 I'd like to welcome everyone to this session entitled Realising Mission Possible, Decarbonising Heavy Industry. My name is Anthony Hobley and I'm the Executive Director of the Mission Possible Platform. This session is part of the high-level Climate Champions Race to Zero November dialogues in the lead up to COP26 next year. It is also part of the Climate Action Drum Deed, a series of events that have been organised by the Mission Possible Platform and others, an initiative by the World Economic Forum in partnership with the Energy Transitions Commission. A key purpose of this session is to examine major obstacles and possibilities for moving forward on achieving sector agreements by the COP26 in Glasgow next year that will set heavy industry and mobility sectors on the pathway towards net zero emissions by 2050. We have an extremely competent panel of industry leaders and experts to help us explore this theme and hopefully give us some good and actionable recommendations. To make our session even more dynamic, we also have invited a digital scriber, Luciana Fabiani, who will illustrate and capture some of the key discussion points visually today. There will also be a lot of social media. Please use the hashtags Mission Possible and Race to Zero. We encourage you to get the word out from this event. Now without further ado, it is my greatest pleasure to hand over to Jules Hortonhorst, who is the CEO of the Rocky Mountain Institute. We quite frankly couldn't be in better hands, Jules. Thank you very much, Anthony, and let me add my welcome and good morning, afternoon, evening to those words from Anthony. When I think about a race to zero, when I think about a race, it's all about speed. And in many sectors, we have tremendous momentum in renewable electricity, renewables are scaling up around the world and replacing fossil fuels. In electric vehicles, we're starting to see EVs out-competing the internal combustion engine. But we all of the industry and heavy transport sector are the slightly less accomplished athletes. We're probably a little bit more like I am, somewhat hurting knees, not every day out there to run, and therefore a bit slower to get started. But we're still part of this race and it is incredibly important as the video at the beginning of this session laid out that we catch up. The industry dialogue today brings together the leaders of heavy industry and heavy transport, government and civil society together to mobilize concrete action on how to accelerate the net zero industry transition, scale up commitments, and keep up the momentum and the drumbeat to maximize progress and tangible outcomes by COP26 in November of next year. The industry transition is starting to happen, but we need action at scale. And we must in the run up to COP26 move forward and set very measurable, very tangible net zero commitments for all of the heavy industry and transport sectors. And we need to do that in conjunction with the policy, the energy, and the technology solutions that are needed to reach that goal. That's why these race to zero and mission possible platform dialogues are so important. That's why the work of Anthony and his team is so important. And that's why we're engaging all of you here today. We have a fantastic panel this morning for me. I'm very pleased to introduce first and foremost, Faustine de la Salle. She is a partner at Systemic and the Director of the Energy Transitions Commission from the UK and France. Then we have on the line, Beau Syrup Simonson, who is the CEO of Maersk McKinney-Muller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping. And Beau has a very impressive background in shipping and the technologies around shipping for a very long time. And in a few minutes, we will also be joined by Harry Brekelmans, who is a Director for Projects and Technology of Royal Dutch Shell in Netherlands. Harry is wrapping up another meeting, but we'll be here shortly. Well, let me start with you. Because you are very much in the middle of this debate, Maersk has been at the leading edge of this. Getting to zero coalition that Maersk has been spearheading is a powerful example of an alliance of more than, I think, more than 120 companies now that have agreed to a common goal for carbon neutral vessels on the water by 2030. And by agreeing to this goal, you have converted the ambition that Maersk already set some time ago into real concrete action. Can you tell us a little bit what in your mind was the critical success factors behind getting the whole industry to move on this? How is momentum building and why is this happening so significantly in the shipping industry? Thank you very much. And thank you very much for inviting me to this session today. It's indeed a pleasure to be part of this. Be part of this very powerful network where we lay out and discuss the future pathways of accelerating the transition. As you rightly said, I'm from shipping and I'm originally from Maersk. And Maersk has joined the Getting to Zero Coalition and has also been taking the initiative to set up the Maersk McKinney-Muller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping, which I am heading. And I think the starting point for this is that there is a general acknowledgement in shipping that we need to be part of the solution hard to obey or not. We see a responsibility to be part of the solution to set ambitious targets and to set in motion concrete activities, to actually start understanding the pathway forward and actually starting that transition. And the Getting to Zero Coalition is all about that. That is really to create a robust understanding of what the future looks like and to set in motion concrete activities to support such a strategy. And the Maersk McKinney-Muller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping that I'm heading is about basically the same objective and therefore we're collaborating very closely with the Getting to Zero Coalition. I think the acknowledgement, the widespread acknowledgement in the industry is well reflected in the strategy that has been adopted in IMO and shipping as a sector is fortunate to have global regulation through the UN international maritime organization. And therefore it's very powerful and it's a very positive that IMO has laid out a strategy now to decarbonize the entire sector. IMO has many times in the past shown that it is possible to regulate effectively globally and this time around as well. So the objective, the ambition is well reflected there. And we are seeing very completely that there are a number of levers that we need