 and our history of contributions in the area of climate change. The National Academy of Sciences was established by Congress and signed into law by President Lincoln in 1863. And the purpose of the academies was to advise the nation on issues of science, engineering and medicine. We're private, non-governmental, non-partisan, non-profit institutions that now constitutes three academies, the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the National Academy of Medicine, as well as the operating arm of the three academies, which we refer to as the National Academies. Together, we marshal the nation's critical thinkers to provide expert advice on some of the most pressing challenges facing the nation and the world. Our work helps shape sound policy, inform public opinion, and advance the pursuit of science, engineering and medicine. Each of the three academies and the National Academies as a whole undertake important work related to climate change. And the three presidents have joined together to call for action in addressing climate change. And you'll have a chance to hear from the three presidents in our next panel. Today, most of our programmatic work here at the academies is carried out by seven program divisions, which range from behavioral and social sciences and education, earth and life studies, engineering and physical sciences, transportation research, policy and global affairs, health and medicine, and the Gulf Research Program. All of our divisions, each of these divisions, house multiple boards and other activities that carry out studies, convene workshops, organize roundtables, and other activities. And all of the divisions have programs and activities related to climate change. And later today, at the end of this afternoon session, you'll have a chance to meet with, learn more about these activities and meet the staff of our program divisions responsible for that work. The academies are probably best known for our consensus study reports. And here I've just shown a few examples of the work that we've done on climate change over the decades. The first starting on the left-hand side, the Charney report, which was released in 1979, provided the first estimate of the amount of warming that would be expected from a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere. And this estimate of what is now referred to as climate sensitivity has been upheld by research over the last 40 years. Another report, climate change science, which was released in 2001. And this was in response to a request from President George W. Bush. And this report provided a roadmap and guidance on climate research priorities for the Bush administration. The report in the middle, America's Climate Choices, is a series of reports that the academies did between 2009 and 2011 in response to a congressional mandate. This activity convened hundreds of experts and other stakeholders and resulted in a series of reports, one on the science of climate change, other reports on laying out options for mitigation and adaptation and for informing decision making. And then more recently, a negative emissions technologies report from 2019, which provided a roadmap for carbon removal and reliable sequestration. And finally, accelerating decarbonization of the U.S. energy system, which was released in 2021, which provided critical input for efforts to advance the energy transition. And this study is actually, we're wrapping up a second report from this committee, which will be released in the next few months. And so these are just a few, a small sampling of our work related to climate change over the years. Recognizing the increased urgency of the climate crisis and the expanding breadth of work that we were doing within the academies. This year, we made a decision to launch a new initiative, which we're calling Climate Crossroads. And Climate Crossroads will serve as the next point within the National Academies, taking a new approach to facilitate and increase collaboration on climate work and allowing us to chart new pathways for sustained national and global leadership over the coming decades. Climate Crossroads will provide high level coordination for strategies to support existing activities to launch new activities across the divisions and to connect us with new partners. This new initiative is being run out of my office to ensure that we leverage the full capacity of the National Academies. And we're really excited to explore new ways to work with partners to drive toward impact and to catalyze action. I'm really pleased that Amanda Stout will be directing this new initiative. Amanda has more than 15 years experience at the National Academies, including serving as the director of our Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate and the Polar Research Board for the last 10 years. And Amanda and her team have done a terrific job planning this event. And I'll now invite her to provide, to come up and provide an overview of our plans for the summit. So, Amanda. Do I need this one? Nope. All right. Thank you so much, Greg. I am really excited to lead this new initiative and I'm really excited for the dialogue that we're going to have here today at the summit. You know, we were very intentional in choosing to call this new initiative Climate Crossroads. You know, Crossroads are places where people come together where historically there's been an exchange of ideas that's enabled societal advances and new understandings. And I think climate addressing the climate crisis requires just that. And we need to bring together the breadth of disciplines of sectors, cultures, stakeholders, perspectives, ideas that are needed to generate insights and make progress. And that's what we hope to do here with the Climate Crossroads initiative and what we aim for this event to embody. We've tried to organize the agenda in a way to enable panel discussions and conversation to have an exchange of ideas. And we've included a lot of time for networking and building collaboration. So, before we continue with the program today, I'd first like to do some thank yous. I'd like to acknowledge that the National Academy of Sciences building where we are gathered here in person in Washington DC is physically located on the traditional land of the Nacotcha tank and Piscataways peoples past and present. We honor with gratitude the land itself and the people who have been at stewards throughout the generations. We honor and respect the enduring relationships that exists between these people and nations and this land and acknowledge that the expertise held by different native communities is crucial to the work of understanding and addressing climate change. I would also like to thank everyone who has helped to make this event possible. Our sponsors the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation and the Arthur L. Day Fund of the National Academy of Sciences. The leadership, Greg and the presidents and others in the leadership at the academies have been incredibly supportive and provided great advice and as we've been thinking about how to pull this together. We have had so many advisors over the last several years that have been incredibly helpful our climate crossroads planning team, our climate communications initiative advisory committee. I've talked to dozens of boards and other advisory committees over the last several years, who have all given just incredibly thoughtful advice and support. I really appreciate all of that that's gone into our thinking. There is a whole crew of staff who've been working hard to pull this together. I really wanted to highlight Amanda Purcell, who's took the lead and putting this event together. Thank you so much Amanda. Amanda on Friday accepted an offer to be the associate director of the climate crossroads initiative and we're super excited to have her on board. And I wanted to give a shout out to Rita Gaskins who handled all of the logistics for this event. She's out. She was out at the registration table so but also someone you can ask go to with any questions as we go through the next few days. At the end of the event I will thank all of the other people there are so many it would take a long time to get through all of them but just really wanted to call out those two. And then finally, thanks to all of our facilitators and panelists. I'm really excited about this agenda and I can't wait to hear all of the conversations. All right, so I have a little bit of housekeeping before we get going. We are committed to fostering a professional respectful inclusive environment, where all participants both in person and virtual can participate fully in an atmosphere that is free of harassment and discrimination based on any identity based factors. The National Academy's policies can be found on our website. If you experience or witness behaviors that appear to violate this code of contact, please notify us immediately. You go one back. There we go. In for those of you in person if there's an emergency, you can exit through the door that you entered in the middle of the auditorium here. There are a few