 Thank you all for coming. I'm Guy Caruso with the energy program here at CSIS, so really welcome you and do this great opportunity here about the IEA's latest energy technology analysis. And as many of you know, technology has been critical to energy over the last at least 40 years that we've been analyzing it here at the Department of Energy in my previous job and now here at CSIS. But for those of us who've been trying to forecast supply and demand over these last years, if someone said what was the thing you missed the most, then that was the pace of technology change. So when the IEA was formed in 1974, in addition to the response to the Arab oil embargo and emergency preparedness functions, which is the core of IEA, there was also the coordination of policy as an important part of IEA. But the third leg of IEA's remit back then was a strong energy technology program. And it's one that I don't think gets enough attention. It has been very instrumental in the IEA's success I think over the last 40 years of its existence, partly because of the collaboration on energy technology projects within the IEA member countries, but maybe equally as important, the opportunity for collaboration and coordination with non-member countries such as China and South Africa, Russia, for a number of key countries. So the IEA technology program is quite important, and I think the IEA is extremely fortunate to have leading that program as its current Deputy Director for Sustainable Energy Policy and Technology, Didier Hussein, who will present the IEA energy technology perspectives report to us in a few moments. Didier is well experienced in the energy field, both as an industry, private sector experience, as well as with the Ministry of Industry and the French government, and then coming to the IEA first as Deputy Director for Emergency Preparedness and Energy Markets. What's it been about two years that you moved to technology? About two years ago, Didier moved to the energy technology job, so we're going to hear from one of the most experienced people in the IEA, one of the most insightful and has been great to have to call Didier a colleague and a friend over a number of years. So we look forward to hearing the summary of the energy technology perspectives, which is a report that the IEA has been issuing every other year for a number of years now, and it really, I think the unique part of it is that it goes out far enough, 2050, that you can really make some important, take some very important takeaways as you look out in some of these critical issues, including sustainable energy and the various aspects of energy efficiency, for example, that Didier has been working on. So, Didier, thank you very much for coming, and we appreciate very much you taking the time to come visit us. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you very much, Guy, for this very nice introduction. I think you very well set the scene in terms of why the IEA has been since its formation doing some work on technology, because we've always thought that I think it's more true than ever that technology is a very important role to play to meet our goals in terms of sustainability, climate change, mitigation, energy security, energy excess. And we think that today it's the importance of technology is more and more recognized. What I want to do this morning is briefly present you energy technology perspective 2014, ETP 2014 that was released on the 12th of May by the IEA Executive Director in the Clean Energy Ministerial Meeting in Seoul. The ETP objective is to present a comprehensive and long term view of energy trends and technology. Maintaining a long term view looking into the possible evolution into 2050 is quite challenging when you think about all the developments that have taken place over the last year. If you think about the shale gas boom in Northern America, the extensive cost reduction in many renewable technologies or the uncertainty surrounding the future of nuclear power. But ETP emphasizes the need to maintain this long term vision when it comes to energy policy and to manage the energy transition which is needed in a holistic way rather than just responding to short term developments of the energy system. So the message is twofold. First, a radical change of course is long overdue as we clearly were not on track on a climate friendly trajectory. And secondly, at the same time, there is a positive message is that we try to show that it is doable, that it is cost effective. Even if it's very ambitious and the key point is that technology will have a key role to play in this energy transition that we need. Last point is about the new format of ETP. You can find three things in the book. First, what we call the global outlook which is the update of our long term scenarios. Secondly, reports about tracking clean energy progress and you have copies of this report in the hall. It can also be downloaded from our website. And thirdly, the larger part of the book is about one specific subject and this year we've picked up the role of electricity, how to harness the potential of electricity in the energy transition. So you have the tracking reports in the hall as well as an executive summary that gives you a brief summary of the whole book. Let me start with the global outlook. The starting point is what we call the carbon intensity index of energy supply. And what is striking in this chart is to show that despite extensive investment in low carbon energy, the carbon intensity of global energy supply has stayed the same in a long period of time, resulting in increasingly high emission as energy demand was growing. Indeed, even if emerging economies have stepped up their ambitions in terms of clean energy and became leaders in many of them, the ongoing increase in coal use in many emerging economies has more than offset these efforts. For instance, over the last 10 years, the increase in coal fire power generation has been as important as the combination of all the carbon technologies capacity increases. It underlines the need to improve coal plant efficiency on one side and also to scale up efforts to promote carbon capture and storage. So ETP shows that a change in direction is needed by looking into three scenarios. The 6DS, which is the continuation of current trends. The 4DS that takes into consideration recent pledges that have been made by governments to limit emissions and to step up efforts to improve energy efficiency. That kind of a central scenario. And finally, the 2DS scenario, two-degree scenarios which is the main focus, of course, of ETP. And it describes a scenario which would be consistent with limiting the increase in global temperatures to two degrees. This chart shows the difference between how we can meet a 2DS scenario compared to the business as usual trend. And it shows that it's possible to decouple global population and economic growth from energy demand, even for oil. And although this scenario has clearly a climate objective, it has profound benefits for energy security and for the global economy. And the convergence of these different topics is more and more clear, including for emerging economies. And I would say that today with current