Lovely. And I'll prepare to open panopto. And we'll start in about five minutes. So if you want to breathe and relax for five minutes, then I'll come back and introduce everyone. Okay, great. Okay, just to let you know that we have now started the live stream. Hello. Can you hear me all the speakers? Yes. Lovely. Could Efrem try speaking to hear his quality? Efrem, could you speak a bit? Hello, Efrem? Let me unmute it. Sorry. Okay, you're still here. It was mute. And for me it is very clear. I can see you clearly and I can listen clearly. Lovely. I can hear you. Thank you, great. I believe that the technicalities look quite good. I will raise a bit the audio on my computer just to make sure that Efrem, would you like to speak one more time? Yes. Lovely. Okay. Yeah, I think it works very well. I'm just double checking the audio intensity and the volume. So I'll give it just one more minute to get to two o'clock and start just on time for those who are joining us live. And not to cheat with a few minutes ahead. For those who have joined us, welcome. I hope that the audio is okay. If you're facing any issues, please email me at ri5atsoas.ac.uk. Let us know if you have any trouble and what we could improve, but do know that we are also recording a high quality video of this session, which will be released afterwards. This is Romina Stratis speaking. It feels like a radio broadcast. It's an interesting role to have. So it's almost two o'clock. Welcome everyone. This is the webinar research for development in the era of COVID-19 challenges and possibilities. Welcome everyone. We hope that you are keeping well and healthy wherever you're joining us from. Thank you for finding the time. Thank you for the interest you've shown. It's reassuring that the issues we're raising in this webinar resonate with you all and that you're interested to be part of this. My name is Romina Stratis and I will be your host for today. I'm currently based at SOAS, teaching at the intersection of gender development and religious studies. And I'm also SOAS's GCRF officer currently. Before I introduce the topic and the speakers for today, just a few logistical matters. If you are SOAS staff, you are welcome to post questions during the discussion using the panopto screen that you're watching right now. You need to sign in and then you go to the section discussion and post your question. If you're a guest, you are welcome to tweet at the hashtag R4D series or you are welcome to email me as well at ri5atsoas.ac.uk. So I'll now move to welcome our speakers. There you go. Can you all see me? Yes, welcome everyone. So in terms of logistical matters, I just wanted to say very briefly that we're using a combination of live streaming and video conferencing technology. The audio has been good, but if we do, if it does become slow, give us a few minutes for it to improve and hopefully you will be able to continue smoothly. So today's webinar is part of a seminar series that we have, we established late last year together with the University of Oxford in order to address more systematically ethical and practical issues that seem to emerge in international collaborative research, but especially development oriented research, a very significant event we held in September, which brought together funding bodies, research directors and researchers attempted to apply the colonial lens to research practice. And that led to many, you know, various problematization around how we work with local partners in low and middle income countries, and evidence that certain bad practices continue, bad practices that Linda to he wise Smith had already outlined in her book, The Internationalizing Methodologies in 1999. So many of these practices continue today. And we set up the series with Oxford essentially to create a platform to continue the conversation and have a specialist from different parts of the world, join and build knowledge together and better practices, but also to bridge the funding bodies with the research offices, the research development side with research practice and field work. So with the current virus outbreak, we will sort of forced to turn to the current situation. And what we'd like to do now for the for the next year, next few seminars is to explore how research institutions and funding bodies could be sensitized or refocused to the particular challenges faced by low and middle income countries, especially in view of the funding schemes that are available such as the global challenges research fund, which Robert you can correct me I think is a 1.5 billion fund for about five years at a time. And, you know, we would like to essentially see how we could support our partners better in this time so what we could do to adapt and become perhaps more flexible in this times, but also with awareness of the historical inequalities and that have defined international development, humanitarian aid and actually scientific knowledge production in general. So, we would like to see how we can continue supporting partners in this crisis, but with, with, in ways that can actually promote local leadership and overcome these asymmetries. In this session, in particular, we want to explore connections between the public health crisis and wider development issues and livelihoods challenges, but also the effects of the crisis on and the challenges that it poses for international development oriented programs or research, and how again funding arrangements and institutional practices could adapt to support egalitarian collaborative research globally. I don't need the specific questions of the advert, but I will address them to the specific speakers as I invite you to speak. So, I'd like to welcome all the speakers. Apologies for monopolizing. We first have Dr Alex Lewis, who is director research at sauce. Alex has been very keen to promote, you know, our decolonizing research initiative at sauce. And