 Thank you very much, and I can already say good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Now, I'm absolutely thrilled that at a conference where we're talking about essentially electrification, the theme of indirectly cities, but certainly space, and the built environment has already been quite central. And what I'm going to do over the next 20 minutes is to really stick to that message as we move towards mobility and movement, and just re-emphasize that we cannot talk about this issue without a deep understanding of the environments we are creating that induce us to travel. So formally, I was asked to give you a presentation on sustainable urban infrastructure, and I will specifically, of course, focus on the theme of transport and accessibility, and that's a term I will also unpack a bit further. What I will go through is, in sequence, an overview on the role and importance of urban transport infrastructure, and making a direct link to cities more generally. We then very briefly need to roast the argument around unsustainable urban mobility as we are seeing it today. That's the reason why we are all motivated to change things. To then also go to the optimism of previous speakers to talk about better accessibility and the opportunities we have, and to finally dwell on the role of electrification as part of this. Now, before going there, I think it's important to make a general comparison of a couple of very fundamental, in fact, four fundamental ideals around our infrastructure policy, developmental ideas, and then also the city. There is, of course, the idea of universal access to infrastructure, and the services that go with them, and that has been driving a lot of policy in many countries around the world. If you unpack it slightly, this is an ideal which can be slightly anti-urban, because it requires us to spread the goods often, also the wealth generated in city across the entire territory. By contrast, the second paradigm is hyper-urban. It's really trying to argue, let's invest where we get the biggest returns, where we get the economic benefits immediately, so connecting competitive space where the efficiency of the infrastructure rollout is granted is sort of a competing ideal. The third one is what we are ultimately talking about today. Infrastructure development as a tool for ecological modernization, and to foster a green economy and as I will tell you later on in that context, thinking about cities, good cities, is absolutely central, and most recently, and maybe still by far the smallest idea around these ideals, we are seeing renewed interest in this idea of new self-sufficiency, off-grid, small-scale solutions, infrastructures that are no longer necessarily connected to the grid. I will not really go into that detail, but it's important to have that in the back of our minds. All right, let's move to transport infrastructure more specifically, and I will immediately open this up after a first quite, I guess, typical interpretation with some visuals here. What comes to mind if we think of urban transport infrastructure? By far the most important thing is the street, this defining principle of urban, of urbanity, and something that makes cities. And then of course the good bridges and tunnels and tracks and highways, all this hardware is of course something which we immediately associate with transport infrastructure. Now some would argue that the digital layer we are now putting on top of all of this is also part of a transport infrastructure, a virtual transport infrastructure that also enables, increasingly, enables the physical mobility underneath. But I want to go one step back and argue that we have to first, before we go into these very specific bits and pieces of infrastructure, really reconsider what it is we're trying to achieve here. And this quote from the Harvard economist at Glazer is a bit sort of trying to make things too simple, but it is helpful to remind us that transport and urban development have a very particular relationship. Cities exist to eliminate transport costs for people, goods and ideas. And in that sense the city itself is a transport solution as I will argue the city itself is a mobility infrastructure. And if we look back historically we detect how transport technologies and yes the city development itself produces this overall good we all desire, which is accessibility to reach each other. This is Victorian London. The technology which enabled the terrace houses in the forefront is in the background. It's the steam train that for the first time allowed the metropolitan region to extend into its hinterland far beyond what a horse drawn carriage or what we could do by foot would be possible. This is the turn of the last century with the introduction of the electric city, the first electric city. This is the scene from New York City of Broadway with an enormous intensity of movement and of course electric street cars for the first time a clean motorized form of urban transport. And of course at the same time also the new opportunity of verticalizing the city with elevators which also used electricity. Zoom a bit forward, post-war, another big revolution in systems, in industry and of course in infrastructures created an entirely new proposition for what cities could be. Some would argue these are no longer cities, these are metropolitan agglomerations. We are of course talking of the introduction of the motor car, the highway systems and very dispersed low density often solely residential development. What we're seeing today is interesting in so far as we are no longer in this linearity of adding new innovations and then simply entirely embracing one dimension of the many I have shown you. But as I speak we are seeing cities and indeed different parts of the same city develop according to one or the other big developmental accessibility paradigms. This is the periphery of Mexico City, very movement intense, very low density. You're not going to get anywhere without motorized personal