million surged from 14% to 40% in recent years, while European participation in the same segment dropped from 55% to 21%. American investors bring specialized sector expertise, immediate access to the world’s largest homogeneous market, and vital connections to corporate partners.

For sectors like semiconductors, photonics, and quantum computing, the United States houses the primary customer base and the most viable exit routes. Forcing Dutch firms to rely solely on domestic capital limits their ability to compete globally.

The rise of the layered expansion model

Critics often fear that accepting American capital triggers an immediate brain drain, pulling Dutch companies entirely across the Atlantic. The data, however, tells a different story. According to Invest-NL findings, only 3.1% of Dutch startups ultimately relocate their parent entities abroad. Instead, successful deep tech firms adopt a "layered expansion model".

Under this structure, companies establish a corporate or commercial subsidiary in the United States to handle sales, marketing, and investor relations. Meanwhile, they keep their core engineering, research and development, and technical talent rooted in the Netherlands.

By keeping the scientific engine in Europe and the commercial engine in the United States, deep tech founders can scale rapidly without stripping their home country of economic value. The goal is to build global champions with deep Dutch roots.

Avoiding the pitfalls of the Delaware flip

Despite the benefits of layered expansion, American investors often pressure European startups to execute a "Delaware flip, relocating the parent company to the US, a process which can create severe legal and operational risks if executed poorly.

A primary danger is "legal limbo," where the new American parent fails to secure proper ownership of the underlying technology. To prevent this, Dutch firms must ensure that all employees and contractors explicitly assign their intellectual property to the correct legal entity. Furthermore, founders can avoid the pressure to flip by structuring their Dutch entities to mirror American investor expectations.

Implementing United States-style preferred stock, drafting robust shareholder agreements with clear investor veto rights, and aligning deal terms with National Venture Capital Association standards can satisfy American funds. These mechanisms allow Dutch firms to attract institutional capital without changing their legal seat or losing control of their core technology.

Stricter safeguards and the expanding Vifo Act

As geopolitical tensions rise, the terms of transatlantic deal-making are shifting from purely economic decisions to matters of national security. The Dutch government is actively intervening to protect critical technologies from unwanted foreign control. Effective January 1, 2027, the government will expand the Act on Security Screening of Investments, Mergers, and Acquisitions, known as the Vifo Act.

This expansion adds six strategic sectors to the mandatory screening registry: biotechnology, AI, advanced materials, nanotechnology, sensor and navigation technology, and medical nuclear technology. While these regulations aim to block undesirable technology transfers, they must remain proportionate. Invest-NL underscores how overly restrictive policies risk choking off the very capital that Dutch deep tech companies need to scale. The challenge for Dutch policymakers is to design a system that protects national security interests while keeping the country open to trusted international investment syndicates.

Mobilizing capital to build a resilient flywheel

Relying entirely on American capital is not a sustainable long-term strategy for European competitiveness, the report concludes. The Netherlands must simultaneously mobilize its own institutional wealth, particularly from pension funds and insurance companies, which remain historically risk-averse.

Currently, European deep tech remains relatively resilient, with nearly half of its investment coming from domestic sources or European funds. However, matching the ticket sizes of American growth rounds requires deeper domestic participation. To bridge this gap, the newly integrated national investment institutions of Invest-NL and Invest International can act as an anchor, co-investing alongside American venture funds.

This ensures that Dutch public and private entities maintain a seat at the table during critical late-stage decisions. Ultimately, the goal is to create an "exit flywheel". When a Dutch deep tech company succeeds globally, the resulting capital, talent, and entrepreneurial expertise must circulate back into the local ecosystem. This reinvestment cycle will fuel the next generation of Dutch innovation.

Holland High Tech wants acceleration: from strategy to execution

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 07:00:00 GMT

At Holland High Tech’s annual Networking Event, high-tech, government and defence came together around one central question: how can the Netherlands ensure that innovation does not remain stuck in plans, but grows into strategic strength?