she has been, you know, really adamant about us, and re evaluating our research practices and how we support partners in non-medical countries. So we have Robert Felstead, I hope I pronounced that well, at the, who is head of GCF challenges at UKRI. He previously worked at EPSRC as senior portfolio manager for manufacturing sustainable industries and new industrial systems. He has a scientific background in chemistry. We have the pleasure to also host Professor Kevin Marsh, who is professor of tropical medicine and new field department of medicine University of Oxford. He has spent most of his career leading research on health in Africa. He's also director of the Africa Oxford initiative, which supports the development of equitable partnerships between African researchers and colleagues in Oxford. He is senior advisor to the African Academy of Sciences. Welcome. We also are privileged to have two partners joining us from Kenya and Ethiopia. Respectively, we have Dr Judy Omombo. I hope I said that well. Judy, who currently works as program manager for the affiliates and postdoctoral programs at the African Academy of Sciences. She has worked over 20 years of experience in epidemiologic research focusing on data driven decision making for disease control programs in Africa, and she has served on several global and African panels that advise African governments on climate policy. Good to have you Judy. And last but certainly not least, we have Dr Efrem Tessema, who is a social development specialist in Ethiopia. Efrem has degrees in the social sciences from a disability university and the University of Basel in Switzerland. He has been involved in socioeconomic development programs in Ethiopia for many decades, and currently working with Agri team Canada in the disability as a gender specialist. Welcome Efrem, good to have you. Great. Okay, so I don't want to linger any more. Let's jump into the discussion. So I'd like to invite Efrem to speak first if that's okay. Dear Efrem, I know you since 2012, when you were working on the IPMS program to support small scale farmers with livelihoods in ways that considered gender differentials. And I think you would be the most equipped to tell us to give us a better sense of what this public crisis, public health crisis has translated in terms of livelihoods challenges, and what kind of sustainable development issues it raises. But also whether it points to other needs in terms of development oriented research that needs to occur currently in order to support those efforts. And can I remind you to unmute yourself when you respond. Thank you Romina for giving me this opportunity. Thank you all. I may not be a good speaker on this current situation because there are a lot of experts and frontline health extension workers and the medics are struggling to safeguard the safety of the public. But the topic that you have given me is very pertinent to my area of engagement. So I can throw a few, a few pointers. First of all, when this plague, you know, become global, it has taken us by surprise.  And most people after one month, one colleague asked me, when I wake in the night, I ask myself, is this real or something which is, you know, the media and some corners of, you know, some, some groups really try to confuse us. So still, more than, more than the impacts of, you know, the infection, people are psychologically become very timid. And our social life is really jeopardized, as you know, like the rest of Africa in Ethiopia. Our life is always based on, you know, kind of communion, kind of, you know, rendezvous during the middle time, during working time, be it in the rural area as well as in the urban area. So now the rules that the government gave us, the public, you know, medics gave us has become really problematic for us to adapt. Sometimes when somebody may rush to you and to take your hand or to hug you. So little by little, gradually, now people are trying to learn how to live with the danger of COVID-19. Coming to this as a topic, the social development issues, including the project I'm working now, we can't move on as we planned, because movements are restricted within the offices. Only essential staff are allowed to get into the offices, the entire government offices. Without those partners, key partners, it is very difficult to push on our development plans. For example, I work in four regions, more than 150 districts, and many, many hundreds of localities in Cabales. So this time, transportation is restricted. If you want to go by car from this to any region, you pay double. Because that transport should decrease the number of people, half, so that back and place should be paid. So first of all, it brings burden on the one who move on the different places. The other one is, it is also very difficult for the government to oversight, because we are living in a big country with different diverse cultures and experiences. Given that, for example, those who are working as farmers, they are in a big problem, because first of all, the value chain for some products like horticulture has become totally failed, because farmers do not get input, because there is no movement from the districts and the regions to transport them inputs. And also, the product value is becoming very low. One content of, for example, cabbage was, before COVID, was 300 Ethiopian birds. Maybe it is, it is maybe some 90, 90 dealers. But now, it has decreased into only 100. Because it is not because of only transportation, because most, you know, retailers and also also are not interacting, but there are also rumors, misinformation that if you devour, eat something raw, the virus is, you know, maybe catching. So there are, you know, even when you translate some of the things from the medics, when it goes to the local level, it has different meanings. So now people have their own way of interpreting some, some message. There are also, even for the urban, urban young people, there are also some media, some mediums like, you know, this YouTube that shows a lot of, you know, misinformation.  