 And I think we'll we'll make a start. So yeah, friends and colleagues, good afternoon. Good evening and good morning from across the world. I'm based in Glasgow. I'm nice to meet you all. Today's panel session is right at the start of COP 26. So thank you for joining on the exciting day of day one. All the leaders are making their speeches for giving us your time to share some insights with you. And to hear from you as well. We are keen to hear from you. This is a panel discussion and it's framed around a whole systems approach to developing climate and carbon neutral districts. We're joined here by several colleagues from from Glasgow and from San Diego in the United States. We're working on visions that cross city and region and collaborating at scale to bring forward innovation and most importantly delivery of climate action. So our panel is going to focus on the development of long term pathways, investment, plans and strategies. And we'll describe some of the solutions being studied and integrated into city and region thinking and how these are supported by our city and region policies and planning. And how they integrate with other projects and developments as well. We'll showcase some examples from Glasgow City Region in Scotland and from San Diego, San Diego County in California. So I'm your moderator for this afternoon session. I work with the University of Strathclyde where I lead our operational climate change and social responsibility activities. I'm joined by colleagues from Glasgow City Council, Graham Smith, and also by Gordon and for Antara from San Diego. The format is a very simple panel session with some presentations, short and sharp, just to let you see what's going on. We'll ask for some questions from the audience later and you can put questions as they come to you in the chat bar. And we'll make a very quick start and then I'll introduce each panel member in order. So I'm going to go first and I'm going to ask Elena, our great organizer. And first of all, I should say be remiss of me not to say thank you to the Cecilia Development Solutions Network for creating this event. The University are members of the event and I believe there are 3000 people registered for the sessions that are organized by SDSN across the week which is which is a great effort and I'm very thankful to Elena and Gordon and colleagues for doing that. So, yeah, Elena, would you be able to share the video, please. Can you imagine using a city centre river as a heat source to warm our buildings? This is just one idea that engineers have for a clean source of energy. Climate change presents real issues for society now and in the future. Some aspects of climate change are already apparent and to some extent locked in. It is a fact that we need to very rapidly shift towards a future that uses 100% renewable energy and to become more active in how we move around our city. A city with less waste and more reuse, more of a focus on place and community, fewer cars, more people first. We all need access to clean air, more green space for shade, shelter, health and well-being. Imagine what these things could mean for the area we work and live in. We can reimagine the river cloud as an energy source and an accessible resource for people, an enabler of change working for the people of Glasgow. We can tap into the river cloud as a clean ambient source of energy, energy that can generate heat from warm, well insulated homes and buildings in the city. This is possible. What if we also generated and connected clean power from wind and solar into our city? Combining these into a revitalised and greener streetscape is a real possibility. It's in our reach. These ideas could be integrated into a re-imagined high street. The original birthplace of Glasgow could be reborn and made into a climate corridor with clean air, less noise, more space for communities. It would mean putting people first, not cars, vans, lorries, when it comes to street priority. Less traffic, more space for people to move safely, walking, wheeling and sometimes just sitting and enjoying more green space. More trees for shelter and shade, green walls, green roofs, working with nature, not against it. Access to the services we need within a short distance or on a clean and accessible integrated transport system. This is the vision of a Climate Neutral Innovation District in Glasgow City Centre and at the University of Strothcly, we have the brightest minds working towards this cleaner, healthier future. Thanks Elena. I'm now going to move on to my presentation and I'll share my screen. Hopefully colleagues can see that. So yeah, my subject area is the creation of a Climate Neutral Innovation District in Glasgow City Centre. I'm the project sponsor for this piece of work and really the few slides that I'll run through just exemplify our vision for the city centre space, led by the University of Strothcly, but working very much in close collaboration and partnership with a number of city stakeholders. So the Innovation District is an entrepreneurial and innovation zone in Glasgow City Centre, which is a 70 hectare area right in the dense heart of the city. It's a partnership between the University Council, Scottish Enterprise, Glasgow Chamber and Entrepreneurial Scotland and the business community and various public sector organisations all working together to create innovation in this zone. So my work as executive lead for sustainability is to make this zone climate neutral and by that we mean energy carbon neutral in operation and climate resilience. I'm thinking that I'm being aware of the existence of climate issues right now and being locked in. So the image you've got here is really the geography of the space and you can see the river collide here and that will feature very much in what we're doing. As you'll see, the vision is to create a 100% renewable heat power transport adaptation and wellbeing plan for the community and the community being the businesses, organisations and the residents living, working, visiting the space in the city centre. I'm really thinking about the climate solutions that we can bring forward to help deliver the change that we need and to enable that city centre zone to be vibrant and to be a sustainable city centre zone. So the geography is as you can see it right in the heart of the city here and you'll see George Square highlighted here. So the innovation centre is the tech zone, university is here, you've got a hospital up here, you've the river collide to the south. And in the video you saw High Street, the original birthplace of Glasgow here right in the spine of the area and with housing all around the area. This is the tenants factory which produces beer, which you may be familiar with, and we have a waste energy plant several kilometres south of the zone. So that's the vision in essence. The work that we've done thus far is looked at the technical and financial solutions to achieve energy carbon neutral, and also to make the zone resilient and these key facts and figures here. We'll make these available to you after the presentation so you don't need to note anything down. You can see the scale of the ambition is to decarbonise by at least 84% and we think we can get to 93% through various interventions, starting at a cost of 210 million and affecting the population that resides within and works within the district. We're deploying district heating to bring low-grade heat from the cloud and use heat pumps to amplify that to create heat in our spaces. In Scotland we need heat, and that's one of the big challenges that we need to decarbonise. 40% of the emissions that we have generally in Scotland are from energy, particularly from heat. And even that our renewable energy sector is decarbonised significantly over the past 10 to 20 years. We want to plant some trees. We think that's important in terms of urban canopy and green shade for shelter. And we think we really need to start thinking about deploying more of our own solar PV within the district. We have a team that's been working on the project so far. We've recently reported the first phase of technical work and we also have a steering group and you can see the nature of the collaboration that's going on within this work. Lots of actors in the city and in the region, all of whom have been helping to shape the project thus far. We're going to jump into the river Clyde to extract the heat that's within that huge resource for the city. It runs right through the heart of the city and you'll be aware that COP26 is taking place right on the Clyde. So there's a huge ambition to capture the heat energy that's within that and distribute that into the city centre zone. This is our kind of vision for what High Street, which currently looks like this on the left, could look like, and this is an artist's impression obviously. And the point is that we need to start thinking about greening our city spaces. We need to think about district heating to help provide affordable clean heat for our communities and businesses. And also think about other aspects like digital, HV upgrades, high voltage power upgrades, adaptation solutions that all sit within that infrastructure piece. And these kind of solutions all build into that large scale, financeable renewables and climate responsive solutions that we're looking at. Is it achievable? These pictures show you the nature of district heating in the cities. This is not unusual. A lot of cities have done this. And these are images from the