 All right. Well, welcome. It has already been a terrific morning. I want to also give thanks to the secretaries, to Arun Sallie, just to everyone who worked so hard to put this event together. It's just been tremendous being here, and looking forward to the next day and a half. In this session, this is one where we're going to explore entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurial journey of our sector. Arun referred to the game changers of the industry, the need to innovate, the importance of innovation and tackling the 21st century energy industry and energy future. He talked a bit about that convergence between startup to scale up, capital and innovation and talked a bit about the ethos of Silicon Valley rooted in entrepreneurship. One of my favorite quotes that summarizes the journey of entrepreneurship is, first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you and then you win. And we're fortunate to have a panel of winners who are going to share insights on how they were initially ignored, how they were laughed at, how they were attacked and how they won. We have three incredible entrepreneurs who've done wonderful things not just from a business standpoint but also from our planet. You have their bios, but we're fortunate to have the person who's considered to be really one of the fathers if not the father of the U.S. solar industry in Dick Swanson. With KR, we have the epitome of an entrepreneur who has survived and thrived through his entrepreneurial journey at Bloom. And with Natasha, we have one of the great newest entrepreneurs who's tackling again this convergence of profit and planet. Let me kick it off with a question to Dick. Dick, I talked about this quote that epitomizes the journey and what trips off the tongue today as we think about solar, as we think about sun power, as we think about the success of your career, it'd be great to hear about the journey in that context. You know, today we think about solar is booming, over 250,000 jobs in solar, more than double the number, just as recently as 2012. Again, today as we think about solar, it's quite different from when you started. Talk a little bit about this journey you've been on. Oh, boy. Thanks, Ira. Appreciate that. I think the key was, from my perspective, was to recognize early on that we needed renewable energy. And that was that sort of vision sustained me through all the laughter and ridicule and that sort of thing because we had, our mission at the time was to take a factor of 200 out of the cost of solar cells. And give folks a context. When you say at that time, when was that? That was in 1973. Right. And so that's a big job. But I came from the microelectronics industry at the time which I felt was beginning to mature. And when I got excited about solar and started going to solar conferences, I saw the enthusiasm of the people for the mission that was very energizing. And that enthusiasm is still here today, I think. So I really got drawn in by that enthusiasm which sustained us over the years as we whacked away at that factor of 200. And just give folks, I mean, we now know it as Swanson's law. Which is a misnomer, by the way. Tell us about that. Tell us about that. Well, and this was not actually a law by Mrs. Swanson, was it? There is that one, but that's not the one you're thinking of. So the history of learning curves is very interesting. I first learned about it from Paul Maycock who had been tapped to be the Secretary of Energy DOE right when it was formed. And he came from the chip industry where the power of learning was very well established and known and took that methodology over into PV. It should be by rights called Maycock's law. I think the reason that my name got stuck to it is I talked about it till the audiences were asleep and totally ready to shoot themselves from hearing about it so much. So let's move to KR. You know, entrepreneurs tackle so many issues and challenges along the way. And in your case, one of the tensions you've had is this tension between ideology and innovation. It's this notion of really tackling the war on carbon. Folks who say it can only be done and the only acceptable answer is on 100% renewable energy side. And on the other hand, you have pragmatists who talk about a more balanced pathway forward. How do you see this? And tell us how you've navigated the issue at Bloom. That's a great question, Ira, but first and foremost, Ira didn't introduce himself as we started the panel. In the clean tech industry, as it went to the curves, the tourists came and left after the initial people came. You came and initially you saw the tourists come and go. You continued on sustainability. Thank you for doing that. That risk capital from people like you is what make entrepreneurship in this field happen. So thank you. Thank you, Kara. And to Aaron Salley, the secretaries, thank you so much for organizing this and having us. So to your question on renewable versus fossil, that's a great way to put that because unfortunately, electricity, which is so complex and which has so many different dimensions, has been somehow categorized as black and white and it's become a wedge issue in this country. Okay, right versus left. And the reality is, let's just pare it down into the fundamental drivers in our society. Energy has a moral and ethical dimension that we should talk about. It has an economic dimension. It has a security dimension. And it is also incumbency and a scale issue with technology and progress. So you put all this together. It's an extremely complex issue. The moral and ethical questions, which is where I started my journey, was to look at the map of the world and say there are more people on the planet today without access to electricity than when electricity was invented. 