So there is no one now wants to receive you as a worker. And also those who are working on the farm, these migrant workers, they are no more there because they left the area and retreated to, to some, some kind of safe haven. And the labor, the labor migration has its own, you know, the movement is restricted. That means farmers do not get labor. They don't get input. And this means by implication, the female value chain actors, including the retailers, the poor retailers who are sitting along the road from at least up to Awasa, some 250 kilometers, they can't anymore vent these fruits and vegetables. Because first of all, there is no car rushing all day in that area. No passengers coming and picking your tomato, your red pepper. So these people are really in problem and they need a little support. And at the same time, nutrition crisis is slowly deepening because we don't get fresh fruits, even for the middle class in the others. This is also, the plague also needs us to immunize ourselves in different ways. Just to fair you my experience, now even it changes our food culture.   Our forefathers, you know, left a lot of formulas, even if it is by word of mouth. The other thing is not only the challenges, but there are also opportunities we saw. For example, look, now we are virtually organizing meeting in my organization, my supervisors in Canada and also my friends in the four regions of Amara, Oromiya's house. We sit together using zoom. And now we plant the next time, instead of meeting our partners, we can also do this with different districts. Those who have access to the PC and also the internet, we can also do that. Now people also farmers also in the whole cereals, try to use smart phones and negotiate, you know, markets. So you see a lot of creativity around this COVID-19. And the other issue I want to raise is leadership are differently very important. Empathy, togetherness, and sharing even whatever you have is very important. Even a smile is very, very supportive because still we see when I leave my office, I see people who want to get some coins, some alms. So still they are sane, still they are okay because people are supportive. Efrem, thank you so much. I could hear and listen to you all day. We have very limited time, but I think you did very well to convey to us the situation on the ground, especially how it affects small scale farmers, value chain systems, food systems, and that it really brings holistic change in terms of local development. So please stay on the line because we will return probably with questions later on. I'd like to invite next Judy who is in Kenya currently in Nairobi to focus a bit on the research side of it. So obviously Efrem is doing hands-on development locally, but the current changing situation that he described obviously probably generates new challenges also for research and development oriented research projects. Judy you sit at the African Academy of Sciences. I imagine that you have a lot of researchers coming to you reporting challenges or concerns that they have and how this has impacted local research projects that are ongoing or development programs and their capacity to deliver also right because there's high expectations on the other side, especially if these are collaborative projects. Do you want to give us a sense of what these challenges have been, how COVID-19 has impacted on research that is development oriented and the local researchers capacity to deliver? Thanks, Raminie. For sure, I've been thinking through the question around the impacts on our research projects and the capacity of the local partners to be involved and to deliver in living. And for sure, COVID-19 has had a huge impact. It's difficult to do your research when you can't go to your lab, you can't work with your communities that your research is involved in, and many things that impact researchers anywhere across the continent. And of course being at the African Academy of Sciences is a sort of privileged vantage point where we can get a view of what's going on across Africa really. The impacts that are negative have been huge and I think those are obvious, but they're also, as my colleague Efrain mentioned, there have been also many huge opportunities emerging. We see the development of hand sanitizers just from low tech things, hand sanitizers that are being developed here, they're locally developed on the continent. In Nairobi, for example, you can still find hand sanitizers in the shops, innovations in making our own face masks, which are another very low hunting fruit, innovative ways to self distance in shops, in communities, in markets and so on. To more advanced things like testing kits being developed in Africa, affordable ventilators, and even societal compliance to guidelines. I mean, this is something that we research particularly in the area of health in a situation like this that we shouldn't take for granted. Behavior and the study of behavior around the changes in behavior when something like this happened is really important. People are being compliant in general with many things, you know, the government comes in and says stay home and people stay home. Of course there will be a few who still want to go out and party, but you know in general most people comply with these things. And I think a lot has to do with properly delivered health messages, which is also an area of research is very important for something like this. And then to the other extreme and much more complicated, you have genome sequencing happening on the continent within a week sequence and discussions around vaccine development. So there's a lot that Africa has responded to in this crisis, you know, really given the opportunity to say, okay, it's a matter of what can we do and what can our local partners do to avert a lot that's happening. Now Africa has been able to buy some time measures, and this has really allowed scientists to start looking at the epidemiology and thinking through. At the Academy, we are putting out calls for example that we see that scientists are responding to African scientists are responding to research calls to enable the continent to look at things like social distancing. Is it really something that is relevant for our setting? Do we need to know what's out there? You know, conducts actual epidemiological studies to find out what is your actual risk if you go out? You start thinking about lifting the ban on movement and also things like that. So what is a case?  