Houston-based energy companies have again held a sizable presence on the Fortune 500 ranking. Photo via Getty Images

Fourteen businesses with global or regional headquarters in the Houston area appear on Fortune’s new list of the world’s 500 biggest companies.

Oil and gas company Saudi Aramco, whose headquarters for the Americas is in Houston, leads the Houston-area pack. With annual revenue of $494.9 billion, it lands at No. 4 on the Fortune Global 500. Ahead of Saudi Aramco are U.S. retailers Walmart and Amazon, and Chinese electric company State Grid.

To put Saudi Aramco’s annual revenue in perspective, the total is slightly above the gross domestic product for the Philippines.

For the third year in a row, Saudi Aramco stands out as the most profitable member of the Fortune Global 500. The company racked up $121 billion in profit last year.

Overall, Saudi Aramco and 32 other petroleum refiners — many of them with a significant presence in the Houston area — made the Fortune Global 500.

“The Global 500 is the ultimate scorecard for business success. The aggregate revenue of the Fortune Global 500 in 2023 reached $41 trillion, a record level. That sum represents more than a third of global GDP — a sign of how much economic power is concentrated in these companies,” Scott DeCarlo, Fortune’s vice president of research, says in a news release.

Here’s the rundown of Fortune Global 500 companies with global or regional headquarters in the Houston area, including the ranking and annual revenue for each:

  • Saudi Aramco, No. 4, $494.9 billion, Americas headquarters in Houston
  • ExxonMobil, No. 12, $344.6 billion, global headquarters in Spring
  • Shell, No. 13, $323.2 billion; U.S. headquarters in Houston
  • TotalEnergies, No. 23, $218.9 billion, U.S. headquarters in Houston
  • BP, No. 25, $213 billion, U.S. headquarters in Houston
  • Chevron, No. 29, $200.9 billion, global headquarters relocating to Houston in 2024
  • Phillips 66, No. 52, $149.9 billion, global headquarters in Houston
  • Engie, No. 130, $89.3 billion, North American headquarters in Houston
  • Sysco, No. 163, $76.3 billion, global headquarters in Houston
  • ConocoPhillips, No. 235, $58.6 billion, global headquarters in Houston
  • Enterprise Products Partners, No. 303, $49.7 billion, global headquarters in Houston
  • Plains GP Holdings, No. 311, $48.7 billion, global headquarters in Houston
  • LyondellBasell, No. 368, $41.1 billion, global headquarters in Houston
  • SLB (formerly Schlumberger), No. 479, $33.1 billion, global headquarters in Houston

Fortune uses revenue figures for budget years ending on or before March 31, 2024, to rank the world’s largest companies.

------

This article originally ran on EnergyCapital.

Chevron expects all of its corporate functions to shift to Houston over the next five years. Photo via Getty Images

Chevron to relocate HQ, executives to Houston

big move

The Energy Capital of the World is adding another jewel to its corporate crown.

With the impending move of Chevron’s headquarters from Northern California to Houston, the Houston area will be home to 24 Fortune 500 companies. Chevron ranks 15th on this year’s Fortune 500.

Oil and gas giant Chevron, currently based in San Ramon, California, will join three Fortune 500 competitors that already maintain headquarters in the Houston area:

  • Spring-based ExxonMobil, No. 7 on the Fortune 500
  • Houston-based Phillips 66, No. 26 on the Fortune 500
  • Houston-based ConocoPhillips, No. 68 on the Fortune 500

Chevron, which posted revenue of $200.9 billion in 2023, employs about 7,000 people in the Houston area and about 2,000 people in San Ramon. The company says its chairman and CEO, Mike Wirth, and vice chairman, Mark Nelson, will move to Houston before the end of 2024.

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Wirth acknowledged Chevron’s differences of opinion with California policymakers regarding energy matters.

“We believe California has a number of policies that raise costs, that hurt consumers, that discourage investment and ultimately we think that’s not good for the economy in California and for consumers,” Wirth said.

Chevron expects all of its corporate functions to shift to Houston over the next five years. Jobs that support the company’s California operations will remain in San Ramon, where Chevron employs about 2,000 people. Some Chevron employees in San Ramon will relocate to Houston.

