Connect with us

Business

Rogue Devices Capable Of Triggering Blackouts Reportedly Found In Chinese Solar Panels

Published

2 months ago

5 minute read

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Audrey Streb

“That effectively means there is a built-in way to physically destroy the grid”

Officials are reportedly reassessing the risk posed by Chinese-made devices found in solar panels that are capable of damaging the energy infrastructure, destabilizing the power grid and triggering widespread blackouts.

Over the past nine months, “rogue communication devices” not listed in product documents were found in solar power inverters and batteries from several Chinese suppliers, according to sources familiar with the matter who spoke with Reuters. The undocumented devices were found after U.S. experts disassembled the renewable energy equipment to check for security issues, prompting officials to review the potential dangers of the Chinese-made devices, according to the publication.

“We know that China believes there is value in placing at least some elements of our core infrastructure at risk of destruction or disruption,” Mike Rogers, a former director of the U.S. National Security Agency, told Reuters. “I think that the Chinese are, in part, hoping that the widespread use of inverters limits the options that the West has to deal with the security issue.”

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

The communication devices were reportedly found in power inverters, which are used to connect solar panels and wind turbines to the power grid and are often produced in China. They are also found in electric vehicle chargers, batteries and heat pumps. Undocumented cellular radios were also found in Chinese-manufactured batteries, according to the publication.

If the rogue communication devices found in the inverters are used to circumnavigate firewalls and change the settings or turn off inverters remotely, this could destabilize power grids, damage energy technology and prompt blackouts, according to experts who spoke with Reuters.

“That effectively means there is a built-in way to physically destroy the grid,” one of the sources told the publication.

For years, energy and security experts have cautioned that reliance on Chinese products for green energy could expose the U.S. to espionage and security risks.

A spokesperson for the Department of Energy (DOE) told Reuters that it continually evaluates risks involving new technology and that “while this functionality may not have malicious intent, it is critical for those procuring to have a full understanding of the capabilities of the products received.”

“As more domestic manufacturing takes hold, DOE is working across the federal government to strengthen U.S. supply chains, providing additional opportunities to integrate trusted equipment into the power grid,” the spokesperson continued, noting that the department is working to address any missing disclosure information through “Software Bill of Materials” or inventories of all the parts that make up a software application, in addition to other contract requirements.

“We oppose the generalisation [sic] of the concept of national security, distorting and smearing China’s infrastructure achievements,” a spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in Washington told Reuters.

Republican officials sent a letter advising an American energy company to stop using Chinese-manufactured batteries due to the security risks in December 2023, according to a February 2024 statement.

“We approached Duke Energy regarding its use of Chinese-manufactured CATL batteries and network-equipped systems, which posed an unacceptable surveillance risk at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina — the largest Marine Base in the United States. Directly following our inquiry, Duke disconnected  the Chinese-manufactured systems from the grid,” former Republican Wisconsin Rep. Mike Gallagher and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a U.S. senator for the state of Florida at the time, wrote in the press release. “Others that continue to work with CATL, and other companies under the control of the CCP, should take note,” they continued.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Censorship Industrial Complex / 18 mins ago

Global media alliance colluded with foreign nations to crush free speech in America: House report

Business / 42 mins ago

Elon Musk slams Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ calls for new political party

Health / 12 hours ago

RFK Jr. Unloads Disturbing Vaccine Secrets on Tucker—And Surprises Everyone on Trump

Business

Elon Musk slams Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill,’ calls for new political party

Published on July 1, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Robert Jones

The Tesla CEO warned that Trump’s $5 trillion plan erases DOGE’s cost-cutting gains, while threatening to unseat lawmakers who vote for it.

Elon Musk has reignited his feud with President Donald Trump by denouncing his “Big Beautiful Bill” in a string of social media posts, warning that it would add $5 trillion to the national debt.

“I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it,” Musk exclaimed in an X post last month.

Musk renewed his criticism Monday after weeks of public silence, shaming lawmakers who support it while vowing to unseat Republicans who vote for it.

“They’ll lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth,” he posted on X, while adding that they “should hang their heads in shame.”

The Tesla and SpaceX CEO also threatened to publish images branding those lawmakers as “liars.”

 

Trump responded on Truth Social by accusing Musk of hypocrisy. “He may get more subsidy than any human being in history,” the president wrote. “Without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa… BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED!!!”

Musk responded by saying that even subsidies to his own companies should be cut.

Before and after the 2024 presidential election, Musk spoke out about government subsidies, including ones for electric vehicles, stating that Tesla would benefit if they were eliminated.

