 Well that was a nice snapshot of the different voices around the world the next generation if you will the gents editors are very active on the issue we're tackling today on John Defterios joining you from Dubai and welcome to our session building tomorrow's energy systems as you know as part of the world economic forum sustainable development impact summit. Our timing for this roundtable discussion could not be better right in the midst of the United Nations UNGA and the package that's taking place in the General Assembly and the discussions around this topic and also about five weeks ahead of cop 26 in Glasgow as I noted I'm joining you from Dubai today and I yesterday in the last 24 hours chair three sessions around hydrocarbons with ministers from very large emerging markets and I think the thing that came out of it for me what stood out is that we're living in a bipolar world and I don't mean to be cute here but you have the developed countries primarily in the West the United States and you're laying out very clear strategies to net zero by 2050 collaboration between the government and the capital markets lots of investment flowing into this sector of the world and then the developing world the ministers I spoke to from Bangladesh and Nigeria Indonesia very populated developing countries saying for the next decade they're kind of wedded to hydrocarbons because they have these assets are lower cost oil and gas gas as a transition fuel they'd like to go in a deeper way to renewable energy but they're hamstrung by finance so one of the topics here in our session today is is this green fund really going to come to reality be robust and be long term so these governments and companies around the world in the development world can make plans we're going to have a 40 minute session here we welcome your comments put them into the chat box and I'd like to have your location and name if you'd like to as well to pepper to our panel let me introduce them now first the deputy secretary of energy joining us from Washington is David Turk John Moore is the chief executive officer Bloomberg. Nef he joins us from from the UK Ignacio Galan is the chairman and chief executive officer of Ibadrola and Judith Harbin is executive vice president and CFO of the French energy giant Angie a nice world economic forum welcome to all of you before I get a chance to begin our questioning I wanted to bring up a Slido a side here of a word cloud and a key question that we'd like to have you weigh in put in your input to how you see COP 26 coming forward how would you define a great success from COP 26 and Glasgow what are your expectations to come in the next five weeks in this 12 day meeting that's taking place will bring that slide up and then bring it up a little bit later to see those in the audience who have weighed in as well and in fact I would like to start with the deputy secretary David Turk David you know we saw some progress in the last 24 hours and in fact the last 48 hours we had the UN secretary general at the general assembly say look we need to move in a much more rapid way and consolidate the games we've had so far and move further we heard Boris Johnson who is the president of COP 26 as a country the Prime Minister of the UK again and also we've had President Biden weigh in and then China suggesting won't export any more coal plants that's kind of late in the process what kind of progress did we make and very importantly how do you consolidate it around COP 26. Well let me start John with a thank you for moderating and thank you to our web colleagues for bringing us all together and it's terrific to be on a panel with such leaders like Ignacio Judith and John and so I'm going to try to keep my comments short so that can listen to them and learn from from then as well. I think it is true as we look at where we're at that we have made progress we've made a lot of progress and not only in the last few days but in the many months and years before that we at the Department of Energy in the US government focus a lot on technology and technology costs. And it's quite remarkable what we've been able to do the US countries around the world private sector leaders around the world really reducing those costs so that we can do things at scale we can do solar PV at scale we can do wind at scale. But we need to keep reducing those costs further so one of the key priorities for us is and I think this helps everybody's ambition it helps political leaders ambition in terms of NBC contributions and the Paris agreement helps companies. Making ambitious pledges going forward as well as even on solar we've seen solar PV costs be reduced dramatically over recent years but we're going to keep pushing those costs down. So our goal is to reduce those costs another 60% we're trying to reduce costs for hydrogen green hydrogen gets a lot of attention we're trying to reduce those costs for green hydrogen to a dollar per kilogram in this decade. Electricity storage especially long duration storage such an important part of the equation as we get higher and higher intermittent renewables penetration of our grids. We've got goals to reduce those costs 90% for that long duration storage over 10 hours. So as we focus on the political commitments including the one that my president put on the table in terms of international finance. Other commitments that are being made and will be made in the Paris agreement. Let's focus on where the progress is on the technology side which helps everybody frankly and helps everybody be more ambitious as well. Okay I want to talk to you about some of those technologies that are in place today and kind of the moonshots of tomorrow. Let's bring up the Slido and the word cloud here and see what the initial indications are from our audience. Again we welcome the questions coming in and we'll try to get to as many of them as possible. I know we have a slight delay and we'll pose a question at the same time here. John Moore investments into