university's district energy scheme which we installed a number of years ago, and for which I was project sponsor. So I know this is possible. This image on the right is kind of the Victorian, right up to the modern day infrastructure landscape that we have to deal with. And we inserted district heating pipes right underneath all of these services here that you can see gas, water, digital power. It is doable, but it's not going to be easy. The second example that we're working on is the National Manufacturing Institute, which we're making our first energy carbon neutral development. There is no gas grid connection in this development, which is a digital factory that we're developing at the university site in next to Glasgow Airport. So again, that's our first building. I would argue potentially at this scale, one of the first in Scotland to be energy carbon neutral in operation and have no gas grid connection at this scale. And how we're doing that is we're tapping into waste heat from the local sewage treatment works. The sewage treatment works treats and discharges clean water, which is warm. We're building an ambient heat loop that will connect back to the digital factory and we'll install a heat pump to amplify that heat to provide the heat source for the building. And we'll have a large scale solar ray on the roof of the building that will provide the power, but we will be connected to the main spread. So those are just two very brief examples to let you see, this is a vision that we've got, but in terms of enemies, it's actually starting to become a reality. There's already construction images for the site, which is coming forward out of the ground as we speak, but I'm going to stop sharing there. And I will pass on to Graham, my colleague Graham Smith is group manager for business growth within Glasgow City Council responsible for driving business growth in the city working towards making Glasgow the most productive UK city economy by 2023. Graham leads a team of skilled professionals delivering business advice and support across the city and work collaboratively with stakeholders across public, private and education sectors, as well as leading the development of innovation districts in the city. Graham sits as a director on business loans Scotland, providing access to debt finance for businesses. Graham over to you. Thanks for coming. Thank you. And I'm genuinely delighted to be here with you this afternoon in Glasgow is here. So wish you all good afternoon. And to share with you some of the work that we've been doing here in Glasgow and to join discussions and such an important topic at a time when the world's eyes are on our great city. I'd like to take 10 minutes or so just to briefly consider a couple of the real driving forces that are dictating the conversation around climate. Before maybe moving on to talk about what Glasgow is doing and to share with all of you some of our plans for the next 10 years. So what's wrong with our current economy and what are the outcomes that are being produced macroeconomically and a city region level to address this. This is a busy slide. And it shows some of the work that's been carried out by the World Economic Forum's global risk network demonstrating that whilst some of the biggest risks of climate action failure come from things like a loss of biodiversity and human environmental damage. It's also major products of the wider aspects of our economic and social systems. And as you can see from the diagram, it's quite a complex landscape with high levels of interconnectedness between the macroeconomic factors and the drivers of climate action failure. And importantly, if you look at these risks, they're systemic and translate through to many other risks. So this isn't just about decisions on CO2. It's much, much broader than that in terms of decisions that have to be taken around our economy and our lived society to mitigate and reduce CO2 emissions to the required levels over the next decade. But we're nowhere near that. And as you can see highlighted by the UN emissions gap report, there's a significant gap between the level of action plan to reduce global emissions by 2030. And we're not on the right trajectory to reduce them in time. When the nationally determined contributions that countries were requested to submit in advance of COP26, they're insufficient to achieve the temperature goal of the Paris Agreement. An incremental change that we've seen over the last decade is nowhere near close enough to where the science needs us to be. So we need some radical changes in our approach to mitigation and adaptation, but this must be linked to changes in our wider economic and social systems. I'm going to talk about what our city's responses to climate emergency. I thought it might be quite nice to share with you an example of some of the some of the aspects related to why changes need to take place that haven't. There's a famous scene for those of you that have seen Lawrence of Arabia. There's a very famous scene in that movie where Omar Sharif makes his entrance. It's a scene that's typical of the human response to uncertainty and how we react to an unknown or a changing situation. So in the movie, Lawrence and his companion are resting at a well, they're having some water when they see a black dog appear on the horizon. The two of them stand, transfects watching as that unknown phenomenon grows bigger and approaches them, not knowing who it is or what they should do. And finally they decide that there's a threat and they move to grab their guns and do something about it, but before they can react, Omar Sharif's upon them and he shoots Lawrence's companion and it leaves Lawrence asking the question, why? And what this scene highlights very well is the human response to uncertainty. So as I described this, I'd like you to consider how this relates to the climate emergency. So having identified that dot on the horizon, the two men, they try to relate that to their known world. Their thought process is varied. It's not clear which response is appropriate and what decisions should be taken. And as that dot gets closer, new theories emerge, but the overwhelming sense of uncertainty increases. And as the situation evolves, little time is left to develop or implement an effective solution and panic sets in. So if we consider the climate emergency as that dot on the horizon and the time over which we've had to take action and implement policies that would deliver the Paris Agreement 2030, 2035, 2050, they're the dots on the horizon. But before we know it, they'll be here with us and we need to make sure that we have in place the policies and processes that will help to deliver change. So this is what the Glasgow Green Deal aims to do for our city. It's a nine year mission to transform our economy in a way that tackles the climate emergency and operates within the planetary boundaries. It's orchestrated and supported by the city council, but it's much more than just a policy document. It's a deep partnership with business, citizens and government. This is a whole systems change initiative to increase the pace and scale of decarbonising and building resilience to climate change and allow us to bridge some of the gaps between ambition and implementation. In many ways, it's a controlling idea. It's about bringing a hugely significant amount of existing activity under one umbrella initiative, and this will increase over time. It will consist of investments, initiatives, innovation, policies and plans to transform the city in wider region with strong emphasis in co-design and co-production and will be imminently launching a call for ideas and views on a roadmap to shape it within the city. In terms of the mission, objectives and areas of focus of the Glasgow Green Deal, the mission is around equitable net zero carbon and climate resilient living by 2030. That's what we want to achieve. And ultimately, we need to be guided. This needs to be guided and enabled to make it happen. And sitting underneath that, there are three interlinked objectives. So we have poverty and justice, we've got decarbonisation and adaptation, and we've got prosperity, jobs and high quality places. In terms of the area of focus, as you can see, it identifies a series of complex adaptive systems all at different stages of maturity, where increased innovation and intervention is required to scale and accelerate progress with big important economic ones such as infrastructure and connectivity. And at the bottom, it identifies a complementary enabling framework for action. These are levers of change which have the potential to deliver wide ranging positive change beyond the immediate focus. And the Green Deal will use system innovation and areas of focus with these levers to build and develop a portfolio of investments and initiatives that will help to transform the city in the wider region and support existing projects to rescope and accelerate action. Each of these activities or projects will need a different mix of levers to achieve the mission. To implement this in the city, communities, cities, citizens, businesses, sector bodies and trade unions, they all have to be at the heart of achieving the mission. Therefore, it's really, really important for us that our approach ensures that they feel empowered and supported to take on the mission in a way that fits with their own unique context and that there are a number of opportunities for them to participate in citywide action. To guide and support the