to mobilize in order to get this transition going. And first of all those levers are in the energy and the technical space. And we are seeing as you said in the introduction that sustainable energy sources are scaling up and we're seeing opportunities emerging both for creating energy types that we can take on board the ships and also for having the technologies on board the ships so that we can handle these in a safe manner. We do believe that these energy and technical options need to be supported strongly by regulatory, financial and commercial levers. Unfortunately we're seeing great developments in those three areas as well that will support the transition in shipping. I think we need to be honest about the fact that if we are to meet the targets put forward by the scientific community we are in a great hurry and we need to basically move faster than the trends we're seeing at the moment. So I think in shipping as we're seeing in other sectors as well we really have a task of getting the clarity and getting the levers mobilized to actually get concrete in the efforts of decarbonization. So I'm very happy to work with Getting to Zero and I'm very happy to lead now the establishment of the Merch McKinney-Möller Center Institute. Those two initiatives are all about understanding how we can accelerate the sector transformation. Very happy to be here, very happy to talk much more about that. Thank you. Thank you Bo. And that is the following. You emphasize the importance of collaboration and that is crystal clear. You've also highlighted the role of the IMO but in my assessment there is another factor that has made a significant impact on the progress that we've seen in the sector and that is individual leadership of a company that sort of takes the bull by the horns as they say and steps forward. And I can ask you this question because you've only just recently joined Merch but talk a little bit about the role that you believe the leadership of Merch as a company specifically has played in assembling this coalition. I think that's exactly right and I think there's a growing acknowledgement that it's not a matter of just waiting for regulations to shape up and start driving the industry. So we're seeing companies now stepping forward, really wanting and actually taking leadership to drive this forward. And leadership in this regard means creating clarity in the strategy going forward, taking action within own space and establishing various forms of collaboration that will actually bring together other leaders from other parts of the supply chain willing to take, to spend resources on understanding how to move forward and actually starting to make it happen. So I think that's what we've seen with Merch. That's what we're seeing with other companies joining Getting to Zero, joining the center that I am now leading. And I have to say it's always the chicken and the egg in a transition. And I think this time we have to rely on significant industry players really stepping forward. So this is what these initiatives are about, because it also has to be very robust and very thought through activities when we ask the big industry players to step forward. So it's really also about preparing the groundwork very well so that those steps become extremely effective in driving this forward. So we don't have to do a lot of rework and so on. So I think that's really a part of the exercise to create a framework and a clarity without going into analysis, paralysis, where everything stops because we have to do more research. So I think that's what we're seeing now. And I think that's a really powerful trend that we're seeing fortunately amongst several companies, leading companies. Super. Thank you, Bo. Talking about leading companies, let me switch and Harry allow me to put you on the spot. The oil and gas industry is of course a big part of the challenge, but also is going to play a crucial role in the solution. And at Shell you guys have recently announced your ambition to become a net zero emissions company by 2050 or even sooner. Talk to us about how Shell is thinking about this internally. But I'd also love to hear your perspective on how you see yourself working together with industries like the shipping industry and with companies like Maersk to drive the sort of collaborative effort that Bo was describing. Yeah, first of all, hi, Joel. Good to see you. And thanks very much for the kind and invite. And also in regards to the other panelists, very privileged to be here. And then also wishing all the participants and the audience well. I think we live in very challenging times. And I hope people are able to navigate through it safely and also positively. To your point, Joel, we also as a company find ourselves in these challenging times and it certainly has hit our industry very hard. As a consequence, we have taken and made some rather significant interventions this year with respect to the company's balance sheet and our ability to to navigate through these times in a resilient manner. And of course, much of that kind of plays out in the near term as direct impact on what we do. Starting first and foremost with making sure we keep our people safe and we can continue to supply our customers with the with the products they want. But we didn't stop there. I think it was very important for us, as you pointed out, Joel, that in April, we we also made the announcement and expressed our ambition to become a net zero carbon energy business by 2050 together with our customers. We felt it was a very important announcement to make. Whereas, of course, a lot of our effort and a lot of the eyes of the world focused on the current pandemic, but also with that signaling that there is a long term here, and that perhaps and even we can use the current situation to come out of it more strongly and then actually return on a path that that accelerates towards a different society in a different economy. And so for us, very important to say we feel strengthened and we reconfirm our commitment to a net zero carbon journey in the midst of this challenging moment. And so your point about what are you doing as a company, I think plays into that to the extent that even today, as you I hope would have expected, many of our people around the world are working to serve customers within the same time or at the same time, ensure that we are managing operational emissions and continue to update these on an ongoing basis and accelerate that process. So when you think about what's happening in Australia and operations in Singapore and our refining chemical