 So, the IIA released a study last month saying that Ireland's sovereign wealth fund is investing 70 million in polluting industries, and I asked Lorna, do you think there's a trade-off between what the money our sovereign wealth fund makes for the state and our commitment to a low-carbon future in Ireland? Thanks. Do you think there's a trade-off between our sovereign wealth fund's aims to make as much money for our citizens and between our commitment to a low-carbon future in Ireland? Well, the two can marry quite well, so we often see a lot of pension funds and sovereign wealth funds invest in their own low-carbon environment going forward, so it's not surprising that Ireland is part of that overall mix as well, I think. There's two questions, we'll take these two together, please, and thank you for the short question, that's set a good pattern, so there you go. Tony Walsh, ESB Network's question for Matt, you showed the implicit subsidy between a customer who has solar panels and one who doesn't have solar panels, what way are the utility in Australia resolving that cross-up subsidy? Do you want to wait for us to get the second question, there was one just behind. Same question, there you go, Brett. It's very frustrating. The problem we have with tariff reform is that it's harder to do after you have that solar boom because you have a greater political resistance to the reform, but equally we just have the effect of the rising increase in retail electricity prices has really politicised the issue of energy, so that coupled with the incumbents, if you like, in solar households means governments are very reticent to change tariffs, even when we explain that better tariff shapes will enable a faster uptake of new technologies and drive the smart grid more aggressively, and even when we explain to them that there are worsening conditions where low-income households and vulnerable households are gradually paying more and more to subsidise households who can afford these technologies. So there's a status quo which is being maintained and it's very difficult to break. Any other? Here's another one over here. Yeah. Kemaro Shakurio's future design. I'd just like to ask the panel why if 80% of wind energy, for instance, is owned by local people in Denmark, 50% of renewable energy is owned by local people in Germany, 100% of the solar energy apparently is owned by ordinary local people in Australia. Why do you think that big investors such as pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and infrastructure funds are the future? Surely, when you look at it, an individual will get less than 1% in the bank, and that's taxed. Why isn't it individual investors? Not the future for renewable energy. Compute. Thanks. Michael? I don't know if I would say that the individual investor is the future or should be the future, but you're absolutely spot on because what you have is individuals who are currently earning 3.25%, 1%, 1.5% on their savings are not investing in this sector. And a lot of it is to do with, I think, I would say there's two reasons. One is regulatory structures. Is it possible to create the bundles of investment and offer them to the retail consumer from a regulatory point of view? And the other is innovation from the financial services industry. Because we saw this in 2005, especially 2006, 2007, every asset manager, every retail asset manager creating funds. I go back to 2007, actually the first time I came here to Dublin whilst running New Energy Finance and I showed a slide which I looked at last night and it showed 1,470 venture funds offering clean tech, clean energy, making investments in clean tech and clean energy. There was this huge ferment of innovation from the asset management industry and all of that went away when the crisis hit. Innovation got essentially penalized, was squeezed out of the system and we start to see it coming back now in some forms. Some of the third party solar roof ownership schemes, Matt talked about how the super funds sort of affected things, but you see also green bonds, not necessarily retail products, but you start to see innovation again. And I think that if you can fix the legislative frameworks which allow community ownership peer to peer lending, those sorts of things, and then also allow the innovation or expect the financial services industry, particularly the retail savings industry, the Virgin monies and the Schwabs in the US and then the high street banks, and then I think you will see the consumer owning these resources. As you point out, Denmark, Germany, Australia, they are incredibly attractive investments at the retail level, but for retail everything has to be super simple and we're just not there yet. We've seen developers being more innovative in terms of working with local communities to give them opportunities even on larger scale, wind farms and solar farms to actually give the local communities ability to own directly part of that as well. And in the UK, we've seen, I think, retail investors come back to the listed market through some of the investment trusts like Greencoat Capital and some of the other investment trust models that have come to market, and we've even seen governments support those as cornerstones in order to create new products for investors going forward. So I think it's starting to happen, but I agree it's slower than it would otherwise like to be. The answer is both. The answer is both. So all that solar going to Australia, it's still only 3% of Australia's generation. So and when the sun sets, households still need power and they still need all the ancillary services, not just the megawatts, they need, you know, they need, they don't know they need it, but they need inertia and they need voltage management and they need frequency management. So that's all going to be provided by somebody, whether it's a utility scale, whether it's a battery or it's a flywheel or it's a power station. So there'll be a growth in both. There will be our future modelling shows in the most aggressive scenarios in Australia. We're still drawing half of the energy we need from the grid by 2050. So it's a 50-50 split on localised generation and grid-based demand as well. Thank you. Yes, another question in the middle here if we have a... Good afternoon. Paul O'Donnell from Greencoat Capital. Just a question to any of the panel really. I guess historically we've seen utilities as the main delivery vehicle for a conventional