developments in the Middle East, the concern about future oil prices and energy security become more and more important. But they are also a strong driver from our perspective to move faster in the energy transition. How we can meet that gap between the 6DS and the 2DS, the first thing is energy efficiency. It's a confirmation of previous IEA work. Energy efficiency has always been overlooked and underestimated. We think that looking at the most cost-effective solutions, it would represent almost 40% of the global abatements compared to the 6DS. But this is not enough. We need also a change on the supply side. And the role of renewable is dominant on the supply side with 30% of the difference between the two scenarios followed by a CCS at 14% nuclear 7%. What is important is to see that compared to our previous modeling exercise, the role of renewable has been increased reflecting current trends on energy markets, whereby the role of CCS and nuclear has declined. But I'll come back to that. So this is a massive change in cost which is needed and the efforts in terms of investment are huge. But we do think that it would be cost-effective in the long run. The difference between the two scenarios in terms of needed investment amounts to 44 trillion US dollars. But these efforts would be compensated by over 115 trillion US dollar savings in terms of fuels. And as you can see on the strut, even with a 10% discount rate, this would pay off in the long run. But of course one of the key challenges in this transition is how to finance investment in low carbon energy, which have increased upfront cost and which makes also financing much more difficult. And this is why we have in the book a specific analysis about how to finance low carbon energy investment. And I'll come back to that later. Let me move now to the track and clean energy progress report. Just one slide trying to summarize the result of this chapter. This chapter looks at recent developments for a number of clean technologies which are which of them are progressing are on track on a 2DS trajectory, which are not. The picture is rather gloomy. Of course it's a confirmation because we all know that the 2DS is very ambitious. But still there is one exception. Renewables are green on this chart. Why? Because they have even beaten expectations and previous forecasts in terms of global deployment and they're on track with the 2DS trajectory. We also had before electric vehicles. Electric vehicles still are progressing at fast rate but not fast enough to be in line with the 2DS trajectory. And for other technologies that are in yellow the picture is a bit mixed. And some of them are really not on track in particular CCS. This is one of the key issues if you think about the very important role of fossil fuels in the mix, in particular for many emerging countries. And I think this is one of the key challenge in this energy transition. As you can see in this list, a number of these technologies are linked to electricity and we do think that electricity is going to play a defining role in this first half of the century as the energy career that will increasingly power economy growth and development. This is why we have decided to focus on electricity in this ETP with the key messages that it's important also to get it right and to decarbonize the electricity sector. And a number of options are available with renewables, nuclear power, CCS smart grids just to name a few. But again, the challenge is great and a number of policies will need to be put in place to decarbonize electricity generation and doing so cleaning up the end-use sectors by switching to electricity. This is moving to electricity. This is the summary of the key developments that we see in the three scenarios of ETP. What is striking is that in all of them you see an increasing role for electricity in final energy demand. It's growing in all scenarios at different basis because the gross is 80 percent for the 2DS and 130 percent for the 6DS. Of course, it's lower for the 2DS because as I said, energy efficiency is key and it's important across the board, including in the electricity sector in the 2DS. But it doesn't mean that electricity is less important for the 2DS. On the contrary, the share of electricity in overall energy demand would grow in the 2DS from 17 percent to 26 percent. And furthermore, there would be a key difference in the 2DS. Electricity would overtake all products as the largest energy carrier in the energy system. But the growth in electricity use is not necessarily a positive development. It also depends on the way electricity is generated. And today, as you can see, here the power represents 40 percent of primary energy demand and produces 40 percent of global carbon emissions. So in the 2DS, there is a radical change of this situation with in the 2DS, the growth in overall energy demand is moderated and the increase in the use of electricity means that the power sectors would consume more than half of primary energy. But at the same time contributes only 5 percent of global emissions as almost all the power generation sector is decarbonized. So how would electricity be generated in the 2DS? There you have a total change in course, a reversal from how electricity is generated today. Today is more than two-thirds based on fossil fuels with 20 percent coming from renewables and in the 2DS at global level and the situation in different among regions, of course, but you have two-thirds coming from renewables, not just variable renewables, also including lots of biomass and hydro, but still two-thirds from renewables. What would be the share of variable renewables? It would be 30 percent in our model at global level, again with key differences among regions. We come back to that, which means that with such a high share of variable renewables in the power system, you need to change the way your power system is managed and increase its capacity to adapt to flexibility and to the variability of power generation. Let me move now to the regional situation because of course the global averages are a bit misleading. The situation is very different according to different regions and we see very different pathways of electricity system developments in different regions. For the OECD, we've seen over the last year a very flat demand, very modest growth in electricity demand in OECD regions and we expect this trend to continue in the 2DS with a growth limited to 16 percent by 2050. It means that the challenges for OECD countries would be rather to maintain a high level of reliability of electricity supply against the backdrop of limited growth in revenues and aging infrastructure. In emerging economies and developing countries, you have a very significant growth averaging 150 percent at global level which means a key challenge of managing large investment needs to meet the growth in demand for electricity and including large investment needed in electricity infrastructure. If you look at India, the growth in electricity is even higher. It's 300 percent by 2050 and we looked into the situation of India more specifically this year with a specific chapter on India, reflecting the key challenges of the power sector in