135 years ago we had the grid. Today there are less people with access to the grid than when that happened. That's an ethical issue. That's a moral issue. That's an access issue. There's another 1.5 billion people that don't have affordability. And in a digital world, not having access and affordability to electricity is not having access to a future. And that's a security issue. It's a global security issue if you want to think about the number of people. And then you take on that. We are living in a post-climate change world. Let's not talk about climate change is coming. We are living in a post-climate change world. The 100-year hurricanes are happening three times a year. We shouldn't be calling them 100-year hurricanes. Our forest fire season is going from four months to eight months here in the West Coast. So in this post-climate change world, how do we build resiliency to an electric grid? Because if chances are, if you are in a hospital and you're getting a complex surgery without electricity, that surgery is not going to go well. It affects every part of what we do. So our war is against time and against carbon dioxide. And that war can be, if it is against time, every possible way from conservation to reducing the footprint of the fossil fuel that we use in terms of carbon to renewables. It is an and, and, and. It's all of the above. It cannot be one or the other. And unfortunately, it has been polarized. And all parties, all sides have sufficient blame for where we are as a country in dealing with this issue. And you've been very successful though in being a bridge in many ways and actually trying to navigate those two polarized sides. Just talk a bit about how you've done that. So if you look at it's, it's education and it's about value proposition. The education is the reason people cannot breathe in Shanghai and Delhi is not CO2. It's criteria pollutants. It's NOx, it's SOx, it's particulates. We have a solution that can be put out there and give zero carbon, sorry, zero NOx, zero SOx, zero particulates. We can reduce the CO2 footprint significantly with our technology because of the efficiency and the lack of transmission distribution. We can also get it to zero carbon using a biofuels. About 20% of our install base uses biogas from bio waste and therefore on a cycle basis it's zero carbon. On top of that we have a technology to capture carbon almost for free so the sequestration can happen. So we are zero carbon ready. There is no willingness to pay at this point in the world. So when we educated across the board of you can take a fossil fuel and have an opportunity to zero carbon using a solution like what we have because we don't have the nitrogen dilution. You can have zero criteria pollutants and we consume no water when we operate. Water is a huge issue in most parts of the world. So you got to think about sustainability not in a single dimension. It is not a black and white renewable versus fossil. Yeah, great point. So people always ask about the biggest risk of funding and being part of these entrepreneurial companies and we always start with financing risk. Some people talk about it as valley of death. K.R., you talked about the notion of this being in some ways in the early days an island and then tourists came in and back to an island particularly on the financing side and financing side has really become the biggest risk of the sector and yet there are entrepreneurs all three of them here on this panel who have been creative about how they have actually built their cap tables how they've capitalized their companies figured out how to de-risk the risk mitigation journey with sources of capital ranging from non-dilutive capital government foundations angels and ultimately potentially equity sources like VCs. Natasha, you also have done a great job doing exactly that. Talk about how give some examples. How have you done it? Yeah, first of all, I want to say how honor I am to be on this panel amongst these titans of clean tech entrepreneurship and clean tech investment. We're honored to have you. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, so we realized early on that we would need to be very strategic in how we accrued funding and so for every sort of KR and Dick out there there was tens of hundreds of other entrepreneurs that couldn't quite get off the ground and take off and so we were able to kind of leverage that knowledge and create a pathway that so far has been really good in bringing in different sources of funding. So we started off with philanthropic sources. So in fact our first funding to support this project was through the Tomcat Center here at Stanford. So that was funding to build our first prototype. We had our lab here at Stanford and we had ideas to kind of scale that up and bring it out and so Tomcat supported that scale-up initiative. From then we were able to attract government funding so we were in a program at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab called Cyclotron Road and that was a two-year program where we got- For those who don't know, explain what that is. Yeah, so Cyclotron Road is this amazing incubator accelerator for clean tech companies. So you come in as a company with an idea with a team and you have access to the lab, you have access to the staff scientists that are there and you also get funding to support the project. The money does not come into the company but you get it through salary support. You get money to purchase supplies. You get basically free rent by being co-located at the National Lab and you get access to the billion dollars worth of equipment that's available at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, really one of the gems of the Department of Energy, these national labs that we have. So within that program, we were able to really bring in a top team and really build our prototype and really show that we could advance this technology quite significantly. We also could apply to small business innovation research grants through the National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, NASA, because our technology can be useful in space. And once