hydrocarbons tracking for the last five years very close to about a trillion dollars. They dipped down prior to the pandemic in anticipation of this investment into renewables. But the renewable investment worldwide if you factor in electric vehicles about a half a trillion dollars. What needs to happen with that gap to get to net zero by 2050. Yeah I mean so thank you very much for having me on. It's really great to share some thoughts. And so actually there's been an increase in investment over the last few years up to that half a trillion. And again depending on how you measure it what you will see is that sort of on a private basis into fossil fuels we think there's about 700 billion per annum going into that support and on a private G 20 level there's about another 700 billion. There's sort of one point four trillion dollars going into fossil fuels. You have half a trillion flowing into renewables. So essentially what needs to happen over time is is a transition towards from fossil fuels into renewables. And by our numbers what we think is that to get near to Paris that the half a trillion needs to be between one and one and a half over the next decade. And then it needs to go up again sort of two or three times to between two and four trillion dollars per annum. So it has to scale. But these are into technologies by then that would be proven. So hopefully we see an acceleration from but we really need to get moving this decade to see that swing from fossil fuels into renewables and other clean technologies. Ignacio Golan that sounds overly ambitious with John's talking about here and these are the facts of how to get to the targets that are set out not for the developed world but globally right. Is that feasible in your view and some of the markets that you're working in here that are suffering from underinvestment and why the Green Fund that President Biden committed to yesterday is so important. So first thank you very much for inviting me to this panel. So I know we're optimistic. I think today are more than 100 countries signed the Paris Agreement. So the civil society is pressing to make changes and I'm confident that the progress some progress going to be make is going to go down to six. So I think I did the sector since 20 years. And I think the situation is very different today. What it was at that time many government regulators competitors were not convinced about the need to fight against climate change. Today that is not the situation. So I think we in a dollar we've been already moving ahead since then. I think we have invested heavily. So hundred and forty billion renewables electricity networks storage. All the things we documented today in which we transform the company in things with everybody agrees now. But I think my first point is as you carry says we need to accelerate. I think the sense of audience. Most of the things have to be done during the decade. If we are not already move rapidly we will not reach our goals. We have to need to invest massively in renewables. It's my great and the storage. And I think as David was commenting with the technology with the skill with the financial resources. But we need things which are not dependent is dependent on the administration fast to permitting processes. Thanks. It's still continuous fine for five six years to find a permit for making anything. But either for renewable either for networks. I think it's it's almost impossible. Most can play an unstable framework. I think I this is not that one for many reasons I would comment later on tax policies applying the principle who pollutes pay so we cannot change the rules any time because of the temporary situation. We cannot jump from subsidization renewables to penalizing them. You have to call it temporary situation of the global community prices. We have to be very consistent with investment that mature over 40 feet 60 years. So I think they are already rules. I think it's in the European Union is already clear part of carbon neutrality with the green deal and fit for 55 low. But I think now because of this temporary situation some countries is penalizing already this clean energy. So I think they are the situation which is absolutely crazy. We are moving that today they are already paying gas five power plants 20 euros per megawatt hour. Gold 60 euro megawatt hour and green hydro nuclear between 80 and 100 euro megawatt hour. That is not already considered because of the policy. And that is that is my concern. But put the European model at risk. The Commission cannot stay apart. It needs to take action to make it. The 5455 will be a reality. It is is not a new model. The model was already developed 50 years ago. Everybody knew that the carbon price is going to increase. Now they are discovering that the price is because it's increasing the effect to the price of energy. But everybody knew that that is already worth it. So I have to say the opposite about the United States. The United States we are already you know we have very important president this country. The United States has already had the same regime based on tax incentives for 50 years. No change. It depended to the change of the federal authorities. And that is the result is they are more renewable here elsewhere. And they are already extending this model as well now for net worth. So I think but as well here they have this employment about permitting etc etc. So I think for me and the concern is if we would like to convince another countries to follow our path American and European path. So we have to be very consistent. It's stable and trust me the sense of value. We cannot change the rules on the middle of the way. And because the temporary situation of the gas like that. We cannot convince countries you mentioned before because what is about you. You change the things because you have a temporary situation. I think for completing my point is consistency stability sense of urgency. And no change the rules because of the temporary situation