 So good morning, good afternoon, and good evening to all of our viewers from around the world. Lynn Orr and I will be your hosts for today's Global Energy Dialogue. This will also be our last Global Energy Dialogue for 2020. And we just want to thank all of the 7,000 people that have joined us over the course of the past six months or so. So this has been quite a year. We began our dialogues with a discussion about COVID-19 and the impacts of COVID-19 on energy utilization. And we've spanned a huge range of topics all the way through energy access and climate change, and we have a terrific collection of videos. So I encourage you to take a look at those at gef.stemford.edu. So our dialogue today will consider the impact of changes in the U.S. energy and climate landscape from the perspective of our Stanford experts in energy technology and policy. And of course the U.S. election has changed the outlook for U.S. participation in efforts around the world to deal with climate change and the worldwide clean energy transition that is now underway. So we're really fortunate to have a large panel of Stanford energy experts, people with deep expertise in their respective fields. So we'll hear from them briefly in turn, and then we'll open it up to questions and we would really like to have a lively discussion with you. So we're going to start with energy efficiency. And to talk about this, we have Diane Grunek, who is a pre-court energy scholar, a member of the Schultz-Stevensson Energy Policy Task Force at the Huber Institution, and an affiliated scholar with the Bill Lane Center for the American West. She was a commissioner at the Public Utilities Commission from 2005 to 2010, and she's a deep expertise in energy efficiency, demand response, smart grid, renewables, and climate change. So Diane, for you, every bit of energy that we don't use in the future is energy that doesn't need to be provided with low greenhouse gas emissions. So what is the potential for significant improvements in energy efficiency going forward? And what do you think are the most exciting opportunities? Thanks so much, Sally, and hello to everyone out there. I really want to emphasize that energy efficiency is probably the most critical tool that we have for addressing climate change because not only does it reduce carbon emissions, but it saves money to individuals, to businesses, to our entire economy. So it's an incredibly important tool. According to the International Energy Agency, we need to get about 40% of our greenhouse gas emissions from energy efficiency over the next 20 years. So again, its importance is critical. But in a report that the IEA released just last week, there's some disturbing news in this area that we're looking at in 2020, our energy efficiency investments internationally are going to go down about 10% from last year. And that's because of coronavirus, our economic downturn, shutdown of buildings. So frankly, we all need to double down on what we can do in this area. Now, there's a lot of economic stimulus packages, and that's a big opportunity that many of them are including additional funding and programs for energy efficiency, which can be ramped up very quickly and provide great jobs. So that's one area of great opportunity is to focus on our economic stimulus packages that are going to be coming out over the next year or two. I'm going to just quickly end with two areas that I'm very excited about. The first is intelligent efficiency. And that's the additional energy efficiency that's possible with information and communication technologies where we're looking at sensors, connected devices, networks, data analytics. And so we have the ability to have smart buildings that can really be optimized in terms of how much energy they use, come for the occupants, etc. But they then can be connected to our grid, and these smart buildings then become a building block for how we can bring in our renewables, our storage demand response. There's a lot of opportunity in this new area in terms of technology, policy, finance. The second area just real quickly is building decarbonization. In the United States, our buildings account for about 40% of emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, 40%. And about half of that is from the fossil fuels we actually burn inside our buildings, natural gas, propane, and heating oil. So we need to be really smart about how we're going to decrease that fossil usage within our buildings, both our new buildings, but existing buildings. And I was saying I'm involved now with a really exciting new effort at Stanford, which we will be launching next year. It's called the Stanford building decarbonization learning accelerator. It will be a free online resource that will provide very highly curated material to lecturers to faculty to students to practitioners throughout the world about teaching building decarbonization. So I'll end now, but it's really an exciting new endeavor we're doing here at Stanford. Great. Thank you, Diane, for getting us started in a good way. So next, we're going to hear from Rahm Rajikapal. He's an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering and a senior fellow at the Precord Institute for Energy and professor by courtesy of electrical engineering. He directs the Sustainable Systems Lab here where research focuses on power systems. And that includes the integration of renewable smart distribution systems and demand side data analytics that many of the kinds of things that that Diane mentioned. So, Rahm, there've been deep reductions in the costs of renewables and like wind and solar in the last decade or so, and deployment at scale is continuing, although it certainly has a way to go. What kind of modifications to the grid, including storage are going to be needed in order to manage that operation of a grid with lots of intermittent renewable resources on it. Lynn, this is an excellent question. You know, the first thing to acknowledge is that there is no silver bullet, but overall we will need to move from a supply meets demand paradigm to one of flexible matching of resources. Let me just start with technology. We will need to integrate short term and seasonal storage solutions and combine that with the coordination of the demand side, including, you know, things like EV charging distributed storage and smart loads. In doing this, we certainly will have to do it in a way that preserves the reliability of the whole system. In addition, we are seeing some trends such as the deployment of micro grids to increase local resiliency, and they will offer additional grid flexibility. In this conversation on the technology side. Consideration will have to be given to DC transmission network solutions wherever it's cost effective and integrated with the rest of the grid. And something that Diane brought up, which is what I would say are grid measurable energy efficiency measures. That means we can actually measure their impact on the base load and communicate to the system operations. And I think we need to go significantly beyond just the technologies. I think if we want to support deeper penetration of renewables, planning will have to change. It has to account for significant uncertainty that we have in what technologies will be available, what their costs are going to be, what the weather patterns are going to be. We have to include a lot of different criteria that we have not done in the past, including life cycle emissions costs, helping health impacts and equity. On the operation side, I feel we need to develop kind of a new generation of algorithms that will leverage a scalable AI and optimization. That are risk aware and will be used to operate all these resources. And, you know, finally, we certainly need to redesign markets and create various market mechanisms and policies to appropriately engage and compensate these participants. I think, and just to put in some closing words, I think there will be a large amounts of sensing that will be deployed. Power electronics is a big enabler of this transformation as well. But we will need to think about how to facilitate the flow and the integration of resources by having various forms of open standards. So it's a quite complex problem, but it's very, very exciting. Okay, well, thanks very much, Ram. So now we're going to move on to something completely different. We're going to talk about natural gas. So over the past 15 years or so, there's really been a revolution in the ability to discover and produce natural gas at a very big scale. The U.S. is the largest producer of natural gas today. And to talk about the role of natural gas in the clean energy future, we have Mark Zobac, who is the Benjamin M. Page Professor of Geophysics and the director of Stanford's Natural Gas Initiative. The initiative focuses on the major advances in natural gas production and how that can affect the clean energy transition. So over to you, Mark. So what role can natural gas play in enabling large scale deployment of renewable energy? Well, thank you, Sally, and good morning, everyone. You know, in fact, my engagement with the natural gas initiative was seeing natural gas as an enabler for renewables. The primary need is to decarbonize the energy system, but a high priority, whether you live in California or the developing world is the need for reliable power 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year. And in 2019 in California, we had 18 gigawatts of solar and wind installed and operating