 Excellent. Well, welcome everyone. On behalf of Morgan bazillion coach here of the electric power working group and me, David Victor, pleased to welcome you to this event by the standable developments solutions network connected to the release of the Z cap report to the zero carbon action plan report. The release was yesterday. It's all online. I think the video, the video tape of it or whatever the technology is that is memorized the presentation is online. The idea behind Z cap is to present a vision of how the United States could get to zero by 2050, a goal that is net zero by 2050 a goal that is consistent with widely discussed international goals and would be the American contribution to a global strategy for for helping to stop climate change. And several studies have been really are being released right now. And that's very important the Z cap project is aiming to have internal consistency by modeling what is being done across the economy or could be done across the economy. To look at what needs to happen in terms of policies and regulations to look at the impacts on employment. And, and then also to look in depth at six major sectors. One of them is electric power sector, which is the one that we're talking about today and they'll be webinars an hour long webinars on each of those sectors over the course of the coming days. If you could put the next slide please. I just one slide to show you the nature of the challenge. The power sector in the United States has already seen significant deep significant decarbonization as a result of the shift from coal to natural gas courtesy of large supplies of low cost to shale gas, along with the spread of renewables into the electric power system in the United States. And so we've seen if you like a kind of shallow decarbonization reduction in the carbon intensity the CO2 per kilowatt hour generated is shown here on this chart in the orange historically of about 20%. What's needed for deep decarbonization so getting to zero is that, and then some accelerating what we've seen historically, and then eventually getting to essentially zero and that's what we're going to be talking about today. So through each of the major elements of the vision that we've laid out here, which is designed to complement the modeling work really give a lot of granularity as to which technologies what are the uncertainties, what are the kinds of policies that could matter. I want to hand the floor over to my co convener, Morgan bazillion is going to say a few introductory remarks and then we're going to go off and first talk about the decarbonization supply Morgan. David thanks very much. And I just like to thank the UN SDSN team for for a job really well done pulling this all together and congratulate them on the wider report that came out as David said, we're going to focus today's hour on the power sector, and we have some terrific people speaking about four different sections so we're going to have a closer look at the decarbonization of supply. Then look at demand for electricity, followed by evolution and grid typology, and then finally before q amp a session will have a session on policy and markets. In order to move quickly through this agenda I'd like to introduce Jacqueline Dowling, and she is going to discuss the decarbonization supply and Jackie the floor is yours. Thanks very much. So I'm Jackie Dowling I'm a PhD student at Caltech. And this section of the document was had contribute contributions from Jeff Logan and Brian to Rocha. And we'll be talking about decarbonizing decarbonization of supply. So several states have mandated 100% carbon free electricity systems by mid century already. And these carbon 100% carbon free standards or goals or mandates. These are mandates for these eight states besides Nevada. And there are 13 other states that are consuming considering analogous standards or goals. And these carbon free mandates many states have capacity requirements for technology such as wind and solar, which are renewable California for example, has a 100% clean electricity goal by 2045 but has a requirement to have 60% of the electricity supply by renewables by 2030. So, different states some states have 100% renewable targets, and some states have 100% clean targets and those have different implications on what technologies would be allowed to meet these targets. Next slide, please. So what I mean by, so generation technology options in the electricity sector can be grouped by policy definition. Some, as I showed in the image before, there's this kind of renewable definition that's defined by states renewable portfolio standards, but then some states or some technologies fall into this kind of clean category, that can be agreed to net net zero carbon electricity targets in some states. And so renewable primarily means wind and solar but it also includes geothermal small hydro and then clean, clean hydrogen and trash gas. This includes more like nuclear hydro, possibly natural gas with CCS this is being debated about whether or not that can be included. But these are technologies that are clean but haven't, but aren't explicitly renewable. So next slide please. So it's important to know that one, no one size fits all clean electricity technology is available for all 50 states. Different states have access to different resources so this map is from EIA and I've layered all some of the power plants that would count as clean. And so in the Northwest there's a lot of hydro Southwest there's a lot of solar in the Midwest. There's a lot of wind and so this would make helps make sense why some states have 100% clean targets versus renewable targets. Washington for example already has 70 already meet 70% of its electricity demand with hydro so it has a 100% clean goal by mid century for example. Next slide. And also group generation technology by their by the functional role that they play on the grid. So variable renewables include wind and solar, and these types of generation sources are intermittent and you can't control when you have them it's based on weather. So this firm and dispatchable are can provide bulk load and you can have them kind of you can control when you, when you will use them. And those include nuclear hydro geothermal. These are kind of like can provide bulk power. The third category is capture carbon capture and that includes carbon capture utilization and storage bio energy carbon capture and storage, where you're using but you're using carbon for fuel but also sequestering. So, next slide. So then we've in the section we've basically categorize these three, we've taken these three functional roles variable