implementation of the Glasgow Green Deal, we're seeking views on establishing a Green Deal unit and that would draw on the expertise and resources from across the council and wider city institutions and add new capacity with the unit's purpose of being to orchestrate the mission by involving citizens, communities and communities and businesses, as well as public organisations and governments. This will bring on going activity under the umbrella and the guiding objectives of the Green Deal activity that will develop underpinning evidence and provide resources to support the mission, as well as to build much needed capacity and capabilities of organisations and individuals to lead the change. The programme area and activities are set out in the next couple of slides, some of which are linked to existing activity within our climate plan, so things like co-designing the future that the people of Glasgow want, like the innovation, the market making and the skills required to make Glasgow a hub for Scotland. Let's take how we will finance the Green Deal, a massive issue for us, and how we will strengthen the economic case for investment. And as I mentioned earlier, how the mission orchestration will support enabling inspire citizens, businesses and communities to participate in the mission creating an ecosystem of change and innovation. As I mentioned, the Climate Innovation District is one of the hallmarks of success. The Innovation District concept started prior to the development of the Glasgow Green Deal, but it's got many hallmarks of the Green Deal approach. It doesn't see the environment as separate from our wider efforts to develop the economy in the city, and it covers many of the different areas of focus and place based action. In many ways it's going much bigger, solving the problem in the most straightforward way, with clear goals on financing, huge net zero ambitions and structured governance models that engages and brings stakeholders in a journey that is clear and well articulated. This is a technically feasible project that aligns well with the wider city aspirations and it's open to experimentation and doing things differently. Importantly, it's open to the possibility of failure. Why is that important? Well, we've never done this before, so it's important to recognise that there will be failures, but it's how we respond to failure that's important in order to learn and put in place new strategies for success. Finally, the emphasis here is very much on collaboration and empowerment. It's supported by the city, but critically it's led by the University of Strathclyde and really focused on doing the right thing. So in terms of next steps, we'll be developing a Green Deal unit and a roadmap of projects is being scoped out currently with a view to starting multiple project developments. And then the interim name is to deliver a Climate Neutral Innovation District. One of the three main strategic priorities for the council over the next few years is to see the Glasgow City Innovation District develop climate neutrality. This involves us answering a number of questions such as what is really needed to move forward to implementation stage? Is it new governance, institutions, actors, policy, finance models that's required? And who's prepared to step into that space? How do we manage but not avoid risk associated with something that isn't a guaranteed success? That's a real challenge for us. So how has been learnt from the project development process? What are the success factors that would enable citywide replication and update? So how can we take the learning from this and replicate this across other parts of the city? I'll stop there, Roddy. I hope that's helped you set the scene and contributed to the debate over the course of the next couple of hours. And thank you very much. Thank you very much. That was hugely helpful. And we've shared the link to the Green Dale so you might get some emails from various people and certainly some interest. So it's hugely insightful. And thank you very much. We're going to turn now to our colleagues in the US. And first of all, we'll turn to Gordon McCord, who is Associate Dean and Associate Teaching Professor of Economics at the School of Global Policy and Strategy University of California in San Diego. And I do like Gordon's backdrop. It's just incredible that picture. It's dry and it's nice in Glasgow at the moment, but certainly doesn't look like that. Gordon directs the SDG Policy Initiative and Senior Advisor to the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. And Gordon's research is on development, economics, public health and the environment. Gordon, I'll pass to you now and then if you would pass me back and we'll move then to Tara. Thank you very much. Sounds great. Thank you, Roddy, for coordinating us and thanks to SDSN for organizing this entire event. It's really inspiring to hear examples from other cities to hear the specificity of what's going on in Glasgow and and I really love Graham's description of how uncertainty can be paralyzing, which I think is exactly right. And so laying out concrete plans I think is the way out of paralysis. And that's what I'll describe a little bit of what we're trying to do here in the southwestern corner of the United States and in the county of San Diego, California. So just for a little bit of context, California has set a target of net zero emissions by 2045. So even as we're waiting for national leaders at COP26 to make their commitments at the subnational level in the United States, many states have set their own targets and California has a net zero target that's set by executive order for 2045. But despite a state level target, the truth is that many decarbonization decisions are made locally and by locally I mean at county and city level in the United States. And what kind of decisions do I mean by this, where do we cite renewables where are the solar panels going to go where are the wind turbines going to go what kind of land uses will be displaced through massive construction of renewables. What land use for natural climate solutions like carbon sequestration do we protect. How do we set building codes so building codes are set locally in the US system, and then transportation system decisions to try to reduce emissions. These are all examples of things that are not only not set at national level. They're not even really set at state level they're set down at county and city level which means that we have a lot of work to do and laying out a plan for decarbonization and to help local governments make these decisions over the next few decades. San Diego is a county with about 3.3 million people, but the, it consists of several parts of government so there's a county government of which supervisor Tara Lawson reamer is in the leadership of the county government. But within the county there are 18 cities and different agencies, all of which have climate action plans. The challenge here is coordinating across all of these government entities and decarbonization really requires a systems approach thinking because energy systems and transportation systems are of course systems and they don't end at the end of a city jurisdiction or the end of a county jurisdiction and we need to bring all of these actors and government together and align their policy making process towards planning for emissions reductions. The project is called the regional decarbonization framework that was put together by the county of say, of San Diego, and the idea is to start with the science, provide very specific and technical pathways to decarbonization that can inform the policy making among these different government actors at regional county and city level. You begin with a national and state energy model, of course as I said everything is interconnected and and San Diego cannot make its own plan without being coherent with what the state of California energy system is going to be like and what the western state energy system is going to be like. And so our approach is to begin first with a broader energy system model chart out the trajectory to meet zero by by mid century or sooner and have that guide the San Diego bottom up modeling that needs to And this ensures that the San Diego regional pathway as I said is coherent with the statewide pathway to decarbonization and that we know by when by 2035 by 2040 by 2045. How much do we need to reduce in buildings in energy systems production in transportation emissions, and of the new energy that's going to be produced, how much will be solar how much will be when how much will be from other sources so we begin with a coherent pathway that will guide all of these local jurisdictions and then engage in a bottom up approach that's consistent with that more regional pathway. And so the idea here is to produce produce specific and quantitative pathways that highlight trade offs and inform the policy making conversation so as, for example, how much renewable energy needs to be produced by when, and where should it go to minimize What if we choose to prioritize ecosystem and biodiversity protection, how does that reconfigure where the renewable energy would go. What if we choose to protect high value agricultural and urban lands, how does that reconfigure the decision. Or what if we prioritize rooftop solar and bourbon infill solar in marginalized communities to reduce energy costs and create jobs among marginalized communities in our cities. All of these are the different kinds of