a massive amount of power, but it had a three gigawatt average utilization over the year. So the intermittency of renewables is a real fact. And in California, you know, we, in many other places, we need a daily backup for demand exceeding supply and maybe massive battery installations will address this. But in California and in many other parts of the world, we also have longer term needs for seasonal storage at a massive scale. And so natural gas coupled with carbon capture and storage is really the only option we have today to back up electrical power systems with large scale deployment of resources and to provide at scale for economic development in many parts of the world that are now highly dependent on coal. And greenhouse gas emissions is truly a global problem. And so if we shift our focus to where a lot of growth is going to occur, future emissions are going to occur. We have to look at the developing world. But economic development requires reliable power, whether it's refrigeration for a grocery store or power for manufacturing. And the demographic trend of people in the developing world is concentrated is the concentration of large numbers of people in mega cities that require a lot of energy in a limited amount of area. So natural gas isn't the end game, but it's for the next couple of decades until perhaps hydrogen comes on at scale, or there's a nuclear renaissance, or some other solutions come forward. Right now, natural gas coupled with carbon capture and storage is going to play a critical role for the energy transition to succeed. So thank you Mark and actually thank you for providing a very nice transition to the, to the next topic which is carbon capture and storage. And for that we'll turn to Sally Benson Sally's internationally recognized energy expert with deep expertise in energy systems and in carbon capture and storage specifically. She's the pre court family professor and professor of energy resources engineering here at Stanford. She has lots of background she served as director of the global climate and energy project here. And then in payment for all of that she got to be director of the pre court Institute and co director over the last seven years. And before that she was at Lawrence Berkeley lab where she was the associate lab director for energy sciences, and then the deputy director of the entire Lawrence Berkeley National Lab so she really does have the background to talk about this. So Sally. Mark alluded to this. The question of carbon capture and storage. What role should CCS play in decarbonizing electricity and, and also you might comment on the other hard to decarbonize industry settings that are important here in California and around the world. Thanks Lynn. Yeah, so, so the way I think about carbon capture and storage is that it's a subset of a broad category of technologies that can either reduce carbon emissions, or offset them directly. We're not relying on a substitute for for fossil fuels for example but we're just, you know, going head on to reduce emissions from that. And just to give you some examples of what these technologies are. So they fall I think into two big bins one is what we would call natural climate solutions. And that's things like planting forests or changing our agricultural practices so that we can accommodate more carbon in the soils. And, and the second category is carbon capture and storage on industrial sources, so that we can put for example a scrubber on the smokestack of a power plant, and we can capture those emissions, and we can compress them and turn them into a liquid and basically pump them deep underground. Basically you can think of putting that carbon back underground where it came from in the first place. So those are the two broad categories, and then there's a hybrid of those, which combines natural climate solutions with with industrial carbon capture and storage. And that's something called bio energy plus CCS, where for example you would use biomass feed stocks to produce power and then capture and store those emissions. Those kind of technologies sort of have great current relevance in places like California, where our forests need significant effort to pull out all dead stock and so forth to help prevent forest fires. So, so what is the role of these technologies. You know, there's clearly, you know, huge progress and renewable generation but as Mark Zoback pointed out that getting the 24 seven 365 reliability that we need, even with demand response. We really aren't there yet in terms of doing that with just renewable and shorter long duration storage so carbon capture and storage can play a key role in California. We've done studies which which indicate that, you know, if we had say 15 gigawatts of natural gas combined cycle plants with carbon capture and storage really cost effectively and very quickly decarbonize the California electricity system. And you'd be using massive amounts of renewables but that that natural gas would provide a backstop. The other very important role for carbon capture and storage is in the hard to abate sectors the industrial sectors like cement plants and steel plant plants and chemical production facilities. We just don't have good substitutes for those technologies today, and we can't afford to wait until we can decarbonize decarbonize those another way so that's very important. And just one more point in the long run carbon capture and storage is going to play a very important role in creating something that we call negative emissions. It's highly likely we're going to overshoot the total amount of emissions that will enable us to limit warming to two degrees C. But if we can capture if we can capture carbon from the atmosphere through direct air capture or bioenergy plus CCS or through carbon management and forests and so forth, we can offset those emissions and and we can then get on a pathway to achieving limiting warming to two degrees C. So those are what I see as important roles for carbon capture and storage. But that's going to bring us to another topic. I mentioned briefly energy storage and to talk about this and other issues we have Yixue, who's a professor of material science and engineering at Stanford, and a photon science at the Slack National Laboratory. And he focuses on nanomaterials for energy storage, solar cells, insulators, and biology. He's a definitely someone of many talents and interests. But for this conversation, we'd like to know what do you think is the state of play for battery storage, particularly for EVs, because we're seeing the beginning of a revolution of transition to EVs. And, you know, can we expect that today's chemistries or even new chemistries will support continued reduction in battery costs which are going to be critical towards the the scaling and well, wide, wide scale deployment of EVs around the world. Well, thanks Sally. On behalf of my co director of storage X real chair, I think I'm very excited to share a few points with everybody here. The first if you look at what happened in the past decade, past decade, the batteries pack the pack level cost is reduced from somewhere around $1,200 per kilowatt hour to today, roughly slightly below $150 per kilowatt hour. So I'm talking about eight times cost reduction. So this is very exciting. I think we have a reason to say to celebrate a little bit you know what what happened in the course of learning curve that enabled the electrical vehicles coming up like crazy. Then you we asked the question we said what was the challenges right there to continuous to reduce the cost. Let me let me throw one number first. So that's so critical. You look at currently what's the yearly production of lithium ion batteries. In say in 10 years 2030, what where do we need to get to we actually need to increase the production roughly by 10 times. What's the number is telling you I'm talking about a few tell what our or better production. That means we need to build a Gigafactory gigawatt hour one gigafactory roughly one gigafactory per day. That's the type of challenging we are facing these all provide a challenges the whole supply chain, the mining industry, everything needs to go to that scale so this is a big challenge ahead of us. So these are scaling will be able to see the cost continuous to go down now sitting at $150 per kilowatt hour and the pack level can be cut by half. I can be cut a cost by half. I'm very confident this will happen through scaling number one. Number two is the new chemistry coming in. For example, we are using now the capital chemistry of lithium that's the contain cobalt. Let's move away from cobalt using high nickel. So this is going this is coming. And then graphite and no side putting in silicon your energy density can increase by 60 to 80%. This will have reduced the cost as well. So I think this is coming cutting half is no problem. Then if I look further I say in 20 years 30 years. Well, we want to address even bigger challenge. Maybe let's just mention one point related to the grease scale storage, you know, resonant back to what the RAM is saying, and also marker so bag is saying, saying, can we do 24 7365 kind of storage to have reliability on the grid. We need a cost to be even lower. We are looking into 10 times lower, even the storage cost. We don't know how to do that yet. So this will be a big challenge for the whole community. So I will pause right here. Well, plenty, plenty to think about there but also plenty of opportunity for storage to have