 OK, thank you very much, thanks for the invitation, thanks for the chance to participate in this interesting and wide-ranging debate. And particularly to think about the kind of systems or socio-technical systems which have organised, reorganised, remade lives and remade cities, particularly over the last century or so. It's worth remembering the first car to go over 60 miles an hour was an electric car in Paris in 1899 and subsequent developments of electric battery-powered vehicles were relatively common with even Ford making battery-driven cars in the early years of the 20th century. But in a kind of way the interesting question for me about electric cities is that the predominant forms of transportation have not been electric. They have been based upon a very significant discovery, the discovery of oil gushing out of the ground. This was the first oil gusher in 1901 in Texas. And in a way that made a peculiar pattern in which, although there was in a kind of way an electric society coming to be formed, certainly during the interwar period beginning in the States, the forms of transportation have remained resolutely oil-based. And my question really is, could it be the case that a new socio-technical system which is post-oil, an electric system in some way or another might come to be formed and what would be the conditions under which that might happen to occur? And of course it's interesting to think about the car system. Of course the car system is never just a car. It's adapts, it spreads along the roads and paths of each city, draws in many aspects of its environment. It's utterly central to almost all the leading industrial sectors and leading firms of the 20th century. It promotes notions of convenience. It seemingly provides solutions to the problems of congestion, which in a kind of way it itself generates. It externalizes danger and is central to a sort of individualistic freedom to drive, freedom to consume culture of contemporary capitalism. So this was an extraordinarily powerful socio-technical system that kind of spread through the world and has kind of remade pretty well every city that we have come to know and has produced, similar to another picture this morning, a pattern of being locked into oil. And it's worth noting that 95% of transportation energy, at least 95%, is oil-based, providing the power to move cars, lorries, planes, ships and many trains. And this is a powerful system. But of course it has, as we know in various ways, lots of problems. One of the problems is, this is for the United States, the declining ratio between the use of oil and the supply of oil, an increasing gap between the two over a relatively short period. A pattern of contributing to global carbon emissions. And I think this figure is particularly striking because of the upward shift from 1950. If only we could turn the clock back, I know there's a small problem of changing population to 1950, then, and many, some of us in this room vaguely remember 1950, actually that's an interesting pattern and there may be lessons from indeed wartime experiences as to how lives might be better lived. And then also the more general global supply of oil at the time of astonishing increases in likely demand as we've been hearing this morning across the developing world and especially within China. That gap between the two is very striking and if you see from that 1960s, interesting decade, was the peak discovery period for oil and there's been a kind of increasing gap between the two. We also heard in one of the talks this morning about the role of oil shortages and price increases in the financial collapse in 2008. So what is to be done, we might ask, and I want first of all to say just a little bit about the systems that are in place here and these are systems which are never just technical or technological. And they also are important because of the way in which they generate lock-ins over decades. I like the notion that systems have a kind of momentum and the systems significant in the contemporary world are never economic or physical or technological or social or political. They are all of those and they fit together, they combine together, they generate momentum and patterns of path dependence and lock-in as also we heard this morning. And thus we should resist an analysis of change which looks at technology as though technologies in and of themselves will come along, will generate themselves autonomously and remake the social or physical or economic worlds. They are heavily embedded in forms of economic, social and political life. I like to describe this as therefore new technologies require both a business model but also a societal or sociological model of the kinds of uses to which any such new technology might be put. There's obviously much unpredictability, non-linear kinds of relations between systems and their patterns of development. And then when we're trying to think about innovation, innovation must be and is hugely sort of made up of many different components and elements, some of which we're going to hear more about in the discussion in a minute. And I quite like the idea of thinking about the ways in which one can effect synchronisation through and across many different social, economic and political organisational entities. A bit taking up the book by Steve Strograts on sync, the role of synchronising a system in a kind of unplanned but not uncoordinated way. And also when we think of systems we have to think of the relationship of course not just, well we have to think of the relationship to existing systems. I very much like this quote from Buckminster Fuller, the futurist writer who says, you never change anything by fighting the existing reality. What you have to do is to build a new model, mobile phones, and that will over time or may over time make existing model of landline phones obsolete. It's the new model building and of course as you're trying to build that new model there are many difficulties and problems, particularly the part of interest invested in the existing model. And another quote from the complexity economist Brian Arthur. So a revolution, a new socio-technical system, he says, does not arrive until we reorganise our activities, our uses, the purposes to which it's put around its technologies. And then the technologies themselves kind of reacting and responding to us as he puts it. For this to happen the new domain must gain adherence and prestige. It must find purposes and uses and that takes decades and that's one of the massive problems in many discussions about low carbon systems is of course they take decades not years. And during the time the old technology we might say lives on driving out the new and making the new model so difficult to bring into being. So I then have tried in a couple of books to articulate what might constitute what I call a post car socio-technical system. Obviously I've just listed some of the characteristics and the main point I suppose of these characteristics is that there are many of them. They're not led by the new kind of materials for building vehicles or the type of engine drive or the type of charging system. But probably it's probably such a new system entails all of those things. All of those things being developed in different places and there being this kind of process of synchronisation of those processes around the world across multiple cities and so on and so forth. And in such a post car system there's some of it is involves new kinds of movement and so on. But the most important thing I think is the idea that there are digital forms of communication and information which enable one to assess whether or not physically moving is desirable or good. Too much of the literature on transport focuses on transport and doesn't take sufficient account of the kinds of ways in which there may be alternatives, substitutes, there may be different ways of organising people's lives. And these are some more characteristics which I'll move on. In a report that I was part of one of the things that we tried to argue in relationship to electric vehicles was the utter importance not of adding in electric vehicles but of how is it that a kind of system substitution might come to be realised. There are some interesting cracks in the current system, what I call the steel and petroleum car system. And they're nicely indicated in that book, edited book, some of which we've already been discussing. And this I think is striking the plateauing at least of car travel in a number of major western countries. That actually starts in the US sort of before the economic collapse of 2008. And people in the sort of transport field now are talking quite extensively about the idea of peak travel. And some data for the UK shows again a declining number of trips per person, declining distance travelled. And in particular I think is the striking decline in the proportion of young people who now have a driving licence. That figure had been going up year on year and it has now stopped going up and it's stopped going up again in many of the major western countries. So what I've done is in a very brief, I now have the red light, the red card. So if this kind of post car system does not develop then there are some other alternatives. One of which is a sort of a kind of Schumacher local sustainability future with the localising of friendship work, education and so on. A second alternative which I have talked about is what I rather dramatically call regional warlordism. And the breakdown of many of the possible functions and systems which have organised and organised contemporary forms of contemporary life. And if the post car does not materialise we might either have local sustainability or regional warlordism, as in Mad Max 2.