scenarios that we that we outline, not because we're producing a single plan quite the contrary because the idea is to elucidate the trade offs. And those of us that are policymakers have very specific pathways in front of them that can help them gauge the benefits and costs of these different decisions that they need to make. As I said the idea is to model the entire region as a system to help inform and align all of the jurisdictions within the geographic region of the county. And focus on proved and scalable technology so I think part of the power of the paralysis can sometimes happen by focusing on on piloted technologies or theoretical technologies and waiting to see for something for something to be developed. And what's changed over the last 10 to 15 years is that we have the ability to to produce renewable energy at scale, and the costs of that has has come down and so focusing these pathways these technical pathways using proved and scalable technologies as opposed to theoretical technologies or things that only in pilots can help see what the evolution of the system will be, even if those pilots and that those theoretical technologies never come to fruition. This also means that this kind of work needs to be updated continuously as technologies evolve and as costs evolve over the next few decades, this kind of modeling work to guide local policy making needs to be updated. Also, and Graham highlighted this nicely, we need to highlight uncertainties throughout because there is there's a lot of things that we don't know in terms of how technologies and costs will evolve. In 2035 or after 2045 or after 2040 and so we need to constantly be have an ongoing planning process as this information changes. And as I said earlier, the RDF does not identify the quote unquote right pathway. The idea is to show multiple ways forward that reach zero net carbon by by 2045 highlight the trade offs across those different pathways, highlight what the key decision points are the risks and the synergies. And so inject science to inform the policy making conversation in these little different local governments in the region. So the values of this pathways approach. First, identifying and lowering the risk of dead end strategies, dead end strategies are things that cost us now they're costly investments, and they do reduce emissions now, but they don't achieve full large scale investments and that moving up move us away from say coal or oil to natural gas would be something that reduce emissions today, but they don't provide a path to full be carbonization so that's an example. Identifying commonalities and pathways under sensitivity analysis so if you imagine different realizations of how technology could evolve in the future. There are near term decisions that seem to be a good idea in the short term, regardless of how the long term system evolves so we call these low regret or some people call them no regret strategies. Can we identify near term actions that we worthwhile, regardless of how the longer term uncertainty resolves itself because these are going to be low hanging fruit there are always a good idea. Situating near term policy targets that are compatible with longer term goals and so if we have a goal to get to zero by 2045. What should our 2035 target be that's compatible with getting to 2045. And finally helping policymakers identify key decision points really what are the main things to be focused on and what decisions need to be made by when. An example of this is the fact that capital replacement cycles for heating technology or other things have different capital has different lifespans. And so, if we want to do least cost decarbonization one of the most important things to do is try to avoid stranding assets in the future. People make capital investments, some things last for many, many years, and we don't want to have to take things offline before the end of the natural lifespan of that piece of capital. So for things that last a very long time like power plants and pipelines, those things need to be made. Now those decisions need to be made now to convert things to electrified systems because if somebody replaces a fossil fuel powered boiler. In the next few years that boilers going to be around for for decades and and we may have to take it offline ahead of time by if we're going to reach zero and that's a very expensive thing to do. Other decisions will have more time for so vehicles for example have a shorter lifespan and so we don't need to worry about getting every single person driving an electric vehicle by next year. We should phase that in over the next decade, and California has plans to do that, but, but things like boilers or pipelines those kinds of things would be first priority in terms of trying to avoid stranded assets in the future. So in order to do all of this, the regional decarbonization framework put together a team that cover all of the relevant sectors so first energy and system modeling at state and federal level geospatial analysis of the renewable energy production within the San Diego region, a team that works on decarbonization of transportation, a team that works on the natural climate solutions potential in the region, a team that works on buildings, a team that focuses on how all these different green investments would affect labor effect the effect employment, a team that works on broad policy considerations for, for example to coordinate San Diego jurisdictions. A team that works very specifically on the climate action plans of the individual cities. And finally a team that works on how to generate scale from San Diego's model if we're going to be successful we need not only San Diego as a pilot example of this this needs to be replicated across the United States by thousands of local governments and by governments and so that's the team and the idea is that all of this is disciplined as an exercise by the energy modeling so the buildings team knows exactly where they need to be in terms of emission reduction by year, the transportation team the natural climate solutions team and all of this acts as a single system. So to show an example here's one scenario for the geospatial analysis, you see this is a least cost analysis for where solar and wind should be deployed out in San Diego County. We could produce 50,000 gigawatt hours by 2050 and solar and wind and and we map there how much area it would take to do. So that's one scenario this is the least cost in terms of the levelized cost of energy, but we also produce a similar map, if you avoid areas of very high conservation value that's important for biodiversity, or another one that avoids high value agricultural and urban land, another one that avoids land that has high natural carbon sequestration potential. That allows for a lot of renewable power coming in from our neighboring county that has significantly more solar and geothermal potential than San Diego. And then across all of these different scenarios we also identify what seems to be a good idea across these scenarios and so here's an example of one part of the county in the southeastern area of the county, we're developing this, this climate and solar potential always seems to be a good idea regardless of which scenario you're in at the top. So this is the kind of information that we provide to policymakers to try to guide the conversation and ground it in science over the next over the next few years. And so we emphasize several things. First, that the reduction of emissions is a coordination problem for cities and agencies that are all in the same geographic space. And so we're going to have to come up with mechanisms that incentivize the sharing of information capacity and technology across all of these local jurisdictions. So which sector should identify near term actions, right, what are the no regret strategies that seem to be a good idea regardless of which pathway we're on in the future. Those are the things we should focus on immediately. We should also try to think about a region wide governance structure for decarbonization so something about maybe a regional steering committee with sector working groups for buildings and power and transportation and buildings with frontline with a deep technical expertise in these things. And this all to allow a lot of experimentation and adaptation as the technological and political realities and the local jurisdictions change. Finally a local, some conference of governments might bring together these these 1819 governments in the region to coordinate and come up with as they write their own climate action plans. To be fed by a continuously updated systems analysis like what the RDF is doing. And finally it's important for San Diego to be proactive in generating followership among other regions, we are just a drop in the bucket in terms of global emissions, and so success really needs to really would be defined as getting other counties across the country, and other local jurisdictions across the world, doing similar exercise to have specific and ambitious targets for decarbonization of local law. And this is just a figure of how we're conceptualizing a possibility for local governance structures that allows for sharing across the local jurisdictions. There are a lot of kinds of things that, especially for for regions like counties in the United States but other federated states in countries across the world will have to think about innovative ways so that there's a lot of sharing of information across local