At the Fokker Terminal in The Hague, the event's message was already evident in its title: Ignite Innovation: Accelerating Dutch High Tech. Technology is no longer a choice, Holland High Tech stated in the run-up to the event, but a foundation for resilience, autonomy and sustainable growth. The programme therefore brought together industry, knowledge institutions and government around themes such as cognitive robotics, future of compute, semicon, circular economy, the National Technology Strategy and defence innovation.

That breadth was no accidental sum of parts. In the words of Peter Stolk, chair of Holland High Tech, the organisation stands “at the intersection of government policy and the high-tech ecosystem”. Where last year he still expressed the hope that a new cabinet would embrace the knowledge and innovation economy, he could now conclude that “a major step” has been taken in that direction. According to him, the National Technology Strategy, the industrial policy agenda and the strategic markets provide direction to a landscape in which Holland High Tech is increasingly taking on the role of connector, programmer and adviser.

Leo Warmerdam, executive director of Holland High Tech, made that role concrete. In 2025, Holland High Tech funded 168 projects with a total project volume of €87 million, about half of which came from subsidies and the other half from contributions by participating companies. He also pointed to the programme council that is now up and running, with eleven innovation domains closely linked to the National Technology Strategy (NTS). The underlying message: public-private cooperation is no longer a side issue, but the way in which the Netherlands must organise its technological position.

Robotics evangelist

The urgency became immediately clear in Lukas M. Ziegler's keynote. The European robotics evangelist, who says he has seen more than 150 robotics companies from the inside since 2018, placed cognitive robotics at the heart of the next industrial wave. According to him, AI has already changed the digital world; now AI is getting a body. “Physical AI”, he said, is no longer a hobby topic for nerds but is recognised by young engineers, investors and institutes as a strategic field. Robots that can perceive, reason and adapt are, according to him, no longer a distant future. “We are no longer approaching Robotics 2.0,” he said, “we have entered a new era.”

Ziegler linked that technological leap to three developments: ageing, labour shortages and the explosion of e-commerce. According to him, labour is becoming a luxury for the first time in history. At the same time, consumers still want their package delivered tomorrow. In that tension, robotics is not a gadget but a necessary engine for productivity. Still, he warned against hype. The most promising humanoids, he said, do not start as all-rounders, but with one task: welding, moving boxes, inspecting, sorting. First, excel in one application, only then expand horizontally. And “in all honesty”, he added: “At the moment, there is still no logical business model available that would justify purchasing a batch of humanoid robots.”

Flexible automation

Ton Peijnenburg, CTO of VDL Enabling Technologies Group and member of the programme council, extended that line to the Dutch manufacturing industry. For him, the great promise of cognitive robotics lies in flexible automation. While classical automation often gets stuck at low volumes, with limited variation and difficult ROI, robots with recognition and learning capabilities can become more widely deployable. In that way, they can strengthen productivity and competitiveness. But Peijnenburg also made clear where the real value lies: in data and craftsmanship. “There is an enormous amount of craftsmanship in our industries,” he said. “If we want to automate that, we need to transfer that craftsmanship to robots; that makes craftsmanship an asset.” The Netherlands should not simply give away that asset.

This also made robotics a matter of strategic autonomy. Peijnenburg saw three routes: applying robots in domestic industry, supplying components and production capacity for robotics, and building automation systems in which new types of robots can find their place. According to him, Holland High Tech can take on the missing role of orchestrator in this. Earlier robotics initiatives partly failed because parties moved past each other. What is needed now is system development: technology, application knowledge, chips, AI, sensors, data and production must come together.

Sharper choices

Tjerk Opmeer, deputy director-general for Enterprise & Innovation at the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy, placed that call in a geopolitical context. The world is becoming more complex, he said, with the rise of Asia, China’s strategic position and changing relations with the United States. Precisely for that reason, Europe, and within it the Netherlands, must make sharper choices. The Dutch high-tech position is strong, from fundamental research to system integration, from start-ups to major companies. But the question is where the Netherlands wants to be indispensable. “We cannot be the best at everything,” was the underlying message. Focus is necessary.