a big impact, particularly in the in the transportation area. So that that kind of raises a point that that I'm going to ask Tom Haramio about Tom's associate professor of chemical engineering here at Stanford and associate professor of photon science and slide National Laboratory. He's a Suncat Center for interface science and catalysis, and his research focuses on fundamental catalytic processes that occur on solid state services in both production and consumption of energy that are catalysts are everywhere. So Tom, what about the idea of using hydrogen to fuel transportation. Obviously that means you have to make the hydrogen and some pretty big quantities which presumably will require lots of the electricity that we've just delivered and stored with the previous speakers. So, so what do you see what options are foreseeable for using low carbon electricity electric electric chemistry and catalysis and maybe nano structured materials to make fuels for transportation. Thank you so much for the question Lynn and it's really great pleasure to be here today and be part of this panel and indeed there's a tremendous opportunity ahead for hydrogen and for other fuels and chemicals that are produced through sustainable processes. There are two key points that we really like to make today. I'll start by stating those two points and we can dive in a little bit deeper. The first point is that today there already exists here and now a massive hydrogen market, and it's a market with already that's continuing to grow. And there's even a much greater opportunity for growth of that market for new, new uses of hydrogen. So I want to speak to that point in a moment. And the second one that hydrogen is just one of many important molecules that we already use today and will continue to need in the future. And so really these hydrogen technologies that I'll be talking about are serving as a flagship in this broader endeavor. Everything that we can do towards hydrogen is we electrify it and sustainably produce it, transport it, store it. We can imagine doing that with other important molecules as well. So let me get back to my first point and just talking about kind of the market demand just to give everyone an idea. It might not be so obvious because we don't go to the store and buy ourselves a gallon of hydrogen. What we do buy are lots of products that hydrogen was absolutely essential to make. And the demand as a result is about 65 billion with a B kilograms per year, 65 billion kilograms per year. And so if we just divide that by the number of people on Earth, which is over 7 billion these days, it's about 9 kilos per person or about 20 pounds of hydrogen per person. That's the average demand per person across the globe. That's a large amount. It's a significant portion of our body weight if we want to think of it that way. And those of us who are on the line, we're consuming probably more than our fair share based on where we're calling in from, calling in from countries that probably use more than the average than the global average of hydrogen. Now that hydrogen, so it's a very important ingredient in lots of things. It's important for oil refining for sure, as well as in fertilizer production. This is how we are able to feed ourselves, literally feed billions of people across the planet. So these are very important uses of hydrogen that already exist today. We're thankful for the scientists and engineers who developed the tech to convert mostly natural gases, where most of that hydrogen does come from and almost exclusively comes from fossil fuels, predominantly from natural gas to be able to make these important products. So step one is we already have a large scale market for hydrogen. Can we come up with new technologies that can contribute to that in a sustainable way? But there's also future markets. And if you can come up with new technologies that are more sustainable, that can really open up the future uses and transportation, as you mentioned, is one of them. Another one is grid scale energy storage. So when you think about transportation and the wonderful revolution that we're seeing in transportation with all kinds of new technologies, the electrification of transportation, making really great headway, and we need to support that and push that as far and as fast as we can. There are some forms of transportation that are not as easy to electrify naturally, usually things that are heavier duty, marine, heavy duty trucking, aviation, international aviation in particular, which is a major carbon emitter. And just to give everyone a sense of the challenge, I mean, you know, back in those days when we used to go to the airports frequently, you know, go to SFO, you're looking to fly to Frankfurt, Germany, and the plane comes in, it deep planes, they clean the aircraft, they reboard the new crew and passengers. And, you know, an hour and a half, they turn that that thing around and head right back to Frankfurt. And during that timescale, if you just calculate the fill-up time of jet fuel that's going into that vehicle and to that aircraft, it's about a gigawatt nuclear power plant worth of electricity if you want to convert into those units in about one hour refilling that thing to give it enough energy to travel from SFO to Frankfurt with, you know, 300 of your close friends around you. So that's kind of what's marvelous about fuels in general and chemical fuels and so hydrogen can absolutely play a role. And we need lots of new tech development in space. It's certainly electrification of the processes to make the hydrogen. So you can take renewables to make it. But you also need to distribute it, to transport it, to store it. And there's all kinds of technical challenges in these domains, many of which of course we're working on here at Stanford and at Slack, at the National Lab, as well as many others out there. And so the future really is bright as new technological developments and also I should say for the consumption and use of the hydrogen as well, fuel cells and other forms of technology that can employ that hydrogen for transportation or for other applications. The outlook is equally bright I'd say for grid-scale energy storage with the very simple premise that once you put the time and effort in to make a molecule, storing it is a piece of pie compared to other forms of storage. You can store it for an hour, a day, a year and that chemical can retain its chemical structure and you can use it when you need to. So this really serves as a native kind of application for you've got renewable electricity now and you want to store it for a season, for a year, that can be accomplished with molecules such as hydrogen. The question is, can we get that to be cost effective enough? And so certainly many of us are working in that space as well. I'll wrap up really with my second point and that is to say that everything that I just said about hydrogen, we can imagine that same dialogue happening with other molecules. So ammonia is an important one, that's where the hydrogen goes to make ammonia to feed billions of people across the earth. So we're talking about new technologies to sustainably produce ammonia, to sustainably produce plastics, to sustainably produce building materials, to sustainably produce carbon-based fuels like gasoline and diesel and jet fuel. So everything that I just mentioned about hydrogen, we can imagine electrifying processes to make these other important molecules and that will, I hope and expect, it will naturally plug in to a world in which we have renewable energy costs that are dropping and deploying at larger scales really help mitigate all of the challenges that we're seeing in terms of demand and the time shifting of that demand, seasonal storage, et cetera, while also providing the molecules that we need for society. So thanks again for the opportunity to participate. I'll wrap up here and look forward to the Q&A ahead. Okay, well, thanks very much, Tom. So we're going to shift gears now, but before we do that, I just want to recap and I just want to make it clear some main points it's been really extraordinary the progress that has already been made in renewable generation in batteries, you know, you heard great examples and energy efficiency and that we have so many technologies that can cost effectively be deployed today to on our pathway to the clean energy transition. So there's just all the reason in the world for optimism and, you know, and that's renewables, efficiency, CCS, grid, batteries, hydrogen and in the words of the great George Schultz, who it's his 100th birthday, either today or tomorrow. You know, he said about technologies, there are those that are here today and there are so many that are here today. There are those that are coming soon. And I think we've heard about some of them that are coming soon. And there's some that are on the horizon, like being able to make, you know, gasoline from purely renewable resources and CO2 captured out of the atmosphere. So lots of lots of reason to hope, but technology isn't the only part of the story. We need to think about policy as well. And so to do this, we're going to transition back to you, and I'm going to turn the tables and start with you. And you served as the U.S. Undersecretary for Science and Energy for over two years. You were the founding director of the Precourt Institute at Stanford. You were also the founding director of the Global Climate and Energy Project. And you led the School of Earth