government so that everybody is moving forward and lockstep with coherent plans for decarbonization, because at the end of the day, as I started with energy systems transportation systems. They're all interconnected across local jurisdictions. And so all of us need to figure out how to move in lockstep towards a shared path of reaching zero. And I'll end there. Thanks very much. Gordon brilliant to see that the pathway that you're taking and to draw the similarities and some of the challenges that certainly Graham and I would reflect upon that local regional and state dimension the importance of data science and economic factors in enabling it to develop the right policy metrics and communication and collaboration. But yeah, your skill is bigger than ours, but you face the same the same issues I sense. Thank you for that. I'm going to now introduce our next speaker, Tara Lawson Reamer. Tara is a supervisor on the San Diego County Board and has a lifelong track record of bringing people together to solve problems. Tara graduated from Yale, earned a full scholarship to law and graduate school and received a PhD of law degree from NYU. Tara served as senior advisor, I believe in the Obama administration, developing environmental policies to cut pollution from oil drilling and from mining with a proven track record of environmental leadership. Tara, it's great to have you here. Thank you for your time. I'll hand over straight to you. Thank you. Thank you so much. It's really great to be here this morning. And such a pleasure to be sharing a panel with Gordon and yourself, Roddy and Graham, and to be participating in COPE 26 more broadly. And I think as we all saw with the impressive presentation from Gordon McCord, that is why we brought his team on board to put together a regional decarbonization framework for San Diego County. I'm here to talk today a little bit about subnational climate action and the work that we are doing at the county of San Diego to eliminate carbon emissions for our region. I want to focus on the political economy issues. I'm just taking a step back. I think when I, when I, when I watch Gordon's presentation and we're just so excited for the work that his team has done. We, it is no question how important it is for us as a region to be able to have that kind of technical roadmap. Because when we talk about bringing stakeholders together, if we don't have the analysis to discuss and to guide our work. It's very, very hard to get everyone on the same page. So, as Gordon mentioned, the, the, the challenges that we face result in large part from the fact that there's just various different levers that different levels of levels of government have. So the state of California and then of course the, the national government in Washington have some levers, the vast majority of questions around land use planning around transit investments around whether we're going to build more roads, or we're going to invest in mass transit and we're going to build houses and sprawl development all across the horizon or set aside land for biodiversity or allow for solar panels to be built in areas where neighbors might be opposed to those investments. Those are all local decisions. So it is just so vital that we have the kind of framework that Gordon and his team has to put together. So, what are the challenges and opportunities with our local stakeholders. What are the main stakeholders who need to be brought on board and how can we make them to take the risks that do things differently. Who is opposed to climate action and how can we turn them into allies. Those are a lot of the questions that I've spent my time trying to think through over the past year. As for those of you who are unfamiliar with administrative structure in California counties are the intermediate jurisdiction between the between the state and the cities. So we've brought authority over land use planning in an unincorporated areas, while the cities within our territory of authority in incorporated areas. And we have the largest share of votes in our regional transit and housing planning bodies, which include representatives from other jurisdictions as well. We came into the office at the beginning of the year we flipped a county that had been under Republican control for Republican control for half a century to a Democratic majority. And prior to my election, we had no climate plan, no regional climate plan at all at the county level, or the regional level for this area that includes is the home for over 3.3 million people. And we had the old county had really just taken its hand off the wheel to let land speculators and sprawl developers drive our county's land use and transportation policy. So I decided that we needed a regional plan to tackle climate change. Because as Gordon mentioned, we, these are interconnected systems, and it's very difficult to get one piece of the system to move forward, when they don't have a sense of what the other pieces of the system are going to do. So this regional planning is very complex because of our structure of government, where power is shared across all these different entities. So all that being said, from our point of view, the first step was to do this work to put together a regional decarbonization framework, so that we all are operating on shared information. One of the biggest challenges has been, frankly, a lack of information and interest groups that are advocate for their own interests and their own self interest without policymakers or the broader public, having an understanding of how these policy decisions have implications that impose, you know, frankly very large externalities on the rest of us. In the absence of the kind of analysis that Gordon and his team has put together, all we have had were interest groups lobbying on their own behalf. And so this kind of framework is really, really vital, because it gives us the ability to understand the tradeoffs and the choices that policymakers like myself have to make. So that's that's the first step. The second piece of this is the work that we need to do to bring a table together. And I think we often talk about stakeholders and stakeholder engagement and stakeholders feeling like they have a seat at the table, but it isn't sufficient for for us to do stakeholder consultation, or for individuals to feel like they were seen or seen and heard. It's much deeper than that. I'm at the core, it's about ensuring that the policies that we put together are able to align interest to some extent or another, and that the most powerful important stakeholders in our regional government. I don't feel like losers at the end of this process. And when I talk about our regional government I don't mean people who sit on our regional body. I mean the individuals and entities who influence the electorate who influence money in politics, who really determine who has power, and what policies get enacted and what policies get put in the garbage bin. So, generally we think about the oil and gas industry as a key stakeholder. One of the things that's really interesting locally is that our oil we don't have a significant amount of workforce or economy at all. We invested directly in oil and gas, our local power production company, their profit comes from distribution rather than production. So that's important because it means that they are very amenable to alternative modes of production of energy so long as their control over distribution is not threatened. So if we have our workforce and our labor partners, we do have significant numbers of workers who do natural gas pipe fitting, others for pipelines, others who work in natural gas power plants, others who build roads and freeways. So there is, there's absolutely work that we have to do to ensure that we have a just transition that when we are talking about moving towards new sectors and away from old sectors that we have clear plans and pathways to create new and equally good opportunities for workers in these new sectors. And that itself is going to be a huge part of the work in trying to figure out how to implement a regional decarbonization framework. So these changes that are that we have to look at in land use and transportation are going to have very significant impacts on the types and quality of construction jobs. Again, in terms of jobs but also more broadly in terms of economic stakeholders. So developers, developers play a huge role in San Diego's regional economy, and the developers have been long invested in building single family housing. Because that's where their margin is largest on building single family housing on a greenfield in other words on places where they don't need to bulldoze and blow up other buildings. They can just build on land that's never been built on before, which basically means sprawl development. So developers are very, very opposed to any kind of land use patterns that would prevent them building in areas where there aren't already homes of agriculture similar sets of questions over regarding whether land should be utilized for agriculture on the one hand or potentially be utilized for solar power generation on the other and what some of those traders are. So, the big challenges that we face is a big challenges that we face really sit in this place of how do we figure out how to get these various stakeholders to work together. Not just across government entities and across government bodies, but really the interest groups who have something to lose and something to gain