we can affect the temporary prices of electricity. Yes. I know you're making reference to the gas price hikes we're seeing here in the European Union in particular the UK. It's been topping headlines this week. As a result of this due to it seems to me we're in that space in between right in the transition. There was some underinvestment. We drew down inventories of gas because of the longer winter last year. We have that price squeeze. But there's been underinvestment in hydrocarbons and not enough renewable energy to fill the gap yet. Is that how you see it. And this is the reality of the transition. It will be painful at different times and consumers will pay higher prices. I think John it's great to see you first of all and great to see the race of the panelists. What you just talked about I think is a great proof that energies two things you need to be. You have to have some long term thinking and you need to have a balance. You know often when people talk about the energy transition they talk about just wind and solar. That's obviously incredibly important. You know Angie we're investing billions a year and are very confident that this is a huge opportunity for all of us. But but really what you're seeing here is the system at the end has to work and it's not going to be by one technology. You're going to have to have a balance here. The gas will be there for some time to stay to deal with the intermittency of the renewables. And then of course over time it's going to be incredibly important to work on the greening of gas. And I think that by 2030 much of it is still for sale. But you know France as an example has a target of a 10 percent biomass in target in in 2030 which in energy terms is very quickly. And we believe that by 2050 all gas is going to be a renewable gas. And I think you know once you put it all together and like it was mentioned earlier by John there's so many technologies now available. And we should not bet our house or our planet on just one solution because we will need a mix of things. The good news is there's trillions of dollars literally flowing into into ESG funds. And so there's a lot of money available for investment. So if we create the right circumstances the regulatory is of course incredibly important. Like an answer just brought it up. And quite frankly I am personally very confident that we can make this happen. But sense of urgency is what we need now. I think by 2030 we need to have all the target of reducing by half our CO2 emissions. And certainly certainly that's our commitment at NG. OK. We did promise the response from the word cloud and we can check into it a little bit later as well. Let's bring that up now to see what our audience is thinking. We're getting some questions from the audience as well. So what are the key expectations. Your key expectations from COP26 to enable the global transition to net zero commitment to call phase out. And this was a discussion that was good that China gave that sort of commitment turning commitments into reality to Ignacio's point here. We've got to be bolder energy transition pathway acting earlier than 2050. We see a number of companies saying we'll be net zero by 2035. Some countries are trying to do the same thing. Speed scale net zero business leadership which is obviously from NG and from Iberdola is there at this stage. So very interesting the feedback that we're getting and finance for technology. And I'd like to pick up on that topic now if we can. David. I know President Biden said we've got this one. Here's our commitment to it. The criticism of the developed world is that we have democracies and there are four or five six year cycles on the election cycles. And you know what's going to happen with the next leader. We saw what we had with President Trump who's not even part of the Paris climate agreement to Ignacio's point. How do we give clarity line of sight continuity to the developing world in your view David. Well thank thanks John and really interesting word cloud that you just put up and the ones that really stuck out to me is is absolutely key or turning commitments to reality and then the speed and scale. We've got to move with the speed and scale here that's unprecedented. And while we have made significant progress as Ignacio and other panelists have said and many others have spoken very eloquently about this. We've got to just move with that speed and pace that speed and pace and scale like we've never done before. Finance is absolutely key. John incredibly as a U. S. citizen incredibly gratifying to see the U. S. step up the leadership by President Biden. And it's not just a speech that he made yesterday at the General Assembly. It's been the leadership that he's brought to the table from day one. Joining the Paris rejoining the Paris Agreement. The climate summit that I think was incredibly helpful this spring to really keep that momentum to put people on notice that everyone's paying attention to what commitments they put on the table during that point in time. I've had a chance to travel a few times with Secretary Kerry and all his phenomenal leadership around the world really trying to make sure that this is a shared enterprise all of us working together on those levels of commitment. Finance is key of course John I think it's useful to think of finance a couple different ways. One is and I go back to an earlier point the more we can use our R&D levers are other levers domestically and in collaboration with others to reduce those technology costs. That's a good that's a public good for everybody. If we're able to make progress in the U. S. or Europe or India or elsewhere and reduce those costs for solar PV that's going to allow more financing more solar PV out into the market. So we need to focus on that technology cost part of it as we focus on the finance piece. And then the other point to make I think here is incredibly important for governments to step up. That's what President Biden was doing yesterday in terms