Sciences as Dean. So then you have a tremendous experience in leadership, both in the government and academia. So, so from your perspective, what are the approaches, the mechanisms or standards that we can use to accelerate the deployment of this incredibly wide menu of technologies that we've just been talking about? Sally, it's, it's such a good question. If there's any lesson that has come home to me and all that my checkered employment history. It's that the technology is crucially important that we need to deliver these technologies at scales that are really quite large. And that depends on cost reductions and all the engineering and science that goes into that. But equally important and maybe more important and maybe tougher to deal with is the combination of policy tools that we need to implement all of that. It seems unlikely that we're going to have something like a carbon tax here in the US at least in the future. But I think the good news is that there's a rich opportunity space of other options. So there are policies at state and regional levels. There are regulatory systems, market structures and financing all play really important roles and we need as much creativity in designing all of that as we go forward as we do on the technology side. So the good news is that we have coming up a series of faculty speakers who have deep expertise in that side of it as well. So I think I'll shut up here and and we'll let's move to those who actually know what they're talking about. So first up will be Deborah Sivas who is the Luke W. Cole professor of environmental law director and the environmental and natural resources law and policy program. Also the director of the environmental law clinic, a senior fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute for the environment. She's an environmental leading environmental litigator and her litigation successes include challenging the Bush administration's gas mileage standards for SUVs and light duty trucks. So she is the perfect person to help us think about the transportation sector. And while there's been a great deal of progress in decarbonizing the electricity sector. If you look around the United States at least we haven't made the same kind of progress on the transportation sector so it's such an important issue so so so to to Deborah. So what are the challenges we need to face and the policies that we need to develop in order to expedite the facilitation of cleaner transportation systems and and thinking both of more efficient combustion engines, but as well as EVs and hydrogen vehicles. Well, thank you Sally and I'm so happy to be here this is a great discussion. I've learned a lot myself. I will, I think of these challenges in. And I would just say that the transportation sector is so important because about 28% of the greenhouse gas emissions generated in the US come from the transportation sector so it's important to really bite down on that and as as we go forward here. I think of the challenges as as three kind of interrelated buckets of ideas so the first is continuing technology improvements, which we've talked a fair amount about here today, changing consumer behavior, and related to both of those is designing the regulatory and economic incentives to get where we want to be in the future. We've heard a lot about the technology side I will just say in the in the focus has really been electric vehicles, although as we heard from Tom hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are also still in the mix in terms of the regulatory structure out there. And really the big, the big breakthroughs are coming in battery technology I will say we had one of the first Nissan Leafs on the road, you know the battery was took you 80 miles. You know, if you kept the heat off and drove slowly so we're you know we're doing much better in that in that domain and and I think we're also now seeing the market. Develop for heavier duty vehicles trucks and buses and that's important because about 23% of all transportation related to greenhouse gas emissions in the in the US are from that sector so it's important to see those improvements to I would just just one final. On the technology side one final point is we need to be as these breakthroughs go forward we need to also be thinking about the life cycle which we talked about some here of these products right because it depends on what where they're manufactured where batteries are manufactured what is the what is the electricity source in those locations and also where they're being used and driven both for electric and how the hydrogen fuel is being produced so we need to think about all of that in the mix. It's not very well built into our policy structure at this point right policies are often kind of a blunt instrument. And so, I think those are things we'll want to think about more in the in the future but then turning to the second bucket kind of consumer behavior so we have seen a real ramp up in production of, especially electric vehicle sale, new car sales. And, but, but even, even so, it's still a tiny share of the market a little over 1% in the US market probably a lot of that he is here in California and, and something like 0.2% of the worldwide market right so so even as we're seeing the technology improve and, and, and sales increase, we still need to do giant leaps forward and try to hit some tipping point where we're really changing consumer behavior. In my view that's the real breakthrough is going to come when we get the manufacturers on board so for the for anyone has ever watched a TV commercial they're very effective at selling you know, SUVs and and other high profit vehicles right so I think it's really going to take getting that private market on board with with actually marketing and selling these vehicles and, and you know getting their dealerships where cars are sold maybe less and less these days as we're all locked down but getting their dealerships educated about these vehicles because there's been some surveys done where people walk into dealers and, and they don't know anything about the electric cars in their in their fleets. I think there are a lot of exciting new models on the horizon things have slowed down a little bit during the pandemic but I think we're going to see as consumer choice opens up. Battery life increases, and if we can bring the manufacturers along which we're starting to see we're going to we're going to we're going to facilitate that market so third is is really the regulatory incentives both both kind of command and control regulations and market incentives on both the producer and the consumer side. And this is really being led for the large for the for most part right now by the states and California in particular with a lot of states then following along with California. On the, on the, on the producer side the California has its clean car program which is an evolving program it's been evolving over the last 20 years and it's really a mix of aspiration so California now has a goal of no new fossil fuel vehicle sales by the year 2035 that's in line with some of the European nations Norway. The UK France India have all set similar aspirational targets right you still need to have the policy to get there so in California that's a mix of increasing fleet fuel economy standard so that's both EVs and and better a better fuel economy out of internal combustion engines, and then also a zero emission vehicles mandate. So that's where in California there's a requirement the requirements going forward depending on the manufacturer share the market and the year on the trajectory out. There's some percentage of the new car sales to be zero emission vehicles. So those are. Those are some of the scent of the California has put in place for those of you following politics. There has been there has been ongoing litigation with the federal government which has tried to pull back on California's ability to do that. There's been other states who've adopted California standard only standards only California can set those standards in to be stronger than the national standards but about 10 other states have followed suit, and, and that's been embroiled in litigation with the changing of the administration is that litigation is probably going to go away and hopefully the federal government's going to step in and really step up on on fuel economy standards, just on the just a final point on the consumer side in California as the as at the federal level and many other states there's there's a number of different types of financial incentives rebates for certain types of EVs and hydrogen fuel vehicles. Some of these are phasing out. Some are arguing it's too early to face them out since we have such low penetration of the market. Some of them are being adjusted so that they're not available to higher income consumers or those buying higher income cars, as the price as battery technology as we heard is going to improving and the cost is falling and as the price of cars comes into parity with internal combustion cars, I think those, those rebates will be less important but right now they're still important in in pulling people into the market and one final point the other, you know, big, when the surveys are done one of the big considerations is infrastructure in a particular charging stations right in the whole idea of range anxiety and even if batteries are going further than they used to people want to know they can drive, drive out of town and and find a