we have this government funding and then again could just really improve the performance and show that we can actually build this, we then were able to attract private equity. So we were able to attract first angel investors and family offices and lately we've been bringing on institutional investors into the mix of our financing. And what's been really great about this is that we see these three financing sources as kind of three buckets and we still actively go after each one of those buckets. And so the first bucket being philanthropic funding which really keeps us focused on our mission, really reminds us the impact that we want to have as we grow and scale up our company. Then the bucket of government funding, that gives us really great feedback on the technology. It forces us to really think about our technology development plan and gives us peer reviewed comments. And then of course institutional investors really of course keep us focused on our commercialization and thinking about how we're going to navigate the economics of bringing our technology to market and making sure we're always thinking about kind of a profit driven approach and making sure we're going after the lower hanging fruit. So each of these three buckets create this really nice ecosystem that really is there to support us as we navigate this sort of clean tech field. And maybe just to put some specifics on it, you've basically gotten a one for one leverage on the non-dilutive capital as you built this company so far. That's right, we've attracted close to 20 million into our company and so it's been a mix of these three sources. Yeah, that's great. So the newest successful IPO and newest successful entrepreneur in our sector who's just gone public is sitting up here with us. KR's journey is inspirational in so many ways. First and foremost, I think of just that tenacity and perseverance and riding out those tough times in our sector over the long journey that it often is. These are companies that are building real companies and not quick flips as it sometimes gets categorized by other sectors in this region. And KR, you have figured out a way to navigate through those challenging times, come out the other side with this great IPO recently and I've heard you speak many times about the lessons and learnings that you impart to other entrepreneurs along the way. Give us a sense of some of the lessons that you have had. Lucky is extremely important. Luck is extremely important. Let me just start with that. Hold on, hold on. Unfortunately, you don't control that. So it's something you hope for and hope's not a strategy. So outside of that, what do you do, right? Things you can control. I would say in our case, like, you know, I can just speak very specifically to our case. We had a extremely aspirational mission that for a company starting out there, looking at the sector of a multi-trillion-dollar marketplace and to have the audacity or the stupidity to say our mission is to bring clean, reliable power that's affordable to everybody on the planet, right? You said the laughable, all that stuff. But there is sincerity to that mission. It is put out there every single day we stare at it. Every single day when we come to work, no matter what the ups or downs, we keep asking, are we inching forward towards that goal? And we never forget that. Every employee in the company. That mission is ingrained in us. I think having something that strong, that is well beyond the profit and loss, that's well beyond the everyday stuff, is essential to be able to weather through the ups and downs. So, you know, that's one. The second thing is, with any new technology in a field like this, there's a technology learning curve. And there's a cost curve that goes with that technology learning curve. And things that you do when you start are absolutely unaffordable for most people. And it seems so incongruous with the mission of where you are. But the key is, do you have a road map and a pathway? I said. And just like the first cell phones were carried by the CEOs and Hollywood stars at $5 a minute and it barely worked. The first great cars were owned by the people who did not need that car because half the time it sat in the garage, right? So that's your early adopter who is willing to stick with you and learn. And along the way comes your technology. So at every step of the way you need to ask, do you have a value proposition for a customer? And will that pathway help you survive today and give you enough time today to work towards your longer term future? Time and capital. Talk a little bit about, you have successfully managed to actually figure out how to track the capital to bridge that gap and to get you along that cost curve. Maybe just say a few minutes about that as well. Yeah, so the first few rounds of funding for Bloom came from venture capitalists on Sandal Road. And here people think when things are going badly, it's a bad time to go pitch a new idea. I would say it's exactly the opposite. The dot-com busted happened. The VCs were cleaning up and not investing in anything new. So I went and said, I'm sure you don't know the difference between energy and electricity. I'm sure you don't know the difference between kilowatt and kilowatt hour. That's a winning pitch. Yeah, that's a winning pitch. I'm going to educate you, but the impact of investing in this field and the market size and what you can do is very large. And can I get you interested in a new field? They're willing to listen about a new field because the fields that they've been investing in are not doing that greatly. So it was a great time for us to be able to go make that pitch, right? And we could get started. But along the way, what we realized was the kind of money that we were raising in every round was about the size of an entire venture capital fund and not a venture capital investment. So we needed to go beyond that. We made a higher-level decision that we're not