of the commitments and the messages that he was sending our European colleagues of course and other stepping up on that front in terms of the public finance piece. But we've got to work hand in hand with investors with the private sector with companies we need investment at such a scale by some estimates 23 trillion that we need for this clean energy transition and that's probably a low estimate of what we actually need here. We need to have that finance from the private sector from the investors work with other governments on the enabling environments and other kinds of mechanisms to really get that flowing. We're starting to see that. But as has been clear already in this panel we just need that pace and scale even further including and especially on the finance front. The numbers are extraordinary. I've seen even higher ones from arena for example here in the UAE right up to thirty one trillion dollars by 2050. Let's take some questions from our audience and I'll let everybody weigh in and I'll call on you so you don't have to kind of shout through the box. What's the one policy intervention that could in your opinion really make a difference in speeding up the process of decarbonization. And I know this is not an easy question as if European policy or national policy. For example Mr. Golan in Spain Judith where you sit in Paris normally. But what is the one policy intervention that could in your opinion really make a difference in speeding up the process of decarbonization. Judith you want to start. Sure I think the one thing that could make a huge difference is really the is to speed up coal exit. So we have in Europe as you know certain countries have given a twenty thirty target Germany has given a twenty thirty eight target. There are certain countries have not given any dates at all. It is quite outstanding that we're still having this debate to be honest because coal is of course the most the most polluting way of generating electricity. And given that we have so many options now on renewables on on green gas like I said earlier it is this would be the one thing that could make a huge difference very very quickly. And so I think we should all commit to that and get our respective governments to go faster on this topic. OK good. Again there was a good sign from China but they've been exporting plants pretty aggressively especially into Africa. Mr. Golan you wanted what did you say is a number one policy decision. You said you picked out a few in your opening remarks about tax policy providing some incentives here. David alluded to that on the new technology to foster to get back into the market faster. The one policy recommendation was a question from our audience. So I think it's a Europe in the fifth of fifty five is already contemplating several things and I come again to the point of sense of urgency. I think they are already as planning to uniformize the European taxation of energy is an S. every country does whatever they like. So I think it's impossible to make anything because it depends on the every country country can do whatever. So I think they are planning as well to modify to make a directive for a permitting. So but I think they're planning to make that for twenty twenty four. I said another day to also apply it to the president. I think twenty twenty four is too late when all this will be already completed. We are over. It will be over the twenty thirty and another one is very important is to keep the market rules. No intervention. I think we have something with David was saying the two words which I think is very important for me in this game. And I would like to put the example what the United States has already made with these two things. I think you know we have the bayonets in this country in offshore. I think we've been during the previous administration for months and months and years and years was funding delay the permits for making already the first offshore with farming this country. So the administration came within two months was done what has not been done in the last four years. The second one they have already make something which is very important scale. So they are already making an option at the same time in future option in such a way that they can attract the investor. Not only investors but as well industries. We can already provide wealth in the country because they are already not critical much for that. And the third one is finance. I think it's as well finance means to reduce capital. You need already a certain level of escape. But I think something which is already committed not very much. Everybody talk about the reduction of price of PV which I think absolutely agree. But it's more important to have already cheap and easy access to transmission. So in most countries the bottleneck is not because of the cost of the PV or the cost of the wind which is a problem that we have to continue reducing. It's the difficulties to have already transmission and the cost of this transmission represent and the time we take. I think we've been for the last seven years to make an interconnection between Canada and Massachusetts. So it's plenty of indications, continuous litigation. And it makes it possible to bring the clean electricity from one part to another one. But the same thing to support electricity for New Mexico. I was just today there from New Mexico. California where they spread the need to learn a long time. I think it's the finance. The finance is not only the cost of the renewable is the cost of all the things which are around mostly transmission distribution. OK, Mr. Golan and it's a market rules. OK, we have to just watch the length of our answers at this stage going forward because we have so many questions coming in from the audience at the same time. This raises a question I wanted to pepper our panel with John Moore. One of the questions that came up is what role do you expect nuclear power to play in the future? The minister of energy from Bangladesh said that they're