place to charge and and there are also incentives being built into some of these policy programs to to both incentivize public more public charging stations so rebates in developing those charging stations and also incentives that we can build into the residential electricity rate structure so that people can, for instance, do off peak charging of their vehicles at a relatively low price of course all that is facilitated if we have a grid driven by renewables but that's a that's a some of the policies that are out there and where we should be thinking forward. Well, thank you. Thank you, Deborah. Deborah mentioned that all the electrification opera options and we're certainly going to need to be able to deliver the electricity to do this. Diane let's, let's come back to you to you we we started this conversation with opportunities and energy efficiency. But you have a lot of experience in the regulatory structures for electricity markets. How do those need to evolve as the new generation mix and in the new grid that runs working on emerges to provide power for all of this. Sure. Thanks. Short answers. We need a lot of change in our, our markets we can go all the way from there's wholesale power electric markets which are transparent way of really having between the buyers and sellers of the electricity that is produced at the utility scale, and we don't have those any everywhere in the world at all here in the West. We have tried for I think 40 years to get a Western interconnection wholesale market developed we've made some progress, but we don't have that and that's really critical for lowering our costs, bringing on lots of renewables, dealing with I think issues like cybersecurity where you can combine resources, ensuring there's enough for resource adequacy. So literally just getting markets established is still a big challenge. The second thing though is the market structures that we have, they were really developed to think about lowering costs through competition which is great, and enhancing reliability. But when we're looking at a carbon constrained world. We need to think about how can those markets evolve so that they're working in sync with our climate policies, and not at odds and types of resources being selected. And so, there's a lot of work to be done that I think is actually very interesting to think through of how can we blend in carbon policies into the traditional markets structures we have. The other area I'll mention quickly is something that you've heard everybody talking about today is we've got a lot of new technologies coming in to play in the energy electricity sector. And the rules that we set up originally for markets were really a type of technology are coal plants are natural gas plants, and many of the new technologies are far different so we have to change our market structures. So that literally they don't discriminate or prohibit the use of our new technologies, but that there's at least a level playing field. And I'm also very interested in as we have this ongoing flow of new technologies coming in. How do we get from just the pilot stage to more widespread usage, and can our markets be a better player in this. So there's a lot of work that does need to be done in terms of markets, some of the solutions we know and we just have to sort of get the policies in line. But there's a lot of good work that does need to be done on what are changing market structures, we want to put in place. Okay, thank you Diane. Okay, so we're going to move on to a new topic. And that is basically how do we pay for all of this how do we pay for all these new technologies and energy infrastructure is very capital intensive. So, getting good financing is really critical it has to be at low cost it has to be widespread and so forth that you know if we think about all the power plants transmission lives charging infrastructure factories to build the solar panels factories to build you know we heard about how the giga giga factories we're going to be meeting. So, all of these require enormous investments and on the scale of trillions of dollars per year. So, to talk with us about this we have Tom Heller, who is an expert in international law and legal institutions. He's the Lewis Talbot and native and maybe in her and Shelton professor of international legal studies emeritus at the Stanford Law School. He's also the faculty director of our style Taylor Center for energy policy and finance, and also the faculty director of our sustainable finance initiative, and his research focuses on the rule of law, international climate control, and so forth. So, so Tom, what needs to happen to enable enable and financing at the scale that we're talking about not only for individual components but for energy systems that we've been hearing about. And, and this is going to be crucial not only in the US, but really much more importantly in developing economies around the world. Yeah, thanks Ali always left with the best questions you know the usual way you hear about this in politics as the people who advocate for something say well it's good now it's now it's just money. And problem solved. Not quite. And so what I really like the, the participants in this discussion. And in the audience to keep in mind as we move through our four topics that are just the beginning of discussion. First thing I'd like everyone to just plant away in their mind is the turn to risk. What does what does that mean. The second thing I'd like to plant with you is, it's the downside. Okay, it's an upside in the downside whenever you're dealing with risk and change. And remember from this, it's the downside. The third point, a lot of people have already made it's critically important and particularly on the upside. It's the system. And necessarily just the physical infrastructure. It's the system. And the last thing, which is perhaps the biggest challenge of all for to this discussion is about US policy which is certainly going to change. But the last point is, it's Asia. Okay, and how we are going to engage with with Asia to deal with the set of problems that that we are all discussing. We just make some principle points about each of these, what do I mean by the turn to risk. I mean, it's the way we talk about and think about action concerning climate. It has increasingly become in recent years, a question of measuring and managing risk. And of course that takes you to finance because what finance is really about is the structuring and the distribution of risk. So turn to risk is number is the first thing I'd like to talk about. Lynn mentioned that the very beginning of his second presentation that we're unlikely to have carbon pricing in the US that is through through some sort of carbon tax or substantial trade and tax system. That's general across the world. There is carbon pricing enacted in more and more places, but it's far too low cost, it's variable where it is and it has relatively narrow scope. So many of you in the audience, particularly those thinking about investment will be will realize that we have increasing private market pressures for disclosure for disinvestment divestment for thematic funds of one kind or another. And the sustainability finance initiative here at Stanford is working heavily on a bunch of issues that have to do with greenwashing and noise in the private markets the signals you're getting transparency. All of that is really interesting. There are increasing industry standards. But what you will see over the coming years is the increase in mandatory regulation of these markets. That is going to come internationally through a coalition of central banks, but it will come also in the US through stress testing, increasing emphasis on macroeconomic and prudential policy and work by the Fed or the communities trading commodity futures trading commission, which work is already underway. So a shift in the way we are discussing things on the downside. Most new studies that are coming out trying to say are we in line or not in line with the Paris agreements or other plans to move toward a low carbon economy. What we're finding is we're not doing that badly across the world in building out the upside, the renewable plants, the physical infrastructure associated with that. But on the downside we are not closing down the fossil infrastructure at nearly the pace which is necessary. We can easily see this in the United States, where although we've closed down more than half the coal plants that existed a decade ago. The ones that have been closed down are those that were no longer being compensated for their capital. In other words, it's where the capital where the amortization of the capital was finished that we've closed them and beyond that they're still operating and indeed even at increased levels. I think what you will hear more and more about in this coming period is what we could call transition risk or downside risk. And just to introduce that topic. Think about the different kinds of risk that are at play here. We obviously have the physical risk in the short term, which is coming from increased hurricanes increased fires that we're all very well aware of. The risk is basically locked in because of concentrations in the atmosphere already for the short run risk. In the midterm, the risk starts to shift to transition risk, by which we mean the value of assets, the know how of workers, the, the, the specialized capacities of different companies, and the way in which that risk may be affected by