Which case do we need to find out how many people are actually positive? And what does that mean? What do you mean when you tell somebody that they're positive? Does it mean that you go to worry about quarantining yourself really or are you at a great risk in your family? All these things need to be defined in practical ways for people. You know, all these protocols are not defined yet and even things like what can scientists do to allay the fear that is really hampering governments' efforts to control the pandemic. So quite there is a lot, but you know, as I mentioned right at the beginning, it's great to be able to report that Africa is responding, the researchers are responding in a very, very strong, strong way and we're making lots of gains. Thank you, Judy. It's amazing that you're overviewing such limited time. It's really insightful. I've been following the reports from various African countries. So just reading on Senegal's approach, which has been quite science driven and various other examples of timely approaches that are customized to the specific conditions of the countries, even here in the UK. We have multiple complaints about the political response, right? So we can actually learn, reverse the knowledge transfer currently and I think this is where we're really trying to promote here and also promote the understanding that one size never fits all. And everyone has to, you know, mobilize local specialization, know how and effort to address it. So thank you so much. You spoke so eloquently. And I think, Robert, actually this ties well with what Robert might have to say. Robert, you sitting in being the head of DSRF challenges, how has UKRI responded? Because I'm pretty sure similar thoughts and conversations are going on within your organization of what kind of calls to put out, you know, how to support this kind of research and collaborations and really promote local leadership. Given also, as you know, the funding constraints of where the funds can go, right, the practical side of it. So could you give us an overview of what UKRI has been doing? Yeah, so I've got a couple of things to talk about in this session. And what I'll do is in this particular snippet, I'll maybe focus on impact on the GCRF portfolio. As I mentioned, it's 1.5 billion pounds and actually we're in, we're now, we've just come into the fifth year of the GCRF. So that started this month. And so, you know, a lot of our projects are up and running right now. And so there's obviously significant implications for our projects. The whole of the UKRI portfolio, obviously all projects are in some way affected by this. And our website is a good resource in terms of the latest information. And we are updating it several times a week at the moment, because things are changing so rapidly. So we are changing policy and updating policy very, very often. We encourage people to check there. In terms of specifics for the Global Challenges Research Fund, it's worth pointing out that it is different in a number of ways from the other parts of UKRI funding that we have. And in particular, it's focused on developing country problems. And so that in terms of the actual focus of the research, obviously then the way these grants are impacted is different, particularly because international collaboration is key to almost every single project. The vast majority of projects that we have have active collaborations between UK researchers and researchers all over the world. It's in over 100 countries. So obviously that means that the sort of research that people are doing will either have to be done differently. And there will be certain things that people can't do for the moment. So, you know, we recognize that there are some very significant challenges. And I suppose I'll break it down to sort of three different ways, which is three different scenarios. So one is projects that are sort of in the middle. In some ways, this is the simplest scenario because, you know, our position at the moment is if you're kind of in the middle of your project. Do your best to continue. We understand some things will be difficult to do and then look to extend that project at the end. I think for projects that I've just started, obviously there are greater challenges in the sense that you're trying to recruit people get things up and running. So our current position is try and start as best as you can. And again, extend later on once we know the full impact of everything that you're doing. And then probably the trickiest one and the one that you carry as a whole is wrestling with at the moment are projects that are coming to an end. So ones that just finished in some ways it's obviously that's less of a problem but those that are just about to finish and particularly the GCRF. It's towards the end of the project that we hope some more of the impact might come from that project. And so we are looking very seriously at ways that we can try and support those at this time. One thing just to be wary of the UKRI website has policies updated but those weren't necessarily applied to the GCRF that will be considered separately and that's because this is a fund that's run throughout host government department