complex here in the Netherlands, in Qatar, in the US, every day people are shall are working to manage and reduce our own scope and one or two scope one and two operational emissions. And of course, that is a found foundational premise that needs to continue and is continuing even in the current times. At the same time, we are in the process of providing our customers increasingly with lower carbon products. So so when you look across the business, whether that is an increasing share of biofuels, more options for customers to be provided with electrical charging in our retail stations, our ventures in solar and wind energy investing significantly and increasingly in the provision of low or no carbon electricity. So as a company, we are increasingly and significantly investing in lower carbon products. And of course, that is what needs to happen to be able to get to that net zero aspiration. But I think, Jill, what you are pointing at is that if you think about that going forward in the context of the challenge that the world is facing, that isn't going to be enough. And I think I heard both say it, it's, you know, we are not going fast enough. There is an enormous urgency, especially now. And so what we've come to realize for some time is we cannot do this by ourselves. And so I think the word collaboration brings true. And I think the word across sectors also rings true. So you can look at a company like ourselves, and maybe frame it within the space of the energy industry, or maybe even more narrowly, the oil and gas industry and say, well, you need to be carbonized. That's correct. But we would also say we cannot do that by ourselves. Or if we would do it by ourselves, we wouldn't attain the scale and the pace that we need to to get the world to meeting the Paris commitments or even go beyond that. So the frame we're providing or the frame we're suggesting is one to say, you really need to lock arms and think about the carbonization across sectors. And sectors, as you know, go across companies, they go across industries, they go across borders. And so collaboration then becomes enormously important. And not only between companies, but actually also between governments, companies, consumers, and if you want more broadly civil society, and so that on the one that speaks to the opportunity, but it also of course highlights the challenge, because then the question becomes, how do you do that then? Because in some ways you could say it's challenging enough for Shell in its own right to decide on investments in low carbon products, in developing the technologies and find that path in other ways. But to do it together with others is perhaps even more challenging. And I think our point would be, yes, on the one hand it is that at the same time we see and embrace the opportunity. So where does that apply? And where do we see that opportunity? Well, not in a small way in the hard-to-abate sectors. And so when you think about transport, when you think about shipping, when you think about aviation, when you think about heavy-duty transport, we believe there's a huge opportunity there to do in a collaborative fashion to drive for decarbonization. Both talk to it, and he can probably major on it more than I can. But this is really about us working together in the context of the shipping industry to provide the lower carbon fuels, but then also likelihood needs different engines, different ship designs, and of course companies like Merce to embrace that and to support it, but also find support from government and customers to be able to afford that big shift. And that's kind of, I think, the process we are in the midst of and the various coalitions that you see being formed in the context of that. And so what is key in that regard? I think what is key, of course, is for us to be looking through these lenses and to essentially be approaching customers and partners in that regard. And there are many examples. Perhaps recently you heard of our partnership with Microsoft in their decarbonization, and of course that ranges very broadly from their air travel and how we could provide sustainable aviation fuels, but also decarbonizing the energy used from their data centers. And you probably wouldn't know it, but in North America we are one of the largest power traders and power providers. And in fact, we do that to a large extent with renewable power. And so as a customer provider, we can really find each other there to provide a far broader lower carbon proposition that goes well beyond the sort of traditional sort of bilateral relationship you would have argued. It goes global, but it also goes across the many activities that we find ourselves in as companies. And maybe to testify to that further, Microsoft recently joined, as you may know, the northern lights decarbonization project that aims to invest in carbon capture and secretion in Norway as a service, bringing together the various elements of the value chain between a big consortium of partners and the Norwegian government in that regard. And I think you're really starting to see the emergence of these non-traditional coalitions and these non-traditional comings together of actors that otherwise perhaps would have interacted in many different ways. And I think it's exactly that we're going to need in terms of being able to scale up this journey in terms of breath and speed. And that's exactly what we're going to need. Now last word on that, that is going to require a lot of changes to the way we interact and operate. And as a company we're therefore in the midst of a major restructuring to not only address the challenges in the pandemic, but also to basically redress many of the existing company structures in aligning them with what we need in getting through the energy transition successfully. So that's one thing we need to start redirecting investment. We're going to have to redirect the way we develop our technologies. And you and I have spoken about that on quite a few occasions and of course that's actively taking place. And then last but not least, our whole interaction both from a behavioral as well as a sort of an operational perspective with the many partners around us, not in the least people like Bo and his company, but also governments and broader sections of society. And I can tell you that is not always very easy for us as a company, but I'm sure peps in the following conversations we can come back to that. So let me pause here and hand back over to you, Jo. I think you're on mute. Thank you, Harry. And let me turn to Faustin because Harry has later a