This latest exchange marks a new escalation in the long-running and often unpredictable relationship between the two figures. Musk contributed more than $250 million to Trump’s reelection campaign and was later appointed to lead the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which oversaw the termination of more than 120,000 federal employees.

Musk has argued that Trump’s new bill wipes out DOGE’s savings and reveals a deeper structural problem. “We live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!” he wrote, arguing that the legislation should be knows as the “DEBT SLAVERY bill” before calling for a new political party “that actually cares about the people.”

In June, Musk deleted several inflammatory posts about the president, including one claiming that Trump was implicated in the Jeffrey Epstein files. He later acknowledged some of his comments “went too far.” Trump, in response, said the apology was “very nice.”

With the bill still under Senate review, the dispute underscores growing pressure on Trump from fiscal hardliners and tech-aligned conservatives – some of whom helped deliver his return to power. Cracks in the coalition may spell longer term problems for the Make America Great Again movement.

Continue Reading

Business

Massive government child-care plan wreaking havoc across Ontario

Published on June 30, 2025

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Matthew Lau

It’s now more than four years since the federal Liberal government pledged $30 billion in spending over five years for $10-per-day national child care, and more than three years since Ontario’s Progressive Conservative government signed a $13.2 billion deal with the federal government to deliver this child-care plan.

Not surprisingly, with massive government funding came massive government control. While demand for child care has increased due to the government subsidies and lower out-of-pocket costs for parents, the plan significantly restricts how child-care centres operate (including what items participating centres may purchase), and crucially, caps the proportion of government funds available to private for-profit providers.

What have families and taxpayers got for this enormous government effort? Widespread child-care shortages across Ontario.

For example, according to the City of Ottawa, the number of children (aged 0 to 5 years) on child-care waitlists has ballooned by more than 300 per cent since 2019, there are significant disparities in affordable child-care access “with nearly half of neighbourhoods underserved, and limited access in suburban and rural areas,” and families face “significantly higher” costs for before-and-after-school care for school-age children.

In addition, Ottawa families find the system “complex and difficult to navigate” and “fewer child care options exist for children with special needs.” And while 42 per cent of surveyed parents need flexible child care (weekends, evenings, part-time care), only one per cent of child-care centres offer these flexible options. These are clearly not encouraging statistics, and show that a government-knows-best approach does not properly anticipate the diverse needs of diverse families.

Moreover, according to the Peel Region’s 2025 pre-budget submission to the federal government (essentially, a list of asks and recommendations), it “has maximized its for-profit allocation, leaving 1,460 for-profit spaces on a waitlist.” In other words, families can’t access $10-per-day child care—the central promise of the plan—because the government has capped the number of for-profit centres.

Similarly, according to Halton Region’s pre-budget submission to the provincial government, “no additional families can be supported with affordable child care” because, under current provincial rules, government funding can only be used to reduce child-care fees for families already in the program.

And according to a March 2025 Oxford County report, the municipality is experiencing a shortage of child-care staff and access challenges for low-income families and children with special needs. The report includes a grim bureaucratic predication that “provincial expansion targets do not reflect anticipated child care demand.”

Child-care access is also a problem provincewide. In Stratford, which has a population of roughly 33,000, the municipal government reports that more than 1,000 children are on a child-care waitlist. Similarly in Port Colborne (population 20,000), the city’s chief administrative officer told city council in April 2025 there were almost 500 children on daycare waitlists at the beginning of the school term. As of the end of last year, Guelph and Wellington County reportedly had a total of 2,569 full-day child-care spaces for children up to age four, versus a waitlist of 4,559 children—in other words, nearly two times as many children on a waitlist compared to the number of child-care spaces.

More examples. In Prince Edward County, population around 26,000, there are more than 400 children waitlisted for licensed daycare. In Kawartha Lakes and Haliburton County, the child-care waitlist is about 1,500 children long and the average wait time is four years. And in St. Mary’s, there are more than 600 children waitlisted for child care, but in recent years town staff have only been able to move 25 to 30 children off the wait list annually.

The numbers speak for themselves. Massive government spending and control over child care has created havoc for Ontario families and made child-care access worse. This cannot be a surprise. Quebec’s child-care system has been largely government controlled for decades, with poor results. Why would Ontario be any different? And how long will Premier Ford allow this debacle to continue before he asks the new prime minister to rethink the child-care policy of his predecessor?

Matthew Lau

Adjunct Scholar, Fraser Institute
Continue Reading

Trending

X