going to go to one single strategic industry partner because that's going to inhibit us from that long-term mission and that big aspirational mission that we had. So we wanted to stay true to that. So I sat for days thinking about it and a little light bulb went off, which in hindsight was very simple. What about all the pension funds and the sovereign wealth funds? They have the long-term vision. They want money to be coming in an annuity basis over the long term. So we went and directly started pitching to them and they said, we don't directly invest in companies. I said, there's always a first time. I know you don't, but shouldn't you be? Does this not align? And that's where we went to the next round. And at some point in time, you have to grow up and be accountable. And here we are being public and I'll tell you how it went 10 years from now. Congratulations. Dick, you are uniquely qualified to answer the question that we all get asked all the time, which is give us a sense of where we are today in terms of being an energy entrepreneur. What kind of time is this to invest? We, of course, think of this as a renaissance time at our fund. But given your history, give us a sense of what it's like today and put it in some historical framework for us. I'm glad you feel that way, Ira, because I do also, I think, today is probably the most exciting moment in the sector. We have renewable energy at maybe 1% of the energy globally. We need to get much larger. And how to do that is a huge monumental task. I mean, certainly a rune outlined a lot of the barriers to that. But it's going to require the creative thinking of the global community about taking that 1% and making it 50, 80, 90, probably eventually 100 within a century. So I think, you know, the challenge of that is so exciting and monumental that I also wish I was a young student right now getting into it. You know, one of the things that we, at DBL, we spent a lot of time thinking about when entrepreneurs come to pitch us is trying to figure out is someone trying to tackle the entire ocean day one or if they really figured out a way to risk mitigate over time. And one of the strategies is focusing on core strategic differentiation and leveraging what you can infrastructure around you in the early days. Even if over time you may want to build more end to end. And, Natasha, you've done that really well. You have figured out a way to speed up your development, to speed up your execution by really understanding how to bifurcate that which you are uniquely positioned and different and that which you are able to partner and buy off the shelf. Talk a bit about that. Yeah, absolutely. When we were thinking about forming the company, you know, we come from, at least me and my co-founder Kendra, we did our PhD here and so we were coming from this basic science side where we looked at these catalysts that can make all these different products and we were trying to figure out, okay, how do we now think about bringing this to industry? And again, hearing of stories of other entrepreneurs, we realized that trying to build the entire reactor, all the pumps and the firmware that would go around this system that we would need to build would really be very, very expensive. We'd have to bring in a diverse group of team. And so we asked ourselves, okay, what is the thing that we can uniquely do? Like, what is the enabling part of this whole technology? And then can we find a manufacturing partner who has already, you know, built the manufacturing floor, already has the expertise in designing the system? And luckily enough, there is a manufacturing partner in the East Coast in Connecticut that builds these systems that we can basically be a drop-in component to it. So we focus on the electrode that goes into these reactors and an analogy we like to use is sort of in your Dell laptop, you know, you have many different components made by different companies, but Dell puts all that together. So we are effectively the Intel chip that's in this sort of Dell laptop and then our manufacturing partner is putting all of that together. Opus 12 inside. Opus 12 inside. Okay. Yeah. That's right. So this allows us to get to market a lot quicker. We don't have to uniquely hire different people to build this system. And so we're, and we can also think about scaling up and we know what our costs will be and this kind of thing. So it's been a really great leveraging tool to leverage these decades of engineering that's already gone into these systems. You know, one of the things as we think about this entrepreneurship panel and we get asked this question of, well, why now or why is it a renaissance or why are we so excited? It does come down to what we think is the most fundamental barometer of where we are and that's human capital. We're just seeing extraordinary entrepreneurship. We're seeing experienced executives who want to make the next chapter of their personal professional lives and we're seeing the younger generation as represented here on this campus and many others who are tackling energy in ways we just haven't seen before. And, K.R., you have spent a lot of time focusing on the human capital side. I've heard you talk about the importance of how you've built your team. If you can actually spend a little bit of time talking about that, maybe we can just go down the line after you speak and hear about this human capital element and the importance of that sector. So very early on we said the single most important resource or the competitive advantage or the secret sauce for Bloom has to be the people that walk in and out of the door voluntarily every single day. It's the human resource. We made that a core way of how we think about stuff. So we use this phrase, I don't think we invented it. Maybe we heard it somewhere and we happily copied it and used it, which was gene pool engineering. We were going to gene pool engineer our workforce and we asked what are we gene pool