India first to provide access to electricity to 300 million Indians that do not have access to modern energy today and at the same time powering the projected economic growth of the country and in addition the very high level of carbon, coal-based electricity generation representing more than two-thirds of the electricity production in China means that decarbonizing or starting to decarbonize the power sector in India will be extremely challenging. I don't go further into details but we have a specific study on India in the book. Let's look now at the situation in Northern America more specifically it's what is striking is like in OECD countries the growth in global electricity demand is much lower than the global averages and at the same times we have a shift to low carbon generation but in the near term we see that the impact of the shale gas revolutions mean that natural gas, the role of natural gas will be increasing at least in the short to medium term and in the longer term we see also a shift away from fossil fuel electricity generation which is even larger than for the global averages. With a large chunk of arrival renewable energy in the mix we will need to increase the flexibility of electricity systems and a variety of options are available as you can see here the most important one today is dispatchable generation but also a great infrastructure development including smart grids, demand side integration and storage. We've looked more specifically this year in ETP at two of these options first the role of natural gas because natural gas as gas fire generation is supporting two key elements in the cleaner energy system first increasing integration of renewables as a dispatchable flexible generation capacity and also displacing coal fire generation as we've seen in northern America with the development of shale gas and this has sparked significant decrease in CO2 emissions in particular in the U.S. But it means that there will be some challenges in terms of the role of gas in these two situations and for the countries which have a large part of the rival renewable energy the flexibility of gas finer gas fired power generation will be extremely important to serve as a backup in the power system. The second area of flexibility which we have analyzed more in depth is the role of storage. There is a lot of hype and expectation about the role of electricity storage and of course lots of people think that if we had a significant breakthrough in terms of electricity storage then we would be able to open the door to unlimited deployment of a rival renewable energy. So we've done an in-depth analysis of the different options for storage and benchmarking them against other flexibility options. Today storage technologies come in very different shapes and sizes from a large pump hydro system to battery inside some of our of the many appliances that we use on a daily basis including also some of the thermal energy storage options. So we have a variety of options and applications that are different in size but for the moment we must recognize that electricity storage is very limited to a pumped hydro system in the electricity system and its contributions remain limited due to higher costs and insufficient performances. So near-term opportunities need to be further exploited including frequency regulation or off-grid applications that are quite promising off-grid application connected with for instance PV solutions for isolated areas. So there are a number of attractive niche opportunities but we don't think that today we can expect storage to become silver bullet for the problem of flexibility of power system considering the need to lower the cost extensively for many applications. I mentioned the role of gas and the gas will serve as a bridge in the energy transition and in all our scenarios we see the role of gas increasing by 2025 through fuel switching from coal to gas and the development of gas in many regions but after 2025 the carbon content of gas is too high compared to the objective of the 2DS to be maintained without CCS. So we see a decline of the role of gas for the later part of the period and gas need to be used as a baseload option just with CCS. This is why we have undertaken a comparison of the cost and benefits of applying CCS to coal and to gas fire generation. Usually CCS is analyzed in the context of coal fire generation and it's true that the cost per ton of CO2 is higher for gas than for coal but if we compare the cost of low emissions electricity production gas is more attractive than coal fire generation including with CCS. With a carbon price of around $100 per ton combined cycle gas turbines with CCS have a lower levelized cost of electricity than CCGTs alone which reflects the importance of the carbon price and it's also less costly than clean coal options with CCS. Let me now move to the demand side of the equation which is also critical in the energy transition and what we show through this slide is that through decarbonizing electricity production we can decarbonize most of the end-use sectors and it's particularly striking for the building sector which represents half of global electricity use if you include also the appliances and so the carbon impact of buildings is even higher than transport if you include the carbon content of power generation so through decarbonizing power generation we have a spillover effect in all end-use sectors. It's also true for the transport sectors even if the role of electricity is much more limited for instance all the electricity makes up only around 10 percent of total transport energy demand by 2050 even in the 2DS or a limited role for electricity it accounts for approximately half of transport efficiency gain but it doesn't mean that the electrification of transport can offer emission reduction in all situations and we've looked at different options different transport modes for which electrification would make sense in a specific chapter on e-mobility and in this chapter we have developed a tool that we call the Low Carbon Electric Transport Maximization Index and with this tool we try to offer analysis as to what situations can offer the maximum benefit to electrifying transport based on individual country situations. I mentioned the building sector it's a very important part of where the electrification can play an important role and we've looked at a variant a wide-if scenario if we go even farther than in the 2DS in terms of developing the role of electricity through modern heat pumps for heating and cooling of space and water even further than in the 2DS and what what it shows is that having wider use of these heat pumps could have benefits in terms of extensive benefits in terms of displacing also the use of natural gas and we've studied this particular variant scenario for two regions the EU and China in both cases we see a much lower role in this variant for natural gas which has important benefits for the EU if you think at the problem of gas supply the the cost and the energy security concerns in Europe about future gas supply in this case the role of the share of gas in the EU come down compared from from 34 today to 25 percent in the 2DS scenario in the case