generation and significant engineering expertise required. As we move forward into, you know, more solar or wind, which doesn't require or has a differing level of engineering capability, how do you see the role for utilities evolving in this new market? Who would like to take that? Don't all fight over it. I mean, I think it's... I think this is the problem is that these are... So we have a state in South Australia, or called South Australia, which is in South Australia, and it's an accident of history. So as a result of the YR scheme to design, I won't bore you with it. It's approaching 40% renewables generation and this is a state of about 1.4 million people and it's relatively isolated. It's got a small interconnector, but it's coping with 40% renewables generation. So it's this amazing experiment in deep penetration of variable supply renewables. It's so far it's working. Now, the market operator says, the problem they've got is we don't know what's going to go wrong or when it's going to go wrong because no one's gone here before. So it's important we understand this and we're going to lose two large coal-fired power stations next year in that state. So it's going to be exposed to the risk of very slow black starts and a whole range of services being out. The talk is, do we talk about an inertia market? How do we solve this? It's not just the amount of kilowatt hours. How do we solve the maintenance of a reliable, sustainable grid which no one wants to really be bothered with but we have to solve? And it's going to be the big challenge. It's a great challenge to have because that means we're at levels of penetration and renewables which require us to really aggressively think about that, but it's the challenge that's coming for grids and it's either an electronics challenge or it's a transmission challenge or it's a finding a way of market supporting conventional generators in a way where they can provide that as required. Let me pick up where Matt left off. That's the challenge. That's correctly characterized, is it? But I think in these periods of great change, if you're running a business, the only thing you can do, you've got to start and if you're the regulator, you have to stand back and let this happen. You have to ask what the customer wants. You've got to start from what the customer's needs are because I think for too long, as Emery Loven said, this has been a model that was, the utility model was invented 150 years ago and it was well understood. But we've now got a situation where the customer's needs are, the customer's being offered a huge range of products and services. They can buy conventional power, they can do energy efficiency, they can put solar on their roof and so on. And then the question is, what do you do to get close to those customers? If you're the utility, then one of the things you can do is you can say, right, I will help you navigate. That is a complex world and you're probably a shopping mall or you might be a small manufacturer or you might be a residential consumer. I'll help you. I'll figure out what's the best way. You need to manage all your appliances because you're going to have much more complexity on your premises. You're also going to buy energy because you're not going to go off grid. You're still going to buy a bit, but where are you going to get it from? What's the cheapest? What's the cheapest during the night? What's the cheapest during the day? What's the cheapest when it's windy? Don't worry, we'll help you with that. And you're going to sell surplus because when it is sunny, your solar is going to need to dump and you want to be paid for it. So these are services. Look at it like that and your utility looks much more like a telecoms player than it looks like a traditional utility. It's not selling you kilowatt hours. That's not the value that it's put. It's helping you to manage a range of services. And the sorts of big data analytics that it needs, the sorts of relation, the password relationship and so on, is much closer to an internet service provider, a Google type relationship, maybe an iTunes type relationship than it is like your previous utility relationship. And that's, I think, then there's, Emery showed this thing with eon and eoff. That was actually a slide that I created and he borrowed. But you've got the other bit of the utility. Then you say, well, what do you do with the generating bit? And do you create a, I believe the term in Australia is a crap code to put the generating bits that can't get close to those retail customers. And do you then say, well, we'll be in the bulk kilowatt hours, we will reduce costs and just be the low cost provider. We'll be the, I don't know, I believe it's sort of the legal strategy, pile them high and sell them cheap. Or we will get very close to high energy demand business customers. So the actual manufacturers and so on, because they really need residential, they can also operate through the night, they can do all sorts of things, so smelting and car manufacturers and so on. So there are just different strategies. And I think, as I say, if I was a utility right now, I would be splitting operationally if not institutionally. And I would be looking to purchase or be purchased by a telecoms provider. So I could understand how to do all that data management service provision in the household, the SME and so on. That's what I would be looking to do. And if I was the regulator, I'd be saying, I kind of need to let that happen without anybody going bankrupt. Otherwise, I'm going to get, or without service collapsing, because that would be sort of really, really bad for my career. And we shouldn't forget that some of the best developers still sit within the utilities. So we need the utilities to drive forward some of the development of the generation that we see coming up in the future. The question is, do the utilities need to own that generation long term? They actually need to own the grid. Should they be selling minority stakes down to institutional investors who want to be a passive investor alongside them and using that capital and recycling that capital much more innovatively into some of the blue sky thinking that I think still exists within a lot of the utilities and people are challenged to follow through with capital. On that note, I'm going to bring it to a close. We were due to finish at 10 past. So thank you very much, Michael, Laura, Matt. Thank you very much indeed.