major exits but the easiest thing to do is head straight across and continue straight through the Great Hall and out the exit onto Constitution Avenue. The restrooms are marked in blue here. If you exit the auditorium, you can turn right for the facilities that are near the C Street entrance, or you can go into the Great Hall and make a left for those that are opposite the East Court. All right, so I'm going to walk quickly through the agenda and we're already a little behind. As I mentioned, we've set this up as a series of facilitated conversations, along with audience Q&A. We want to engage everyone in the conversation. So please, please join us in that. We have a lot of folks registered online. Welcome all of you into the conversation as well. All of the panel discussions, those that are in the, in the brighter blue color will be live streamed. We'll also be using Slido to get questions from our virtual participants. And for those of you online, you'll see a box just below the live stream where you can sign in and input questions. Those of you here in the room, you can also join the Slido and enter your questions there if you would like. We will be having an opportunity for folks to come to the microphone in the room and ask questions, and our staff will be coming up and asking questions that have been upvoted on Slido. So we get a mixture of those from in person and online. Close captioning is enabled on the video stream so you can click the CC button in the lower right portion of the video to see the captions. And then let me just highlight at the end of the day today where I'm going to be back up here and going to give a really quick overview of some of the activities that are happening around the academies. And then we're going to invite those of you in person to join us for a showcase and reception where staff from the academies have set up tables and will be available to chat with you about the kind of work that they're doing. Okay, lastly, just to note that the live stream is being recorded and the video will be available soon, if not immediately after the event concludes. All right, so that's all the housekeeping and with that, I am excited to get underway. I'd like to invite Peter from half who will be facilitating our first panel and our three presidents to join me here on the stage and we will get underway. Thank you. Thank you, Amanda. Welcome everybody. Good morning. My name is Peter from hop on the senior science policy advisor at the Woodwell Climate Research Center and Woods Hole. I teach at Harvard University. I'm also a member of the board on atmospheric sciences and climate here at the National Academies at a moment in time in which extreme heat and flooding is intensifying both across the US and internationally. Global temperature records are being shattered. We are clearly at a crossroads in our national and global response to climate change. I could not be more pleased than to be able to moderate this morning's panel. And I look forward to a rich discussion now and over the next two days. Let me start by introducing each of our distinguished panelists. I'm Richard McNutt, president of the National Academy of Sciences. John Anderson, president of the National Academy of Engineering, and Victor Sau, president of the National Academy of Medicine, and Amanda Stout who you've just met as the director of the new climate crossroads initiative here at the academies. This morning will discuss the need, the challenges, the opportunities to bring research across many disciplines together to address the climate crisis. The three academies are working together to accelerate essential and actionable cross-disciplinary work on climate. We'll also leave plenty of time for Q&A with the audience. And Marsha, let me start with you. The National Academies have a long and storied history of bringing science to bear across disciplines to have impact at national and global levels. Could you say a little bit about how what you see as the key challenges and opportunities and harnessing the breadth of expertise needed to address the climate crisis? Yes, Peter, sure. Thank you for that question. And first of all, welcome from me to all our people who are here in the auditorium and our online audience. I don't think we could be meeting at a more important time. Wildfires in Canada, I mean, honestly, floods in Vermont. You turn on the news and we're constantly being overwhelmed by all of these climate emergencies and climate fueled natural disasters. I'm by background a geoscientist. So for much of my career, I've been involved in the climate issue going back many decades. But I have to say that about 10 years ago, I was very concerned that as geoscientists, we were putting a finer and finer point on how bad this climate crisis was going to become and what some of the implications would be. And yet, so little was being done about it. So I was invited, as I say, about 10 years ago to give a union lecture at the American Geophysical Union meeting on any topic I wanted to talk about. Well, at the time, the real buzzword in biomedical research was convergence. And it occurred to me that convergence was exactly what we needed to embrace in the geosciences in order to address this climate emergency. So in that talk that I gave at the AGU, I talked about the importance of geoscientists reaching out to other disciplines to the biomedical community, because of course, one of the best ways to encourage people to take action is to talk about it in terms of their personal health, and how that will be impacted by climate change. We needed to reach out to engineering, because after all, engineering new technology was going to be the source of many of the solutions, but also currently was the source of much of the problems. And then of course we needed to reach out to the social scientists in order to understand what is actually going to motivate people to take action, and what are some of the foibles that we have as human beings that are preventing us from acting to a slow motion crisis. After I got here to the Academy, I started working with people here including Amanda to try to bring this convergent type framework to the climate crisis, hence the climate crossroads, which will involve our transportation transport, because after all, transportation is one of the biggest contributors to climate change, and it can be one of our best approaches to reducing our carbon footprint, and depths our division of engineering and physical sciences. And after we're going to find a lot of solutions, and of course, debas, where the social sciences and HMD medical, and our policy and global affairs group, because this is a global problem, and we have to work internationally on it. And just in closing, I'll say, we're even going, as far as the National Academy of Sciences, to try to take a more convergent approach, even in how we engage with our members. Like many other groups, we are we elect members in disciplines that are very siloed in the election process. But now we're starting to set up affinity groups, and our first affinity group is actually in the area of agriculture and climate change. Because agriculture right now is we're concerned that it's at a tipping point that too many of the crops that we depend on today to feed the world are operating within a very narrow range of productivity. And as temperature changes and rainfall changes, we are not prepared for how that is going to affect crops, including pests, pests that previously couldn't even survive a Midwest winter, and now they can. So there's so much to be done in the ag space. And I think this will just be the first of many affinity groups on climate change, you know, climate change and demand for critical minerals, climate change and human health, which is another part of this. So, frankly, I think this convergent approach is what we need to take in order to get real action. Thanks so much, Marcia. So, John, let me turn to you. And let's pick up on this concept of convergence and think about the role of technological and engineering approaches connecting to other disciplines and other communities of expertise to, you know, to address both and accelerate the connection to net zero emissions, but also to think about their, their role in sort of Marcia was also alluding to supporting greater climate resilience and adaptation. Can you share your take on the importance of those connections and what the engineering community needs to bring to bear. Before I do that, I'd like to acknowledge the contribution by a man that our staff, this idea didn't come overnight. I think the first thing I got about it was over three years ago. So this is arrived in man as a great sales person. And all of us in Accudane, though, that to do good research you have to be a good sales person because you've got to be equally supportive. So she got us the support of someone to congratulate you and your staff because you did a fantastic job. And he's going to be behind you. Yeah, really, where climate policy is exactly like there and after getting together all parts can bring together