they're working on a plant right down. They want to tap into that cleaner energy up front costs are high. The output is pretty low, but you have to stretch it out to pay it back over like four decades. Do you follow the money, John? What do you see here in terms of investment into the nuclear sector? And why is it not mentioned more when it comes to the transition? Sure, a really great question. And so actually we looked at in our in our last forecast, we looked at three different solutions, one of which was based around nuclear and actually using nuclear to create green hydrogen as one of the solutions for for 2040s and 2050s. And so, you know, it will depend really on the geography. It will depend on the country, the country view. Nuclear probably has a role. As we've said, there needs to be so much rollout that if you go down a pure path of, say, you know, renewables and green hydrogen, the scale of build out is absolutely enormous for all of those technologies. If you look at sort of gas and CCS, again, the investment in CCS is enormous. So any pure approach is going to be difficult. So it'll really depend country by country where nuclear is acceptable and where nuclear can be a sort of piece of the solution, let's say. And I think that will be one of the areas where countries sort of will decide their own road maps depending on where they start today. It's not obvious that a lot will will become new nuclear powers, but there's already, you know, a lot of nuclear around right now. And, you know, certainly that can be roll forward and have a positive impact. So I think there'll be certain nuclear countries, let's say, that are using nuclear to generate green hydrogen and those kinds of things. The other question I wanted to present to you is because we're looking for solutions here. And I'd love to have our panel. David Turk, you can talk about it because the role of the U.S. as shareholders in the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Asian Investment Infrastructure Fund. AIIB, of course, African Development Bank. Shouldn't we have a more aggressive mandate for these development banks to really make it fly and say that this should be our number one concentration over the next 10 to 20 years? It seems like we're kind of crawling to the process. David, is that a fair criticism? So there's no doubt, John, we need to do a whole lot more and a whole lot of areas. And to the earlier question on what single policy or this technology or that technology or this finance mechanism or that finance mechanism. The short answer is we need a whole lot more of a whole lot more policy technology and on the finance side. So I think your point's an excellent one. We need to be thinking about the World Bank. We need to be thinking about the regional development banks. We need to be leveraging them as much as we possibly can. We've had a lot of discussion in the U.S. government, not only with our Treasury colleagues who coordinate our relationship with those banks, those regional banks and the World Bank. But I've had personal discussions with the head of USAID, our bilateral development agency, Samantha Power, who's very passionate on these issues. And I'm convinced there's a lot more we can be doing from the USAID side of things and other countries bilaterally in terms of helping other countries move on the mitigation side and help on the adaptation side. We've got the DFC, which does a lot of international deals. We can leverage that further to get even more benefit. But we have to take a step back, appreciate how much we have to do to fundamentally transform our energy economies in a very, very short amount of time to be consistent with the IPCC. The experts are scientific consensus and what we're seeing around us with wildfires, droughts and other kinds of things. So we just need a whole lot more of a whole lot of instruments, policy instruments, finance instruments and technology levers as well. Okay. I don't want to be the doomsayer, but as I was saying, I was sitting on a panel with ministers of energy from Nigeria, Bangladesh, Indonesia, very populated developing countries. Indonesia's cold demand because they have so much growth right now, post-pandemic, shot up and they're still searching for gas. They've got major IOCs or international energy companies in Indonesia exploring for gas right now. What do we do about the very populated countries of the world, India in particular, which needs the financing? Indonesia, Nigeria, Bangladesh are sure kind of wedded to either coal or other hydrocarbons right now. Judith, you work in these countries as NG. What's the best solution here? I mean, you bring up a good point, John. There isn't one solution that fits all and certain of these countries still depend on coal. But again, like I said earlier, collectively we need to move towards more renewables and complement it with gas. We have at NG decided to exit coal. We have reduced our CO2 by 50 percent already in the last five years. We're going to have to do another 50 percent in the next until 2030. And I think if we all collectively put our minds to it, then we can make it happen. So to be concrete in these countries, renewables is equally important. Some of these countries have a lot of sun. So to create a green hydrogen, because often you will need gas, including on transportation often and electricity production. Those are some of the options that we need to look at. You know, Dave mentioned it earlier. We need to get the cost curves down on some of these technologies still. And certainly what we can do also in the developed countries is really to work on those cost curves so we can then deploy it in the countries that need it the most. And that half the highest energy needs, the growing energy needs, of course, because of their population growth. So local renewables, local green hydrogen, the transportation that comes with it. All of that technologically is possible. And of course, we're going to have to tap into some of the