base. So we need to make sure that you know that they are so happy with what we're doing. But we are looking at that very seriously in the hope to update on that soon and it is useful for us what's happening particularly on those examples of things coming to an end because if we have examples then we can use those to make various cases. The tricky thing is of course if things will cost more money and then the question is about where the money comes from I'll probably come to that in my second bit actually because that will be relevant to what we're looking at particularly in response to the crisis. And what we're trying to do with GCRF and to use the GCRF to help respond to the crisis as well. So I'll probably leave it there for now. Yes, Robert, I think it's great and you have outlined some of the the key issues actually I had some conversations with Alex Lewis our director of research at SOS. Who actually I think could sort of add to what you said and maybe offer a slightly different perspective from the from the point of view of research institutions right who have to then respond to what funding bodies like UKRI are doing and are putting out there. So Alex may invite you to then tell us what you've dealt with so far what you've observed in the institution in terms of how our partners have responded and how our principal investigators are or co-investigators are responding to their partners locally. And I believe that there was an internal survey going on to gather, collect data from our PIs or CoIs on challenges and how we could respond to that. So do you want to maybe give us a few ideas? Yes, no, absolutely. And firstly, I think I'd just like to say thank you for organizing this the seminar. We know it's you've got a wonderful line up of people on this wonderful to hear so many different sort of perspectives during this sort of global pandemic. So thank you very much for that. And I think it's been a great transition from our joint seminar series with Oxford. But obviously time is pressing on. So I want to address the specific questions that you just raised. And in particular, you're correct. You know, we did, we did issue a survey very early on when the lockdown was first initiated within the UK and announced and we sent out a survey to our grant holders. It really took time quickly assess the impact to their research projects. And I'll be honest at that point in time we were looking at it more from an operational perspective. I, you know, can we assess the scale of work that was likely to be necessary, and also keep abreast of all of the funders sort of changing terms and conditions and responding to how people are, you know, considering supporting potential things like no cost extensions or the extending the likely extensions to the grant. So it's very useful to hear from Robert, the kind of middle just starting and coming to an end perspective from that perspective as well. And so we asked questions around the impact to projects and also to the staff on the projects. But at that point we weren't really looking, as I said, to that kind of more global impact to the to the partnerships per se. But I think when I was reviewing the responses I sort of very rapidly realized that obviously we needed to expand and consider the wider implications of the sort of mitigating circumstances that our researchers were proposing. And also, you know, what role could so as actually play in any sort of damage limitation and actually supporting the sort of mitigating steps as a result of the pandemic. So, I mean there were no immediate and absolute solutions I think and well, and many of us are sort of trying to sort of wait and see with, you know, with the limited sort of clear directions that are coming out from the governments and stuff but I do believe that it is key that we are maintaining open dialogue with our partners. And that as institutions we are making sort of every effort to understand the local environments that is being researched, and that we're listening to our partners to understand how we can best put them during these sorts of unprecedented times and of course vice versa how can our partners enable the research and what lessons can we sort of learn through this whole process. I mean the majority of the cases from the from the survey obviously the major thing that came through with the travel disruptions, given that the majority of our research is internationally focused. There were significant travel plans coming up in the next few months. It's the summer months it's when researchers tend to travel most. And, and, and, you know, because a lot of these travel plans are going to be canceled. This included the workshops that were being organized conferences that were going to be canceled or postponed. You know there's, there's a lot of challenges associated with trying to find alternative dates further down the line to reschedule them potentially.  And you know, how do we will the world have changed so much so that actually the research that was originally visaged, you know still be the key priority. And but I would say that that was that some of the challenges but one of the kind of positives if you like that came from from reviewing the responses to the survey was that with some of our sort of larger collaborative projects, our partners in the country were actually you know, very able and willing to take on the lead when we locked down in the UK first. And so there was one case where we have some workshops I think in Nigeria coming up, and the expectation was this lead PI from UK would travel out there and sort of help coordinate it. But as it turned out, you know, the travel wasn't possible. And so the partners the workshops went ahead at that time and the partners were able to facilitate those and by all accounts they were incredibly successful and obviously the UK participated through sort of using zoom and what have you as well. And so, you know, that was a real positive to me and it kind of described the, you know, where we had these really strong international equitable partnerships, actually things could continue.  