renewable energy dispatchable and capture and given them basically technology readiness levels or how they compare and shown how they compare and costs so variable renewable energy is currently low costs and are protected projected to be even lower in 2050 they have. They have fixed costs but they have very low or or no variable costs there's no fuel costs with women solar. Nuclear or some of the dispatchable have higher upfront costs can be very high upfront costs, but they also have long lifetimes and relatively inexpensive fuel costs but they also can have ecosystem conflicts and citing concerns. So, and then the carbon capture is also kind of a less mature or is a less mature area of current high costs right now. And you can read the section for more detail I don't have time to go all the way in. But, okay, next slide. Variable renewable electricity resources are very are low cost and mature technologies. We would recommend that states build wind and solar dominant systems but they also have to deal with the variability that wind and solar have and wind shows that basically they're over a 39 year data set from a NASA weather model. We see some problems with wind and solar that includes seasonal lows and wind power during the summer and wind and solar resource droughts that last five days in the US and also inter-annual variability where on the same day of the year you could have much more or much less wind power. So next slide. So wind and solar alone are only about 80% reliable. It is about, it is current understanding shows that it's feasible to get to about 80% reliability with just wind and solar. But you need other enabling technologies to make wind and solar systems fully reliable, because the North American reliability electric electric reliability corporation requires greater than 99.97% reliability which is less than a black out less than one black out day in a decade that you have to have resource adequacy standards for to build for. So next slide. So some of these enabling technologies include storage, flexible loads that can include vehicle to grid, smart buildings, or flexible fuel production, which will be kind of talked about more in the next section on demand or transmission expansion. It's important to note that storage comes in two types, long duration storage options and short duration storage options, which include batteries, whereas long duration storage includes things like hydrogen fuel stored underground, hydrogen, power to gas power, pump, hydro, electricity and compressed air, and that batteries alone, currently the Amion batteries are not cost effective for seasonal storage and would have to come down a few orders of magnitude and costs in order to be used for seasonal storage. Currently so, although there are on, there is 150 hour duration battery being built in Minnesota by form energy. Currently the Amion batteries are not cost effective for seasonal storage. Okay, so next slide. So basically, in order to make reliable wind and solar based electricity systems more affordable. One option is to add long duration energy storage like I talked about to reduce the cost of wind solar battery systems, or to add firm slash dispatchable generation. So if you go to the next slide. This long duration energy storage includes things that I mentioned before pump, hydro, air or hydrogen underground, and then firm dispatchable generation includes those kind of clean, clean technologies I mentioned before. Those would be our recommendations for states trying to meet renewable or clean targets. They should add long duration energy storage or firm slash dispatchable generation in order to make wind and solar based electricity systems reliable and affordable. Thank you. Excellent. Thank you very much Jackie. So the next segment we're going to talk about the demand for electricity and this is the part of our larger team that led this includes Megan matter from Stanford, Chris Castro from from Florida, me and Morgan and Megan and Chris are both tied up with other very current activities and so Morgan and I have been deputized to talk about about this topic and I just to give you a macro perspective here. I think one of the key messages out of Jackie's presentation is that there are a lot of options on the supply side, including options that are very high technological ready list levels either now or could in the in the approximate future. It looks highly likely that that future is going to be heavily renewable is plus a variety of investments to help firm as renewable long duration storage as her own work has focused on an excellent ways, and then also clean firm power which is really emerging from a lot of modeling community a lot of modeling work is very very important and absent that the supply is going to be probably the very low load factor. So that's the kind of picture on the supply side where all else equally should expect a lot of variability and supply. That says very important things about the, about the demand picture, because it tells us we need to pay attention not only to demand overall, but it also means we have to pay a very high attention to the shape of the demand curve and the potential responsiveness in that shape of the demand curve. So what we're going to do is over the next three slides is talk a little bit about that I'm going to say a few words about this and then I'm going to give the floor back to Morgan for additional questions on the demand side but if we go to the next slide please. First I think maybe most important point to make is that over the last century sent a lot more than a century, the American economy like all modern industrial economies has autonomously electrified. And from essentially 0% of primary energy converted into electricity before final consumption to a quarter or so of primary energy that's converted into electricity before final consumption. And then that's flattened a bit recently, but one of the clear implications of deep decarbonization is that there's going to be additional electrification, more loads are going to be electrified. And that's going to be conspicuous in buildings, including with the role of very important roles for heat pumps and a variety of other technologies that will be true in light duty transportation that's already evident, particularly evident here in California where we're going to go to essentially 100% all new vehicle sales soon will be all electric and infrastructure to support that. And that's going to generate additional demand for for primary energy consumed as via electricity as the energy carrier that may be the root for for heavy, heavier transportation for