from this transition that we need to make to a carbon neutral future. So I think from my perspective as a policymaker which is a new hat for me just was elected a year ago and a year prior to that was much more comfortable in the technical seat that Gordon sits. But from my perspective as a policymaker now, it's just so incredibly important to be able to have that technical assessment and framework, which then allows a focus of decision making, as opposed to a bunch of fear, fear driven speculation because I think what I would say, because at the end of the day, you know what we need to do is show stakeholders that they will be, if not better off at least as well off under a different set of land use transit and energy production choices, as they are today. And to the extent that we can't bring them on board, we need to make sure that they're a small enough minority, both in terms of resources and individuals that they can't derail the broader work so we need to build a very large coalition, where most stakeholders are winners in order to move this forward. So the second piece of it and then as I circling back to what how I began. The second piece of the work is how do we bring all these jurisdictions together, because as Gordon discussed and as I mentioned as well. We all have a different lever, but all of our work is integrated because we have to take a systems approach because clearly we live in reality in an integrated system not one that's bifurcated by jurisdiction. So that that is the work that we are focused on and that I am focused on now that we begun to put together this regional decarbonization framework. And basically, from my point of view, I think Gordon had the easy job of figuring out some of the, the technical pathways, and we have the hard job of figuring out how we actually align stakeholders and interest groups who have a lot of fear of uncertainty of an uncertain future they know what today looks like. They know where their jobs are today. They know where they make their profits today. They know what today looks like in terms of a business model. When we have policy shifts that creates a very uncertain future. There's not a lot of trust that that future is going to actually deliver promises in terms of what's good for their self interest. And so there is a huge amount of work to do to convince people to essentially trust each other enough to take a leap forward into a future where they will have a different set of incentives and different different jobs, different business models, but that can be equally beneficial to their own interest groups. So that's a piece of it. I do also want to take a moment to talk about the value of the political economy of the voters, and the extent to which voters in Southern California really care about climate action. It's very valuable because it means that we can encourage other elected officials who might otherwise be reluctant to take risks, or reluctant to take on entrenched special interest groups, we can we can encourage them to take steps to support the regional decarbonization framework, because they know that the voters support decarbonization, and they don't want to be painted as someone who is dragging their feet on climate action. So those are the pieces of the puzzle that I'm working on now. We're trying to figure out how we move forward in to implement a decarbonization framework. Just want to circle back to the importance of this for for this work, because, although we can have so many important and big and lofty goals set at the federal level, and at the state level, it doesn't translate into actual information locally where a vast majority of these decisions are being made. We don't have the information we don't have a plan to how we would move towards a zero in our local region. And so absent that I all I could say is you have a lot of policymakers running around without a clear vision of what they ought to do. And at least once we know what we ought to do. Then we can make a plan on how to encourage people to move towards what they ought to do. But but absent that plan absent that analysis. You're just talking, you're all you have to rely on are the really the lobbying pieces of paper produced by interest groups in their own behalf, and no objective scientific basis on which to make these decisions so again, I really am grateful to be here today, and was really excited to bring us to stay in all of our partners on board to put this regional decarbonization framework together for San Diego County, not just to benefit our region. But our hope is that this approach can become a model that other counties can follow other regions can follow every other jurisdictions can follow. We have 3.3 million people who live here which is a lot, but there's a lot more regions around the world that I am sure face a similar similar set of challenges so with that I'd like to stop and pass the floor back to our host thank you very much. Tara, that was really insightful to see and listen to and hear what challenges you've you've got. I immediately reflect that in the UK and in Scotland. We seem to have that kind of national framework, which you've described, but we also, I think, maybe the difference I don't know. I'm interested to hear you put Graham's thoughts on this and perhaps reflect back to you and Gordon, how in Scotland and at a regional and local it doesn't seem to be as challenging for us to have a plan that we think we can enact, but I might have that I might have read that wrong. But because I have no I didn't know any of this I thought that there would be a local plan, a regional plan and a national federal plan. So, we'll move to questions and answers with the panel just now and I know we've got questions and answers from from the audience. Thank you very much. We'll try and get to those as well. At three o'clock we have another half hour scheduled, I believe. I hope that's right. And we're not about to get caught off at three o'clock. Hopefully that's not the case. But if I could perhaps turn to Graham and ask you a question Graham. What are the key challenges for scaling innovative and inclusive climate and finance, financeable solutions from your perspective and then I'll move to Gordon and then Tara please. Graham, would you? Yeah, and can I just echo I think that it was really insightful hearing both Tara and Gordon speaking and hearing what's going on in other parts of the country. I think for us, there are two things that we really need to be focused on. The first one and I alluded to this earlier in the presentation is we need to do things differently. We can't continue to, as a local authority, as local government and regional government do things the way that we've been doing them for the past 10, 15, 20 years. Things need to change. Our systems need to change. Our policies need to change. The speed at which your decision making changes or our planning policies need to be more adaptive and flexible in order for us to achieve our ambition of net zero by 20. 30, which is nine years, isn't a lot, isn't a long time. But perhaps the biggest challenge, Roddy, I think we face is around climate finance and financing, some of these changes, you know, Glasgow. We reckon that we're in the region of 50 billion is what we need over the next nine years to try and deliver on some of the ambitions that we have. And how do you finance that? That's a big question. It's one that hopefully is being discussed over the next two weeks at COP. And what's the role of both local government and national government in that because we're clear we can't finance all of this. We need the private sector to come in. We need the financial institutions to be stepping up. And we're debating a big discussion to be had in terms of the return on investment for green projects and how they are viewed. And for me, that's probably the biggest challenge that we have in terms of scaling innovative and inclusive climate solutions. Thanks, Graeme. Gordon, do you have any reflections on that? I can repeat the question, if that helps. I think the question is on the challenge of scaling up these different efforts. And so I think a piece of it is that, I mean, at first I think we should say what the good news is, is compared to where we were 20 years ago, technologies have come a long, long way. And so the cost of taking action serious scaled action has come down a lot. So a lot of our work, which is based on national level, modeling by Evolved Energy Research, part of a big project that's called the deep decarbonization pathways project that's at national scale in 21 of the largest countries in the world, shows that in the United States, decarbonizing by 2045 would probably cost on the order of one to two percent of GDP. And that number used to be much higher. And so the idea that we need massive, massive outlays, that this is going to be, you know, we're going to bankrupt other parts of government in order to save the environment. That's just not true. And yes, there's a role for private co-investment and the private sector will continue to be the most innovative and least cost actor in the economy. But the idea that financing is what's stopping us probably is not the case. And, and the fact is that over time, a lot of these investments will pay for themselves in the idea that as you, as you reach more and more efficiency in buildings in the region, as there's more and more, perhaps the decentralized solar on rooftops, it's the case that in lots, in lots of cases people's energy