financial instruments that you've seen because it's private that you've mentioned. Because as private companies, we need to have, you know, a certain security around our investments. And of course, the returns that come with it. And that, quite frankly, in some of the more complex countries, we will need some support from the financial institutions. Okay. I'm going to ask the team from the World Economic Forum to bring back up that word cloud and see if it's altered through our conversations here. Ignacio, I'd love to get your thoughts coming out of COP26. What do you want to hear to address these major emerging markets? We shouldn't be debating about a green energy fund and lacking commitments. Number one, U.S. and China. Can this energy and the energy transition and climate change be the unifying policy between the U.S. and China? Ignacio, give us that in about a minute because we're a little bit tight on time. You're muted there, Ignacio. I will say something about the previous question. I think the first thing to, we have to convince the emerging countries that today, CAPEX in solar or CAPEX in wind is cheaper than CAPEX in coal or CAPEX in a combined cycle of gas. So I think they need less capital for generating. The second one, I think they can already make themselves insufficient. They will not depend on the import of other countries. So I think these two things are important. The third one is related financing. I think it's a big change, a big improvement in the financing. The green bonds are there. So I think today, many companies, we have access to green bonds. I think we are one of the leaders in green bonds, more than 40 billion dollars already have for this in green bonds. But what is the problem of achieving the green bonds? I come again, stability, predictability, clear rule, rule of law. And that is what we have to request to the countries to have access to that one because the money is available. But I think the one which I put in money for 40, 50, 60 years, they are asking for stability, predictability, clear rule, changing the rules of the middle of the match, et cetera. So what we are expecting on the, on August 26th, the first one, we are the main sponsor of coal. So I think we are already our headquarters in Britain and in Glasgow. Although you are invited to come here, it's a beautiful office. And I'm sure that we will, a part of the conclusion, we can already enjoy a wonderful time there with the Glasgow people. It's very, very nice. And I think we can already make it. I think what I expect, I don't get so optimistic. I was starting saying, well, I've been already attending the cops in Copenhagen. I've seen how the world has evolved in this period. How the people is already understanding because of the civil society pressure that they have to be done. So a natural in Glasgow is going to be as well, as well as before this one. I think the main problem would be who is going to finance the renewable expansion in the emerging countries. But I think everybody is like a pandemic. I think it's something which affecting to everybody, if all of us, we are not doing all the necessary. So therefore we are making one part of the planet. It is affecting to another part of the planet. So it's a common effort to transfer the situation. And I'm sure that that is the point. That's why I come to my point. It's very important that those countries, what we have already made their leadership, European Union in this moment, United States will be very consistent in our policy. We cannot change the rules just because of temporary situation. We cannot affect the market. If we are intervening in the energy market, if we are changing the taxation rules, if we are already just not providing the stability, who is going to trust in our modernist, the current one. So for me, that is the main thing. We have to provide already a real, a real good path for those which have to follow our line. If not, I will start. So I think that for me is very important. And optimistic because the social, the young people, especially that is the main thing that they argue when you talk with them. The climate change is at the top of the priorities. And we, those we have the responsibility in running the companies or running the countries, we have to provide already a solution for them. And that's what that is going to happen. Glasgow is a good place for already just trying to achieve this. Ignacio, I like your optimism because the world needs a rally at this period. I have a question for both John Moore and Judith, the same question that I'm going to conclude with David Turk. For John and Judith, the impact of environmental social governance. We saw a lot of different proclamations from major fund managers saying that you cannot be invested or have that exposure to hydrocarbons and take money from us basically is the bottom line. So should we follow the money on Wall Street, the city of London and Frankfurt, the major capitals like Paris? And if you track it, John, is it having an influence on where the money is flowing? And does that model need to be applied to the developing world at the same time? Judith, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the impact ESG's had on the makeup of NG as well. Let's start with John. Thank you. So I mean, there's certainly been a huge massive uptick in ESG. So we're already had more inflows this year, year to date than we had in the whole of last year. And things like sustainable debt we've already had as much in half one of this year than we had in the whole of the prior year. And the three years before that it had already traveled. So the good news is there really is money flowing in. There's a lot of commitments being made. So now 70% of emissions are covered by some form of government commitment. So that's another good thing. So people are setting targets. I think the gap we have to close is really the implementation gap, how to deploy those funds, where to deploy those funds. And that's where I think