very compelling argument why we have to complement the government-driven national-centric approach to addressing climate change by this collaborative international sector-driven approach. But that is hugely challenging and it's significantly hugely challenging because we need to develop the technologies. We need to build the commitments. There's an important amount of work and we're under the time pressure that Bo mentioned. Faustin, you are as director of the Energy Transition Commission constantly in dialogue with companies who are thinking about this. Tell us what you see as the challenges and the opportunities of creating that dialogue. Like what Harry was saying was absolutely music in my ears because I think this is exactly what we're trying to achieve through the work of the Mission Possible platform that we started a year ago with the World Economic Forum and that we're now scaling up with a number of other partners. I think that the different building blocks that he was describing that are really for a company to feel confident enough to invest in certain technologies and be able to develop them, deploy them, bring them to commercial scale, they need to be in an environment that will be favorable to those investments and will only create that favorable environment through collaborations across the value chains and across different sectors. And that's why the Mission Possible platform was created a year ago. I think the building blocks that he was describing were roughly around those lines. We need a policy right. I'd say we need two timelines of policy right. We need very specific policies right today to help the first movers who will need support in the next five years to get the first wave of projects off the ground. And then we need longer term policies that will accompany and support the scale up and the deployment of technologies at scale. But those two things are actually a quite different nature. And we have found it useful to distinguish between those two timelines of policymaking because we don't want to wait for the longer term stuff to actually be able to support first movers in the next five years. The second element I think he was describing very well is that we need to get the energy input right. And that's particularly important for the hard of debate sectors because there's a lot of investment required in terms of CAPEX in each of those sectors. But when you look at the overall economics of producing steel zero carbon or running ships zero carbon, the bulk of the cost comes from zero emission fuels. And that's why having a shell around the table is so important because we need to get the cost of zero emission energy down, especially for the hard of debate sectors, the cost of hydrogen down. And that will imply collaboration between suppliers and demanders because the only way we're going to get that cost down is through scale. And we will only get through to scale if we crack the chicken and egg issue that Bo was describing earlier on. And so we need collaborations between those who can supply that energy and those that really will need that new form of energy to decarbonize to understand how what pace we can scale both supply and demand in a coherent way and in a way that actually provides confidence to those parties that they can move forward with their projects. To do that though, you really need another piece of the puzzle. You need demand for zero carbon products and for zero carbon services. I think what we've been observing and talking to both the materials industry as well as the long distance transport industries is that they are very happy and very ready to move to invest in new technologies. But these technologies at this stage represent an extra cost. So the only way for them to actually move forward is to ensure that somewhere that extra cost is accounted for. And it can come from policy, but it can actually come from consumer good companies. There's a major role for consumer good companies to help the rest of their value chains, their suppliers, to go through the carbonization because the cost of zero carbon shipping, for instance, is very significant for a ship owner and for a ship operator. But if you run it through to what it represents on the cost of a consumer product, let's say a pair of shoes or some IT product that is shipped around the world, it's no more than 1% of the total price of that final product. So if we can manage to run that cost through to the end consumer, we actually provide a way to those harder to obey sectors to manage the extra cost of zero emissions and operating zero emissions. And we facilitate investment across the value chain all the way up to the fuel provider. So demand signals and demand from consumers and from consumer good companies is really the third bucket that we really need. And the final dimension I would add to that is the dialogue with the finance community. The finance community is obviously very diverse with very different levels of risk appetite and will need to intervene at different levels of development of the technology. But I think there's a huge appetite from the finance community exemplifies through multiple initiatives that have been created over the past few months to really understand how the hardest to obey sectors are going to decarbonize and understand how they can help in partnership with public financiers, in partnership with public development banks and with governments. So those four blocks, policy, finance, demand and energy inputs are I think the blocks that we need to work on together that we started working on through a range of initiatives and now we need to speed up. And my take after four years meeting the Energy Transitions Commission is that we will only speed up if we create trust among industry leaders. And so what we hope to do with the panelists here that was a much broader community is create that level of trust that enables us to move at the fastest speed. Thank you Farstein. That makes a lot of sense. It also describes a very complex multi-stakeholder engagement with a lot of different players with different interests. Has the Mission Possible platform come up with a way in which this dialogue is going to happen? A sort of methodology, one, two, three, four steps of how we're going to get there. We have and we are trialling it and we'll probably need to refine it over time. The way we've been describing it is a four step process. Step number one, bring together all of the most ambitious, really committed industry leaders who want to move together at the value chain level. So bringing in the