And, you know, at that point, they weren't happening in Africa. So we were able to do that. But we're certainly a different place now than when the original sort of survey was conducted. And I've sort of spoken with several of our PIs and with some of our partners. And to some extent I think a lot of people are sort of waiting and seeing how things develop and waiting for more clarification from sort of funders and policymakers as to how we can progress with our with our research. So I think, you know, I'm sort of interested to hear certainly what Robert has to say the next in the next round. Thank you so much. That's what that's great here. And I think it kind of the situation for us, perhaps Western researchers to take a step back and trust their, their partners locally right and I think we've, I think we tend to take, maybe this is a the epistemology leads a researcher to think that they should be leading at all times but but we have to be humble to work actively and that means taking the step back and allow those who know best and are better equipped to deal with the situation to take the lead. So, so this was really interesting case study to hear. I'm sure Kevin has a lot to say in this with our next speaker. I mean Kevin you have been supporting research development in Africa for the biggest chunk of your career. What kind of needs there might be I mean we're looking at a lot of researchers in low and middle income countries taking the lead being very active being very creative what what are there, are there any needs that we could complement and you know, help strengthen and what do you think could funding bodies and institutions do to help that that process in that effort. Thanks very much and thanks for inviting me to be part of this. I must say that when I was first asked to reflect about what the crisis reveals about research systems in MICs. I reminded myself as you one often has to do that you have to be very cautious about this whole concept that you can talk about research systems in LMIC as if it was some sort of singular concept. Obviously LMICs are enormously diverse geographically politically and culturally and even if I, you know, restrict myself to Africa where I have spent most of my career. The same is true of course I mean it's a massive continent 54 countries enormous diversity and research institutions themselves are diverse. We tend often to reflect about the under resourced institutions but they're a world they're a world leading institution in Africa to sometimes in the same country as the under resourced one so that's just a caveat to say that I think we have to be careful about generalising and talking about the effect on LMICs and so with that qualification my response to the first bit I suspect will be my disappoint you and the organisers because we have to say what what's the crisis reveal and I suspect it doesn't reveal very much at all that we didn't already know. And the reason for that is fairly obvious because the challenges that face research systems are a matter of everyday experience and they're very long term processes to deal with them. So I actually don't think we'll learn very much about research systems, but one thing I do think we will bring in to focus and do more make more explicit is something we do know, which is the over dependence on external funding. Now this is not simply a concern that LMIC researchers might find themselves at the back of the queue for funding. What I think what is a concern is that when you're dependent on external funding, you have far less autonomy in setting the research agenda. And I think this relates not simply to research on COVID, but actually in some ways more importantly research in other areas, because I think one thing we have to be very careful about. And I realise I'm probably in a bit of a minority here, but I actually don't totally unhaul, you know, sort of without reservation welcome to move it away from any funders to redirect funding streams towards COVID and LMIC. Now, I don't want to be misunderstood here. COVID is a global emergency, we need to respond to it and everyone is responding to it. But I think we need to bear in mind that the rest of the development research agenda does not go away.  None of these things will suddenly sort of be less important, but there is a real danger that will direct funding away from them in the long term. And the LMIC institutions are more susceptible to this redirection because they are historically over dependent on external funding. So I think that's the thing we need to be aware of. The second reflection is actually fits very well with most of my colleagues and I'm happy to see that, particularly with Judith's reflection, which perhaps isn't surprising because we work together in the same institution. And that is the real sense of positivity and optimism in the way the crisis is revealing the way that research capacity in Africa has changed very dramatically. I'm not just talking about technical capacity, but also capacity in terms of strategic thinking and research governance. And I think this is really a very positive side of the response to the crisis. I think we've probably all been struck, as you always are in the situations over the last few weeks, that there's been a real resurgence of the sort of Africa as a disaster narrative. But it's not just restricted to some parts of the international media. I'm afraid this is also coming out from some institutions involved with development who should really know better than to pander to this. You know, well intentioned attempt to direct funds towards it. And of course it's turning out that that's not, it's not helpful. I mean, never is helpful, but it's also particularly