all parts of the university. They don't easily grant degrees that they can do and they don't even know the various pieces and Marcia touched on that before and converging. I view the climate challenges as two pieces one is the what the scientists have really laid out the strong support for anthropogenic causes of climate change. And what is the models and the scenarios that you know do something even if we do some things. Engineering is really about the how how do we get there. And that's the real real challenge for for us for humanity. There's technological challenges. There are systems challenges this is system systems. There are social challenges, something that I don't think engineering has paid enough attention to social awareness of how we do things. So the house is what we're interested in. And as Peter you alluded to before those great deal and Amanda great deal of work has been done on addressing understanding and addressing climate change over the years. This report on decarbonization, I think you're very influential, which gives us some pathways to achieve zero net carbon emissions line easy. The recent one just came out was laying the foundations for advanced nuclear reactors I personally don't think we have a chance to get to where we want to be in 2050, unless we can do something with nuclear in addition to renewables and electrification countries so this report if you haven't seen it laying the foundation for advanced nuclear reactors is really very good, and we'll be part of the showpiece of the crossroads, the planet crossroads. In the technologies to decarbonize to two main ideas have come out. One is that we can decarbonize the 75% of the energy usage, we can relatively easily carbonize cost some money but we know how to do those things. If we have a commitment to do it. Then there's 25% is more difficult. What are the most difficult things aviation, long term shipping over land and see and manufacturing, which accounts for something like 1920% of the energy usage in the United States. I know when I was, we teach chemical I'm a chemical engineer to teach course in design and we'll say heat exchangers or piece of equipment in a process. You just say he to you know you don't say where it comes from where you're going to get it how you're going to use it, and so on. So I think we need a revamping of how we actually teach process design. So, recently in our recent issue of the bridge. The whole issue is devoted to the transition to zero carbon in processing and then in residential and so on. I think it's a really good advice you to take a take a look at that. And that came about also at the urging of the climate crossroads piece and Amanda worked with the editor of that journal bridge and people involved and had to be involved. Finally, in terms of education I touched on this briefly I'm a chemical engineer as I said, and there's a new study that came out about the future of chemical engineering and a focused on education and I think we have to pay more attention to the people that are going to solve our problems are not probably the audience today, and we're teaching education. The importance of looking at what we're doing to the atmosphere and climate and the environment in general, when we create things. And so this report that came out. Because it emphasized all those, those things I mentioned, and how education should bring it not just an engineering but also in science should bring in the new to consider environment and sustainability. So education is a big area for engineering as well because we know that even if we stop putting CO2 in the atmosphere, we're still going to be some things happening. As you mentioned Peter, see level rise and I think we have a board on environmental infrastructure and constructed environment in the board on engineering and energy and environmental systems. We have other boards. This is the strength of the crossroads we can bring these boards together and convene the power of the academies is convening experts, both in the national academies and outside the national academies. So the climate climate crossroads can really help us with the people we need to address the problems, some of which are yet to be exposed. So I'm very positive on this initiative. I think we can do it very positive that we can make an impact through the national academies and we'll see what happens. Thank you John. So Victor to you. Some of really important conversion work is already being done in the national academies of medicine through what you've called the grand challenge on climate change, human health and equity. That's been in operation as I understand it for more than a year now. Could you say a little bit maybe to make this tangible to bring this down home about that program and what's who's involved and what impact you're seeking to have. Thank you Peter and I to join Marsha and John and congratulations Amanda and Greg for putting this together. Certainly it's great for me to be sitting here along with the other academies top of convergence, because it is what it's all about. So from a medicine point of view, I know that all of you care about your health. And had you realized that climate is not only about, you know, the environment, the future generations but also yourself. You realize very quickly that something needs to be done and there's a sense of urgency. So that's what we got how we got into this because when you look at the data, it's really quite astounding. Globally, over 20 million people are dying from climate related issues, extreme weather, famine drought, you name it, right. So this is a big deal. And there's, you know, as you know, there's the climate migrants, you name it and United States were not immune from this. A lot of people dying from air pollution hundreds of thousands and from extreme weather the Marsha talked about. And of course you're all seen in television, the human toll that it takes on. So when we talk about all these things, I just want to shine a light on the human toll, but you care about. And this is why we got involved because, you know, when we first started, this is about four years ago, but this area, not a lot of people talk about climate change and human health. Right. They talk about, you know, you see a picture of a polar bear on the shrinking slab of ice, but very few pictures show you the human suffering that come from climate change. And consequently, we decided something needs to be done. Now, the good news we believe is the profession, the medical professions do very trusted with high level of trust. So we figure we've got to be messengers to the public, to every patient, others for them to where it's not just the future is happening right now. And therefore we need something about this. Likewise, for our health professionals, we need to understand this, because we contribute, in fact to the carbon emission, in many ways I'll talk about later. So we want all our health professional educators so introducing curriculum to medical school, nursing school, you name it. But I think the real important issue is how to pull this together. And Peter mentioned the grand challenge. So we had a whole bunch of planning committees of three and a half four years ago, which result launching the grand challenge two years ago. We call the grand challenge because as born from engineering, it requires everybody, both ideas to work together. So our grand challenge is a public-private partnership. It's not just health, but disciplines in engineering and other sciences. It's not just about the academia, but we in fact have involved private sectors, industry, government, etc. In fact, Rachel Levine, the city secretary of health co-chairs, a decarbonization of healthcare with me, among others who are major leaders in biomedical pharmaceutical device companies, etc. We're working together. So what is the grand challenge? We identify five areas that we should work with, along of course with the discipline that you heard about convergence. One is communication. I talked about that already. We work with climate communication initiative to look at this. We're working with a lot of people to make sure this message is out there and that people are more eager to act. Our second area is, in fact, what we call the roadmap, which is truly convergent because Judy Rodin, who's the former president of Rockefeller, chairs this grand challenge and the roadmap. And the idea is to say, you know, when you look at all the things that Washington John talked about and all the sectors, most of their work is looking vertically on terms of consumption and emission and how we reduce it, how we mitigate it. Really, they talk about what is it doing to health. So we decided what we need to bring together is all these sectors with a lens about human health and human well-being. So agriculture, transportation, energy, water, and of course health sector, and you name it. So by coming together, we call this systems transformation, we want to create a macroeconomic model that focus on human well-being versus just emission alone. That's the second. Third is decarbonize