of China you have a very very sharp increase in the role of gas but which is lower than in the 2DS scenario if you develop of course much more modern heat pumps for heating cooling of space and water let me move now to another areas that we've studied in in the book it's the important energy implications of more and more devices going online as internet access and usage spreads at a rapid rate the electricity demand of network enabled device devices is expected to almost double by 2025 so it's an extremely rapid increase of these of these devices and as they spend most of their time in a standby mode up to 80 percent of the electricity consumption is just to maintain connection to the to the network this is just an example here with gaming and consoles but it's true for many other network connected devices for which we there's a lot of energy squandering also linked to the importance of staying in standby mode and we have estimated that these equipment the demand of electricity from this equipment could be slashed by two-thirds just by implementing best available technologies and with this would result in savings of almost corresponding to four percent of total final electricity consumption today so it's a it's a massive stake which is often overlooked and an issue that we think should be studied at international level in the coming years financing and instead I said at the beginning that the role of financing during the transition to a low carbon electricity system will be very important why because low carbon generation is not only more expensive but than conventional generation like ccgt's as you can see on the chart that the it's also much more capital in capital intensive so this increased upfront capital costs can increase the various risks that are perceived by investors including construction risk electricity price risk carbon policy risk and others and in the absence of a carbon price and a wholesale electricity prices may be inadequate to incentivize investment in low carbon power generation and and this lack of investment is a key risk in the in the transition and there is a very important reflection to be to be made at the political level as how to limit the risk for investors and put in place the appropriate market designs and appropriate market frameworks to encourage investment in low carbon technologies one of the key ways to clear the obstacle towards 2ds trajectory is to change the perspective about uh energy system and electricity system uh the key message being that a sustainable electricity system will be a smarter more unified and integrate and integrated electricity system more decentralized and multi-directional where technologies should be deployed together rather than in isolation and policies would need to address electricity system as a whole rather than specific technologies and and it's true that traditionally we tend to have too much of focus on the supply side rather than the demand side as we and we may well see a number of a revolution on the demand side through the use of ICT the rules of smart trees that could really change the nature of our electricity system so success will hinge on system thinking uh which is more efficient because it identifies synergies across sectors and application and it focuses on the efficiency of the service provided rather than the energy delivered so let me conclude with uh just uh the uh summary of the outline of the book haven't mentioned all the all the specific analysis that you can find in ATP 2014 in particular we have a specific chapter on the role of solar energy which is being the fastest growing energy renewable energy source of the last year and and we'll play a key role in the 2DS I mentioned the double role the double role of natural gas uh immobility the role of storage financing and and India so a different series of specific analysis uh more detail in the in the importance of electricity let me now conclude with a couple of key messages first 2DS would represent a radical change in course but it's what we try to show through this scenario it's not a forecast it's just a scenario based on least cost options and so we try to show that it is doable um electricity will play a key role in that process and the in the transition so the reflections at the political level on market design and how to favor investment in lower carbon power generation options will be key and finally a strong leadership which will be needed both in industry and among policymakers to embrace these long-term visions which is needed and put in place the necessary financial means which because mobilizing the necessary financing now will be much better than having to pay a much higher price much higher price down the road because one of the things we show is that the more you you wait the more costly the transition will be and with that I would like to thank you for your attention and I would like to introduce you also David Elzinga who will come to participate to the Q&A session now is the project manager for this project and one of the our best electricity specialist so please don't hesitate to ask him very very technical and difficult question thank you very much thank you Didier and thank you David for joining us so as you can imagine somebody actually has to make sure that a project like this ETP every other year gets shepherded through the system and published and that's David's role I can tell you from the history of having worked with the late Lee Shipper and other of your predecessors it's a it's a tough job so you're lucky to have David Didier as you said you know one thing that strikes me as you look at that presentation is it's the pathway to 2050 as in the under the different scenarios looks very obviously it's very ambitious when you think about the the shifting out of coal for example in the electricity sector and places like China and India and what kind of when you present this and work with the large consumers who are not members of the IA in particular how did a what kind of response have you been getting in terms of the really deployment of that technology I mean we've been talking about some of those things for a number of years and obviously CCS and others and the things in the electricity sector high if and you point out how in recent years we've actually seen a kind of you call it stuck we're kind of stuck with you know the energy intensity going kind of in the wrong way with coal actually rising in I think in the BP presentation we heard just a week ago they're saying coal is actually been the fastest growing fuel in the last decade so it's kind of yeah we seem to be going a bit in the wrong direction how what kind of response you've been getting from the from these large emerging economies when you present your information or when they come to IEA meetings sir yeah this this is a this is a very good question of course and they it's always a challenge to present to the yes because and in the book again we have two messages it's doable it's necessary at the same time we're really not on track when we look at current developments at the same time there are some seeds for for hope and and and and and there is a broader realization of the firstly important climate