bills might actually be going down. And so I think the challenge of scale is a political one. It's actually sitting down and saying, okay, we need a plan, and then having forward looking politicians like Tara, bringing her colleagues together and bringing constituents together and saying we need this, and that's starting to happen in places like Glasgow, in places like New York City, Massachusetts, Hawaii, parts of California, but we need this to happen everywhere on the planet, and we need, and we need it to happen quickly. But I think that that's mostly a political challenge, especially in the high income world. Yeah, yeah, no, no, it's a fair comment. And that, that 1% of GDP was mentioned in the opening remarks at COP. I heard that a few times and our climate change committee reflects on on that similar percentage very small percentage impact figure. But, but staying with that political policy piece, Tara, perhaps you could reflect your thoughts on that question. And the question being the challenges around climate finance. Yeah. So a few, a few thoughts. So, first of all, in terms of our regional challenges. You know, I want to say, very back the envelope but maybe half of them are cost problems at all, which I can address in a second but the half aren't cost problems whatsoever so for example our land use challenges right, like whether we build. You know, I talked a lot about housing and where we're building housing and kind of the structure of how we live and work, and whether we continue building sprawl development, or stop and try to create like an urban periphery and start building infill, which could then, you know, get people out of their cars, and then I'll lead towards the ability to utilize mass transit right I mean remember we're talking about Southern California, you know the home of the car. So, that is a that is not a climate investment that's not a finance issue that is purely a political economy interest group challenge where you have developers who make a lot of money, building sprawl development, who have given lots of campaign donations for a really long time to elected officials, so elected officials don't want to vote against their development projects like it's pretty it's not about needing to come up with more money it's a net about needing to come up with sort of the political will. I would like to tell a story to the voters on standing up against developers so that you have the backing of a lot of voters, even if you don't have developer money, I mean that is a very it's it's not it's a political issue pure and simple, not a financing issue. Then I do think there's another maybe I'd say half of the question which is about financing. Those are so we're trying to, for example, raise funds to do a massive amount of transit investments in our region, because right now we just have roads and cars right. But it's, and it would be an initiative that would go to the voters. This is not a question of having to sort of come up with money out of thin air. It's a question of convincing voters that it is in their own interest to vote for their for a tax measure that's going to, you know, in the end, not just benefit their and their, their climate future, but, you know, also improve their quality of life and make their life more convenient and better. So it's both values aligned but also figuring out how you talk about these investments in a way that's both values aligned, as well as aligned with self interest. Again, it's and what we're talking about would be I think we're talking about like a half cent sales tax so far below 1% GDP right I mean this is very very small in the scheme of things. I think I'm with Gordon that this these are political challenges, particularly in the high in high income countries, which are, you know, which are are primarily driven at the end of the day by by interest groups who are entrenched in their current mode of doing business. And I think one of the ways in which we are going to hopefully be able to raise that half cent sales tax and generate some revenue for these transit investments is because some of these entities who previously would have been digging pipelines for example for oil and gas, they're going to have a lot of jobs in digging subways for new trains. So they see it in their self interest to support transit investments because they have jobs digging subway lines, and they'll have more jobs digging more subway lines than they're losing on on on pipelines right so it's it's that sort of, to be frank like really crass sort of self interest, putting together coalitions of entities with sufficient self interest to to put resources and time into moving forward initiatives to generate revenue or to make big policy changes, and to be able to be supportive of that. You know, I don't think it's, it's not the interesting complex technical analysis that, you know, I think I personally find, frankly, more interesting, but it's it's it's much more a situation, such kind of a sense of like how do you figure out how to make enough interest groups with power to be winners that they're going to be supportive of the measures that you need to take. That's really interesting because we have a similar transition, I guess, the North Sea oil fields that we have in Scotland are transitioning and some to some degree have transitioned into a different renewable sector. So going away from oil and gas into, for instance offshore wind and installing offshore wind platforms instead of oil platforms, digging subways is your, you've got a massive mass transit challenge to get more people out of cars of single occupancy vehicles into mass transit so so yeah you're building subways or you're building infrastructure that supports electrification of transport. So that's quite similar I think an interesting to see how we repurpose our economy from a fossil fuel based economy into a much more renewable and climate resilient economy. Maybe that's a similarity. It's a quarter past three just looking at the clock. I would like to get to audience Q&A and there are a number of questions in there but what one thing I have to ask all of our panelists I think is, you know, we're in the decade of change. What is the most important time scale to make the transition and achieve, you know, the one and a half degree target. What are the most important aspects of your work, each of you that must be explored in the next decade of action. And I'll go there to Gordon first. Thank you. Thanks. That's a great question Roddy. I would say two things. First, let's not despair, regardless of what happens in COP 26. And part of the great and inspiring thing about talking about local jurisdictions is to just see in the United States for example how much progress has been made at state level and sub-state level over the last decade, even if the federal government is not taking bold and ambitious commitments. And so the power of local government is that it can move faster than the federal government in lots of cases. And so let's not despair, regardless of what national commitments are. And those are very important. Nevertheless, we can take bold and ambitious action at local level in countries all over the world. I think that's the first. And the second is let's think hard about what the low hanging fruit are. I mean that really is the challenge over the next five to 10 years is to say what are the things that we should do, regardless, what are the cheapest things that we can do. And really very clear eyed about that. When a building owner has a gas powered furnace that is at the end of its lifespan, what incentives can we create that the next large capital purchase is an electrified one, for example. That's an easier problem than retrofitting something while it's still operational and leaving that capital stranded. So that's just an example. What are the parts of the of our landscape that must be protected because they have the highest natural carbon sequestration potential let's identify those, cordon those off politically and saying these are not going to be touched they're too important for climate. So there are very, very concrete things that we can do over the next five to 10 years that will get the ball rolling. And perhaps that's the hardest part of this is just to start. So we should start. Yeah, we need to take a step. Graham, do you like to reflect, please? Yeah, I mean, for me, it's a really easy one coming from a city that has had unjust transition in the past and had a major major contributions to continuous generational unemployment, economic and activity and social challenges. For me over the next 10 years, it's just transition and ensuring that we bring with, you know, we address social justice and climate justice, they both go hand in hand. And the need for that just transitions, particularly pertinent for us, you know, we're scarred by the legacies of our industrial past. So getting this right for future generations is absolutely critical for us in terms of ensuring a fairer than greener future for everybody. Thank you, Graham. Yeah, very, very poignant, very appropriate. Tara, would you like to reflect? Yeah, I think what I think a lot about is how we utilize our first steps on the government side to realign incentives on private on the private sector side. So in other words, as we build more green industries, there are more jobs and more businesses in those green economy spaces who then become advocates and allies for continued investments in those sectors. And the difficulty is getting