engineering for and it's value set, mindset and skill set. Skill set is easy. I'm not going to describe that to you. If you don't have the right skills, you're not even going to come for the interview. So somebody's going to filter that. The mindset and the value set became extremely important to us because we knew it was going to be a long journey and Silicon Valley. We talk about sprints. Next one year, I'm going to put everything on hold and get this company to this point, sell it to somebody else and then I can take my vacation. Smell the roses. That's a sprint. Some are marathons. We knew when we started the company, this is a tour de France. They're going to be sprints. They're going to be marathons. It's going to go on for a long time. So we needed missionaries who believed in the mission and wanted to stay and do what everybody else thought was impossible. So that mindset was extremely important and that came from them believing the value. So when you have that kind of an aspirational goal, what we found out later on, this is hindsight, was you can attract people of a caliber that you otherwise cannot attract. Let me give you two examples. When we were building our factory in Delaware and even prior to that building our factory, it's not like we can go to the next fuel cell industry and hire those experts to come and work for us. So I looked around everywhere to see how can I bring somebody who knows a lot about manufacturing and I know nothing about it or I knew nothing about it. And teachers but also adapted for the bloom way of doing it and it was the head of all of Toyota manufacturing for North America. Mr. Lean, Gary Convis, who had hundreds of thousands of employees working for him, the first non-Japanese to be on the board of Toyota. So I went and met with him and his wife had a golf course because he had just retired and said retirement is overrated. You can play your golf later. I'm sure you handicap will get better along the way. But for the next three years, I need you to come and help me make an impact. And I vividly remember, I'm going to use this as an example. I vividly remember his wife saying, maybe that's useful for you, but he's done everything. And he's going to do three more years of having done everything he's done. What can he possibly do at Bloom? And I said, number one, he can make a huge impact on your grandchildren and the kind of planet that you guys are going to leave behind for them. Number one. And number two, I know your husband's probably the world's best manufacturing guy, but I'm going to look at him and ask him a question. If he answers he has done that, then I'll walk away. I need somebody who has built a product that has aerospace quality, built it in numbers that are automobile quantity at prices that are like washing machines and refrigerators. Has he done that? And he just said, wow, that's an interesting job. That's, again, an aspirational challenge. Long story short, he joined the company. So what I would say is that's how you attract the company. I am so happy you brought that up and I think it's worth just pausing on that. At DBL, our core mission is this notion when people talk about doing good, doing well, value values, the profit purpose, it has historically been thought of as a trade-off, as a compromise. And you have so well articulated how this has actually become a strategic differentiator for entrepreneurship and for folks who are trying to figure out how to recruit people out of bigger companies, out of other startup companies. And this is actually one of the ways that young companies actually are competing right now. Each of you have had that example. Natasha, why don't you talk a bit about how you could, Natasha is incredibly impressive, could have gone into a wide variety of opportunities you had, and yet this is where you're focused. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, in some ways, I feel really lucky to be able to take my graduate research and build something out of it. And I would agree too, in terms of attracting students or employees, we've been able to really leverage the fact that we do have this impact. A lot of inbound come to us and say, I want to do something in climate change. I want to affect things globally. I want to have an impact. And so that is a huge differentiated factor for us as well. I would say also one thing that's been really helpful is the fact that academic institutions such as Stanford and other institutions are training the next generation of employees for us. And the fact that my advisor, Tom Hadamil here, is still very much active in the field. And so that attracts new employees for us as well. And early on, us being at Cyclochon Road at the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, that also was a huge attraction for us because there's so much history there. You're being at the lab. You're surrounded by other scientists and engineers. And for someone who is in technology, that's really exciting to be around other people doing really exciting things. So we've been able to hire a very top-notch team of scientists and engineers because of the impact and where we're at. But maybe before leaving the topic for you, Dick, we always talk about the migration of great talent from other sectors, other sectors here in Silicon Valley that are now coming into the energy sector for the first time and many of the folks at Sun Power and even Tom Werner himself, a great example of that. Talk about how the human capital evolution has changed since the early days to today. Yeah, interesting question, Ira. In the early days, I think we didn't have such a codified procedure for judging people. But I think it was the vision that attracted people and kept people there. And the key is not only to attract the best people, but to keep the team together through all these ups and downs going on. And as you go, well, for one thing, I'm really proud of the fact that four of my early students and