That focus took different forms in the programme. In the breakout session Next Steps in Semicon, the move from roadmap to execution was central, with Semicon Vision 2035 as the starting point. In the session on the National Technology Strategy, the discussion focused on action agendas and innovation coalitions: how policy is translated into consortia, calls and projects. The circular economy session focused on scalable, joint value chains for high-tech systems. And in the live podcast sessions by IO+, the discussion was broadened to include voices from the innovation ecosystem, including Ziegler, Opmeer, and Neways CEO Hans Büthker.

Dual use

The most urgent tone came from the defence sector. In the breakout Innovation in Security & Defence, the focus was on accelerated dual-use ecosystems: how high-tech SMEs can contribute to defence innovation and European strategic autonomy. Holland High Tech pointed to a new innovation domain: High-Tech Security. In addition, there is a strategic programme with €2.5 million in annual funding for three years, and the SME Defence Call was mentioned, for which interest was “unprecedentedly” high.

Carla Andela, responsible for space technology at Defence, showed how concrete that cooperation is becoming. Spaceflight is no longer a niche, but part of military and civil resilience, she said. A range of factors plays a role in this: GPS disruption, space weather, space debris, and the protection of satellites require sensors, cyber technology, quantum technology, and launch capacity. According to her, Europe still launches far too little compared with SpaceX. The message to the room was clear: Defence may want many things, but it needs industry and knowledge institutions to develop the armed forces of the future.

Charlotte Rugers, senior innovation manager COMMIT for quantum, brought a sober test to a domain that is quickly surrounded by big promises. For Defence, she said, the principle is: “Only quantum if it really makes a difference.” Quantum can be relevant for sensors, computing, networks and understanding new threats, but soldiers in the field have no use for technology for technology’s sake. It must work, be integrated into systems and contribute to a successful mission.

Jasper Heeren, Defence Innovation & Production Orchestrator for smart materials, zoomed in on materials. “Composites can save weight and provide protection; additive manufacturing can enable local production and reduce dependence on logistics chains; metamaterials can help make things less visible at radar, infrared or acoustic level.” But perhaps his most important point was that materials are worth little without a manufacturing industry. “Ultimately, those materials are of no use to us if we cannot also produce them,” he said.

Innovation can go wrong

That idea connected with the plenary speech by State Secretary Derk Boswijk. He began with a story from 1888, when a fatal accident involving electricity was seized upon by the oil and petroleum industry to portray electrical innovation as dangerous. Yes, innovation can go wrong, Boswijk said. But that must not be an excuse to stop. “When it comes to defence, the most dangerous thing you can do is play it safe.” The war in Ukraine shows, according to him, that playing it safe is not an option: those who fall behind lose.

Boswijk placed the biggest innovation challenge not with a new type of drone or tank, but with collaboration. “The biggest innovation we need to realise is closer cooperation between knowledge institutions, schools, universities and companies.” In doing so, government must learn to accept that not everything can be captured in Excel in advance. Defence will more often formulate effects and ask the ecosystem to help think about solutions. That requires trust, risk acceptance and a willingness to make mistakes.

Demand for computing power

Freeke Heijman-te Paske, vice president QuIC for Qblox and strategic adviser to Holland High Tech, then shifted the gaze to the future of compute. Demand for computing power is growing explosively, while energy consumption and geopolitical dependencies are increasing. “With ASML, the Netherlands has an exceptionally strong control point, but it needs more such strategic positions in the value chain.” In advanced semiconductors, quantum, integrated photonics, neuromorphic computing and high-performance computing, she sees an ecosystem that is already much stronger than is often said. Research shows, according to her, that 65 fast-growing companies are active in this domain, representing a substantial share of tech capital. But the bottleneck lies in scaling up: from lab to fab, the Netherlands must “step up our game”.