over a status quo hump, where you have aligned you have your entrenched interests in who benefit from how things are today, and are afraid of an unknown and uncertain future. If we can do this really difficult work of creating new jobs in new sectors, and showing how there are, there is money to be made, there's jobs to be had, there's businesses to be run in a future that doesn't rely on carbon. And I think that's how we then the ball begins to take off and start to roll, because then you have all of these other actors who are advocating in their own self interest, and their self interest happens to align with what's best for the planet. And that to me that's the, that is the work that I think we're really engaged in is getting over that hump, so that we have more entities more actors who self interest is aligned with a zero carbon future, because that's where their jobs are and that's where their money is made. Thank you. And colleagues, I'll go now to some questions in the Q&A, and starting at the bottom, as in the most recent question from Andrea, I'll put this out to whoever wishes to come in. I was wondering if you already have some participatory tools in mind to engage local stakeholders. Good question. And in particular those who are losing decision making power within the new framework and to your point, Tara developers. So I don't know who would like to come in. Each of you may do of course but is there somebody who's desperate to answer that question is a great question. I'm happy to take a cut at it. So yes, and it's not necessarily exactly what you would anticipate so what we're trying to do is put together a new body that's focused on housing and building housing in the right places and giving them a seat at the table on that body, so that we are basically not sticking. No, we're not doing any more sprawl. But if you play ball, you'll be able to have a seat at the table at the infill housing and the new developments and in the places that we want to build and being partners with them in finding some funding mechanisms financing mechanisms for housing in the right places so that they see that they have a different path. Great. Thanks. Anybody else want to come in. I can move on. I'll just add one one very quick thing which is, I think it's very powerful to bring all of these stakeholders in a very transparent process that lays out the decarbonization framework. So bring the developers to the table, show them the different scenarios, have them sitting around the room with other interest groups and saying your task as a group is to get us to zero. That's the only condition for the exercise. And so I think their every interest groups including developers will say okay I really see the trade off from the government point of view. And, and there can be some interesting learning and back and forth in a very transparent process that centered around a model with maps, and a lot of arithmetic and say, the only thing we need to do is get to zero after that let's have a conversation. Because it's so true. I think that is hugely important. Setting a challenge and creating the vision and using data to really back up. And that transparency is so important, I think. I'm going to go to another question this time and I apologize if I get the pronunciation of this name wrong. I don't mean to. It's a question from Yanburn Burrell. Just transition and decarbonization is truly promising. And we all hope, what we all hope for yet challenges such as social exclusion marginalization and limited stakeholder engagement. How can these be addressed minimized or avoided at all. Graham you might wish to reflect upon that. Yeah, yeah, I was actually going to type an answer but I thought I'd a sense Roddy that you would you would maybe pick that up. I think one of the ways to approach this and certainly the way that we're approaching it in the cities is bottom up approach. It has to be engaging with communities. It has to be engaging with schools and children at primary school to ensure that they are brought along in this journey with us. That for me is the central key. We've learned we had a period in the 70s and early 80s where that was enforced on us and I think we've learned from that as a society that we need to bring people along with us community groups are critically important. As our businesses and helping businesses with that just transition and we often think that because businesses do what they do they have the answers they don't and they need they need some help as well. So that whole systems approach to ensuring that there's cross collaboration is really important in delivering the just transition. Gordon or Tara, would you like to reflect on that at all, or I can move on. Okay, in that case I'll move on to Zora. Hey, or hey again apologies if I've got that wrong. I see many approaches are aiming at industry. What about reducing carbon emissions from the consumption side market demand can change supply. Like the way can we raise public awareness and lead a little carbon lifestyle. Great question that speaks to, you know, mass action across the whole of our communities. Would anybody like to to give their reflections on that. Gordon, I'm going to ask you. I'm happy to I think the question is is right in that our focus has been kind of on what's the technological solution to decarbonization. But, and less about what are the policies that get us there which is the next logical question to ask. There are of course lots of tools in the government's toolkit to try to promote the consumers change so whether it's giving rates for electric vehicles or for building or to businesses for building EV charging stations, changing the price for for mass transit. Of course, so things things like that we could list many, many, many. I think my philosophy is that broadly any change on the consumption side is good, but we can't depend on it. So, of course, the problem is much easier if we all wake up one morning and decide that we're going to bike to work that would be great. And I fully fully support that. But I think as a as policymakers are challenges we need to build a system that said that says if people continue to behave the way they do. So I think that's one of the things that they like to do how much energy would they be using and what kind of system would we would we have to build that that's decarbonized. So, I think it's a very fair question governments are doing a lot to try to try to reduce individual's consumption promoting biking promoting mass translate taxing gasoline we do a lot of that, but it's not going to be what gives us transformative change and gets us to zero. I do think that a lot of the onus is going to be on the energy production side to get us there. Yeah, I'm going to ask a question that isn't in the chat isn't written down. I just came to me. It's great to be just in the final few minutes. And thank you for your participation. If there was one thing that you could do in the next year to start that that kind of at scale change. What would it be. Whilst you're all desperately thinking the answer that Gordon you might have the answer immediately I think you might have said at the end there but what would you do one thing. There's no more new fossil fuel investments. I think large scale fossil fuel investments are just going to be stranded assets. They're going to be expensive down the line. So if I could do what I can have one thing that would be it. Let's not spend a lot of money on new fossil fuel infrastructure. Excellent. Good question, buddy. Where to start. I think for me, the one thing for me would be to make big traction with the financial institutions. That's something that's really, really important to us in the city. To get them at the table investing in our green infrastructure projects. If we can achieve that in the next year, I'll be an extremely happy person. Excellent. Thank you. And finally, Tara. I think for me it would be a carbon tax has so many. So many implications. It would change incentives across the board. It would make it would make fossil fuels more expensive. It would make renewables more attractive. It would change consumer patterns. It would change incentives based on the financing side of where they see greater returns. It would, it would change incentives on the supply side in terms of investments. So if I had one silver bullet, it would be a pretty significant carbon tax. Yeah, that's certainly a live issue in the UK at the moment. Okay, I think we've got about two minutes left. Elena might cut me off at the knees there, but I find the session today hugely insightful, positive, encouraging. I've learned a lot about the United States in your microcosm at the bottom part of California there as you call it. I would like to visit one day but who knows. But I think the session emphasizes the importance of collaboration, reimagining our economy in a positive way to creating that vision on those scenarios that will get us to net zero and climate resilience as well. I'm going to stop very shortly. I think in the next few seconds, I would point you to the other sessions that are part of the conference program this week. And thank you very much to our panelists, and Graham, Tara and Gordon, and to the audience for asking some questions. I'm sorry we didn't get through all of those questions but your participation is welcome. This is the COP26 and I hope you enjoy the rest of your day, your evening or your morning. Thank you very much. Thank you everyone. Thank you. Thank you.