financiers, bringing in the consumers, bringing in the energy suppliers. Step two, defining with them what the trajectory to net zero emissions looks like. At what pace could we go if we dream big, if we dream fast? And so that goes for roadmap. I think there's a lot of excellent analysis out there on how do we get to net zero, including from the likes of DIA, who increasingly work on that target. But what's missing is agreement across the industry leaders on what that trajectory looks like and how fast can we go in the 2020s? I think it's quite easy to understand what can happen in the 2030s, 2040s. The key question is how fast can we go in the 2020s? Once we've got that roadmap, then it's much easier to encourage industry leaders to take bold commitments and to take both commitments that will be complementary. Because an industry leader, let's say a steel manufacturer might feel uncomfortable taking a very bold commitment alone. But if they're taking it alongside some of their consumers, some of their financiers, and some of their energy suppliers, then it creates an environment that is much more favorable, where you can believe and you can trust that this commitment will not backfire in the future, because you're actually moving with the rest of the value chain and with the industry leaders in the value chain. And the final step is to help implementation of those commitments. And that's going into the nitty-gritty of how do you make things happen. So for instance, we're publishing tomorrow with the Global Maritime Forum, a blueprint on how do you do risk and finance first zero emission pilots in the shipping sector. And that's really getting into the nitty gritty. So I think we need to go through all those four steps, but obviously different sectors are at different stages in that process. And we'll need to adapt also to the specificities of each sector. So work in progress to be refined over the coming months. Thank you, Faustin. I'd love to hone in for a moment on the second step of your process and look specifically at the shipping industry. So we get very tangible for a moment on what does this imply. And Bo, you've done massive thinking and research on what shipping technologies of the future might look like. So I'd love to ask you, what are the perspectives? What are the solutions? Is it biofuel or is it hydrogen or what is the magic? And then I'm going to come to you, Harry, and see if you agree. So we can play out the second phase right here on the screen in the middle of this session. Bo, over to you. Okay. Thank you very much. And thanks to my fellow panelists. It's a very, very interesting discussion here. And coming from the shipping side, I can really agree to the way that the picture is painted here. I think talking now concretely about shipping, first of all, we have to realize that shipping is many different things. So shipping is a small, short sea shipping. Ferris, for example, running along the coast, its small coastal vessels, etc. And it's huge ships going in between continents, deep sea. So in a way, we're fortunate that looking at shipping, we have a multitude of different types of operation and different types of assets. And from an implementation, ease point of view, and from an impact point of view, you'll see that the different segments of shipping are placed, are scattered all over this chart. So now when we start talking about which order should we do things, we're fortunate to have actually a segment here where there are low hanging fruits. So to speak, they're not that low hanging, but they are lower hanging than other fruits. The lower hanging ones also tend to be the smaller ones, you know. So that's just how it is. So the thing is that before we get to the deep sea global shipping, and to make it even more complex, some of those are trading in a non-regular manner between different regions. So they are not on a line of predictive trade, you know. So they go from Africa to Europe one time, and then they go to somewhere unknown next time. So that makes it ultimately difficult to plan and support infrastructure for these kinds of ships. But before we get to that, we can start with some of the lower hanging fruits, and that could very well be ferries within a country. If you start with the inner country, then you're fortunate to have predictability around where you need to support infrastructure. And you're even happy to have support probably also from the local government, because they have an incentive to work with all the national operations, including the shipping operation. So eventually for some countries, there'll also be a strong financial incentive to actually invest from the public sector in decarbonizing operations. So you see, when you're looking at shipping, we can divide it actually into a number of different groups, and we can identify areas where it's just easier to get started than in other areas. And I think that that gives us a lot of guidance. And secondly, I think to what was said before that we have to start thinking in terms of the difficult ones as well. So that means deep sea shipping with tanker, bulk carriers and container ships. And we need to start finding out how we're going to decarbonize those. Definitely for new builds in the future, what are the future solutions that we'll be aiming for. And then to make it even more complex, we also need to start thinking about how can we work with the existing fleet and use drop in fuels and who knows maybe even CCS to take some CO2 out of the operations of existing ships. So then in this more difficult but larger impact segments, I think now to your question, what are the solutions for that? I think we're looking at a multitude of opportunities. We're looking at a number of so-called power to X opportunities where we take electrons from solar or wind, for example, and turn them into fuels. And we know technically that it's possible to produce a number of fuels. You have both, I mean, zero carbon fuels like hydrogen and ammonia. And then you have methanol and other fuels where you still produce it from the electrons, but there is a carbon component in them that you either recycle or that you take out the carbon. But anyway, and then finally, you have the more heavier fuels and some of them are from the bio sources. So we have a multitude of opportunities in shipping to take the energies on board the ships. And we have already available technologies to actually run on some of those fuels. So today, for example, you will see that we have already ships running on methanol, for example. So that's a proven