The company’s move to Houston hardly comes as a surprise. Speculation about a relocation to Houston intensified after Chevron sold its 98-acre San Ramon headquarters in 2022 and moved corporate employees to leased office space. Over the past several years, Chevron has shifted various corporate functions to Houston.

“This is just the final step that many industry observers were waiting to happen,” Ken Medlock, senior director of the Baker Institute’s Center for Energy Studies at Rice University, says in a news release.

“To start, Houston provides a world-class location for internationally focused energy companies, which is why there is such a massive international presence here,” Medlock adds. “Texas is also the nation’s largest energy producer across multiple energy sources and is poised to lead in emerging opportunities such as hydrogen and carbon capture, so Houston is a great place for domestically focused activities as well.”

The announcement of Chevron’s exit from California comes just a year after ExxonMobil finalized its relocation from Irving to Spring.

“Chevron’s decision to relocate its headquarters underscores the compelling advantages that position Houston as the prime destination for leading energy companies today and for the future,” Steve Kean, president and CEO of the Greater Houston Partnership, says in a post on the organization’s website.

“With deep roots in our region,” he adds, “Chevron is [a] key player in establishing Houston as a global energy leader. This move will further enhance those efforts.”

------

This article originally ran on EnergyCapital.

Houston could have ranked higher on a global report of top cities in the world if it had a bit more business diversification. Photo via Getty Images

Report ranks Houston as a top global city — with one thing holding it back

take note

A new analysis positions the Energy Capital of the World as an economic dynamo, albeit a flawed one.

The recently released Oxford Economics Global Cities Index, which assesses the strengths and weaknesses of the world’s 1,000 largest cities, puts Houston at No. 25.

Houston ranks well for economics (No. 15) and human capital (No. 18), but ranks poorly for governance (No. 184), environment (No. 271), and quality of life (No. 298).

New York City appears at No. 1 on the index, followed by London; San Jose, California; Tokyo; and Paris. Dallas lands at No. 18 and Austin at No. 39.

In its Global Cities Index report, Oxford Economics says Houston’s status as “an international and vertically integrated hub for the oil and gas sector makes it an economic powerhouse. Most aspects of the industry — downstream, midstream, and upstream — are managed from here, including the major fuel refining and petrochemicals sectors.”

“And although the city has notable aerospace and logistics sectors and has diversified into other areas such as biomedical research and tech, its fortunes remain very much tied to oil and gas,” the report adds. “As such, its economic stability and growth lag other leading cities in the index.”

The report points out that Houston ranks highly in the human capital category thanks to the large number of corporate headquarters in the region. The Houston area is home to the headquarters of 26 Fortune 500 companies, including ExxonMobil, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, and Sysco.

Another contributor to Houston’s human capital ranking, the report says, is the presence of Rice University, the University of Houston and the Texas Medical Center.

“Despite this,” says the report, “it lacks the number of world-leading universities that other cities have, and only performs moderately in terms of the educational attainment of its residents.”

Slower-than-expected population growth and an aging population weaken Houston’s human capital score, the report says.

Meanwhile, Houston’s score for quality is life is hurt by a high level of income inequality, along with a low life expectancy compared with nearly half the 1,000 cities on the list, says the report.

Also in the quality-of-life bucket, the report underscores the region’s variety of arts, cultural, and recreational activities. But that’s offset by urban sprawl, traffic congestion, an underdeveloped public transportation system, decreased air quality, and high carbon emissions.

Furthermore, the report downgrades Houston’s environmental stature due to the risks of hurricanes and flooding.

“Undoubtedly, Houston is a leading business [center] that plays a key role in supporting the U.S. economy,” says the report, “but given its shortcomings in other categories, it will need to follow the path of some of its more well-rounded peers in order to move up in the rankings.”