change to extreme weather events that we are becoming more and more frequent I think the realization in the public opinion and many governments that this is a real issue is is is increasing also there are other drivers in the energy transition in particular for emerging economies that are maybe not so as concerned as in some more industrious countries about the challenges of climate change but are very concerned about the question of energy security the problem of oil prices and today I think that's more evident than ever how to develop their domestic resources to increase the energy security and also to combat pollution I think for China is an obvious key political objective now and they've put in place a number of tools to limit the role of carbon of course starting from a very high level but still it's a change in trends which I think is quite interesting and to give you an example the this report was presented that the clean energy ministerial and and and China has been extremely active in the clean energy ministerial process and and China is extremely motivated by developing by developing renewable technologies and it's not just it's not just for climate change it's for equality it's just for energy security and they're developing all options including nuclear switching from coal to gas developing renewables and China has become the first market for renewables and they didn't mention it in the presentation but if renewables are green is despite the OECD countries not because of the I of the OECD countries because we saw a slowdown in for various reasons in in OECD countries in terms of investment for renewables in 2013 so it's a short-term time period and and and the most of the increase was in emerging economies and in particularly in China and and and and most of the more than half of the PV pulse were installed in there in Asia in 2013 and not not not in OECD countries so these are just example having said that it's true that the challenge of considering the the role of coal the challenge of moving away from coal as the as the key source of power generation at global level remains extremely extremely difficult moving first to clean coal technologies rather than than subcritical technologies that still represent almost two-third of new investments so we'll be there for 50 years it's it's one third thing and continuing the efforts to promote CCS and we are concerned in the IEA by the lack of progress in terms of CCS and more limited interest among policymakers and we think that it's very important to continue to do R&D and try to cut the cost of CCS because it has it will have an important role to play in this energy transition. Do you want to add anything? Just a small thing just a surprise when we we looked at the data so the the curve that Didier showed was the the energy sector carbon intensity index we also do an electricity generation carbon intensity index and it shows a very similar trend on the global level but then when you look at regions you see some differences and you know when you look at China that's you know the the bad guy on the block often from a emissions perspective their their electricity generation sector index has been coming down over a number of years so they they are actually making progress in this in this area with that said their demand is growing very much as well so their net emissions are growing of course but but they are doing something so I think it is very important to look at what what actions can be taken specific regions and again our analysis is framed in the in the lens of of CO2 emissions reductions but it has huge impacts on economy and positive impacts on economy and energy security so looking at it more holistically you can create those drivers that that really are relevant and can motivate emerging economies as well. Well let's open up we've got plenty of time for questions so I'll open up the start with Scott and then this gentleman to the left. Scott Ogdenbaugh CSIS I have a question about carbon capture have you thought about separating out carbon capture from CO2 conversion going forward because one of the things that's been suggested is a series of ways in which we can just remove CO2 from certain resources things like the U.S. Navy for instance is focusing on how do you extract CO2 from ocean water and other sorts of technologies there and then the other part of this would be if you're talking about electrifying a battery fleet if a battery still costs you five thousand dollars as Elon Musk's has as a target for his Tesla vehicle you can't really sell that in the developing world so some of these technologies obviously I think there's some hope for them but how far away are we in your opinion from some of those two particular technologies really taking off or a sets of technologies. I would thank you for the question I would just like to make a general point which I think is important to understand how ETP is done and then David will respond to the question more directly is that we don't include in our modeling exercise technology breakthrough this is why paradoxically even if it's ambitious it's very cautious in terms of which technology could be used because you cannot predict the unpredictable and you cannot predict technology breakthrough that may provide some solutions like a dramatic breakthrough in terms of the cost of batteries and when we look at storage we start from existing technologies trying to forecast some decline in cost based on unreasonable assumptions but we don't foresee a massive breakthrough in CCS a massive breakthrough in the cost of batteries or other options and one of the other messages is that it's important to continue R&D in many options that are not available today but that may provide part of the solution looking forward because if you look at the technology breakthrough that we've seen over the last year whether it's on renewables whether it's on shale gas it's always been a combination of long-term R&D efforts policy frameworks that incentivize the development of the technology and market conditions that allow them to suddenly take off which was the case for shale gas when I mean the efforts are always on the drilling had been had been supported by the US governance for many years for instance and suddenly when you have a spike in gas prices you have and the proper market policy framework you can see the technology a ramp up we may well see the same sort of thing with CCS because the technology is not totally unknown it's just too costly and the incentives for deploying it are not there this is why we need to maintain the message that that the support to CCS should be there so this is a general point that the all the scenario are based on existing technologies and we don't include potential breakthrough but now I leave it to David for the difficult part well so firstly on co2 conversion it's not included so that's a very simple but I will just add to that that we look at co2 or CCS often in the context of the power sector but actually in the 2DS by 2050 we see 50% of that being deployed in industry as well so it's just a small point I want to make that to decarbonize the industrial sector CCS is an essential technology and we really are not seeing