freight and so on. Probably not the root for aircraft in the immediate future but there might be other energy carriers like hydrogen for aircraft, hydrogen for some industrial processes, and also potentially a lot of industrial processes including perhaps things like steel production that go to electricity as well. The key point here on this slide is, over time the economy has autonomously electrified, and we may well see a doubling or tripling of that electrification over the with the same pace of deep decarbonization across the economy, overall. Next slide please. One of the things we spent some time on the report is looking at the question of which demands could be variable and could be shifted around in bulk or in response to market conditions. It's very hard to see how you go to an even more pervasive electrification and a more variable supply and electric on the variable electric supply without also having more responsiveness on the demand side and a lot of questions of human behavioral questions about how responsive it's going to be to price incentives and so on, especially as you move outside the commercial sector where you've got large loads run by professionals very attentive to market conditions to, to people at home who are busy doing other things like raising the kids and not paying on a second by second basis to the larger market conditions of the grid. But there's been all kinds of innovation to aggregate loads to make a load to make it possible for those to be much more responsive and so on and one of the great promises as we electrify the vehicle fleet is going to be a shifting load at different times of different times of the day so this happens to be an illustration from the system we have here at UC San Diego, we run I believe by charge points measurements, the largest charging network by volume is an open network in the United States. And this is an image taken just before the pandemic set in, showing a typical week so each colored line is a different day of the week, the blue and yellow lines in the bottom are weekend and the other lines are during the day and what you see in our load profile is that people show up at work, they plug in at about 730 or 8 o'clock in the morning, and they charge for two to four hours and then it tapers off very quickly. And that's in part because of our parking rules which don't let you stay in a spot, more than four hours, and mainly because of convenience because people show up at the office in the morning they plug in and they want to go do what they do during the day. This is a problem for our grid as we become more dependent on solar with a peak of later in the day and so we're now actively looking at a lot of measures to create incentives to have people shift their load they're charging later in the day and so on. This is in one example of a whole class of things that will be necessary as we make demand more responsive to a grid supply system that is itself also more, more variable. Next slide please. This is a summary of work done comparing energy efficiency, measuring the broadest in the broadest sense energy intensity of whole economies. What we've seen historically since the 1980s through the 2010, which is a relatively modest kind of 1% per year improvement in primary energy intensity and acceleration since the year, since the year 2010, which is pretty interesting and and a lot of debate as to why that is high energy prices in parts of the world played a role. A lot of active investment by governments, including directly as a result of the stimulus packages in the last economic crisis where depending on how you measure 10 to 15% of those stimulus packages including here in the United States where our stimulus packages economic stimulus packages right now have essentially no spending around clean energy but they might come January, February. So we've seen a big increase that has helped slow the growth of a primary energy demand and electricity has played a big role in that, not fast enough, even to meet the IEA is two degree or scenarios that are consistent with two degrees and so part of what we do in the report is document a lot of areas where energy efficiency could play a much bigger role in particular energy efficiency throughout the electric power system because frankly the more efficient you make the consumption of electricity not just the supply of electricity but also the consumption of electricity that the greater you reduce the needed primary energy supply. So, I want to just pause for a moment and give the floor back to Morgan bazillion for any further comments about the demand side before we go on to the next section which will be evolution of great topology. Morgan. David thanks very much. I guess just to support a couple of the things you said there very quickly before we move on. There has been a focus on energy efficiency for many decades, and it still has not taken the place as a primary focus of policy or even technological advances in the energy system. But hopefully those things are changing with the advent of deeper electrification decarbonization as a key driver. Energy efficiency is a first fuel has been called out by almost all energy models and systems from the IEA to others for a long time. The issues of digitalization and demand flexibility as David said are critical to to its peace in the power sector. And keeping in mind that it's complicated so it's not the same in all sectors, and that it has issues related to behavioral behavior on socio economics that call for specific policies and measures to address it. So with that, I just jump in because it looks like Chris Castro is on the line here as well who was one of the co-authors of the section so I want to just quickly give the floor to Chris in case you have comments about the demand. David, I think he's out there. Thank you, David and Morgan. Yeah, I'm in and out of some important efforts here at the city of Orlando with with our mayor regarding our energy systems so exciting things happening. The one thing I would add is, you know, obviously, there is an amazing opportunity for us to to reinvest in the built environment and drive more energy efficiency as Morgan was alluding to. We have a pretty inefficient system across, you know, across the board, you know, from not just generation but the transmission distribution all the way down to the site. And when you start to look at the amount of jobs that we have in this field, I think a report came out showing over 3.3 million jobs now in the clean energy space. And many of those still in trying to figure out how to reduce the demand. So, for the most part, you know, we see