changing risks of technology changing risks of policy, all of which have been discussed. And the key point that I'd like to leave you with is in the long run, the physical risk, which scientists have detailed beautifully in the, from the, from the increasing temperatures and extreme events that climate represents. The short run physical risk is a function of how we manage the midterm transition risks they are not separate. And as a consequence of that you need integrated analysis that integrated analysis has a number of challenges both institutional and analytic. And the ones that I just would highlight if we had further discussion are people behave strategically people nations communities behave strategically, and they try and move the risk from their balance sheet to the balance sheet of someone else, often that makes that risk harder to manage. Secondly, most of the risk that we are facing certainly in transition is very concentrated and immediate losses, while most of the gains on the upside are very diffuse and future gains. It makes it difficult either for public or private finance to manage. And finally, as someone has recently said the gearbox for understanding physical risk is really quite different from the gearbox the metrics the modeling of transition risk. It involves measuring uncertainties in the future, moving as Mark Carney says from snapshots to videos and providing the toolbox to deal with it. And because of time I'm not going to talk about the system risks directly, but it has to do principally with the difference between financing and distributing returns between hardware and software. We're doing well on the hardware side, generally, the software side the data the analysis the communications of systems integration, which many of my colleagues have spoken about lags, lags in the United States and elsewhere. And the final point which I think is critical, not just for for the world's climate situation, but for our own work in the US is my point that it's about Asia, why basically the cost of gas, as Mark described as a transition resource is is high in Asia, and gas supplies are so the choice remains largely between various forms of low carbon energy and coal. And we all understand the significance of that as a as a as a as a an area for dealing with climate policy. The second big problem is the coal fleet and the infrastructure infrastructure fleet in Asia is young, which means it is not amortized not written off, as it has been in the US, and particularly under the laboring of effects of coven debt management is already very developed by sovereigns and corporates across Asia. They cannot easily take on substantial writing off of the cost of the fleets, which since they are built by state enterprises and state banks, largely fallen the states balance sheets. And finally, the question of data communication analytics. These are very important in the key countries of China and India without any doubt, but they are certainly all subject to security issues in their diffusion. And so we will see substantial and already see substantial industrial competition that will make the financing of this and particularly US contribution to the Asian transitions, particularly problematic. So let me stop there and thanks very much for the opportunity Lynn and Sally. So, thank you Tom, you've raised lots of complicated issues that are going to require a lot more thought. We're going to start now with questions from the audience, and there are plenty of them. And so I'm going to start with one that's that's that's an interesting way to think about the problem. We've, we've spent a lot of time talking partly about decarbonizing electricity and how that might flow into things like transportation. On the other hand, in some cases, we've talked about making fuels. So, and the distinction between those two is that that fuels. In a way fuels are an energy storage medium that we use by combustion. We might carry the fuels around with them with in a vehicle or store them like hydrogen for use in making electricity. And how should we think about that balance. In particular, how does that balance work with the determining how much we invest in things like renewables. And a lot of grid to support all of that versus making the fuels and figuring out the storage side of those so so it's a it's a hard question and now I have to select a victim. I mean, maybe you could, you, you, you talked about a version of this, maybe you could say a word and then then I'll get maybe wrong, or, or, or Diane maybe as a grid representative into this time go ahead. Absolutely. Thank you so much Lynn for that question. Great question from the audience. You know, it's that you've highlighted some of the complications and I think the first thing that I would say is that there's no such thing as a plug and play solution and maybe we don't want a plug and play solution. So we know what the world looks like today we know how we use energy today, and it's it's convenient to think about developing technologies that could, you know be hot swappable with something out and providing something that's cleaner and more sustainable etc. But I don't think that's the right way to think about it what we really want to think about is what does the future look like. What is the future landscape look like from a technology perspective. What does it look like from a business and finance perspective what does it look like from a public public policy perspective. We need innovation and all of these things and we need to think about what the future should be where should we be in say two decades, three decades, and that's what we should be aligning our our our efforts towards as opposed to trying to just simply replace what we've got in the ground now. And then it's really so thus it is about really integration and we have to think of things at the systems level. And it's hard to do that because we don't know what what that future holds. So what I would say is that at the moment where we're at is, we've got a lot of options, thanks to the efforts of many people who are really developing all kinds of different things, whether it's on the technology side on the society side on the policy side on the economic side, and really just kind of developing different modes and different possibilities. And now that where we're at today in 2020 say versus where we were in the year 2000, we have a lot more information and we have a lot more development in lots of different areas. The future is still uncertain. And we'd better if we haven't started already start thinking about, you know, how these systems are all going to work together, because that's how our current that's that's a big reason why our current system works so well. That's why a gallon of gasoline costs only $3. It's marvelous what we can get the value out of $3 towards what a gallon of gas can get us. So how do we do that with with everything else. I'll pause there and let others chime in. Thank you. Thank you, Lynn. Okay, I think that's that that actually covered the waterfront pretty well there unless Ron, do you want to say a word about the grid side of that. Yeah, very quickly I think this type of conversion technology can serve as a basis for a long term, long duration storage. But it all depends on the efficiency of the process. Aside from that, whenever you have a technology where you're converting electricity from for some other use, and you have the possibility of time when that electricity is used. That ability can be very Sally go ahead. Yeah, maybe I'll just be really quick and think about this from the perspective of the electricity grid. So we and many others around the world are now using something called capacity expansion models to try to understand what's the most cost effective way to meet electricity loads. And what we all find is that basically electricity needs to consist of three components. One is renewables. The second one is energy storage, particularly short term energy storage for things like peaking. And then the third thing you need is clean firm power. In regard to clean firm power, there are different ways you could get it, you can use CCS plus natural gas combined cycle, you can use nuclear, and you can use zero carbon fuels, you know, as we're discussing here. And it turns out that once you have even one of those things, you can significantly reduce the overall cost of decarbonizing electricity. And from that perspective, you know, zero carbon fuels, you know, can be a very important component of this. So, and then the other thing we find out is that if you have two of these technologies, it's even cheaper. If you have three, it's even cheaper. So I think this really argues for a diversification of our ways of producing storing and converting energy back into electricity. I think I'm going to ask the next question. Is that right, Lynn? Is that where we are here? Okay, so, so this is going to be a question for, for you and, and Ram, I believe. So, the question is, is that, you know, clearly EVs are taking off and scaling quickly, but we also need a lot of energy storage for the grid. So, to what extent, what really are the prospects are trying to use EVs as energy storage for the grid or often it's called vehicle to grid. And, and either one of you can jump in first, but I think you both have different perspectives on this. Ram, do you want to take it first, or do you want me to jump in first? Yeah. So, Sally, this is a great question. The vehicle to grid. I was in short