technology. That's fully possible to do. And we'll see, I mean, soon in the future that we'll have also opportunities to run, for example, on ammonia on a larger scale. So we're really seeing these opportunities emerging. And of course, in bringing these forwards, we need to be aware of the very high safety levels that that shipping needs to display. We need to maintain those in the future as well. And it goes without saying that some of these new fuels also need to be matured with regard to the safety elements. And for example, ammonia has certain health issues related to them. So that needs to be managed. And we believe that can be managed. But it is important to handle that alongside with the looks to efficiency and cost levels. So you asked very specifically about the technology solutions possible. I think they are definitely the technical solutions are definitely going to mature. We're going to see that emerging. I think what is going to be critical in terms of implementation is the question about scalability and availability of the energy sources. Because I mean, it doesn't really matter if we can run on hydrogen or ammonia produced from renewable energy sources, if those renewable energies are not available or in too strong competition with other sectors, you know, so it's, it's really, we really need to understand the bigger picture here and make sure that the solutions we're bringing forward for the transition are also available when you look at the global picture and the dynamics between the different sectors. Thank you. And in the meantime, we have a chance to see Lucia's beautiful illustration of this dialogue. Thank you. Hari, let me come to you. And I'm now on thin eyes because you're a Delft engineer and I'm a simple economist. But we heard Bo argue for really zero carbon fuels or methanol with recycled carbons. In the past, Shell has argued that shipping might be able to leverage the relatively cleaner nature of natural gas. What's the emerging view now, given the timeline that we have and given that we're only going to have one cycle of capital asset turnover ahead of 2050 in the shipping industry. What would be the fuel that you guys would argue is the answer for the shipping industry? Yeah, well, great point, Joel. And thanks. Well, I think it's very comprehensive perspective, which in my mind reinforces that it's very hard to pick a winner. So I'm not going to be tempted here. But what I'm going to draw out more is the points that you have made around, well, I think there's a timing dimension. So there's a pace and there's a place. So depending on who you are, our pure ferry operator today, there are actually quite a lot of or a few ferry operators who have electrified their ferries. So it's done. Or at least, to the extent they can get access to renewable electricity, then they're there already. Some of our customers who have elected to have their vessels fueled on liquefied natural gas, why? Because it can be done fairly easily and it can be done now. And so I think the time dimension here where choosing for gas today vis-à-vis perhaps for ammonia or hydrogen in 10 years, I think is still an important consideration to make. And I, for one, would not say that, well, then, you know, I take a point around the capital to replace the cycles. But I'm not just sure the wisdom of saying, well, just wait for hydrogen or ammonia to come. And therefore, now we will just continue to emit very high carbon intensity fuels or even tend to burn high carbon intensity fuels. I'm not so sure yet. So what I would suggest is that we will see a mosaic of solutions emerge in the coming years. And I, for one, would want to pick a winner, albeit I think all the options that Bo identified, I think are actually pretty good. And many of these were actually participating or very actively leading the development thereof. So that's one perspective. The other perspective would be to say, how would you make sure that the entirety of that is actually managed in a way that allows it to go forward? And one way we would like to think about it is that if you frame all the things that Bo offered in a sort of a roadmap for the shipping industry that would get the shipping industry by 50 to a certain aspiration, say net zero, then that would be a very good way to get all the cycles together around the common ambition. So you'd have a defined target. But perhaps you accept that there are different ways to get there. So you would maybe say to the fuel providers like ourselves, what we really would be aiming for is an overall fuel offering that has a decline in carbon intensity as you go forward. Could be gas to start with, could be biofuels to come in, could be ammonia to follow. As long as we get there in aggregate, that would be okay. And likewise, then you can have governments provide the appropriate incentives. Because I wanted to come back to a good point that Faustin made, which is that of course, in the in the fullness of time, and across the entirety of the backdrop of a shipping industry, I think the and their customers, the cost can be socialized. And indeed, the carbonizing, you know, the logistics around genes, would only amount to a few cents per gene. The problem, though, with that is, most of the costs are incurred early on, and by a relatively small proportion of the players. And frankly, a bit like in steel, they cannot afford it. So you really need in that early trajectory, not necessarily to pick the winners, but provide the broad stimulus offered through governments or incentives like a carbon price to be able to motivate the appropriate developments, but also be able to finance and fund them to basically get through that valley into a place where, indeed, the scope and the scale and the socialization of the cost is such that indeed, it can be turned over against many, many genes, and in the fullness of time, rather than across the early trajectory where I'm just not going to be able to afford the genes that over the next five years will fund the investments that Bo and I need to be able to get the ships and the fuels there. So I think that that's another thing to consider. But that can all be organized around this roadmap, and we would actually call that roadmap maybe the equivalent of the nationally determined contributions, we would call them industry determined contributions, or sexually determined contributions, and that may be a way to frame the pathways and road maps we need. Let me hand it back over to you again. Thank you. And Faustin, the last question to you then. We've heard both Bo and Hari lay out very