energy efficiency as a significant economic driver, and one that's going to be critical for us to ensure that we achieve the deep decarbonization strategies. Chris, thanks very much and thanks for all your efforts on behalf of the report and the great work you're doing down in Florida. So, I'd like to just keep moving on around a tight schedule and turn the floor over to my friends Emory Genser from MIT and Dan Kamen from Berkeley. The floor is yours on evolution in grid typology. Just trying to start the video which looks like maybe you need to authorize from your side. So, until the host starts let me just thank both Emory and also Payment as well. It's it's really a pleasure to work with with this team. If you can get and start the video there that'd be great, but maybe not working so let me just move to the next slide please. Okay, so, so, as you heard and we can hear you loud and clear and I know it's just the videos looks like it's stopped so that's fine. So, just as you heard before prices for renewables are falling dramatically and when we think about the grid. There are two very exciting dramatic areas one is this graph just illustrates the systemic change with the coal sector plunging and the renewables rising and obviously what takes place in in gas and something we'll talk about a little bit of the go forward. So thinking about enabling large scale clean energy both for stationary power and for the vehicle issues you mentioned before, it does suggest two very important structural changes are both needed and also opportunities and so the next slide. So let me just highlight as we think about new projects that will go in anywhere in the country. And this is essentially the geographic version of what you saw before. So if we think about projects with their overnight cost with no cost of carbon at all. So if you try to map across the country if you just advance the slide you'll see the color coding that highlights the rust colored areas are where natural gas is today the cheapest form of energy. There's a small pocket where nuclear is the least cost. This is the University of Texas calculator you can all utilize. They actually do some interesting work on how they think about the, the waste management costs but really want to draw your attention to the large swaths of green. Where wind power is the least cost middle of the country Appalachia and New York State, and then the mob or purple where solar is the least cost both southwest and some other areas. And of course, this is the world this is the national map. It varies state by state we of course do have carbon prices in the New England, the Reggie region, as well in California and we advanced to that next slide, where we hit the California price if that was applied nationwide. And really the big change is that solar has advanced dramatically kind of be co equal with wind along the lines of Jackie said and gas is being relegated. More and more to smaller and smaller parts of the country and I say this and highlight it. As we think about the demands for the grid, not so much to make an argument for carbon pricing in fact if you just advanced the next slide. I'm specifically not making an argument for carbon pricing I'm really illustrating that many regional policies already have constraints on local air pollution, particulars water pollution and so in many ways, a carbon price is a proxy for a variety of other of other issues. What it does really speak to for the grid are two things one is there are regional advantages for different technologies to play larger roles in different parts of the country and that's going to highlight a need for some thinking about grid integration between region something that our report brings out pretty clearly, and also the last point that I'll come to and that's really about smart system so if we move to the next slide. Now is a whole series of reports which we review in this one that highlight the advantages of power trading and transfers between RTOs the regional power organizations, and some of the real needs and opportunities to shuttle power within our regions, the, the my so the upper Midwest, East Coast regions Texas or caught in the West. And what you find more and more is that the benefits of investing in larger amounts of renewables with higher amounts of reliability really do come by having a grid that enables these power transfers and that's everything from meeting the demand to being able to move power in and out of some of our large demand regions on the Atlantic coast, some of the big central cities, Chicago and others and then along the West Coast. And this is very important to think about because transmission projects are some of the slowest and hardest to build consortium put together due to the long construction times and so there's really exciting and important work to be done that between regional carbon plans such as in the states that have already adopted 100% targets as you heard before from Jackie. But also in the opportunities to now think very differently as we integrated new forms of renewables and that's everything from building out more solar and wind in areas where the resources great and then transmitting power to areas where the demand is great to make a good new opportunities and perhaps a rise of geothermal and certainly the plans underway for offshore wind highlight new grid demands in fact in the West Coast United States. California which has a peak demand of around 45 gigawatts is actually talking about plans now to build upwards of 10 gigawatts over the next decade. And that really highlights the need for the work at the state level with the public utilities commissions and in particular that of the FERC, so that we can enable these clean energy transfers to be both good business models, and both good opportunities for coordination within the community that really speaks to some very dramatic and very exciting opportunities that this report highlights at very high technological readiness levels over this coming decade. That's really on the physical grid side where we think about moving power around and taking advantage of some of the existing lines that formerly moved primarily coal or large hydro power. In the next slide I'll show really highlights the other part of that transformation and that is as much as we will need investments and acceleration of grid topography changes to bring some of the areas of exceptionally low cost renewables, parts of the West Coast have prices well under two cents and amazingly now even under one cent per kilowatt hour. If one takes advantage some of those, those opportunities to really what many of us