transport and often with enormous distances in travel. Two or three hours commute in one direction is indeed typical here. The polar opposite and these are indeed extremes as Hong Kong where you have an enormous concentration of both living and working. The average distance to your destination is typically 10 minutes to your work, it's 15 minutes. So people are trading off here the enormous compaction of the city with fantastic access and opportunities. As I said these are two extremes and often we see sort of varieties and combinations of the two being rolled out in our cities today. The quint essential message is transport infrastructure thought about in isolation doesn't do the trick. So what this simple diagram does it reminds us that if we want to produce good accessibility in cities it's the coming together of the transport thinking with the co-location thinking the spatial distribution of function and then of course the affordability function and in the past unfortunately too often we have thought about delivering the goods of transport access that is only by being in the top left corner and that has led to a couple of problems. So the city in conclusion is indeed the infrastructure for accessibility and we need to plan it and think about it holistically. Let's rehearse the argument why urban mobility so far is highly unsustainable and of course with this conference we need to start with the carbon equation 23% of global carbon emissions energy related these are linked to transport. That in itself is a big share it includes of course also non urban travel but the majority of these emissions take place in cities and their hinterlands. The real problem with transport carbon emission is not the absolute story but it's the growth up to 2050 according to the latest IPCC report. We are on track of doubling transport emissions and are therefore only with the world of transport are either going to make it or break it in terms of the global climate. 10 billion trips in cities around the world are taking place every single day. The unfortunate trend to date is that they are increasingly motorized and also increasingly on higher emission vehicles. So we deeply care about the carbon emissions of these individual modes what you can see here on the left side and that is an important story and in some ways that's what this conference is all about to make sure that all of these modes of transport ideally emit zero carbon. But if I look at those statistics as someone who thinks about the city and its holistic consequences also in terms of carbon we need to consider the right side the space consumption. We cannot from an urban perspective tolerate transport modes that consume more than 150 square meters per person if we travel around in highly dynamic vibrant urban environments. It's a waste of space and it's a waste of also economic efficiency. Our cities are particularly innovative and a particular product productive because they concentrate workplaces. These are the workplace densities of one of several of the world's sort of larger cities London New York and Hong Kong. Typically 150 if not even 200,000 person per square kilometer concentrated in the center. That's what the economic driver of cities is all about. It's the gossip in the street. It's not density on your trading floor or within your workplace. It's the density in aggregate terms. It includes the pub the street and all of those urban opportunities and that makes innovation going. Now if you try to enter the space with your personal car you get the traffic jam. That's well documented. We know all about it and still we're doing it again and again. And in Beijing where maybe the attempt of building infrastructure that can speak to motorization was greatest over the last 20 years. It's now acknowledged that the conventional motorization is eating into the economy something that is equivalent to up to 15% of GDP. Direct loss only related to the effects of motorization. What lies behind these figures are of course a whole range of other negative externalities of traffic. I've highlighted here a few more. The first two figures on air pollution 4.2 million related deaths or premature deaths. About half of them are urban same for traffic crashes about 1.3 million people die on our roads every year about half of them in cities. Inactivity and community severance are of course additional very specific concerns in cities. And then there is the machine itself and its infrastructure highly inefficient in its absolute use. The average American car is standing around for more than 96% of the time. The amount of energy is actually using to move a person is absolutely minimal. And even if you take the roads which we think are congested they are entirely underutilized. And if there's one story I felt was missing so far in this conference is that we also thinking about the goods we are producing can no longer afford this extent of underutilization. The embedded carbon the amount of energy we need to produce the stuff in the first place roughly about 30% of a vehicle across its lifespan is something we need to talk about more. As we electrify therefore we need to increase the utilization of these vehicles and we need to increase all use of our infrastructures. So let's move on to better accessibility and the good news is that cities have been leading this with a lot of good ideas around the world. It's almost I don't have to add the labeling here because these are images and ideas which have been talked a lot about. Not just within these individual cities where often a coalition of citizens I often mayoral leader or other civic leaders have over a short period of time really done amazing interventions. These interventions matter not just to those cities but they have been scaled in 200, 300 more than a thousand cities in many cases elsewhere. So really important the innovation that's coming out of cities here. We also detect a form of new urban mobility amongst citizens. People are asking for different