the U.S. health sector. You know, the health sector emits 4.5% of global emission globally. But if you take U.S., Canada, UK, Australia, these countries together ranked number six when we're independent country in the mission. So I'm talking about healthcare sector now. U.S. alone, we emit 8.5% of total greenhouse emission in the U.S. is huge. As a physician, aside from saying let's make sure they're healthy, we want to do no harm. It's a hypocritical. So we therefore, we may talk more about this, mobilize a lot of people to look at how can we act together. We're now in the midst of actually starting a campaign and movement with all the health sectors across the country, as well as supply chain industry to set goals to decarbonize. So that's great. Third, a fourth area is research innovation, because we clearly recognize that you need this research innovation. Just I think back on the days when our earlier days in terms of how to improve healthcare, and there was a lot of innovative issues even in frontline workers. We want every frontline worker to think about how to reduce carbon emission and how to change the way we deliver care. We want virtual care, much less driving to a hospital. I was just in Boston driving on Longwood, I'm sorry, took me half an hour to go from one end of Longwood to the other. And so there are lots of things we can do. And then finally, equity. I want to emphasize, and I'm going to stop at this, equity is really an important issue. And if you look at globally, the low income countries have five times more impact, and yet they emit the least. And so there's a tremendous global inequity, but in our country, all you have to do is look at what's happening with the extreme events, etc. And Katrina, you name it, marginalized and poor neighborhoods are much more affected by climate environment. So equity is an important issue. So our last one is to get together communities and lived experience along with what we call strategic partners to design what we can do in the issue of more vulnerable communities. So this is where we're working on, but I am truly privileged to be on stage with my co presidents to work on this very issue and amend to yourself as well. Thank you so much, Victor. So Amanda, let's turn to you. Here we are at the launch of the climate crossroads initiative you've been incubating this for some time now with lots of input from others as you mentioned from the academies and and and beyond. Tell us what you're most excited about what what what you see as new what's different. What are you looking forward to. Oh thank you Peter and thank you for all the kind words it's really it really means a lot to me. When we started talking about this and in Marcia's challenge about applying convergence to climate, which makes a lot of sense, but also is a big challenge to think about how do you do that in an institution like ours, which has been around for 160 years, thank you. And it has well established boards and approaches to doing our work. So we're organized kind of like a university with something like 80 different programmatic units that are working in different disciplinary areas. That provides us an amazing reach in terms of the connection with all of these disciplinary experts, and the communities of stakeholders and audiences that are interested in their work. So the challenge is how do you bring those groups together to do work that falls at their interfaces and often and other institutions face the same challenges, those kinds of problems that fall at the intersections can fall through the cracks. So, you know, an important thing that we wanted to think about is how do we incentivize new programmatic work that falls at those intersections, and how do we figure out ways to support it. And that work over the last few years that the report on negative emissions technologies that looked at carbon dioxide removal and sequestration, we brought together seven or eight boards to work on that that the energy board the chemistry board the agriculture board, the camp, and the board that I was directing the board and atmospheric sciences and climate, and that work was incredibly impactful, also really hard to get started. And so, one of the things that we're doing with the climate crossroads is identifying some of these areas that fall at the interface where we want to be intentional about bringing together the different parts of the academies to make progress. We're really inspired by the work that Victor in the National Academy of Medicine have done on his grand challenge, where he said here is a societal problem that we want to go after. And we want to leverage and bring to bear the capacity to do our institution to address that problem. We think we can do that for other areas as well. So we've identified what we're calling four of these pathways to action. I, we've, we've embedded the grand challenges are the first of those pathways and we're delighted that to be working together on that. The second one, the second pathway to action that we've identified is around accelerating decarbonization, building on the body of work that our board and energy and environmental systems is already been leading. And as, as Greg mentioned in his opening remarks, they released a big report about two years ago and have another one that's about to come out. And they're interested in sustaining that engagement over the decades it's going to take for us to accomplish the energy transition. The third of these pathways to action is around thriving ecosystems in the context of a changing climate. And a lot of work, much of it within our division on earth and life studies, that's looked at various aspects of the environment impacts on water and ocean and forests, etc. We haven't had a single way to bring that all together into a coherent portfolio of work. And as we think about ecosystems and climate change, we both have to think about how is climate change affecting those ecosystems, how is it adding to the other kinds of stresses that ecosystems are already facing. And increasingly we're thinking about ecosystems as part of the solution to climate change as a place that can store carbon. And we need to think about those together. And as Greg mentioned agriculture, we also are looking at our managed ecosystems to feed the human population and that that's a pretty hard set of problems to try to address. So the second of these pathways to action where we're focusing effort to build up work is around these thriving ecosystems in the context of the changing climate. And then the fourth one is around climate resilient communities. And this is recognizing that so much of the action and the work to address climate change is going to need to happen at a community scale. And we need to think hard and there's a lot of work that needs to go into figuring out how to bring science, engineering, medicine, other kinds of insights to those kind of community scale decision making. And I'm really excited that our division on behavioral and social sciences and education will be spearheading that pathway and working with colleagues from across the academies to help us think through what we can do to advance work around communities. The other piece of the climate crossroads, which is new is that, you know, we need to think broadly about who are the actors, and who are our audiences for the work that the National Academies has does. Traditionally, and, and to this day, a lot of our work is sponsored by requested by the US federal government. And we need an important stakeholder in addressing the climate crisis, and we will continue to be working with the US government and to support the decision making in the federal government. And addressing climate change requires a whole suite of other kinds of actors. We need to be private industry communities and international groups. There is a whole host of other stakeholders that need to be involved in and helping move forward to address climate change. And what we're looking to do in the climate crossroads is really open the aperture in terms of who we're talking to, to understand what are the science engineering and medicine needs of a broader suite of of actors who need to be involved in addressing the climate climate crisis, and also thinking about how the work that we do can be connected and delivered and shared with those audiences in a way that's more useful for them. And a lot of the climate crossroads is kind of building those kinds of relationships, exploring those kinds of partnerships, and thinking about how we can make our work have a broader reach and impact. Great. Thanks so much. So we're going to open up more of a conversation now. I want to pick up first on Victor, where you talked about communicating with the audience and Amanda, you spoke to that as well. Recognizing that the audience is the academies needs to reach go well beyond Congress and federal agencies and and the crossroads provides a real opportunity to think new and in a fresh way about about reaching various audience about communication. Not enough just to have the scientific and