predict will be the big new innovation for the decade and that is to really think about a smart, integrated grid of grids or an internet of things as is the language in some parts of the story and that is to enable everything from large producers to integrate with either geographically nearby or not so nearby energy to thinking about businesses and homes as not producers only or consumers only but prosumers integrated producers and consumers so that almost everyone can be thinking about the grid as not only a clean energy resource, but an income generation and that's not just for big companies and affluent homeowners. It's really an opportunity to invest in social equity and environmental justice and so the degree to which this transformation of the US power grid to one that is clean and more reliable and we definitely think about more reliability in California where we're still dealing with blackouts, but this report highlights the degree to which we can think about this as an industrial transformation tool, but one that is co equal on social justice and equity as clean energy and I think that if anything comes out of this section it's really that opportunity is tremendous and this report goes into a lot of the details of these smart enable grid of grids and let me pass it back to David but to thank you all for being on this kind of moment of transition. Excellent thank you very much Dan, and I just want to emphasize right where you ended there which is, this is an enormous potential and transformation electric power sector the sector that already is making, frankly the most progress in terms of decorbonization. Yet one of the big challenges here is that the policy is diffused there are 3300 enterprises responsible for the electric power system in the United States. There are much of it is regulated state level some of it's regulated at the federal level Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, some of it's affected by investment policies are D&D policies. And so, any kind of policy strategy is intrinsically kind of chaotic if you like and decentralized. I'm going to Wagner and Brian Tara led the section on policy and Brian is with us today is going to talk about some of the key messages from that, and then we will make sure that 15 minutes past the hour no later that we allow for some questions and so those of you who have questions there have been some coming in already. Please put them into the chat box, and we will get as many answers as possible Brian the floor is yours. Hi everyone thank you for sitting around and I'm glad to wrap up this section of the power webinar by talking about steering the process and the roles of policies and markets. So next slide please. So, the first thing I wanted to say is that there's a lot of different policy instruments that are available for you know helping us progress towards full decarbonization of the electric power supply. There's a robust a robust set of debates and discussions ago that are going on about the effectiveness of these different policy instruments, their pros and cons. And we take the standpoint that there are different instruments that exist, but none are individually sufficient for meeting the carbonization goals. And that's because the effectiveness of a given policy instrument will depend on your theory of change. So we're not going to, in this session recommend preferred policy instruments or compare policy instruments against each other. Rather what we set out to do is to identify key considerations for the development of a suite of policies for decarbonizing the power supply that put us along a no regrets pathway. For you who are unfamiliar with that terminology, a no regrets pathway means that even if all the policies don't work exactly as fully as intended that we still have a high probability of meeting our goal of full power decarbonization while avoiding unintended consequences. So next slide please. So when you evaluate a policy instrument, we identify three dimensions. The first is the environmental effectiveness and this is really what it means at the end of the day, how much does a given policy instrument when implemented progress us in absolute terms towards full decarbonization of the power supply. Right. That's this decarbonization so that's naturally very important. However, there's the second dimension of economic efficiency, where instead of looking at absolute effectiveness, economic efficiency focuses on cost effectiveness. So what's the amount of progress, however you define that toward full decarbonization that you get per unit of or per unit of economic investment that you spend on this policy for so on. Then the third dimension is political efficacy, because in order to make these policies have their intended effect, they have to gain popular and political support among the constituents and the bodies that will be voting on and right. So, any policy instrument whether it's a carbon tax or a mandate or so on and so forth involves trade offs among these dimensions. And it's important to note that where a given policy instrument falls with respect to these dimensions can change and will change over time. So next slide please. So, three categories of policy instruments that we identified. First is direct regulation and you see these in the forms of mandates and standards so a good example is the renewable portfolio standards that have been implemented in different parts of the state, or clean energy standard which is something that people are discussing. The second class is market instruments where instead of mandating from the top down market instruments aim to provide price incentives and interventions and structure of markets to move the market preferred composition of technologies to be comprised more and more of decarbonizing technologies. And the third class we identify as technological interventions. Now this involves director indirect subsidies or industrial policies and technological interventions differ from the first two classes. In the sense that technological interventions are focused on promoting the deployment of specific technologies that the policy designer feels is going to be a major part of the decarbonization effort. So an example of this would be production tax credits say for wind and solar technologies. Next slide please. So, we are going to talk about three focus areas that the suite of policies whatever it ends up being has to consider and a couple of other points that are important as well in order to that we feel will put us on a no regrets pathway towards decarbonization. And the first focus area is the suite of policies has to promote