the progress that we need and we we have done a scenario where we look at meeting the two-degree scenario with a high renewable share with decreased nuclear and decreased CCS and we indeed can make it it just costs more so again we it really reinforces the importance of near-term R&D to do the learning but also start to develop the policy framework so we can really incentivize its use now on to storage so a couple a couple aspects with our analysis we looked out to 2025 in our analysis on storage not or for a good portion of it and some of it we did out to 2050 but the reason we limited some of our analysis to 2025 is because it is truly rapidly changing with that said one of our key messages are storage is a great technology very important but it's not necessarily a game changer or we don't need a game changer in order to integrate the variable renewables that we need in the energy system we have other options flexible generation interconnection on the demand side so from that perspective yes it's important we need to investigate it it can be a really active tool in the transition to a sustainable energy system but if it doesn't happen we have many other tools in the toolbox and then lastly on storage one of the interesting aspects is looking at the interaction of say electric vehicles and using that battery within the electric vehicle to support the integration of renewables therefore a lot of the capital cost you see is for the function of transport and then when you share that that that little piece of infrastructure to then provide whether backup power or electricity system support so you share that it brings the the incremental cost significantly down and in that perspective more using the the battery from a demand side integration perspective you can't actually see some much more near term application so it's it's that systems thinking in a very small way and then bringing it out to the systems thinking more broadly hans i mean the ddd uh analogy with shale oil or shale gas or shale uh technology is very interesting because as you know i mean that's been a 40 year overnight success i mean halibut has been working on that since 1980 and finally it's now pretty successful and as you point out market conditions were important but also there wasn't despite some government investment in r&d it was largely private sector and the tax system and the market conditions that really made it go whereas you think something like ccs and storage really i think uh you might follow that path but i do think government policy probably play seems to me a far more important role and actually ultimately leading to you know ccs and storage i don't know that's sort of a non technologists perspective is that you you agree with that or you think that we can do it without yeah yeah to a certain extent i think cc has a big difference cc doesn't produce in it for produce any any energy so the incentives i mean would be if you have the clear perspective of a carbon price i think that would that would drive the efforts of the of the private sector because a cheap call with ccs could become a clean option if you bet on a on a future carbon price otherwise there's no need to invest but if you change that i mean more and more governments are combating call for various reasons including including the the air quality issue and and call was diminished dramatically in in in in the EU in coming years probably also in the US with recent decision of the current administration in many parts of the world the resources are there so the potential of having cheap call with cheaper ccs could become an interesting option but i think the question of the carbon price i think for storage a bit different because you see a lot of private stakeholders investing in storage through different angles batteries for car car systems electric vehicle system because if look at the success of Tesla or others there if some breakthrough could lead to quite success business model and and and and be that could be rewarded by by the market today but again that you perfectly right that the policy framework would be important i think yes sir state name and i'm bob right department of energy office of fossil energy and i know you were focusing on electricity but i'm sure i assume you probably read the forecast from BP and Exxon and Shell and EIA okay how does your scenario what are the differences that you see in your scenarios versus any one of those or all of them one of the key things that let's let's be very clear here that these aren't forecasts so what we've said is that in the two degree scenario well just i'll focus on that is that if we want to meet these goals these are the the the most cost effective steps that we can take to meet these goals so you know often the question we get framed a little bit differently you know what is the possibility of meeting these these long-term goals and and i would say well i don't know it's it's more of a choice than a than a possibility so the differences i think there are a range of scenarios and these are these are pathways that we can take and i'd say a number of the the scenarios that that you described really have a different endpoint so yeah if our endpoint is is different yeah we're going to have a different pathway so you know one of the things i want to just emphasize a little bit with our scenarios that i think are misunderstood you know we don't see an energy system that's a hundred percent renewables by 2050 we actually see that fossil fuels contribute to 40 percent of the primary energy by 2050 under the two degree scenario so that's down significantly today it's around 80 percent of global primary energy so it's a big shift but we still see fossil fuels playing a significant role so the last thing i'll say is that all models are wrong but some are useful and i really think and hope that we fall into that that framework of being a useful analytical exercise because what we have to do is take from this and say especially in our tracking port report where are we do we truly want to make this goal and are we making meaningful progress in that direction and and the clear answer is no and this has economic implications climate implications and social implications and energy security implications so from that perspective we we really have to determine where we want to go and actually take meaningful steps and get the leadership to get there and then we'll call from Johns Hopkins University question about nuclear power which could be uh attractive from a sustainability perspective going forward how do you see nuclear growing in a post Fukushima world and does the have a position on nuclear power i'm taking the question not because i'm french but because i think it's an important question and yeah we see that the role of nuclear as as as as important as but we are technology neutral in the eye is true for all our work and it's up to each country to design on its electricity mix and and and and and it's certainly not so we're not prescriptive at all in this uh in the in the in this book uh we we we take stock of the tracking progress energy clean energy progress report about recent development on nuclear and they're not very positive to to to be