ways of going about producing accessibility. The return to the city, living at high density, desiring more mixed use neighborhoods. Also wanting to walk again. Think of global tourism. It's so much focusing on inner city urban areas because people want to walk. Think of cycling and how much that has come back. And then we're moving closer to technology with sharing electric mobility and of course multimodality enabled by our mobile phones. So this is happening but policy clearly needs to advance this further. Here are sort of three fundamental transport strategies which are often referred to in the communities that avoid shift and improve paradigm. And it is a hierarchy. First really think about how much particularly in urban environment we can build cities that avoid traveling all together in the first instance. And then yes of course there are many metropolitan trips which we want, which we need. Highly desirable but let's have them in urban agreeable and low carbon modes. And only if that fails to shift the rest towards the low emission vehicles as much as possible. That requires also policy at the national level. This is a recent survey which we conducted with almost 80 transport experts from around the world. What they want to see from national governments for this to happen. Number one budget reallocation. Don't spend more money. Spend the money differently. Don't spend it on highways. Pay for public transport for cycling for walkable cities. Then built up integrated national urban and transport plans. Do road pricing. We may want to come back to this. It's absolutely essential when we move to electric driving that we are introducing road pricing. Otherwise we don't have the resources and the taxes out of fuel anymore. Metropolitan transport authorities and another important financing tool around land value capture. Absolutely critical to get the infrastructure going. Finally the role of electrification. That's why we are here. Now let's remind ourselves that we may think we are in this massively disruptive time where over a very short period a lot of things are happening. Not so. If you look back for example into the degree the American public transport systems were electrified in the late 1800s. It's within 10 years that almost 10 years that they almost 100% electrified what was before horse drawn traffic. So we're not talking about unprecedented speed. Let's also remind ourselves that modern mass rail systems in particular in cities would have been impossible without electrification. So this is where the electric city is already playing out for more than 100 years. This is an image from Berlin. The capacity, the safety, the amount of people we can move with the system impossible without electrification. What we're really talking about is the electrification of road transport. And even here it's not entirely new. The trolley bus has been around for some time. This happens to be a BRT, a bus rapid transit trolley bus in the city of Keto established not because of carbon emission concerns, but because of local air pollution concerns. We are really talking about getting rid of wires. So the battery kicks in and what we're seeing here is now the world largest battery operated bus fleet. 16,000 buses in the city of Shenzhen. That is an amazing achievement over time, but it's not done out of a gift to the world. It's done out of self interest. There are a lot of local industries that profit from this massive shift towards low carbon travel. There are other ideas of going back to the wire to electrifying the highway. I think the case for electrifying heavy goods vehicles is still something where batteries are struggling with. These are very niche solutions at the moment and we are not seeing that these are being scaled to date. By contrast, in the sphere of micro delivery, we are seeing much more things happening. And not just on the road, but also in the third dimension of course. Sticking to micro mobility and this is unexpected. Electrification 10 years ago, no one would have talked about e-bikes that are shared and certainly not e-scooters that are being shared. But those innovations and these ideas are currently changing the way we travel in cities. It's a massive experiment and we don't know where we will get to. By contrast, the big industrial conversation is about a fairly conventional car and I wouldn't tell you that this car is electric, you wouldn't know it. Yes, it's of course fantastic that we may be able to use renewable energy using a three ton vehicle. But if we don't reduce the amount of space it requires to move about in a city, if we don't increase its utilization, it's pretty much a wasted effort. So electric mobility needs to look differently. It needs to be shared in cities for sure. Autonomous vehicles also need to be shared. If we are going to introduce these as privately owned vehicles, it's going to be a problem. This is a trial which we'll see on television next year in Tokyo during the Olympic Games. Otherwise, look at this wonderful little thing I found here on the internet. The traffic jam of electric petrol, self-driving diesel looks the same. So the missing link, transport and utilities, yes. And I hope there are many representatives in room but we also need to connect that with city design and urban planning. And just to leave you with one other area where cities are really good at, it's about bringing these stakeholders together. These are the e-mobility stakeholders in the city of Berlin. How on earth can you organize them? Well, city governments, knowing their actors, they know how to do this and they have been able to roll out a very efficient governance model around shared electric mobility which is on display in Berlin today. The ultimate test, whether we get it right or wrong, is how the future of the urban street will look like. If it looks like today, we failed. If it looks maybe more like this wonderful drawing produced by a friend at Richard Rogers, we may be getting somewhere. Thank you very much.