answer is we have to think about vehicle to grid for sure. If we don't think about that, we are wasting huge resources right there, but I also mentioned a few challenges right there. Well, I just used California as an example. We have about 15 million vehicles on the road. And our electric car will easily get to a million, probably getting close right now, zero emission one soon or a million. Let me take a million as an example. I will take an average of a million vehicles, 100 kilowatt hour battery pack for simple estimation and auto-manageal. So we have 100 gigawatt hour of storage capacity right there, using CO5 as the C-ray, slow-ray. So we have 20 gigawatt of possibility we can tap into. That's basically a baseline, roughly in the order of California electricity consumption, 20 gigawatt, but certainly it's a dark curve, it fluctuates. So if we don't think about using vehicles, I think we are wasting huge resources. Then what are the challenges right there to really think about that? It's communication, the data, right? The B-turn-watch initiative, Rambo probably touched upon. How do we coordinate all the behavior? That's one. This regulation, hurdle right there and how do we use regulation and financing model to do that as well. And also, let me come to the, you know, the badly challenging challenges right there. In order to do that, your battery life needs to be long enough. If your battery life is only a thousand cycles, hey, I think as customer, I don't want my electric car to be used to contribute to the grid storage, you know, back and forth many times. I want the battery life to be sufficiently long in order to manage this charging cycle. Of course, it will be a shallow cycle, shouldn't be a deep cycling. So this multiple consideration needs to come in in order to enable that. But I would say thinking about vehicle to grid is absolutely needed. Okay. So does Rambo want to weigh in on that sort of a grid management side? I think there is two key points to kind of enable vehicle to grid, which definitely has an important potential. The first one is how reliable, how predictable, how much predictable capacity of storage you will have at any given point in time. It will depend on usage patterns, people's preferences and how, you know, you compensate them for allowing their car battery to be discharged. The second key point I think is that generally integrating EV flexibility into the grid needs to have as he pointed out, much better integration of information data, you know, data about the state of charge of the car preferences availability, but also information and data about the network to which this car is connected. So the transformer distribution network constraints and so on. So there has been a lot of experiments on this and demonstrations. And the question is how do we do this at large scale and a low cost? Could I just ask what I think is a quick question is, so, and this will be for the electrochemists. What role do you see is for fuel cells going forward? Are those going to appear in vehicles? Will they be part of the grid generation kind of setting? Who's right for that? I don't know, Ram or Yee or Tom? I don't know, Tom Haramio. I'd be happy to dive in first and then certainly would like to hear a perspective from others. The future is looking really good for a number of reasons. I'd say first and foremost, there's a hydrogen, so first of all, there's lots of different types of fuel cells. Let me be clear about that with different types of fuels. And so there's a lot of different variations on that theme. The one that is growing the fastest is hydrogen fuel cells, state of California, there's over 8000 hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on the road and growing. And part of the reason why that technology is moving really well, a couple of things. Number one, hydrogen, as I mentioned, is already a large big ticket molecule that we produce left, right and center. And so it's readily available. And number two, really the car companies have put a lot of investment in reducing the cost of that technology. And so where that technology is today is about $40 a kilowatt. So if you want to size the engine of a car, and if you convert from horsepower to what we use in the United States, but most of the rest of the world uses kilowatts, call it a 100 kilowatt engine. So 100 kilowatt engine times $40 a kilowatt gets you about $4000. And so now it's hitting a price point that is very reasonable for that sector of light duty vehicles. Another major force is the electrification of vehicles in general. A fuel cell car is in fact an EV. It's an FCEV. You can think of it really as an EV, a standard battery EV where you shrink down the battery and you put on a large range extender that gives you fast fill up times and longer distances. And so now that is what I would call that within the transportation sector. That is the toughest market for hydrogen to really have a value at compared to conventional technology. And it's already making gains. And then the question is what's the prospects ahead because those technologies, the hydrogen fuel cells using chemical fuels as a means for storage has a lot of advantages. Compared to the other forms of storage out there, especially and those advantages become even greater. The heavier duty the transportation gets so aviation and marine and trucking, etc. So I think that looks bright. We don't again, we don't know what the future holds. I think will be a complimentary technology. I think we'll continue to use carbon based fuels and some technologies will continue. We'll use electrification in other direct electricity and batteries and fuel cells definitely have a lot to offer not only for hydrogen, but also as other fuels and other hydrogen fuel cell technologies improved. I'll leave it there. Okay. You want to add anything? Yeah, let me add a little bit. So I agree with Tom. I think the batteries and fuel cell are highly complimentary technology. They have their own strength right there in the transportation in the long distance, heavy trucking for fuel cell. I mean, it's worthwhile to probe deeper. And for the also the grease scale storage as well for the long duration, but people need to look at the power needed carefully. I mean, for long duration hydrogen is amazing. A media right there. And then if couple is fuel cells with some more advancement, I mean, this is highly complimentary to the batteries worthwhile to really look into a lot more. Okay. So, so I think we're going to shift bases again and thinking about the electrical grid. And, you know, we can imagine all different kinds of grid, but one version of the electrical grid is that we would have long distance high voltage transmission for decarbonizing the electricity sector. So what an example would be is that we've got lots of wind in the Midwest that we could bring to the East Coast or we've got lots of solar energy on the West Coast, which could be brought to the, to the Northeast, for example, or in Europe, one could even imagine the Sahara desert, you know, providing power up to up to Northern Europe. So, so to weigh in on this question, I'm going to ask two people, one is sort of Diane from the perspective of what we think these grids might look like. And then also to Tom Heller, I'll ask him about, you know, financing these kind of, you know, mega infrastructure projects, you know, what are the prospects for that so maybe Diane to you first. Sure, happy to take this on. As Sally mentioned, before joining Stanford, I was a commissioner with the California Public Utilities Commission. And one of the areas that I focused on for six years was the building permitting financing of long distance transmission lines. And that was a focus point of California to get more transmission infrastructure built. And we did succeed. We got over $6 billion of new transmission built, all of which carries renewables to California. But I can say nobody likes transmission lines near them. So our quandary is that study after study shows, unless we really take advantage of these deep resources that we have, not just in the United States, but in many places of the world to build large scale wind power plants, wind farms and solar. And then have the transmission to take the power to our cities and places where it's needed. It's going to be a much more expensive system to build just small scale renewables, basically on our rooftops and this is a quandary that we have. But all the studies show we want to frankly have both but we do want more large scale renewables and for that we need renewables. We don't have time to go into this. But especially in the United States, all the efforts that have said let's do it top down, have people in Washington DC draw a map with a line and then we're going to force states and regions and people and our native Americans to just accept these lines fails. And so, in my view, we have had some very successful efforts in the United States, where there was funding from the federal government, but it was much more a stakeholder driven process, where we had honest transparent analysis on costs environmental impacts, timing, etc, to think about transmission lines. And then you really need to have a very focused political support to make it happen because these do take many years but I think it can be done. It's necessary in my mind throughout the world to build more transmission, but it's a far cry from just developing the new technology it's a lot to do with thinking