investment to better enable the electricity system to integrate decarbonizing technologies. And where this comes from is the fact that our, you know, economic market and also regulatory frameworks for how the electricity system operates and how it absorbs and integrates new technologies has been based on the characteristics and business models of incumbent technologies. A good example of this is how electricity markets are based on compensating generators for their marginal cost of electricity right. But in the future if you have a large amount of your system comprised of zero marginal cost resources like wind and solar that structure doesn't really work quite as well so that needs to change. So, a question that needs to be answered is how to repurpose or restructure the classic rate of return regulations and struck and market structures to better enable progress towards the carbonization goals. Next question please, or next slide sorry. Second consideration is that policies need to incentivize the adoption of existing decarbonization technologies and practices. And I'll focus on new technologies and I'll get to that in a bit, but there's a lot of technologies that are out there commercially ready and really need to get put into the ground at large scale to ramp up our decarbonization effort. And these are things that we are able to do today and policies need to promote that. So examples could be emissions pricing to affect dispatch or subsidies for technologies that are commercially available or you know shovel ready so to speak. Next slide please. My focus area is that in parallel to the deployment of current technologies policies also need to incentivize fundamental innovation and adoption of new technologies to support momentum for deep decarbonization in the long term. So there's a lot of studies that talk about with current of currently available technologies we can get very very far towards full decarbonization of the power supply, and you know potentially beyond into other sectors, but not quite to 100% and talking about decarbonizing other sectors by connecting with electricity. There needs to be a bit more innovation and new technologies or the technologies need to come down and cost in order to carry out that follow through to full decarbonization. So policies that incentivize fundamental innovation and adoption of these new technologies allow these technologies to drive down their costs and learn how to improve themselves by doing so that they will be ready for implementation by the point that we need them in our future decarbonization journey. Next slide please. Another important point is the role of co benefits. It's important that policies provide benefits that speak to a wider base of people, rather than, instead of just people whose primary concern is climate, right. So these are things like air quality benefits water supply benefits, economic, near term economic benefits policies that have this wider base of appeal will gain more political and popular support then policies that only emphasize the climate angle, right. So it's also important that these co benefits center and providing tangible benefits for demographics that have been disproportionately burdened by the environmental impacts of the current electricity system. So next slide please. So the point is that in order for this momentum for deep decarbonization to be consistent and to follow through all the way public sector rdnd spending needs to increase historical spending has largely been flat. And if we want that if we want deep decarbonization to become a reality. This is going to have to ramp up now over time what that gets spent on may change. There needs to be a base of public sector rdnd spending in order to ensure that this momentum carries through to full decarbonization. Next slide please. So the bottom line is, in order to develop a no regrets pathway there's a lot of considerations that the suite of policies we end up implementing has to take into account. And this these include things that have a wide appeal, a wide benefit that are politically advocate and actually make good progress toward decarbonization. And make sure that these policies avoid lock ins that can derail our pathway towards full decarbonization. So at the end of the day we need to know it gets pathway and you know there's a lot of discussion about what that will look like, but these are things to consider. So thank you. Thank you very much Brian so we're we are a well-oiled machine. We are right on schedule and that means we have time for some questions and I'm going to put the first question it's in the chat box from side I'll watch, I'll watch or I'm going to put it to Emre Genser from MIT. And I'm curious Emre if you could say a few words in particular about the role of carbon capture and storage the value of carbon capture and storage. I think we've been talking a lot about that for a long time when you look in the real world, not a lot of projects, the role for this and natural gas in particular could be very high. Yet, we see, you know, not a lot of projects. So I'm, how should we think about the role of CCS the pivotal nature or not of CCS as we try to integrate more renewables on the grid and decarbonize the grid overall. I think the audience, by the way, can turn on their video so that we have a full splendor of Hollywood squares here. Emre, the floor is yours. Absolutely, I think this is a great question and so I think we should think about carbon capture, more than for just power sector so carbon capture is really an important instrument for decarbonizing the hard to electrify sectors like industry and other applications. But even for power plants, we shouldn't only think about you, America and US for the power system so for developing countries, where there is a huge new fleet of coal power plants as well as natural gas power plants, the only way to decarbonize power system will be carbon capture for the next decade or so. And even in the US carbon capture can help continue using the existing assets and prevent some early retirement so I really believe that there's a place for carbon capture and we shouldn't ignore when we are moving towards a decarbonize energy system. Excellent. Thank you very much. So and by the way, when I asked the next question we're going to do some shameless promotion we're going to put up a slide for the next webinars that follow ours just so you can have a sense of the landscape is so so and they're all very American a lot of flags. The next one is on transportation tomorrow, but I'm questioning the chat box here from from David Lee. David very nice to see you and see you