technical expertise but to communicate it effectively. So the challenge of communicating of cutting through the noise of meeting folks where they are is daunting, especially in the moment in which we're in with social media and all the complicating distractions of where people get information. I'd love to hear from each of you about what you think the academies, including through climate crossroads can do most effectively to communicate on climate in this moment. So Marsha, let me start with you. Sure. So Peter, if I had to say what I think is the greatest hurdle, we're going to face as an institution is, we're kind of a hammer and thus everything looks like a nail. And the way the academies of course have had impact in the past is to do consensus reports. And this is really not an issue in which just putting out consensus reports is going to get us where we need to be. I think we need to think a lot more creatively about giving people tool kits that actually, first of all, assure them that the science behind it is solid. So they're not going to be investing in some sort of intervention that in the end people will turn around and say, Well, that didn't have any impact. And of course, a case history of that is carbon credits. You know, there, there's so much snake oil out there in the carbon credit department that this is one area where I think we could provide some guidance and some some more certainty about investments that will actually have impact. But then in these tool kits providing vetted ways to success for industry, for example. So what can they invest in that actually will be solving the problem will be affordable that will be impactful, and that won't have unintended consequences. But I think that's what we really have to work on right now. And we're going to need a lot of input from these different audiences from industry from state and local government. This is where so much of the really important climate action is taking place today. Yeah, this has always been a challenge for us, because of the fact that we're a fairly small institution, and there are so many jurisdictions out there with their own problems. We have to get to them where they are. We have to understand what their issues are and provide them with help so that they can be part of the solution. Thank you very much, Marsha John you want to speak to the communication challenges from. Yes, I think it's critical it's been estimated that two to $3 trillion will have to be spent per year for the next 30 years to really get to where we want to be. And that will take political will and government will and you can't reach everybody individually but as I've heard in the past that we want to influence the influencers. We want to get to the right people who can influence the public and the government influence the influencers on this that's one critical thing I think the second one is we have to really impress upon the business community that we're all in this together and they're going to have to work on it as well. So, blaming business is not going to work, we have to work together with that people and business and is always going to be a critical part of it so those are the two things I think that we should focus on. Victor. Communication I mentioned early about communication. The question is who's our audience. So I think we have several audiences and certainly from my point of view Academy shouldn't shy away from those audiences, not our usual lane. So first of all, it's the public right public sentiments are really important in terms of driving changes. And that's why we keep on thinking if we were to focus on their health well being human toll and human life etc. Using their experience in public health. Tobacco auto mobile safety HIV AIDS, we can utilize that kind of approach public health approach, because we say this is a public health crisis. I don't think anybody would disagree with that right. The second is that we need to think about how to, in fact, engage the policy decision makers. And that's really important because at the end of the day we want them to be able to make the right policy, right. And what we've learned is that you can show data all the time. But you know, your eyes glaze over, but if you work in Congress, you know that storytelling narratives are so important. So we really using a combination of what they call a mixed approach of narratives and data. That's key. Getting in fact the life experience I said, people have gone through this being able to talk about this and also importantly being able to bring together that data. So when you think about talking to policy makers, you know, I mean what they care about, right? They care about the fact that this is going to be good for their citizen. They care about the fact that they can look good, have good legacy. So we should really provide them with a positive outlook, not just negative all the time. It's terrible, it's terrible, terrible. But look what you can do if you mitigate this and some real data that can give them some wins. And then finally, I think John's point about all of us communicating together. And our work in collaborating with Grand Challenge, at least 50% of our people, maybe 30% are from private sector. You know, major pharmaceutical companies, AstraZeneca, GSK, device companies like Metronix, supply chain and lines. And they're all saying, okay, we get it. Now with potential ESG ruling on, in fact, reporting. And of course the whole issue, pardon me, SEC and the whole issue of ESG in companies, they are talking about this. So they really did join us to say, let's do it together. Because we need to learn from each other. How do you measure, how do you report it separately? So I think those are the elements of communication. Really important for the public to understand this, really important to get the voice of those who are suffering and really important to show evidence. Thanks so much. The notion of the Academy is really thinking in new ways about combining data and narrative. Going well beyond the consensus report format is really important and exciting. And being somewhat optimistic instead of always pessimistic. That's interesting. I'd love to hear more about that. Let me first turn to Amanda, though, in the context of the Climate Crossroads Initiative and the other work the academies have been doing to communicate on climate change over the last couple of years. Say a little more about both where you see the foundation and platform that you're building through the initiative. It's interesting that you highlighted narrative because one of the main communications things that we've launched over the last two and a half years is the climate conversations webinar series and hopefully many of you in the audience have joined and listened in to some and I know there's some folks who participated in that series over the last couple of years. So when we were starting to put that together, we wanted to have a platform to talk about what was in our reports and what was going on in science after long after a report had been released. We do a lot of work right when a report comes out, but often those issues are still relevant and pertinent for quite a while. And so part of what we wanted to do is have a way to kind of continue to engage around the work. And we thought about, well, maybe we should invite talks by experts and have slides and kind of do a more traditional kind of presentations. And, and we actually moved away from that to more of a narrative conversational style. So those webinars if you haven't participated they involve facilitated discussion with two experts who share about their personal journey to why they got interested in the topic and why they are working on it. They talk about the topic and, and, and the latest science and they engage with audience on the questions and I think that, you know, you know, approach of trying to really kind of humanize the, the science and the, the, the, the, you know, these are hard topics that we're working on and the approach it as a, as a conversation and a dialogue is really central to how we're thinking about the climate crossroads. Thanks Amanda John I want to just quickly turn to you on your, on your kind of a side about positive messages is in addition to an evidence based of course positive messages, in addition to the, the, all the hard challenges that we face in addressing climate change you want to pick up a little more on what you were. I'm told through the experts I know and in engineering and process industries, and so on that the technologies exist to get to where we want to be. It takes a commitment. So that's optimistic. We actually can see a way to get there. Okay, so we have to have the big drive in the commitment to do it. I think continual negative activity is, is not going to appeal to people has been mentioned before. So, so I think you need a mix you don't want to be, you know, in a lot of land about it but you still want to be sure that there's a lot of hope I really impossible. I don't think any of them am on the mic but four of us won't be seeing a whole lot of the