Houston can learn a lot from the decades of success from Silicon Valley, according to this Houston founder, who outlines just what all the city needs to do to become the startup city it has the potential to be. Photo via Getty Images

Houston expert: Can Houston replicate and surpass the success of Silicon Valley?

guest column

Anyone who knows me knows, as a Houston Startup Founder, I often muse about the still developing potential for startups in Houston, especially considering the amount of industry here, subject matter expertise, capital, and size.

For example, Houston is No. 2 in the country for Fortune 500 Companies — with 26 Bayou City companies on the list — behind only NYC, which has 47 ranked corporations, according to Fortune.

Considering layoffs, fund closings, and down rounds, things aren’t all that peachy in San Francisco for the first time in a long time, and despite being a Berkeley native, I’m rooting for Houston now that I’m a transplant.

Let’s start by looking at some stats.

While we’re not No. 1 in all areas, I believe we have the building blocks to be a major player in startups, and in tech (and not just energy and space tech). How? If the best predictor of future success is history, why not use the template of the GOAT of all startup cities: San Francisco and YCombinator. Sorry fellow founders – you’ve heard me talk about this repeatedly.

YCombinator is considered the GOAT of Startup Accelerators/Incubators based on:

  1. The Startup success rate: I’ve heard it’s as high as 75 percent (vs. the national average of 5 to 10 percent) Arc Search says 50 percent of YC Co’s fail within 12 years – not shabby.
  2. Their startup-to-unicorn ratio: 5 to 7 percent of YC startups become unicorns depending on the source — according to an Arc Search search (if you haven’t tried Arc Search do – super cool).
  3. Their network.

YC also parlayed that success into a "YC Startup School" offering:

  1. Free weekly lessons by YC partners — sometimes featuring unicorn alumni
  2. A document and video Library (YC SAFE, etc)
  3. Startup perks for students (AWS cloud credits, etc.)
  4. YC co-founder matching to help founders meet co-founders

Finally, there’s the over $80 billion in returns, according to Arc search, they’ve generated since their 2005 inception with a total of 4,000 companies in their portfolio at over $600 billion in value. So GOAT? Well just for perspective there were a jaw-dropping 18,000 startups in startup school the year I participated – so GOAT indeed.

So how do they do it? Based on anecdotal evidence, their winning formula is said to be the following well-oiled process:

  1. Bring over 282 startups (the number in last cohort) to San Francisco for 90 days to prototype, refine the product, and land on the go-to-market strategy. This includes a pre-seed YC SAFE investment of a phased $500,000 commitment for a fixed min 7 percent of equity, plus more equity at the next round’s valuation, according to YC.
  2. Over 50 percent of the latest cohort were idea stage and heavily AI focused.
  3. Traction day: inter-portfolio traction the company. YC has over 4,000 portfolio companies who can and do sign up for each other’s companies products because “they’re told to."
  4. Get beta testers and test from YC portfolio companies and YC network.
  5. If they see the traction scales to a massively scalable business, they lead the seed round and get this: schedule and attend the VC meetings with the founders.
  6. They create a "fear of missing out" mentality on Sand Hill Road as they casually mention who they’re meeting with next.
  7. They block competitors in the sector by getting the top VC’s to co-invest with then in the seed so competitors are locked out of the A list VC funding market, who then are up against the most well-funded and buzzed about players in the space.

If what I've seen is true, within a six-month period a startup idea is prototyped, tested, pivoted, launched, tractioned, seeded, and juiced for scale with people who can ‘make’ the company all in their corner, if not already on their board.

So how on earth can Houston best this?

  1. We have a massive amount of businesses — around 200,000 — and people — an estimated 7.3 million and growing.
  2. We have capital in search of an identity beyond oil.
  3. Our Fortune 500 companies that are hiring consultants for things that startups here that can do for free, quicker, and for a fraction of the extended cost.
  4. We have a growing base of tech talent for potential machine learning and artificial intelligence talent
  5. A sudden shot at the increasingly laid off big tech engineers.
  6. We have more accelerators and incubators.

What do we need to pull it off?

