 Let me, we are really pushing for time, but let me just see if there are some questions from the audience. Yes, may I treat from Israel the microphone working? No, can you try to make the microphone alive as opposed to asleep? Why don't you try to speak out loudly? I think another microphone will come. Here we are. Thank you. I want to make a comment and question. A comment is that I want to tell Mr. Fredberg that today there is no need for bearing all these nuclear remains. The real today technology which can really deal with it without bearing it. So it is exist. It's working in the United States and different other places. So we can read of this junk of the atomic nuclear power stations without bearing them. Secondly, I would like to ask Mr. Pion about what do you think the chances to have in the future, seems future, a cool fusion, cold fusion. That would change everything if we have a possibility to arrive to cold fusion. Then you have energy as much as you want without any remains. Thank you. The magic grail, absolutely. Another question? Yes, gentleman here in the front. Mr. Narayam first and then... This was a very interesting session I must say and I'm very thankful to... I used to be a member of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission. I also played a role in the India-U.S. nuclear deal. The question is actually to Mr. Servant Shriver because now I'm engaged in a thing to bring back the nuclear debate into India because energy is one of our problems. How reliable is what you have said? Because I would like to know and hopefully after this I'll have a further conversation with you. Is it possible to really use this in a commercial way or is it still a pie in the sky at the moment? I understood what you said, but is a realistic one because my lifetime, I don't know too many years left, but I would like to see whether we can push it together. At the moment in India I have a certain amount of traction still possible. So I would like to have a very honest and realistic assessment as to whether this is possible. And you hear so much about Hallyu, Thorium, new reactors and all that coming up. All this underwrite what you're trying to say. Thank you. Thank you very much. And a final question here. Gentleman with a minus some beer. In addition to what Honorable Narayanan Sir has said, my crux question is that is Thorium is really viable solution. And a comment is that if there is a viable solution then please share that under the technology transfer. Thank you very much. And a final question from Mohammed there. Utilisatrice de Minere rare et un certain nombre d'analyse relève que si l'on devait convertir le parc électrique, le parc véhicule en Angleterre en électricité, il faudrait deux fois la production mondiale de Cobalt, trois quarts de la production mondiale de lithium, la moitié de la production mondiale de cuivre. Évidemment je parle que du parc de l'Angleterre. Ça c'est une équipe de chercheurs, voilà muséhommes qui en parlent. Et évidemment la remarque c'est qu'il n'y aura jamais assez de mine pour que la Chine, les États-Unis, l'Union européenne, la Russie rendent leur véhicule électrique, gère le big data, la constellation des satellites, l'industrie d'armement. Alors la remarque aussi importante c'est qu'une mine de cuivre peut consommer jusqu'à 40 millions de mètres cubes d'eau. Or les six plus grandes entreprises mondiales utilisent exploites leurs mines dans des zones qui se caractérisent par des manques d'eau. Alors quand on envisage les questions technologiques, est-ce que ces politiques sont prises en compte, est-ce que ces financements sont orientés, est-ce que ce débat est organisé. Merci. Merci Mohammed, c'est une question très très pertinente en fait. I think there may definitely be more questions but I want to stop there because we really are running out of time. So we have questions. Thorium, nuclear, the Unrare Earth. And I think that was more or less, unless I've forgotten something. Who wants to tackle us? Let's go, Franklin. I can. Is your thorium pipe dream in the end? First of all, yeah, well, it's a great question because, you know, I was skeptical. So this was not my idea. It's somebody else's idea, just stumbled upon it. And I looked at it for almost two years before I jumped into this because I had a lot of experts tell me that it was viable. So yes, I can assure you that we have a very solid basis that it's way beyond the research stage. We're in the engineering stage. It's just a different way to look at it. So yes, we are credible. And that's why we have those partners. Otherwise they wouldn't come. And I just want to say one thing about fusion before. I think Friedberg, you want to talk about fusion too, but, you know, something that I learned on my own. I had never read it anywhere. Fusion doesn't happen on Earth. It just doesn't happen on Earth. It doesn't happen in the stratosphere, in the atmosphere, on the surface, in the ground, in the core. It doesn't happen. It happens in the Sun. And the Sun is a million times bigger than the Earth. And it happens because you have heat and gravity pressure. So to replace gravity from the Sun just with extra heat is not to me self-evident. I'm not sure this will ever, and I know I'm going against a lot of common wisdom, I'm not sure this will ever produce positive energy. How much energy you put into, how much energy you put out. That's my only way to say we should focus on what we know works because we're in the urgency. And that's a comment from someone living by sand. It's interesting. So it's really fusion that is the complete pipe dream. Friedberg or Nicolas? I think Nicolas first. Okay. Very briefly, please. Maybe I'm just going to try an attempt to answer your comment, at least, on minerals, etc. I think you're right. There's no other way to say it that we don't know how to organize a system without creating entropy. And so we are replacing in one, which was CO2 and GHG emissions, with another one, which is how are you going to sustainably mine all those materials? Yes, it will be an issue. I think, again, we're going to have to work on efficiency. We can't have the same amount of energy per capita that we had in the past. So we're going to have to work on efficiency. Recycling circular economy is critical. And I think in that sense, both what Franklin and Frank are doing is critical. And this is the reason why I was saying if we don't adapt our models, our investment models to integrate externalities, we will never get it. I am fairly certain of that. And our model today are ill-designed for this because financial theory does not take it to account externalities. Frank, any comment on, I mean, you've got a real compliment from Friedberg. I think Friedberg is basically one of nature's natural skeptics in a way. He's a realist. But he was very praiseworthy of your, what's it called? A-fuel, that's what it's called. Perhaps you have the solution. Given that transportation is really the biggest single contributor to climate change at the moment. Now, I tried to show with the presentation the global perspective so that we have the ability and we could be proud about our technology. It's photovoltaic has a huge efficiency. And such a plant is in the end 50 times more efficient than a regular forest. And so we can really create our future, a real future for humankind. And I think it's wonderful to present this also and motivate also financings guys, companies to create the biggest business ever on this earth. And I think it's a positive. Thank you. Friedberg, I'm going to give you the final 30 seconds. I've just described you as a natural skeptic, which you probably not. I mean, you may be a dreamer. I don't know, but what are you feeling? I mean, this panel I think has been fascinating. Does it make you feel actually optimistic or not sure? Absolutely optimistic if we unleash the powers of technology. And let me let me give you a little story in 30 seconds. I hope a German bestseller in 1922. The bestseller of all in that time of a guy called Kellerman. And it's called the tunnel. And it's about technology giving the possibility to pave a tunnel to dig a tunnel between Europe and the United States. We had no planes and at that time this was revolutionary and they went for it. And they financed it and it took them 25 years. Very difficult process. And at the end of this, they had a big celebration in Europe with all the trains coming and suddenly they saw a plane. So in these 25 years technological revolutions had happened which people could not foresee 25 years ago. And therefore my main point, sir, is not is it viable? We cannot decide about this. I think it makes a lot of sense what has been said here. But we should be open to these new technologies and not just say, well we have solar and we have wind and that's it. No, there's so much more going around and we should have an open eye and an open heart and an open brain for that. Thank you very much. I must say at the very beginning I claimed to be a human being and I think the great thing about human beings is that the real quality of the human species is that it has the ability to create and to think. So I think this has been a fascinating panel. Thank you so much. I think you deserve a huge round of applause. Thank you.