change but I'm optimistic for my children my grandchildren. Thank you john so hopefully we'll see a lot of change in the near term I you know I think we can remain optimistic on that as well. So, you know the next panel, folks will be diving into these various pathways to action. And Amanda you spoke to the role of the crossroads initiative and identifying domains areas that sort of fall between the cracks where the current boards work and then motivating action and Marsha you, you spoke to the role of carbon credits and carbon markets as a, as an example of that right and I think it's a really important one. Let's take this opportunity to identify perhaps other areas, substantive areas that you think might be right there where the issues are not fully addressed or, or not well addressed at all that the academies might distinctively contribute to addressing and bringing information to bear on solving problems that don't currently fit within the domains identified by the boards. Anything you want to speak to as topics obviously Victor you spoke to the grand challenges work, you want to take that. I'll take that on. For everyone of you who see a doctor nurse, a hospital you should ask that question, because after all as I said, we contribute 8.5% of carbon emission of the country, and 20% of GDP, it means huge right and think about whether how the practice of medicines affecting climate in a big way. I mean, if you look at what's happened to us in terms of technology, it's unbelievable US is far none right, but those technology, not always necessarily. Well, sometimes are needed, sometimes are not, and certainly they contribute a lot to carbon emission. And the seizure gases. Amazing. Quite a source of greenhouse gas emissions so the anesthesiologist now I talked about well let's convert more to intravenous I anesthesia, so things like that. But I think when you think about this whole area. How we practice medicine is really have great impact on the outcome of you individually, but also at the same time if we can get a win-win that you can look at reduction their carbonization. So what am I talking about. Well, you know, during COVID we went virtual. And I think most people agree that went quite well. I mean, there are many aspects that didn't go well, but you can see the need for transportation and the need for clinics and a lot of testing great, great reduce. But that's an important issue because after all we want prevention care at your home your community. So why do we have to have you walk into clinic every single time. Right. So that's one example. Care pathways. There's so many things we do in treating whatever disease it is with a pathway. We now need to incorporate the thinking of, in fact, the, you know, what do we do in terms of carbon emission. So working in our collaborative working along with in fact the head of Medicare, Medicare innovation, working along with Don Burwick, who used to be the head of CMS and terrific guy, as well as John Perlin who's had a joint commission. And together we're creating this kind of policy and ideas of what to incentivize health systems to actually use carbon emission. So many of you have heard about value based care, which is looking at outcomes rather than encounters that started with President Obama, and it's still moving on. So rather than looking at outcomes, in addition to outcomes, we can also measure what are we doing in terms of carbon emission. Are we also improving care? Are we making things more efficient? So a lot of redesign of the way we do care. I think that's the key message that I want to tell you is because there's lots that can be done. 8.5. I mean, you can say, you know, the things that John does do is amazing technology. I would say starting in fact what we can do what you want to do. Last point, if you think about going to a hospital, I get asked about my date of birth four times. As if, you know, I said, look, I know it. They checked my left hand, right hand whole bit. You know, that all started with a report of Institute of Medicine 20 years ago called The Air's Human, where they demonstrated that there's medical errors that's happening in hospitals. And of course, it took a long time to get the movement going, but Don Berg is one of the key individuals. And now, of course, you can go to any hospital without saying that you're measuring outcome safety or you save whole bit. I actually think that climate is the same situation. We're starting journey now. We're successful. Then I think all healthcare systems will have this into the equation, if we will, measuring the success of this. And it's good for everybody and probably will reduce cost as well. There's a lot of costly, expensive ways of do things in medicine. And now, of course, this can greatly reduce the cost of care. Can I follow up on that? Yeah, that's a really good point that Victor is raising. You can do things better when we innovate and find new ways of achieving our goals. But I heard a comment by the founder of Tesla. It's not Elon Musk. It's the person who founded the company and sold to Elon. And he said, you should sell electric cars because they're better than gasoline. Not because they're going to help the climate, but we'll make better cars, electric cars. So that was a really good point that I think you raised. Marsha? So, so far this morning, the word equity hasn't come up yet. I did. I said, I'm very concerned about the issue of equity as we move to a carbon free future. And let me just give you a quick example on my home. I've got solar panels on the roof and I've got batteries lining the walls of my garage. My electric bill per year is $50. I've got neighbors who are renting their home so they can't put, you know, panels on it. They're paying $250 a month for electricity. So, you know, I think we do have to worry about as we try to design and encourage this carbon free future to worry about equity. Both in terms of mitigation and, of course, in adaptation. Of course, you had power. One of the people did. Yeah, we did. We did. Everyone else has no power. We didn't even know it had gone out. So, so I think in Marsha's point, I'm thinking about equity as having the opportunity for everybody. Right. So the question in terms of she's been able to put solar panels and battery, can it be available to everybody? And there are lots of issues to be sure. That's difficult. She's talked about renting versus owning, having the resources to do this, right? Having the ability to. So I think we do need to address equity in a big way. Now, I'll, what we call Climate Community Network brings lift experienced people in poor community to talk about the need for more equity. We bring strategic partners, including extra just EPA to talk about. Now they have a chance to listen to what people are saying. They can possibly find ways to help or make available to the, to the community. You know, there's the IRA. There's all those policy. There's grants and whole bits. So I think we need to find a way to get to everybody to achieve equity. We just thank you, Vector. We just have a few seconds left before we transition to a Q and A with the audience, both here and online. Any last comments folks want to make about their hopes for the climate crossroads initiatives or to build up on the key equity point? Just my quick comment is we need to find the triple bottom line here where it's good for American economically. It's good for the citizens of America and it's good for the planet. No small charge to Amanda. I'm confident you can do that. And I'm looking forward to the discussions over the next couple of days as you as we do and no pressure. So let's turn this now to Q and A with the with the audience. I believe there'll be some microphones. I'm not quite sure. Yeah, they're microphones. Okay. And we may have questions coming in on Slido from from online as well. So if I want to ask people who get questions, please introduce yourself and and keep your question brief so that we can get those many as possible. Hi, I'm Kathy Woteki. I am currently the chair of the division of earth and life studies here at the academies. And I can't tell you how excited I am about the initiative and us being here today. And the question that I have for you is I think you've seen the interaction with the private sector in new. Yeah, Amanda, we've spent a lot of time talking to people in industry. Yeah, yeah, I mean, it's a really good question because that's it's not traditionally been our, you know, main group that we interact with. And so we've been having a number of conversations with folks in the private sector to understand how we might support their their decision making needs. And so I don't fully have the answer yet. I think this idea of an action collaborative is one that is is as potential so which is something that you know Victor's been starting with the decarbonizing the health sector, where they brought together a coalition of the willing to work together on a problem of mutual interest. And I think that could be a really, you know, a productive way for us to work with the private