  1. An organized well-oiled YC-like process
  2. An inter-Houston traction process
  3. An "Adopt a Startup" program where local companies are willing to beta test and iterate with emerging startup products
  4. We have more accelerators but the cohorts are small — average five to 10 per cohort.
  5. Strategic pre-seed funding, possibly with corporate partners (who can make the company by being a client) and who de-risk the investment.
  6. Companies here to use Houston startup’s products first when they’re launched.
  7. A forum to match companies’ projects or labs groups etc., to startups who can solve them.
  8. A process in place to pull all these pieces together in an organized, structured sequence.

There is one thing missing in the list: there has to be an entity or a person who wants to make this happen. Someone who sees all the pieces, and has the desire, energy and clout to make it happen; and we all know this is the hardest part. And so for now, our hopes of besting YC may be up in the air as well.

------

Jo Clark is the founder of Circle.ooo, a Houston-based tech startup that's streamlining events management.

The Bayou City claims the second most Fortune 500 companies in Texas. Tomasz Zajda/EyeEm/Getty Images

22 Houston companies score a spot on Fortune 500 ranking

h-town proud

A pandemic can't stop the highly anticipated release of the Fortune 500, an annual ranking of the country's most profitable companies. And the Lone Star State has made another impressive showing.

Now back for its 66th year, the Fortune 500 is ranked according to total company revenue for the last fiscal year (in this case 2019), while calculating profits, return to investors, number of employees, assets, and earnings per share.

But, of course, it all comes down to the money. According to a release, these companies represent a mind-boggling two-thirds of the U.S. gross domestic product, with $14.2 trillion in revenues, a 4 percent leap over last year. The revenue threshold to even make this year's Fortune 500 list was $5.7 billion, the magazine notes.

In total, Texas has the third most companies on the list with 50, just behind California and New York, with 53 spots each. And though it always stings to be just behind California when it comes to business, Texas does claim the most spots among the top 10.

Irving-based Exxon Mobil takes the highest spot among Texas companies at No. 3, followed by medical supply and pharmaceutical company McKesson, also headquartered in Irving, at No. 8. Telecommunications giant AT&T, which calls nearby Dallas home, ranks No. 9.

Houston
The Bayou City claims the second most Fortune 500 companies in Texas, largely in the energy and oil sectors. Twenty-two Fortune 500 companies call Houston or The Woodlands home, including:

  • Phillips 66 (No. 27)
  • Sysco (No. 56)
  • ConocoPhillips (No. 93)
  • Plains GP Holdings (No. 98)
  • Enterprise Products (No. 101)
  • Baker Hughes (No. 129)
  • Halliburton (No. 142)
  • Occidental Petroleum (No. 148)
  • EOG Resources (No. 186)
  • Waste Management (No. 207)
  • Kinder Morgan (No. 242)
  • Center Point Energy (No. 260)
  • Quanta Services (No. 261)
  • Group 1 Automotive (No. 264)
  • Calpine (No. 319)
  • Cheniere Energy (No. 329)
  • Targa Resources (No. 365)
  • National Oilwell Varco (No. 374)
  • Huntsman (No. 382)
  • Westlake Chemical (No. 391)
  • Apache (No. 465)
  • Crown Castle (No. 496)

Dallas-Fort Worth
Along with claiming three companies in the top 10, Dallas-Fort Worth is home to 23 Fortune 500 companies, the most of any Texas metro. As a result, Dallas also claims the second most revenue of any city in the U.S.

The Fortune 500 companies located in the greater Dallas area include:

  • Energy Transfer (No. 59)
  • American Airlines Group (No. 70)
  • Southwest Airlines (No. 141)
  • Tenet Healthcare (No. 174)
  • Kimberly-Clark (No. 175)
  • Fluor (No. 181)
  • D.R. Horton (No. 183)
  • HollyFrontier (No. 184)
  • Jacobs Engineering (No. 206)
  • Texas Instruments (No. 222)
  • Core-Mark Holding (No. 240)
  • Vistra Energy (No. 270)
  • J.C. Penney ( No. 286)
  • Pioneer Natural (No. 341)
  • Yum China Holdings (No. 361)
  • Dean Foods (No. 421)
  • Builders FirstSource (No. 425)
  • GameStop (No. 464)
  • Celanese (No. 470)
  • EnLink Midstream (No. 483)
  • Commercial Metals (No. 491)

Austin
Austin doesn't technically have any spots in the top 10, but it does have two prominent area employers. Amazon, owner of Whole Foods Market, comes in at No. 2, and Apple follows at No. 4. Though based in Cupertino, California, the computer giant is currently building a $1 billion second headquarters in Austin. Once open, the corporation should add 5,000 new jobs in the Capital City, making it one of the region's largest employers.