compelling perspectives, but we need to build consensus around that. How is the Mission Possible platform going to do this? What is the mechanism by which we can achieve that consensus? So based on our experience with NGTC, there are two or three ingredients actually that we really need to make it work. The first ingredient is industry leadership. We want to solve that if there's no willingness at CEO level and a chairman level to really engage on that path. And we need leadership not only in the fuel providers, not only in the hard of the bait sectors, but also in the consumer good companies. I think we need more Amazons, more IKEA's, more Apple's who take commitments on the decarbonization of their supply chain to pull the rest of the supply chain with them. That's the first layer. The second ingredient for me is data. What those industry players we have around the table have in common, that there are two types of people working in them. Engineers and economists, and they both like data. So the way we actually make them agree and converge points of view is to actually discuss the data in depth and make them understand that they're not that far apart in their vision of the world and create bridges that are really based on evidence. And then the final layer is to create trust because we can't unpack those data and that evidence if there's not enough trust between those leaders. And unfortunately creating trust takes time. It takes effort, but with willingness and with collective willingness, I think we can get there. So I'm really excited to be embarking on that. Germany towards industry-determined contributions pre COP26. Thank you, Varstein. Trust, data and leadership. Let me let me turn it over to the leadership. We are incredibly fortunate as a community of industry participants to have two unbelievable leaders who have made it their mission to help private sector engage with the UNFCCC and with the COP process. And they are a central point for a lot of the work that needs to come together in creating these industry-determined contributions. So allow me to turn it over to my dear friends Nigel Topping and Carlos Nigel Gonzalez from Chile. Gentlemen, over to you. Gonzalez, maybe I'll just say something about this session. Jules, I was expecting you to bring me and you obviously had a different script from me. And then we're going to close off a whole industry day. I just wanted to come in and just to sort of put a parenthesis around the conversation that we've just had. I think this is a very exciting time for this work. We're talking about collaboratively defining whole sexual transition maps in sectors that historically have never done this. It's actually very familiar and it's so familiar in the technology that we don't even notice that when we talk about 4G, 5G, that's a sexual road map, which is pre-competitively agreed and then driven hard to create value for society and the whole sector. So it's very exciting to hear it. I learned a lot about this from my time on the energy transition questions. I'm really thrilled that Faustine and the ETC and the World Economic Forum are in mind. And we do business now and I've joined the governance mission possible. So I'm really delighted to see that. It's absolutely at the heart of what Gonzalo are trying to do to bridge non-state actors and state actors. So I'm delighted to hear about the real specificity of actions in the short term, in the context of the long-term, Faustine. I think, George, you picked a good one on shipping because it feels like one where there's a lot of collective momentum coming together around some of those concrete plans, which I think we all hope can encourage the IMO to get a dose of ambition ahead of their other slow process. So having said that, I think I'd just like to wrap this session. Thank you, Jules and this great panel. I'll hand over to Gonzalo now. We're going to start trying to wrap on the whole day, just seeing a whole series of these sessions. So Gonzalo, over to you. Thank you so much, Nigel. And thanks also for the session that we have just heard about. And Jules, thanks for the support that you have given us the whole year. And I would like to start then also thanking the World Economic Forum, the Mission Possible Platform, the International Trade Union Confederation, and all of our incredible partners for such an inspirational second day of these dialogues. We are really, really excited about everything that we're seeing in the dialogues. And we understand that we must use this energy and the run up to COP to move forward on specific and very measurable net zero commitments in heavy industries. And to accelerate the policy energy and technology solutions needed to reach net zero by 2050. We know that hard to debate sectors and heavy industry sectors account for up to 30% of greenhouse gas emissions. So today's session carries so much of that sense of urgency around the climate crisis. The good news is that reaching net zero carbon emissions from heavy industry and heavy duty transport sector is technically and financially absolutely possible to a cost of less of 0.5% of global GDP by 2050. And we also know, of course, that the cost of inaction not only surpasses that number, but inaction is simply unacceptable. So now that we know it is technically feasible with technologies that already exist or can reach commercial readiness with a continued investment. And today the enthusiasm has been overwhelming from all different businesses and stakeholders committing to accelerating this transition. So with that in mind, what do you think about today, Nigel? Well, it is mostly who know me now. I spent the first 20 years of my career in industry. So I love that we're getting into real industries where real people make real things and living around the world. And I really love today because this conversation just now has typified it. There's a really strong sense of detailed collaborative efforts about how we get to net zero before 2050. Earlier on, I was on a session with all the leading groups working in the fashion industry, so producers and brands. And they're all coming together to create a shared decarbonisation roadmap very much in the way that Palestine has just described. Looks like they can come together around driving 45% of emissions around those value chains by 2030. That's the UN fashion charter, also an organisation called Fashion Pack, could be as much as a third of the industry. That's a big interim target with some specific steps that can be taken at different parts of the value chain. Also, we're seeing the