Her appeal was pragmatic. Stop constantly inventing new structures; break down walls between initiatives and connect what already exists. “We need the cables, we need the sensors, AI, the whole stack,” she said. The future of compute is therefore not a separate technology dossier, but the digital backbone of the economy, industry and defence.

At the end of the programme, that line came together in the presentation of the SME High-Tech and SME Defence call projects. With Esther Kersten on behalf of Holland High Tech and Derk Boswijk on behalf of Defence, the importance of SMEs was further emphasised. Kersten highlighted the role of SMEs as the engine of the economy: teams that push the boundaries every day of what is possible and manufacturable. Boswijk praised the quality of the proposals and saw in them exactly the connection needed: linking the innovation ecosystem to Defence's needs.

Tangible foundation

In this way, the Networking Event became more than an annual meeting with lunch, an innovation market and dinner. The stands with innovation brokers, KIEM Hightech projects, student teams, SME Call projects and Growth Fund programmes gave the programme a tangible foundation: this is about companies, consortia and people bringing technology into application. The closing networking reception was therefore not a side issue, but part of the method.

The relevance of the day lay precisely there. The Netherlands has strategies, agendas and strong ecosystems. But the speakers repeatedly raised the bar: accelerate, choose, scale up and dare. Cognitive robotics requires industrial data and system integration. Future of compute requires new control points. Defence requires dual-use innovation that does not stop at R&D, but pushes through to implementation. Semicon, circularity and the National Technology Strategy all require execution.

Holland High Tech positioned itself in The Hague as the place where those lines come together. Not because one organisation has all the answers, but because no one can deliver them alone. Or, as Stolk and Warmerdam showed at the start: the high-tech ecosystem stands at a crossroads. The question is no longer whether the Netherlands must accelerate. The question is whether it will succeed in converting the energy of this day into production, cooperation and strategic strength.

TouchWind CEO: ‘Patents aren't a goal, but a means to innovation’

Thu, 18 Jun 2026 04:30:00 GMT

Rikus van de Klippe is a born inventor. It all began in the 1970s, when, as a child during the oil crisis, he laid the groundwork for his future wind energy startups on car-free Sundays. “Of course, I loved biking on the highway, but I also realized that the whole world was dependent on oil,” says Van de Klippe. “It was an exciting time back then, just like it is now.”

After studying aerospace engineering with a focus on business administration, he founded his first startup. “I saw that we could do much more with wind energy than was happening at the time.” He is now the founder and CEO of TouchWind, the third wind energy startup under his name. The company is currently in an exciting development phase, in which it is further developing the technology, protecting its inventions with patents, and seeking the right financing.

For its patent applications, TouchWind receives support from, among others, the Netherlands Patent Office and various patent attorneys. Van de Klippe: “It’s really nice to have a sparring partner in this. The world of patents can be tricky. As an inventor and entrepreneur, you’re at the heart of the innovation and the product, but when you read the patent, it can sometimes get quite complex.”

A wind turbine like a kite

TouchWind is developing different kinds of floating wind turbines. The blades of the wind turbine are not perpendicular to the wind but angled, just like a kite. That is more efficient. The startup is currently conducting several pilot projects to test the technology. “We have a Japanese investor. In Japan, they are looking for incredibly strong wind turbines, because they have to deal with typhoons.” The blades of TouchWind’s wind turbines can shift to a horizontal position during a severe storm. “Then it resembles a helicopter, and the wind can easily blow around it without causing major damage,” explains Van de Klippe.

Thanks to this technology, combined with their floating design, the wind turbines are larger and more powerful than their onshore counterparts. “We’re currently working on a relatively small model with a diameter of 120 meters. Those are the largest onshore models, but at sea we can also look at a diameter of 200 meters,” says the entrepreneur.