at least electronically and I want to put this question maybe to Jackie seems to me that there's if I kind of interpret David's question here. I think this question is about the relationship between zero carbon power clean firm power and storage and I'm curious Jackie as to how we should think about the relative value of the two because you emphasize in your remarks the value of storage seems to me that other people are particularly underscoring the value of clean firm power and saying you know kind of storage really can't do it all because you have these multi day periods when, when we have renewables droughts. How should we think about that question and then if other panelists want to comment on this because it's a very important topic just raise your hand, figuratively or electronically and I'll bring in a little conversation on this topic before we go to the next question. I want to give the 40 you Jackie. Yeah, so I think again just recapping that there's really two kinds of storage functional roles a short duration storage and long duration storage and that it's the short duration storage that can't meet these large gaps but that long duration storage can. But the firm or clean generators such as hydro nuclear, those have been shown to in literature to decrease the cost of electric systems but a lot of them have various other constraints such as like high cost or or ecosystem problems like with hydro or things like nuclear where it's there's a lot of time and money going into building them. And so I think it kind of depends on what the state's goal is I guess if they're going for 100% renewable. They could supplement wind and solar electricity systems with long duration storage and that would reduce costs but if they're going for 100% clean, then they should supplement with hydro or nuclear or geothermal as they have access to those long duration storage and these firm generators have certain geographic requirements and so it's going to be different for different states and so the states should really look at what they have access to in their area and then make decisions about what they'll use to supplement the wind and solar so basically you need something to supplement wind and solar electricity systems and it's going to be different for different states what they will use to supplement wind and solar but just batteries is not enough to make it affordable so you need something else to. Thank you very much and I've been working with a local organization here on a big pumped hydro project and it's interesting because the value proposition is very clear and yet just putting the deal together and getting the regulatory support and so on that stuff is very, very hard to do indeed. So I'm going to go in just a moment to Morgan and ask him to help us get very practical about what we do over the next 123 years to put Z cap into practice but I just want to draw out underscore something that Brian said in his remarks. Which is that in effect we're doing what we're talking about across the economy but especially electric power sectors to moving to an even more capital intensive is one of the most capital intensive sectors the economy, even more capital intensive away from operating costs. And in that world, getting the policy environment right and stable is unbelievably important because it affects the cost of capital and the risks associated with that and I think we're going to see a big and when we turn to the kind of brass you can see a big emphasis on that. We're also going to see a big emphasis in our D&D, you know, depending on which estimates you look at, we might be underfunding by factor three maybe more than a factor of three are D&D and so I think you're going to see with the new stimulus package if there's a lot of emphasis on energy and awful lot of attention as there was in 2009 to to our D&D issues. I want to put the question to you Morgan, maybe you could say a little bit about. Okay, so everyone believes us. What do you do over the next 123 years to start to turn some of these ideas into into into reality. Thanks, David. I'll keep it very brief for a rather expansive question but in this chapter we focused on the power sector. It took roughly a technocratic view of it which is very common in these kind of exercises, and looked at things like specific policies, regulations like clean energy standards or mechanisms like supporting our D&D, to electrification and addressing the defragmentation and the power sector you described. I'd also just like to highlight that other chapters in the report looked at what I think are perhaps the more important issues, and you just referenced one of them and social license to operate, which are the socio-economic aspects of this socio-technical system we're concerned about. And so issues of equity and just transitions and social license to operate are going to be absolutely fundamental to making any positive change in the short term or the long term over this. Like I said, there is a chapter focused on jobs in this report and some others that touch on those subjects. Dan just ran a session on this earlier today that I was part of but those are some of the key aspects I think of making this a viable in the short term. So I want to pick up on the jobs issue. I want to put a question to Dan about that and then in a little bit I'm going to lay out a different question about collaboration between companies and governments and so I'm trying to get Chris Castro in on that. I'm going to go to you Dan. This question in the chat box from Grant Gosnell about jobs and in particular picking up on the issue that you raised about allocation of jobs, diversity in jobs and so on, to put it bluntly seems like a lot of the jobs we're talking about here are jobs for white men. And I'm just curious as to what we know about the diversity in jobs, whether whether and how we need to be more attentive to that if a big part of this play is going to be not just kind of decarbonization but a variety of co benefits, including on the employment front. Yeah, I think this is a critical question and the old stock answer has been for many years. There's more jobs in energy efficiency and clean energy than dirty energy, but they're not accurately distributed. And we've seen in reports that many groups have done, including mine, that even when you think you kind of have a better approach, we're going to try to promote solar at the community level that frequently those jobs go to pre existing, often white run environmental companies and so the next stage of this is really going to have to link efforts at the local level, really promoting local groups but