Along with Amazon and Apple, the Austin area claims one other spot on the Fortune 500 list. Round Rock-based Dell earned $4.6 billion in profits, giving it the No. 34 spot.

San Antonio

Coming in third among Texas' biggest metro areas is San Antonio with three companies on the Fortune 500 list. Though Valero Energy had a rough 2019 and is on track for an even rougher 2020, its revenues surpassed a trillion dollars, and its net income was still $2.4 billion, enough to take the No. 32 spot.

Employee favorite USAA, which also landed on Fortune's 100 Best Places to Work list in February, ranks No. 94 — its highest spot ever on the Fortune 500 list. As Fortune notes, "USAA provides banking and insurance offerings to U.S. military members and their families; it routinely scores at the top of customer-satisfaction surveys in an industry that isn't generally beloved by consumers."

And New Braunfels-based Rush Enterprises, a company that specializes in commercial vehicle sales, parks itself at No. 492.

------

This article originally ran on CultureMap.

Research from a former Rice University professor linked the size of CEO signatures to ego. CEOs with big egos entered into more risky, unreliable deals. Pexels

Rice research reveals that narcissistic CEOs sabotage their firms

Houston Voices

You've just been named CEO of a Fortune 500 company. Your ego fills the room. The laws of gravity don't apply to you.

And naturally, you want to make an impact. So you pour money into mergers and acquisitions, and when you're not trying to acquire another firm, you guide company resources into research and development. You're a genius, and the world will soon be clinging to your every new product.

The only problem: your company will likely underperform. Research by former Rice Business visiting professor Sean Wang (now at Cox School of Business as SMU), along with Nicholas Seybert of the University of Maryland and Charles Ham of Washington University at St. Louis, reveals the high costs of an out of control CEO ego.

The researchers' first challenge was establishing who could legitimately be called a narcissist. What does the term mean, exactly? While there are varying definitions, Wang's team focused on narcissism as a basic personality trait rather than a mental illness. As a personality trait, narcissism is associated with entitlement, vanity, authority, and a sense of superiority.

To spot narcissists, the team took a novel approach: they examined their research subjects' signatures. Signature size turns out to be a handy measure for egos, because it doesn't require participants to answer direct questions about their personalities — and because participants are unlikely to know that ego can affect something as simple as a signature.

Just having a big ego, though, does not a narcissist make. To validate a link between a person's signature and narcissism, the researchers asked 53 graduate business students to provide their signatures by signing a document, and then to take a personality survey that measured narcissism. The findings documented that indeed there was a strong correlation between signature size and narcissism.

Next, the researchers obtained data from prior psychology research on employee perceptions of 32 technology-firm CEOs. Of the 24 CEOS for whom the researchers also had signature samples, they found a significant correlation between narcissism and signature size.

Armed with these findings, Wang and his colleagues were able to extrapolate the narcissistic traits of thousands of CEOs whose signatures were readily available on proxy statements and other corporate documents. The researchers ultimately studied 741 CEOs from 411 firms during the period between 1992 and 2015, corresponding to 6,361 firm-year observations with a median of eight fiscal years per CEO.

They found a pronounced behavior pattern. Firms led by narcissistic CEOs invested more in high-exposure areas such as research and development and mergers and acquisitions, but shied away from routine capital expenditures for day-to-day productivity. This trend was even more pronounced during periods of financial slack, suggesting that narcissistic CEOs prefer an aggressive management style whenever possible. Financial productivity delivered by these narcissistic CEOs in terms of profitability was lower than their less egotistic counterparts.