it needs to be looked at on a country by country basis because every country will have a different path. And every country will need to sort of invite investors in using the right policies, using having the right goals, adopting the right standards. So there's something called TCFD, which is a standard for climate reporting that investors will look at. So again, adopting those standards is a way of attracting foreign investors. So the money is there, but you have to attract it in with great targets and good standards to really get that deployed in the right. Okay. Very good. Judith, for you, because we're a little bit tight on time here, one minute, then I'll ask for the same from David Turr, please. So the ESG is, there's literally trillions. Every time we talk, there's a trillion more basically, quite frankly, flowing into this. I think the way I distinguish is equity, funding, debt, and then on the project level. And I think we're not fully there yet on the green bonds. I agree with Ignacio since his company and mine are the global leaders on green bonds was close to 14 billion each that we've been able to issue. I think that's, you know, for me, the most obvious because you can really tag it to specific projects. When you look at the rest, though, there is many initiatives that are all very good initiatives, but there's no common language yet. And so what we're seeing is that there's a lot of money going into renewable pure players on their stocks and you have very high multiples that come with it. But surely that cannot be the solution, right? It's not going to be like three companies on their own that are going to make this plan at work when it comes to energy. And so collectively, we need to commit to transparency. I think we have like two, three years here. Really important to find a common language that investors can really distinguish and follow the ones that mean it, you know, have a zero carbon date. Yes, but have intermittent, you know, dates also of where you're committed to reduction and so on. And really think as companies, we need to commit to that. And as investors, we need to get more sophisticated to be able to read just like we read somebody's company's balance sheet. We need to get more sophisticated on reading ESG to really place that money because I do believe I'm quite optimistic actually that money will be available. But right now it's too concentrated in very few places when of course it's a global need and we all need to be able to invest and to use these funds to move the energy planet forward. Yeah, thank you very much. It's very precise on what you're saying. Let's bring up the word cloud one more time and then I'm going to present the question to Deputy Secretary Turk. The question to our audience was what are your key expectations from COP26 to enable the global transition to net zero. And you can see the expansion of some of these key phrases here, commitment to coal phase out. And that's not taking place in many parts of the world as I was noting there. Turning commitments to reality energy transition pathway that has to be clear to Judith Hartman's point here acting earlier than 2050. And I know there's a lot of pressure for the next generation saying she's the baby boomers. You guys have been asleep at the wheel. Why didn't you wake up to the challenge earlier to ignore this point? It has to get done at COP26. And what is a real energy transition? Eric, we've been talking about the developing world. I just very concerned that they're moving at a slower pace and they need some support for you at COP26. What's the success that we walk away and say, you know what? We are tackling those who need the financing most most and we have these mechanisms in place. What's realistic from Glasgow? I think that the key thing, John, I took from the word cloud and I think what we need to keep our eye on the ball is the real world. What's happening in the real world? The word cloud had action and had early action. I think that's what we really need to be focused on is what is actually happening in the real world, not just in the U.S. and in Europe. But just as you said, John, in India, in Africa, in Southeast Asia, I was just in India a few weeks ago to talk with our Indian colleagues, five or six different ministries there. What could we do sharing expertise? What could we do collaborating to try to help us all move forward as quickly as we can in the real world? I think we've got a two to three-year window of time here where we either step up and are serious about implementing these technologies with the policy levers, with the finance levers at scale that puts us on, again, as the word cloud said, that trajectory, that pathway to net zero going forward. And if we don't do that in this next couple-year period of time as we come out of the COVID crisis, as our president has said, we can't just build back, we need to build back better. And I think this next couple-year window of time coming out of Glasgow with the commitments on ambition, incredibly important. But we've got a lot of work to do. No doubt all of us need to roll up our sleeves on this panel and many others out there and get to work on those impacts in the real world. Okay, so all the members on this panel, as I'm sure will be in Glasgow, don't let them walk away and I'll be there as well. Don't let them walk away without a deal is what we need to do. We need a commitment across the board. What a fantastic group. I appreciate the audience participation on the word cloud and we couldn't get to all the questions, but they were all very robust. Obviously people that track this very carefully. Judith Hartman of NJ, good to see you again. Ignacio Galan, it's always great to have your expertise. John Moore putting the money flows from Bloomberg nefs into the context that we needed here between hydrocarbons and renewables. And David Turca couldn't ask for a better government voice in terms of breaking down the realities of today. Thanks for joining us.