also with a big hand up in terms of federal agencies at the FERC at EPA at HUD and elsewhere to look at how do you essentially see these companies adequately so that the benefits really do fall, not just to the end users but to building companies and activities in location. We've got some really interesting examples Michigan, for example, has a very very successful program in place. It's been a real nice push for clean energy it's called Michigan saves, and it's one that's invested in minority owned companies really putting the benefits where they are. And I think one piece is also to recognize the lessons that were that were really came out of the clean power plan in the Obama administration and that's not a roadmap to what to do in the future, but clean power plan essentially said that states are going to compete against themselves to get cleaner not to compete against other states, and that there need to be equal investment in job training programs and efforts to move people from for example oil and gas into also geothermal and hydrogen and areas where the expertise really folds over. Those are efforts to really make these programs much more equitable not just along racial grounds, but also around red state blue state to make this much more of a national jobs program and since we know the jobs are there. The next task will be to make them equally distributed and it's something that can be done but it's going to take some thoughtful coordination between local and federal actions. So thank you very much time for one or two more questions I want to put the next one from Adam Fuller to Chris Castro. So Adam's question is about this observation that that there's a lot, a big role in the transportation sector big role in the power sector and there's more collaboration or potential collaboration across the two, but I was really I think pointing to a larger issue which is what are the kinds of corporate partnerships or government corporate partnerships. I think that that you see being on the front lines in a city that's tackling these issues that you see as of paramount importance. Well, you know, first of all I'll say that cities are going to be a major catalyst for implementation of this plan, right we're seeing that with things like the urban sustainability directors network C 40 cities and the like, and little by little we're starting to create policies and programs that are driving forward action in efficiency on the building side, decarbonization and renewables, primarily rooftop solar and many of our cities, and now getting into storage and then electric vehicles and electrification. In terms of partnerships, we have really built a network, at least in Orlando on connecting with not only transit and our utility but also the airports, academia and the business community to begin driving forward kind of a culture of needing to address this in a meaningful way. And I think if we're not creating those pathways for partnerships, it's difficult. You know just recently, a couple of weeks ago our utility just came out with some news about our decarbonization plants officially committing to net zero by 2050 with intermittent pathways of 50% by 2030 and 75 by 2040. And also early retiring to coal fired power plants, probably at least 20 to 30 years before they could have been. And I think we're beginning to see that the policy drivers that we have imposed by committing to 100% renewables at the city side, and working with our hometown utility to work through the modeling the actual integrated resources plan to identify, you know, the technical challenges that we get there has driven some really interesting, you know, partnerships and, and learnings from that. We're also about to tomorrow unveil our first round of electric buses coming into our downtown BRT. And it's the first of 14 which will complete our, you know, our downtown transit but we have a goal of, you know, 100% electric and alternative fuel for the public transit. The utility work we're now, you know, using on bill financing to subsidize the upfront cost for the infrastructure on the utility side, and then, you know, have working together to share the cost for the buses and the operations of this service for people who come and visit and work and learning in our city. So, there are some important partnerships with academia with utility with all the stacks of government that you can imagine that Florida is in one of those states that are looked at upon as as a leader in clean energy, quite frankly. But because of the partnerships locally, we've been able to really excel and create a model for many others and there are so many cities around this country that are truly driving and accelerating the clean energy economy and this decarbonization plan. Another chapter in this sub in this plan also touches upon those policies and encourage everybody to check those out. And thank you very much and team at Brookings put a study out last week showing that half the cities now are quite doing quite a lot, you know, kind of very we need to learn better. Which of these policies are working and not it's a question the chat box about which countries have the cleanest grids. Some of them have the cleanest grids, not for carbon reasons just kind of accidental reasons, especially countries with big hydro systems. So, for example, countries, Swiss grids very clean mainly I dress on nuclear, but I think experience you're having la has had a bunch of other places had where you're closing conventional coal plants. These are the places that are now actually demonstrating the most impact numerically because of the baseline and active effective policy. I want to give the floor to close your we're out of time and so we saw a few questions we answered many of them. I want to do a little shameless promotion on the way out with that slide back up about our upcoming webinars and we give the floor to Morgan bazillion to say a final couple words on behalf of our team Morgan. David thank you very much. So it's done to me just to thank everyone who joined us today, thank all of the authors and co authors and the report. David for your leadership. I'd also like to mention Cheyenne Maddox and Elena Creech who have been tired tirelessly working to make sure this all comes together, as well as the leadership and vision of Jeff sacks and Dan SD and others at the board of this project. I believe the slides for this will be public and there are numerous resources that you can find on the sds and USA.org website. And thank you again for joining us and hope you enjoyed the presentation and take a close look at the material. Thank you. Have a nice day.