Protecting the product with patents

Securing intellectual property (IP), for instance, through patents, is an important step in a startup's development. “You need it to attract investors. No investor will get on board if you haven’t protected the product,” he states. TouchWind’s Japanese investor, Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, thoroughly examined the patent and then used that information to build a model of its own. “That shows how important IP is to them.”

Trust

Patents instill trust not only in investors but also in employees. Van de Klippe says, “Ultimately, as an entrepreneur, you’re going to build a team. I’ve noticed that people often ask for proof that the new technology is being implemented. But you don’t have that proof yet in the beginning. People basically have to trust me on my word. Then we’ll continue developing together and see if we can turn the plans into reality.” That requires something extra from startup employees. “They have to be open to this process and also enjoy being a part of it.”

Patents as a tool

Van de Klippe says he’s now well-versed in “the game of patents.” “Many inventors see a patent as an end in itself. But for me, it isn’t. I see it as a tool to ultimately continue building a product and a company.” The patent offers a certain degree of protection for the technology and the product, but it also has a downside, the entrepreneur notes. “When you file a patent, you’re also telling everyone how the technology works. All documents are made public. If, at some point in the process, you can no longer pay the fees, the patent expires, and the technology becomes the property of the whole world.”

Strategy and fortune-telling

That is why, according to Van de Klippe, it is also relevant to consider what information you choose to include in a patent and at what point. “Anything you include in the patent cannot be patented independently at a later date. Information from a patent becomes public, and then you cannot apply for a new patent for it because it is no longer novel,” he explains.

During the patent process, startups also explore where international growth opportunities lie. “You really have to think a few steps ahead for that. Because international developments and relations between countries play a major role. It remains very challenging for a relatively small startup to be dealing with all of that,” Van de Klippe notes. “Of course, it’s important to come up with a good strategy for this, but it’s also a bit like reading tea leaves.”

Perseverance

Ultimately, the development of the technology, securing patents, and finding the right financing all proceed in parallel. “There’s no clear-cut order to follow. That makes it difficult at times, because you don’t know in advance what the right move is,” says Van de Klippe. Making mistakes is part of the process. “As an inventor and entrepreneur, it’s important to stand behind your product, even when things get tough.”

Wind turbines on a ship

Sometimes, perspectives one did not previously consider may emerge, Van de Klippe notes. “We are currently in talks with a Dutch company that wants to use these wind turbines for Wind-Assisted Ship Propulsion (WASP).” The wind turbine would be mounted on a ship, and the rotor's thrust would propel it, reducing fuel consumption. “We hadn’t considered that as a possibility before. That’s exactly what’s so exciting about building a startup,” he says.

Trade secrets

In addition to patents, TouchWind is also developing a strategy regarding employee confidentiality. “That’s quite complicated. On the one hand, as a startup, you eventually reach a point where you need to create different layers within the team, with some team members handling confidential information and others not. Such matters must therefore be laid out in contracts,” he explains. But simply signing certain contracts isn’t enough, according to the entrepreneur. “It also needs to be safeguarded internally.”

Moreover, the CEO wants to ensure open communication among team members. “You shouldn’t completely shut yourself off either. Everyone needs to understand the company's philosophy and the technology. Otherwise, you can’t brainstorm.”

Ultimately, Van de Klippe has one dream: to develop new technology to realize his vision for wind energy. He concludes: “Patents are not an end in themselves, but a means to better innovations.”

Scientists crack key barrier in AI memory technology

Wed, 17 Jun 2026 12:06:54 GMT

Researchers at Belgian semiconductor institute imec have announced two breakthroughs in a type of memory technology that many in the chip industry believe could solve one of AI's most pressing hardware problems: the looming collapse of conventional memory.

The findings, presented Tuesday at the 2026 IEEE/JSAP Symposium on VLSI Technology & Circuits in Kyoto, target what engineers call ferroelectric memory — a class of chip storage that can hold data without continuous power, switch states at low voltages, and potentially pack far more information into a smaller space than today's standard memory chips.