about the political side, and then as Tom's going to talk about the financing sign is critical. And Tom, as you're thinking about your remarks, you might also think about China which has been, you know, proposing sort of this super grand, this Asian super grand. Yeah, I think Sally, I got it. I think that the questions have highlighted as well as the answers. I argued in my, my introductory remarks that we probably around the world have passed the point where investing in more physical renewable projects facilities has declined in value partially because they're cheaper and the private markets have declined in value, they've declined in finance them, then putting specially public money into into software and and operational characteristics the other things I would stress are are these these answers to where you get productive and whether it's fuels or grid is very much a function of where we see other policies going in other words to the extent we see a general economic transformation that is moving toward it and the introduction of it technologies. It's a very good idea to piggyback our energy investments on those wider system changes that being said. I think these solutions are local as you as you imply. We did build an interstate highway system in the 1950s in the US largely with federal money and state matching money. And I suppose that could be applied to the grid, but our experience in that in the in the development of regional and even state solutions in the US has not been very successful in that area and of course we have a legal system that makes it particularly difficult. And just to highlight the points that I was making that solutions are probably going to be relatively local or regional. China is a great example. They do not have problems in running a transmission system that goes all the way from Xinjiang in the West down to down to guandong in in in the East, and they have emphasized this very heavily. But in point of fact, it's been a real difficulty for them because it's increased the capacity to move cold generated power throughout throughout China and increasingly talked about for doing it throughout Asia. So the questions that I think are remain really critical are the institutional questions in China, it turns out that power lies overwhelmingly in the energy system at the provincial level. So the central government has been very good at building out this integrated grid with long distance transmission lines, but on the whole power decisions are still being made at the at the provincial level. And so much of that grid capacity is not moving and a great deal of renewable power that lies in the north and west of the country is not moving to the south and east. On the other hand, it is clear to me that hydrogen that Tom was talking about earlier has become a major concern in China for no other reason, then they are basically generating from coal heating in much of the cold weather part of the country through a combined heat and power, and they have a district heating system to move that's already in place. So they are much more interested in hydrogen. And I think what this calls for is not international coordination in R&D, which has also proven impossible, but it's a combination of where different countries have different advantages and structuring our own R&D programs around those that are most beneficial in the US context thinking about our own economic transformation going forward. So a number of audience members have asked a question that I think is on lots of people's minds. You mentioned that there's a, in order to meet a parent, or at least possible demand for batteries will need lots of battery manufacturing and that implies mining, but it also raises the question of how batteries get recycled. So where do we stand on that? And Deborah maybe then we'll come to you and ask about the sort of the question of the environmental impacts and the regulatory side of what that might look like. So you go ahead. Yeah, thanks Lin. The recycling of the battery is extremely important. You know, the energy we are talking about it's a so big this scale problem. We cannot say we keep mining our resources but not thinking about recycling. So indeed I stand for right here. We recognize how important this problem is we recently started to launch of consortia, you know, and inside the storage acts about circular economy of the battery thinking about from beginning or mining and to the manufacturing to all the way to the end of the life. Before the end of the life, of course, the purpose thing could be important taking the EV batteries used for the grid. And by this require your battery life is long enough at the end of the life to do the recycling taking out the valuable elements, you know, material like cobalt, nickel, lithium, you know, you really utilizing those very where this needs to do the whole life cycle analysis from economic sense from the technology sense. This is extremely important. I will say encourage the audience. You know, I know we have more than 1000 people right here listening and to think creatively. How do we better do that. I'm glad you know many people recognize these how important this problem is, and we need to put our heads together. We have no other choice but thinking about the circle economy. Yeah, I think. I think that that comment could be applied to just about all the technologies we talked about Deborah, would you like to weigh in on this one. Yes, I'll just I'll just weigh in briefly right I think this is such an important topic and it's not really on the radar of a lot of policymakers right because that we're on the front end how do we incentivize getting you know electric cars on the road and that's incentivizing battery technology so so and we're we're not really good as a society thinking about the back end and these kind of circular economy or life cycle analysis of products so I think one of the things that is necessary is to get this on the radar policy people really and connecting to people at Stanford and other places who are doing this work to understand the importance of this we can we can develop regulations that would deal with this and make those recovery recycling and recovery mandatory but we don't have any of that in place now so it's so important to educate even our policymakers about the back end of of the life cycle. Okay, we, we actually have two minutes left. Lynn, would you like to wrap up or do we want to go for one more question. Oh, let's go for one more question. Okay, all right. Okay, so, so this is going to be for Tom Heller, and I'll be really quick. So, you know, banks and investors don't really like financing projects that rely on subsidies to pay them off. They don't like to go away they, you know, they create perverse incentives for investment and so forth. So, you know, given that we, you know, need huge investments you know are there ways around this. What's your strategy for you know getting more money into into the clean energy sector. Yeah, great one for the last 30 seconds of the discussion. It's true that particularly with regard to innovative hardware and a new clean energy technologies the markets have reacting quite badly to the to the volatility of subsidies no question about it. Although we have finance the huge amount of physical infrastructure in a short time on that on that basis. Today the critical questions are thinking seriously about infrastructure development, which was all public, or largely public until not very long ago. And under the terms that one that that are now being discussed, whether under the idea of a Green New Deal or what, or whatever other terms are put on top of of this I think there is a serious need and it will be taken up in the current administration to think about infrastructure investment, which can be done through a number of different financial mechanisms that move some of the risk, particularly those associated with zero marginal cost services like like renewable energy on to onto the public books, whether it's in China, or whether it's here in the United States. Alas, our time has come to an end so I'm there were lots more questions and lots of thoughtful people think contributing to the discussion so we, we thank you all for that we thank the panelists thanks for joining us and for everybody else around the world, we hope that that you've you've found the global energy dialogues this and this one as well informative and relevant during these times we have a big energy transition underway here and a lot more needs to be done. So the global energy dialogues will take a break for the remainder of December and then resume in January and we hope you will all rejoin us then for what promise to be a series of very interesting conversations. I think we have one final slide here I'd like to just make an announcement or maybe it's an advertisement. We've created a program called the Stanford energy innovation and emerging technology certificate. This offers courses online on storage energy efficiency grid modernization the future fossil fuels and lots of other energy topics. The four folks pictured on the slide are all participants in the conversation today. And if you look at the link that's shown on the screen. You can or you can search search the Stanford website for more information and and all of this. So that will conclude our broadcast today on behalf of the entire Stanford pre court Institute for energy we thank you for joining us. And we look forward to seeing you next time.