sector. I think also roundtables where we're doing convening and creating a space for ongoing dialogue, certainly in the decarbonization work that that pathway, there's a lot of interest in having a forum for those kinds of dialogues that need to take place between different parts of the private sector and academics and and civil society and those who would be interested in the equity piece of etc. So I think some of those sort of convenings, we're all kind of working towards a particular area of shared interest is is really going to pick up on this as well. Yeah, I think the it's really important in my mind to get everybody engaged, especially private sector. Otherwise, we'll be talking to ourselves. I think that when you look at private sector. There are things they can do better. Some of them are reasons why we are where we are. And there are also solutions that they can contribute to. Let's take again health. In terms of emission of 8.5% 70% are scope three. That means that that's the private sector. That is in fact supply chain manufacturing transportation. And if they don't, but part of it we can work all we want the hospitals, we're only making a small impact. I think the good news Kathy is that Sunday in my world. ESG is a very important issue for all companies and boards, not only for the right reason but also for the employees and for the stock, the stockholders. So I think ESG is a very good way to bring them in to participate in solutions, but also look at what they need to do to mitigate, etc. So I think at least for us private sector is a very important issue. All right, let's get some more questions in the mix we have anybody on this side. We do please introduce yourself. Hi, I'm Latisha Grineer from the San Francisco Estuary Institute. I run a group called the resilient landscapes program we work a lot on operationalizing science for climate resilience. And I wanted to bring up the issue of environmental justice and the conception that was offered here, which is the traditional one that you know the environment harms people inequitably. And that makes sense based on the history of contamination, but I think we should also think about especially with respect to climate who benefits. We now know that the environment can be very beneficial to people in terms of mental and physical health having access to nature and access to biodiverse complex nature. So I think I'd love to see if your convergence approach could include thinking about who is benefiting from the environment where can we put in urban greening for carbon sequestration reducing urban heat island, improving human health outcomes and also reducing stormwater contamination and flooding. So there's a lot that could be done and I just want to ask you to think about who's benefiting not just who's being harmed. Thanks so much for that comment question anybody want to weigh in. I'll just jump in to say we, we held a workshop in the last year on the intersection of ecosystem management and public health. And it was just really getting at exactly those those points that you're making that we really can think, you know, a lot more deeply about how we're managing our green spaces our parks are public. You know, places that you know where we're our outdoor sort of shared goods in a way that is both advancing the conservation goals and also thinking about the public health benefits in a way that thinks about equity. Anyway, I would recommend that the videos and the information from that and did you want to mention the golf research program to. Oh yeah good idea like we also have a golf research program here at the National Academies, which is looking at at all of these issues in as well. I'm on the spot I'm not sure I can list off all the great things that they're doing but they do do a lot of work on community and ecosystems and health and engagement with the technology development as well. Exactly but yes really good point thank you. Yeah, let's turn back to this side please ask your question. Carlos Carlos Salinas with healing bridges I accompany the conditional authorities of the phone or I treated peoples in the Colombian Amazon. I thank all of you for your beautiful vision. I don't share as much of the optimism and part of that is also from born from the experience we had with the pandemic. On the one hand, we did see at the beginning. People able to shut down things that needed to be shut down. We went virtual beautiful things happen. You saw the sky again. It was great. Of course there was a untold amount of death and suffering that was a sale. Yet we all also saw that from the beginning towards the end, this massive onslaught of deliberate misinformation taking place. I agree to that there's a positive possibilities with ESG initiatives. And yet we also see in Congress, the onslaught of deliberate attack against any ESG against any equity focus approaches. So my I would like to ask you to comment on the saying that you cannot wake up someone that is pretending to be asleep. How does that all relate to the challenge that we have because unfortunately, from my small perspective, it appears as if that the quest for power and the underlying amount of greed is one of the biggest challenges we have as Mr. John, Dr. John pointed out, we know how to get there. We have the science. We have all the beautiful vision and approach and these climate webinars have been amazing. That's why I'm here. How do we get there, given these deep, deep challenges. Thank you. Victor. So I'll give it a try. I agree with you that misinformation issues like this are something we must tackle. And that's your candies. You mentioned pandemic. I've been very involved with both us and globally on the pandemic issue. A lot of good things came out of it's not perfect. Billions of dollars, trillions of dollars spent, not just economic loss in looking at how to make sure that people access to testing, you know, countermeasures drugs and vaccines. The mRNA vaccine that actually came out within a year and unheard of. So I do think there's a reason to be optimistic because science, if done right, can actually address a lot of issues. The mobilization because of a crisis. And that's why I keep on saying this is a crisis for people to realize this resulted in lots of activities, including us leading the pandemic fund, you name it, and billions of dollars raised for that reason. And then of course people are finally coming together to say, let's make sure that we are much better prepared for the next time. So I'm optimistic in the sense that there is action is not all negative, but I recognize with you what you're saying, in terms of complex political issues, and we just have to deal with it. But I would continue to say that good things have come out and good things will come out from this. Yeah, just one quick comment on this. I think one thing we need to do is really empower young people. The young people are so engaged in this issue. And they're the ones that are looking at the longer time horizon. They're not looking at their next quarterly results or whatever. They are actually looking at what is the future that they're going to inherit. So I think we need to get more power to young people. Can I just build on that any thoughts? I'm going to turn to Amanda now on engaging younger, not just audiences, but experts and budding experts and thinking about the next generation in the context of the Crossroads Initiative. And now, in our collaborative, we actually deliberately include young people. We include them as citizen scientists. That is, they are out there in the community. Actually, there's a thing called a photo voice that pictures and whatever posted to let people know about this. So the equity collaborative includes young people who in fact are involved with a whole collaborative and also enabling the research, the data need to be collected. And both sides, we have a frontiers of science and frontiers of engineering program very active programs that engage hundreds of younger with, you know, your definition of young has to come in here but you know, the age of 40 and below, you know, those programs are very active. And those people I think out of the box too, and they're more optimistic. Amanda. I mean, as a parent myself, this is something that resonates with me a lot. Already we have programs that engage younger people so I called attention to the new voices program that works with a young scholars and many of them are interested in climate change they've actually this, this cohort of new voices that I called fellows or have organized a climate group and they're they're working together to do things on climate already self organize that. And I think there's a lot that we could do to leverage that kind of interest further. The other thing I might highlight is our, our board on science education has been thinking for a long time about doing work around. How do you prepare civil society to make good decisions around climate. So, you know, climate education not just about do you understand how the atmosphere works or the ocean works but really, how can you engage productively in the kinds of really hard decisions that we as a society are going to have to wrestle with. Yeah, and I think we've got precedence for this as well. Many people here who might be of my generation. I remember when I was a kid. There was this big campaign against being a litter bug. And well you didn't want to be a litter bug. Oh my God, you know seeing trash by the roadway. No way. And then for my children. It was recycling. They did what it was. It was like, like a horror show if someone threw a can in the trash. We took a vacation to a state that didn't have curbside recycling. When we came back from that vacation. I was unpacking my children's luggage, and they had filled their luggage with every can to bring it back to California so they could recycle it. And now the fossil fuel emissions back as well that'd be really helpful. Let's get some more questions in the mix on this side, please. Thanks for bringing it forward. It's big questions. 