to be to be frank because of the of the consequences of Fukushima also because in the case of the u.s. for instance the the very the the the very uh cheap prices of gas make nuclear less cost effective if you put aside the issues about public acceptance or safety and and and we saw i think last year four nuclear plans being being stopped in the in the u.s. because it was no more cost effective to invest in refurbishment and modernization of of this plan so uh there's an beyond the issue of public acceptance the question of cost effective that the nuclear is posed in in many oe cd oe cd countries the positive side is what is happening in emerging economies and most of the new built is in emerging economies so you have a massive opposition between the the stock of nuclear planned which is 80 percent in oe cd countries and the and the number of new builds and we saw a number of new a new start of new new built in 2013 and and 80 percent of them are in emerging economies and and the large shank of it in in china uh so we do think that nuclear will play an important will have an important role to play but we've um taken into account these recent developments and the contribution to the 2ds coming from nuclear is lower in etp 2014 that it was in to see then it was in two thousand uh in 2012 and the role of renewable has been increased just reflecting what what's happening in in in various countries so in doing our assumption we of course take into account policy decisions like the decision of Germany political uncertainty in countries like like japan or france that are two countries for which nuclear is very important but where the future role of nuclear is quite uncertain in in in both countries uh are the uh problem of competitiveness like in the case of the of the us but at global level uh the share of nuclear is in in in the in the 2ds is is is by memory around 17 percent so it's it's quite it's still still significant because in all scenarios we have a progression of of nuclear i'll just add one one point to that one of the the um statistics i found interesting that came out of our analysis uh when we look at our progress so again nuclear uh was in the red category as we're not making enough progress and by 2025 we see that um we will be between five and 25 percent behind uh 2ds targets and so what that is makes very clear to me is it's highly uncertain right now the progress of of nuclear so um we really uh don't know what is going to happen from a policy and and uh deployment progress uh over the next 10 years so that's a concern we've had some meetings here on the small scale nuclear is uh is that technology uh factored into the your outlook or do you think it's still too uncertain i'd say broadly no we we definitely monitor it and um we are uh producing a technology roadmap on uh nuclear power so uh from that perspective i think we'll we'll take even a closer look at what the role of a small scale nuclear yes ma'am good morning my name is rosemary seguero i'm a u.s.a. paste kamban i focus on african rural electrification uh do you think uh your technology could be used in africa i don't see africa on your as one of your members do you think africa would be one of your members in this and how would that your technology be used in africa you just talked about china looking at china now china is gone to africa using the same renewables and from africa and exporting and using so how do you see this working in africa looking at your technology thank you let me start and i think in the the the the development of renewables and decentralized biosystem is uh is sometimes very relevant for developing countries for african particularly with the capacity to do a lot of savings in terms of investment in the infrastructure and leapfrogging to more decentralized system and i well i mentioned in like for storage one of the one of the most promising option is uh developing uh pv system with uh with storage with batteries for isolated regions where uh it can be a very very cost effective solution uh and will be more the case even if we make as we make progress in terms of the cost of the storage system and batteries um so that i i think there are an important important aspect in the in the development of distributed power generation for developing countries and david if you have other ideas just a small comment we do work very closely with south africa um so um but um and we are seeing uh obviously significant developments uh in that that region uh some of it around uh coal technologies and some of it around solar technologies as examples so yeah again the the one area we do want to do more work um and uh is around the distributed power systems and and uh for rural electrification so that is uh something that we're we're planning uh to to do make more effort on uh because i think that's one of the the key technologies uh that are going to play a role in the long term uh leveraging smart grid technologies to really uh do that in a fashion that can uh be done first uh at the very small scale and then grown over time and eventually connected to uh largely uh interconnected systems i remember south africa was one of the more uh active countries in uh sub-sahara africa even when i was there in the mid 90s is are there any other uh sub-saharan african countries participating in cert meetings or any other i have i'm not that much no not enough if i can just mention it we need to work more with african countries and and and the world energy at look this year will have a key chapter on africa and so they're doing a lot of workshop and preparative meetings in various african countries so it's a new development for the for the aya which i think is positive is reflecting i mean the key role that africa will play in the coming decades considering the current increase in population and and growth of their economies and and africa has also a very important role to play in terms of fossil fuel production it's well known for oil but the new discoveries in terms of gas in the eastern part of africa are also quite quite significant so that's that's going to be i think an important chapter of the world energy at look this year yes sir yes hi adrian gillam with the american chemical society i have a question actually about your technology is used in the caribbean region which has a sort of unique disadvantage given its geographic location the relative size with a lot of the nations in that area what sort of technologies or what sort of advice would you give to this region if they would like to pursue energy diversification and the like i think i think largely you hit on it by just asking and using the word diversification and i think focusing just on like electricity systems you know when we talk to a number of countries in that there are a broad range of issues whether it's a you know antiquated infrastructure and electricity theft i'll just touch on those and that's where i think there can be some real practical solutions around smart grid technologies to reduce electricity theft and improve system reliability and resilience because of course weather is a key issue but if you don't have a sustainable electricity system you can't maintain it keep or or improve its