The research has multiple implications. Narcissistic leaders, past research shows, are prone to make bad decisions — in part because they are bad listeners. As a result, they often dominate the decision process without incorporating feedback or ideas from others. Ironically, they mistakenly perceive this behavior as a signal of competence and strong leadership.

To counter these bad habits, the researchers say, during periods of financial sluggishness investors and corporate boards should combat excessive narcissist-led investment by pushing for higher dividend payouts. Given that narcissistic CEOs overinvest in R&D, investors also need to closely monitor whether such investments represent real innovation or just vanity. Finally, boards of directors should be aware that narcissistic leaders tend to command higher salaries — and consider whether their CEO falls into this category, and is essentially getting higher pay for inferior performance.

In short, to really be as boss as they see themselves, narcissistic corporate leaders need to recognize their tendencies and rigorously check their egos. Boards, meanwhile, should closely monitor their CEO's priorities in directing firm resources. It could be the writing on the wall.

------

This article originally ran on Rice Business Wisdom.

Sean Wang is a former visiting assistant professor of accounting at Jones Graduate School of Business at Rice University. He is now an assistant professor at Cox School of Business at SMU.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Texas university to lead new FAA tech center focused on drones

taking flight

The Texas A&M University System will run the Federal Aviation Administration’s new Center for Advanced Aviation Technologies, which will focus on innovations like commercial drones.

“Texas is the perfect place for our new Center for Advanced Aviation Technologies,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in a release. “From drones delivering your packages to powered lift technologies like air taxis, we are at the cusp of an aviation revolution. The [center] will ensure we make that dream a reality and unleash American innovation safely.”

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, included creation of the center in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024. The center will consist of an airspace laboratory, flight demonstration zones, and testing corridors.

Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi will lead the initiative, testing unstaffed aircraft systems and other advanced technologies. The Corpus Christi campus houses the Autonomy Research Institute, an FAA-designated test site. The new center will be at Texas A&M University-Fort Worth.

The College Station-based Texas A&M system says the center will “bring together” its 19 institutions, along with partners such as the University of North Texas in Denton and Southern Methodist University in University Park.

According to a Department of Transportation news release, the center will play “a pivotal role” in ensuring the safe operation of advanced aviation technologies in public airspace.

The Department of Transportation says it chose the Texas A&M system to manage the new center because of its:

  • Proximity to major international airports and the FAA’s regional headquarters in Fort Worth
  • Existing infrastructure for testing of advanced aviation technologies
  • Strong academic programs and industry partnerships

“I’m confident this new research and testing center will help the private sector create thousands of high-paying jobs and grow the Texas economy through billions in new investments,” Cruz said.

“This is a significant win for Texas that will impact communities across our state,” the senator added, “and I will continue to pursue policies that create new jobs, and ensure the Lone Star State continues to lead the way in innovation and the manufacturing of emerging aviation technologies.”

Texas Republicans are pushing to move NASA headquarters to Houston

space city

Two federal lawmakers from Texas are spearheading a campaign to relocate NASA’s headquarters from Washington, D.C., to the Johnson Space Center in Houston’s Clear Lake area. Houston faces competition on this front, though, as lawmakers from two other states are also vying for this NASA prize.

With NASA’s headquarters lease in D.C. set to end in 2028, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, and U.S. Rep. Brian Babin, a Republican whose congressional district includes the Johnson Space Center, recently wrote a letter to President Trump touting the Houston area as a prime location for NASA’s headquarters.

“A central location among NASA’s centers and the geographical center of the United States, Houston offers the ideal location for NASA to return to its core mission of space exploration and to do so at a substantially lower operating cost than in Washington, D.C.,” the letter states.

Cruz is chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation; and Babin is chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. Both committees deal with NASA matters. Twenty-five other federal lawmakers from Texas, all Republicans, signed the letter.

In the letter, legislators maintain that shifting NASA’s headquarters to the Houston area makes sense because “a seismic disconnect between NASA’s headquarters and its missions has opened the door to bureaucratic micromanagement and an erosion of [NASA] centers’ interdependence.”

Founded in 1961, the $1.5 billion, 1,620-acre Johnson Space Center hosts NASA’s mission control and astronaut training operations. More than 12,000 employees work at the 100-building complex.