UK retail industry do a similar great job. They've come together around a roadmap to get to net zero by 2040 with all the stores and warehouses being net zero by 2030. Remember, of course, retail industry has a whole of industry in its value chain. Again, the first thing to point about demand signals. So we hope that that can really help pull some of the demand signals for decarbonising shipping and other forms of transport. In the UK, of course, they have 67 million people in their customer base. It's a big chunk of the UK. British retail consortium's roadmaps now have been supported by 60 retailers. That's just in one country. And actually, we're now exploring, rolling that kind of model out to other countries. Also, I really enjoyed today the way that Poet Tree is being incorporated into the dialogues. We had one essay with the World Health Organization. We had the first US National Youth Poet, Laurie Amanda Gorman, joining us today. We also had Nadia Gaudridge, CEO of the Indian Chemicals Company, Goddridge Industries. Repeat a poem he's already broadcast about carbon pricing. I'm looking to our colleagues from Maske and Shell to up their creativity that it's been laid by one of Indian's major industrial corporations, although I don't think that's compulsory as long as we get to zero. So I think it's been a really fantastic day of inspiration and really practical concrete steps as we grapple with the really challenging disruptive changes that every industry is facing now. I agree with that. It's really exciting. And I also love to see how getting to zero is becoming such a competitive race now. In this race to zero, we said during the opening of the day, climate action will become a source of competitive advantage. And we have seen that spirit a lot respected today. We have heard from new signatories to the climate plate, which is a commitment to achieve net zero emissions 10 years ahead of the price agreement. And now has 11 signatories since the launch in June 5th, including now, Mercedes-Benz, Siemens, Verison, Infosys, and of course, Amazon. And that's a great collaboration with global optimism. It's becoming so clear that in order to be the leader of the pack, companies need to commit to going net zero earlier than 2015. That's something that is starting to happen. And indeed, some companies are committing to it as early as 2030, or some of them have already achieved it. The CEO of SAP, Martin Lindquist, summed up this level of enthusiasm today when he said, we should stop talking and start acting across all stakeholders to work together and support good initiatives that support just industry transitions. That invitation to act is something that we heard during the day and many times. But it's not only a race that companies will win on their own. We must all learn from one another and share best practices, both in operation and across supply chains. That integration in the supply chain is also something that we have seen so many times being reflected. This is why it was so good to hear from Asselort-Mittal talking about the effort to scale and promote green steel production and from Schneider Electric participating in Amazon's climate pledge to reach net zero one decade ahead of Paris. Those are, again, companies that will help others also to achieve their own targets. We also heard from Clara de la Torre from the European Commission on how policymakers can and will provide the finance and support to enable businesses to move as fast as they can on this zero carbon pathway. This is where the ambitious look really helps action accelerate. For me, it was very exciting to hear from Lafarge Voltsing, which is the first global building material company to sign up with intermediate targets for 2030, validated by the Science-based Target Initiative, who rightly said that the time is over for incremental action. We need a revolution and revolution requires also magic and we have seen a lot of magic happening during the dialogues. I would say there is a kind of magical ingredient in the dialogues in the global climate action and it's about radical collaboration. So when we think about magic and collaboration yesterday, you were very concerned about me being hungry so you did some magical exercises and gave me a banana through the camera. That was amazing. So I would like now to give it back to you with an orange that might turn into something different when you receive it. So there you are. Oh, again, a banana. Back to you. Incredible magic here on the way to the dialogues. Just a wrap. I think it's really clear that we have great momentum that people realize this is a revolution that we have to go through to get to net zero. We know from the data that we published earlier that we've already more than doubled net zero commitments during the pandemic with now over 1500 businesses committed. And of course with the SME Climate Hub launch, we mean business for International Chamber of Commerce and Expansion Roadmap, looking forward to tens or even hundreds of thousands. I think the ICC have a target of a million SMEs joining the race to zero with companies like IKEA and Unilever joining as supply chain leaders to really encourage that. Looking forward to many more companies making those commitments and many more cities as well. Again, another great demand signal coming from cities and looking forward to all this fantastic work we've heard about today on heavy emitting industrial sectors coming together so that by the time we get to Glasgow, we can really be showing the world that this transition is underway. I think that Chief Sustainability Officer of Mahindra Group put it really well this afternoon when he said that setting science-based targets makes environmental sense that everything you need to do as a business to implement and reach them makes business sense. So we're really excited about the progress we've seen today from many parts of the world of industry from retail and apparel to cement and shipping and across entire value chains. Looking forward to tomorrow we'll be taking a deeper dive into the world of transportation of all forms tomorrow so some of the mission possible magic will be back with us tomorrow. So until then thank you everybody for all your participation everything that you shared today and for those of you listening everything that you've learned and that you're going to implement in your own value change in your own systems. Thank you everyone for watching and we look forward to joining you again seeing you for day three of the race to zero dialogues tomorrow. Thank you and goodbye.