AI workloads are consuming memory at a pace that conventional technology was never designed to handle. The dominant chip memory standard, DRAM, is approaching the limits of how small and efficient it can be made — and the cost and energy demands of scaling it further are becoming untenable for data centers running AI at scale.

On the way to faster memories

imec's first result addresses the reliability of ferroelectric capacitors, a core memory building block. The team demonstrated that these devices can operate at roughly 1.3 volts — low enough to meaningfully cut power consumption — while enduring more than ten trillion data cycles without failure. That level of durability is a prerequisite for any memory technology hoping to compete in AI infrastructure, where chips run continuously under heavy load.

The second result is more structurally novel. imec built the world's first working vertical stack of five ferroelectric memory transistors, layered directly on top of one another in a single column. The technique — already familiar from flash storage in solid-state drives — has never been successfully demonstrated for this type of device. Stacking vertically multiplies storage density without requiring ever-finer chip manufacturing, a key advantage as traditional scaling hits its limits.

Sustaining the growth of AI

The team also solved a longstanding flaw in this class of transistor: difficulty erasing stored data. By adding a second gate to the device architecture, researchers significantly improved erase efficiency — a fix that moves the technology closer to practical use.

Attilio Belmonte, a program director at imec, said the results demonstrate how advances in materials science and chip integration can work in tandem. "This work shows how imec's multidisciplinary expertise enables us to tackle some of the most pressing challenges in memory technology," he said. Colleague Maarten Rosmeulen added that the institute is "exploring multiple paths toward the memory solutions that will be required to sustain the rapid growth of AI."

Neither technology is ready for commercial production. The research center says further work is needed on manufacturing consistency and long-term reliability before either approach could appear in real AI hardware. The institute plans to begin system-level testing next, integrating the devices into full-chip architectures to evaluate their performance under real-world conditions.

Vertoro secures €17 million to scale renewable oil

Wed, 17 Jun 2026 07:47:55 GMT

Dutch renewable oil developer Vertoro closed a €17 million Series B funding round. The company developed a technology to transform plant-based residues and agricultural waste into a highly flexible, low-carbon crude oil alternative. This platform bridges the gap between raw biomass and existing industrial infrastructure, offering a practical pathway to phase out fossil resources.

At the heart of Vertoro's market appeal is a processing technology that is simpler than traditional biofuel methods. Most conventional biomass conversion systems rely on complex catalytic reactions, high operating temperatures, and extreme pressure. These requirements drive up capital expenditure and complicate plant operations. In contrast, Vertoro's system operates at low temperatures and low pressures without requiring expensive catalysts. The output of this process is a highly stable, liquid renewable oil that can directly replace fossil crude in existing refinery infrastructure.

Decarbonizing heavy industries

Vertoro's renewable oil offers an immediate solution for heavy industries that are notoriously difficult to decarbonize. Unlike single-use biofuels, this bio-crude is highly versatile. In the near term, Vertoro is targeting high-value chemical applications, where the oil serves as a sustainable feedstock for materials like thermoplastics. As production scales, the same oil can serve directly as a drop-in fuel for maritime shipping, offering immediate emissions reductions without requiring modifications to existing vessel engines

“Vertoro is building a bridge between sustainable biomass and the global fuel system,” said Dirk den Ouden, incoming CEO of Vertoro. “By creating a renewable oil that can serve multiple industries, from chemicals to shipping to aviation, we can scale faster and deliver meaningful emissions reductions sooner.”

Strategic funding for commercial expansion

The newly secured €17 million funding round will directly accelerate Vertoro's transition from technology validation to commercial production. The company currently operates a demonstration plant in Geleen, Netherlands, to refine its process and produce material for customer trials. However, the primary focus of this capital injection is the construction of a 5-kiloton-per-annum commercial plant at the Port of Rotterdam. Scheduled to begin operations by January 31, 2027, this facility will serve as the commercial launchpad for Vertoro's renewable oil.