According to the state comptroller, the center generates an annual economic impact of $4.7 billion for Texas, and directly and indirectly supports more than 52,000 public and private jobs.

In pitching the Johnson Space Center for NASA’s HQ, the letter points out that Texas is home to more than 2,000 aerospace, aviation, and defense-related companies. Among them are Elon Musk’s SpaceX, based in the newly established South Texas town of Starbase; Axiom Space and Intuitive Machines, both based in Houston; and Firefly Aerospace, based in the Austin suburb of Cedar Park.

The letter also notes the recent creation of the Texas Space Commission, which promotes innovation in the space and commercial aerospace sectors.

Furthermore, the letter cites Houston-area assets for NASA such as:

  • A strong business environment.
  • A low level of state government regulation.
  • A cost of living that’s half of what it is in the D.C. area.

“Moving the NASA headquarters to Texas will create more jobs, save taxpayer dollars, and reinvigorate America’s space agency,” the letter says.

Last November, NASA said it was hunting for about 375,000 to 525,000 square feet of office space in the D.C. area to house the agency’s headquarters workforce. About 2,500 people work at the agency’s main offices. NASA’s announcement set off a scramble among three states to lure the agency’s headquarters.

Aside from officials in Texas, politicians in Florida and Ohio are pressing NASA to move its headquarters to their states. Florida and Ohio both host major NASA facilities.

NASA might take a different approach, however. “NASA is weighing closing its headquarters and scattering responsibilities among the states, a move that has the potential to dilute its coordination and influence in Washington,” Politico reported in March.

Meanwhile, Congressional Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat who represents D.C., introduced legislation in March that would prohibit relocating a federal agency’s headquarters (including NASA’s) away from the D.C. area without permission from Congress.

“Moving federal agencies is not about saving taxpayer money and will degrade the vital services provided to all Americans across the country,” Norton said in a news release. “In the 1990s, the Bureau of Land Management moved its wildfire staff out West, only to move them back when Congress demanded briefings on new wildfires.”

Houston research breakthrough could pave way for next-gen superconductors

Quantum Breakthrough

A study from researchers at Rice University, published in Nature Communications, could lead to future advances in superconductors with the potential to transform energy use.

The study revealed that electrons in strange metals, which exhibit unusual resistance to electricity and behave strangely at low temperatures, become more entangled at a specific tipping point, shedding new light on these materials.

A team led by Rice’s Qimiao Si, the Harry C. and Olga K. Wiess Professor of Physics and Astronomy, used quantum Fisher information (QFI), a concept from quantum metrology, to measure how electron interactions evolve under extreme conditions. The research team also included Rice’s Yuan Fang, Yiming Wang, Mounica Mahankali and Lei Chen along with Haoyu Hu of the Donostia International Physics Center and Silke Paschen of the Vienna University of Technology. Their work showed that the quantum phenomenon of electron entanglement peaks at a quantum critical point, which is the transition between two states of matter.

“Our findings reveal that strange metals exhibit a unique entanglement pattern, which offers a new lens to understand their exotic behavior,” Si said in a news release. “By leveraging quantum information theory, we are uncovering deep quantum correlations that were previously inaccessible.”

The researchers examined a theoretical framework known as the Kondo lattice, which explains how magnetic moments interact with surrounding electrons. At a critical transition point, these interactions intensify to the extent that the quasiparticles—key to understanding electrical behavior—disappear. Using QFI, the team traced this loss of quasiparticles to the growing entanglement of electron spins, which peaks precisely at the quantum critical point.

In terms of future use, the materials share a close connection with high-temperature superconductors, which have the potential to transmit electricity without energy loss, according to the researchers. By unblocking their properties, researchers believe this could revolutionize power grids and make energy transmission more efficient.

The team also found that quantum information tools can be applied to other “exotic materials” and quantum technologies.

“By integrating quantum information science with condensed matter physics, we are pivoting in a new direction in materials research,” Si said in the release.

---

This article originally appeared on our sister site, EnergyCapitalHTX.com.