reliability and then from that perspective people are more likely to steal it because it has less value so um you know and then by modernizing your electricity system that does provide a pathway to deploy more renewables into those systems so you know i think diversification is the key you know there are a number of uh you know systems that are using primarily oil and and you know oil just so expensive you know to try to move away from that and as renewables have really come down in the last number of years i think it is providing more logical pathways to move into solar technologies and wind technologies more cost effectively and in a way to improve energy security much better so i think you nailed it on the head by just asking about diversification that's important yes back row uh james saying following up on the last question as you project out the 2050 was your mix of sources for electricity what kind of metrics do you use for reliability and resilience and do you use the same metrics for all the different geographic areas reliability and resilience don't really come into play because the analysis works on both a capacity of installed technology but also on energy supply and demand perspective so because it's done at a global level it's very difficult to go into the operational aspects at a global level with that said some of the work that we we did this year on the storage technology has taken a very close look at electricity load curves and how the systems are are operated and that's then fed back into our global models from a capacity and and energy supply and demand perspective so it is we're increasingly going in that direction to include operational aspects but really one of the things that that links to another report out of the ia is the integration of renewables and we don't see on a global level that being a threat at this stage the the levels that we see in the two-degree scenario are able to be integrated in a reliable fashion and it's it's some countries european one regions i should say european one of them actually has very high shares of variable renewables going out to 2050 yet they are making the steps now about integrated markets as well as large shares of hydro pump hydro in the north and and strong interconnection throughout europe that i think is is going to allow them to really get to those high shares in a reliable fashion uh bob hersey i'm bob hersey i'm a consultant uh to what extent does cost come into this for the various things you look at well if we reflect on the the one curve when we we look at um that that did he has showed about the the cost effectiveness of the energy transition what we do see is that regardless of scenarios we see tremendous investments needed in the global in global energy systems but it is indeed going to cost about 44 trillion more by 2050 to um transition from a current trends to a two-degree scenario so but the energy savings in that perspective uh come up to around 115 trillion dollars so even even with the 10 percent discount rate we see that as being cost effective so you know it's it's i what i find interesting is that um an additional report from the the ia on finance which uh reflected that uh a very significant portion of investment in the global energy system is going to replace existing infrastructure or uh into uh supply investments to replace existing capacities for fossil fuels and whatnot so from that perspective significant investments are needed so now what where do we put them we we actually now have a choice and i think that is one of the very important messages here is that we have to spend the money anyway why don't we do it in a way that's sustainable that that gives us these you know air quality benefits these climate benefits uh these economic benefits but you know changing the tide a bit is is a difficult process so we're trying to create the arguments that really push people in in what we think is a better direction and just would like to add one thing and this is that the in the in this 44 trillion u.s. dollar additional investment and and and and as david pointed out in all scenarios here's an enormous increase i mean it needs for investment a large chunk of it is linked to transport and rather than just electricity and why because since the previous edp is what we see and it's in another global issue is the need the demand from mobility is increasing at extremely rapid rate in emerging economies so one of the key challenges is what sort of what transport system they're going to put in place and if they follow let's say the northern american model we cannot move to a sustainable uh energy system that's absolutely clear so in these additional costs the transition to a transport system which is sustainable including a mobility but also much much more public transport system electrifying some some of the freight transport having much more stringent fuel economy standards having more energy efficient cars it's a number of things that need to be done all in combination if you want to meet this increase the month for transport in a sustainable manner this is this is one of the most costly and difficult issues it's not necessarily the the power generations there are issues for the transition but the additional costs are not that big if that's the yeah i'd just like to make another point if i may about the scenarios we have a number of questions about the scenarios but what you find in etp is not just an analysis of scenario by far you have a lot of other things i think all the electricity chapter some of the points are underlined underlined by by the scenario analysis but you have a lots of analysis of current status of various technologies what are the key issues some policy recommendations is not just about scenarios and what we try to do is to be quite synthetic in terms of the scenario results and put many of the data on the web that's the meaning of the last slide that's a lot of the data and and and scenario results are available from the website and you just have the key results in the book itself because i think people are more interested in looking at what are the policy questions what is the status of current technologies what are the key issues and and that's we've been that that we've tried to do is focus more on this than on the scenario numbers thank you thank you thank you didi is there one last question anyone uh just to follow up on that point you just made about the before the data was uh you know it's key is spending money and anything you know example is we spent a lot of money to get a lead platinum rating on this building and the building sector remains one that still has a huge potential based on on your chart there for technological improvement is whereas you take a industry like adrian's representing chemicals they've you know they've done a pretty good job of capturing a lot of that through the latest technology because the incentive it's a much stronger incentive at the bottom line when you're running a chemical company then you know building a building where you're maybe trying to cut costs so anyway so that let me uh once again thank didi and david for a excellent presentation and thank you all for coming thanks thank you thank you