Following the successful deployment of the Rotterdam plant, the company plans to design and license larger, full-scale commercial facilities with capacities ranging from 100 to 250 kilotons per annum.

The transaction consists of €10 million in new capital and €7 million in converted loan notes. Backers include Invest-NL, Climate Tech Partners, and the shipping giant Maersk, as well as regional Dutch funds.

Julien Manhes, Airbus Head of Sustainable Aviation Fuel and Carbon Dioxide Removal, welcomed the new investment. "SAF has the potential to reduce aviation emissions by up to 80% on a through-life basis. Renewable energy companies like Vertoro are helping make this a reality while addressing the need to fast-track fuel security by bringing production closer to the source of feedstocks."

Dutch economy under pressure from Middle East instability

Wed, 17 Jun 2026 07:21:38 GMT

Ongoing geopolitical conflict in the Middle East is taking a measurable toll on the Dutch economy. A new report by RaboResearch has downgraded the Netherlands' national growth forecast for 2026 to 1.0% — a 0.4 percentage point reduction from earlier estimates — and six regions are now projected to experience outright economic contraction: IJmond, De Kop van Noord-Holland, Oost-Zuid-Holland, Oost-Groningen, Zuidoost-Drenthe, and Zuid-Limburg.

The crisis is exposing a deepening structural split. Energy-intensive sectors such as manufacturing, construction, transport, and logistics are bearing the brunt of the damage, while high-tech regions remain comparatively insulated. Groot-Amsterdam and Brainport Eindhoven continue to grow on the back of strong global demand for IT and semiconductor equipment. Only four regions — including Utrecht and Zuidoost-Noord-Brabant — are on track to meet the 1.5% growth benchmark set by the "Rapport Wennink," the government's framework for long-term national prosperity. Overig Groningen faces the sharpest downgrade, with projected growth falling from 1.4% to just 0.5%.

Pressures and the government response

The damage is flowing through two main channels: disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz and volatile energy markets. Instability around the strait — a vital chokepoint for global energy and fertilizer flows — has driven urea prices up 55% and international freight costs up 43%, squeezing Dutch agriculture in particular. Peak natural gas prices have doubled, pushing up the cost of steel, aluminum, and petrochemicals for manufacturers. Cargo ships rerouting around the Cape of Good Hope are adding 10 to 14 days to transit times, compounding delays and forcing companies to absorb expensive war-risk insurance surcharges. Energy-intensive industries, unable to pass these costs onto consumers, are seeing margins erode rapidly.

The Dutch Cabinet has responded with a €967 million emergency relief package, comprising €627 million in direct spending and €340 million in tax relief. Practical measures include eliminating road tax for trucks for the remainder of 2026, halving road tax for small commercial vans for at least six months, and raising the untaxed travel allowance to €0.25 per kilometer. The government has also activated the first phase of its national oil crisis plan. These are explicitly short-term stabilization measures, however — there are no tailored recovery plans for the six contracting regions specifically.

Investment climate at risk

The slowdown threatens the Netherlands' longer-term investment ambitions. The Rapport Wennink identified a need for €19 billion in annual investment to sustain future productivity, with 70% expected to come from the private sector. That target looks increasingly out of reach. RaboResearch projects GDP growth will slow further to 0.8% in 2027, while inflation has risen to 2.7% — a combination that tightens fiscal space and dampens corporate appetite for investment. Persistent structural barriers, including electricity grid congestion and nitrogen emission limits, are blocking new projects even where funding exists.

RaboResearch does not expect the Strait of Hormuz to reopen structurally until late 2026, meaning volatility is likely to persist. The contrast between struggling industrial regions and thriving tech hubs points clearly to where resilience lies: energy-efficient production and high-value digital industries. Without coordinated investment to modernize infrastructure and reduce dependence on vulnerable global supply chains, a temporary shock risks becoming permanent stagnation.