employees have won the top prize in photovoltaics. It's offered every year the Cherry Award. So we did have a good founding team, but we didn't have manufacturing expertise. And it was when a cypress semiconductor got interested in it that was sort of the next huge break for us. We realized we all were academics. We had mainly made one device at a time, published a paper and put it in the drawer. And cypress got very excited about the challenge. Credit to TJ. TJ Rogers. But not, and of course, he led the parade, but it wasn't just TJ. It was the whole staff of cypress. We would go, he would have us meet with their manufacturing engineers. And they would say, well, how do you make your solar cell? What's the design rule, which is sort of a chip jargon for how big things are? And we said it's 100 microns, but we've got a roadmap to get to 50. And they said, no, you mean nanometers, right? Microns. And then they laugh. And then they say, well, how many mask levels does your device have? And we say, well, three. And at that time, CMOS chips they made had 21 or something. And then they'd laugh again about how simple this all was. And then they'd say, and how many wafers starts do you want to do? And we'd say, well, our first full factory is going to be a million starts a day, a million wafers a day. And you know, they get this sort of shocked look on their face and say, you mean a million a year, right? No, a million a day. And that challenge just sucked their entire engineering effort into it. In fact, we rated them shamelessly our manufacturing people. We pulled out of Cyprus, for example. And they just ate up that challenge and got tremendously motivated by it. That's great. So we'd be remiss not to take advantage of the wisdom on this panel and end with a key question. Arun and Sally, when they invite all of us back to the 10-year reunion here in 2028 and we're talking about the state of play at that time, give us some prognostication. As we are back for the 10-year reunion, how will innovation and entrepreneurship have changed the future of energy at that time? Let's start with Natasha. Yeah, I think it was mentioned earlier. There's renaissance of clean tech entrepreneurship. I think that the ecosystem is building and I'd like to see more and more graduate students going and creating companies and building new solutions. I would say in 10 years we'll see more. IPOs, more early stage startups, more new ideas, just a very rich ecosystem. And the way we see kind of new software companies, we'll see new clean tech companies coming out. Well, I think that on the one side, today we have the technology at cost which would allow you to say have 25% renewable penetration easily in our electric generation system. To get our aspirational goals of over 80% or so, we, by the way, what I mean by that, Ira, is that if you are going to build a utility today, the most cost-effective solution would have 35% of the energy coming from variable renewables, the rest coming from natural gas, flexible natural gas sources with a big chunk of batteries. To get beyond that 25% or 30%, we need to maybe take the cost of batteries down by a factor of 20. So there is a, you know, the experience I had in bringing a factor of 200 out of PV makes me feel that that's a doable thing and I would challenge the community to do it. I think it can be done. We need to take a little bit more out of the cost of PV, but it's largely, largely there. And once we've done that, which may not happen at the 10-year reunion, but we'll for sure by the 20-year reunion, we'll be set to essentially transition to 80-plus percent variable renewables. Sally and I heard that was a request for an invite to two reunions. I'm going to start at it from the other side. At the end of the day, any industry exists to serve its customers. 10 years from now, what are the customers going to demand and what is it going to look like? I would say from 10 years from now, for most commercial industrial customers, for the first time in the history, their electricity is going to be customized to their needs. Electricity is going to see personalization like digitization and telephony saw personalization from a one-size-fits-all grid to a personalized solution. There are solutions that are going to require DC power, low-voltage, high-voltage, different phases. There are solutions that are going to ask for 100% carbon-free. There are going to be some that are going to be highly carbon-free, but not 100% carbon-free. There is going to be being able to follow the peak. There are going to be solutions that are going to ask for resiliency and reliability. There are significantly higher than what we have today because critical infrastructure not having power and the potential for cyber attacks and man-made attacks and natural disasters. There are so many different reasons in addition to sustainability that the customers are going to demand a different solution and that demand of personalization can only come with distributed, coexisting with the centralized. It is not going to be which one is going to end 10 years from now. It is always a hybrid solution at the end of the day. We have not lost our mainframe computers. They're called data centers. Okay? It's that hybrid. The reason the personal phone is really good is because it can speak to that data center and do something for us. It's that hybrid solution. So I think there'll be microgrids and milligrids connecting to the macrogrid. The microgrids and milligrids will provide personalized solutions for neighborhoods, businesses. That's where it'll be 10 years from now. The great Alan Kaye I thought gave the best advice on this notion of prognostication when he said the best way to predict the future is to invent it. Now is clearly our time to invent the future of energy. Thank the three of you. Thanks to everyone here at Stanford and thanks to so many people in this room who are indeed inventing the future of energy. Thank you.