100 years. 100 to 25 so what can we accelerate the transit. I think the example would be a petroleum we have built all the gas station I mean when you really go from beginning to where we can drive 50 to 75 years I think that there's an emphasis now and engineering on some expediency and speed and transitioning technologies so I think it's naturally going to happen but I think the key here is going to be electrification and we do have a lot of experience electrification. We have to upgrade the grid and improve it and so on. Definitely that that's a key element but we already have that in place. So I think we're, it's not going to be the same as introducing something totally new. I think it'll be a system systems improvement let's say that I hope would take less than 25 years. And we probably need faster incentives for shutting down. I mean, every time I hear about a coal fire power plant being built. I'm really concerned, because without incentives that coal plant is going to run until it dies. For many decades so so but let's I think the question also just to kind of pick up on it was about what kind of the things the academies can do right in this context to accelerate the that's of course the focus and part of one of the main pathways to action but anything specific to the road maps. We need to help by creating road maps for how to get from here to there and convening groups of experts. I mean, the expertise is not within the academy that's here it's outside that we, we bring those together in the convergence. And that's what climate growth is all about. Yeah, I mean, I think we can help by bringing together different groups of experts who might not otherwise interact with each other to sort of accelerate the diffusion of knowledge or the insights that can emerge from those kinds of conversations. And the other thing that comes to mind and not just because time to ask the question but you know I think we know a lot more now about behavior science, social science that we could be better bringing to the table around the, this energy transition and the other kinds of transitions we need to make. We, we are going to have to ask people to change things about the way they live their day to day lives and, and we need to bring to bear what those fields of science have learned about how people make decisions and take actions in a more deliberate kind of way so I think that's another place where we could be kind of bringing that to the table better. Okay, thank you. Are there other questions. I think on this side. Can you hear me. Yes. Oh, thank you very much. I know we're running out of time but I could not resist to chime in on the youth aspect. My name is Leila McCurdy. One of my roles is serve as the chair of the Children's Environmental Health Committee of the American Public Health Association. And I wanted to raise the issue of, you know, the, of course climate change is a, the biggest public health challenge we're facing today. We need to act fast, but there is also the aspect of mental health crisis and part of the among the youth, children and youth. And part of that is echo anxiety, as we all know. And, and there are many things we can do to deal with this. But one way is to educate them about climate change, empower them, and give them solutions they can help resolve because as we all know and we don't need to be mental health experts to acknowledge that I think people suffer more when they have no way to act on an issue. If we empower kids. And, you know, we talked about youth as an upper age group, I think, earlier. I'm talking about K 12 age group, where they are looking for answers and they are suffering with mental health issues. So we need to engage them, empower them, and have them be able to take action to participate in solving this crime climate crisis. And we at the American Public Health Association created a K 12 education kit that can be easily delivered by volunteers like yourself. You don't have to be an expert. You can offer your help to schools because they are overburdened with so many things. And, you know, I'm getting to the classroom or be part of after school activities to help these kids. Thank you. Thank you for that. I'm going to, I really appreciate that intervention and it's about making sure the academies can do work that provides agency to a range of stakeholders right kids but of course to other communities as well we are we are out of time. One more question over there and I, if we have time that'd be great, please. It would be nice to. Yeah. Great. Hi everyone, my name is Jason Toei. I'm a PhD student at Stanford, the door school there. So a lot of my work focuses on looking at the climate impacts of health and then also a sustainable energy transition. But one thing that I'm finding as an early researcher is there's not been a lot of interconnections between these different fields. So let's say I do climate in one say so I work with climate scientists and other times I'm working with all the health professionals, medical doctors and also energy modelers and things and a lot of times is in. And I feel like it's kind of hard to really come together and really make innovative change because even though my program itself is interdisciplinary, a lot of people I work with might be more narrow. So my question is kind of how can the Academy is real and like I know we're here now so this is a thing but like how can the Academy is really work, especially at some of these academic institutions or other institutions of higher learning to really basically, I don't know, push people into being more receptive or appreciative of like doing this cross-disciplinary type work, especially for these types of issues. That's a great question. Let's pick up on it and then we'll have to turn to a close. Yeah, let me just make a quick statement. We have to deal with the academic incentive system, because right now, if someone wants to be hired or promoted or tenured. It is an entirely disciplinary approach, and that discourages people from working in the way that you suggest. First I agree with Marsha. We've learned this and being academic all my life about the need to get incentives and rewards, but also leadership counts, because I know of places where the entire university is into this space. Take USC, Carol Folt, and it goes all the way down to the medical school, the engineering school, etc., and bring them all together. There are quite a few examples like this, and I think that's the opportunity to bring many decisions together, so incentives and also leadership. Yeah, I spent 48 years in the academic environment, and I think this is something to be said for what the questioner said. But there are some experiments in some universities that have gone beyond the traditional department designation, and I was at one of them where you had an appointment in two different colleges. And that's doable, and tenure was doable at that university, so it's a cultural change, but if you have someone who's who's paid, I'm not talking about just a courtesy appointment, actually paid by two separate departments or two separate colleges, you will get into this plenary work, and those people were very, very productive. It's fascinating. It's a great question. I would just say that the academies are uniquely well positioned to inform perhaps make recommendations on changes to the culture and incentive system, precisely to support the... Presidents of universities can't even change things. But when it has to work and the academies are kind of a unique opportunity to build that out. So with that, we're going to have to close this session. If you didn't have a chance to put an idea or question forward, please make sure to add them to Slido. I think we'll have the QR code on the screen. If not now, then we'll have it again later. We'll read them all and perhaps pick them up again in future discussions. So for now, let me thank our panelists. Thank all of you for so many questions. This is just the beginning. We're going to take a short breakdown return, I believe, at 10.45 Eastern time for the next panel on pathways to action. So thank you all.