misplaced in the COVID situation. But there is a parallel narrative, which I think we all have to guard against falling into which has, you know, some resonances with that and that's the idea that African research systems are weak and unable to respond. Now, again, I'm not for a second pretending that there isn't a scandalous lack of investment by governments in research or that there's not far too few researches in Africa. That is absolutely true. But I think what's really struck us is the incredible positivity, speed and energy with which African research and by African research, I mean individuals, institutions, and the networks that bring them together have responded to the crisis. And as an example of that, just my final point, I just want to briefly mention, maybe of interest to some of the people tuning in, an exercise that we've mounted very quickly in the academy about defining research priorities. I'm sure lots of people are aware of the WHO roadmap for research parties for COVID, which involved over 300 experts defining a whole set of a research agenda. And at the time this was done, it was for quite understandable reasons because the focus at that time was on China and Europe. Africa was hardly involved at all in that in that in that process. Now, this is not just simply carping about not being invited to the party, or even about fairness, although fairness is extraordinarily important, but it's really important to recognize that funding will be driven by whatever people think the priorities are. And if the priorities of low middle income countries and in our case, the countries in Africa are not reflected in the global priorities, then funding won't flow in that direction. So we undertook a rapid and extensive open consultation exercise, beginning with a webinar with over 250 researchers from across the continent, moving quickly to a survey, an open source survey, which again as a reflection of the energy with which this has been regarded. We had over 800 complete responses in four days. And that has resulted in a publication that people want to consult on our website, which looks at the whole issue of priorities in Africa, including a whole set of new priorities which came out about consultation. So I think the message from that experience is that there is real energy and commitment across African research to respond to COVID and I think this is really positive. So your final question, I think the answer is pretty obvious from what I've said, because you said what should institutions and funders do in response to this, and I think they should do what they should have been doing all along. And some haven't, some haven't, but often not with enough energy.  It's very tempting to do that. If you're a research group or if you're a fund, it's very tempting to say, we've got to respond to this. There's a real danger at the moment of over response and there's a real need for coordination of response. So to me, that's the message that comes out after this. Well, I really appreciate that you were able, you were part of this and you could make those points, you know, really eloquently better than we could say it. These are some of the issues that emerged at our past events that, you know, the narrative is always defined by the Western funders who are usually based in high income societies. The distribution of funding itself isn't equal, obviously. And the narrative, the conceptualization of the issues, even this idea of global challenges is defined within the, you know, the wider mainstream political agenda around development. So I think you're making absolutely fair point that this might actually be an opportunity for Ukraine and funders that aim to make funding available for development to really find a way to work with the local research leadership to formulate those calls, you know, or any other initiative that they might consider. It might be some option to think about and Robert can speak to that when we get there. But thank you so much, Kevin. I don't know if you're getting these messages. I've just been flashed a message from colleagues in Oxford saying that they can't, they can't hear the presentations. I don't know if that's a local issue, or, or what but I've just mentioned it to you in case there is some general problem, maybe a local problem. I've received a colleague saying that your voice is breaking up a bit, but they can hear me well. So it might be the connection momentarily because I get a lot of wind next to me it's rainy season is rainy weather as well. And I think the internet is a bit unstable. Okay. Thank you, Kevin, and this is being recorded on my device so there will be a high quality video as well available later on. For your colleagues that we will distribute. And so can I also invite Judy to to maybe add to what you said Kevin, since you know you seem to sort of agree many, many of the things you say but also, you know, offer very diverse perspectives. Judy, you know, there is local you're smiling. You know, in what you see in terms of needs and the current creativity how can that be accommodated what is what might be, you know, is it is there need in terms of resources, you know, because obviously the creativity and the work is there and the ideas are there that I think could be done in this situation, especially from our part and the side of the international development which has always been quite arrogantly. I would say if I may I'm allowed, assuming that they know that the panaceas you know in the solutions. What would you advise. Well, there's a lot of talk always about listening to partners understanding local context and collaborative research that's equitable. There's a lot of discussion, you know, letting letting Africa lead the research, but Africa doesn't want to lead somebody else's research you know I think I would like to lead our own research. And as Kevin has said, you know, we are capable of defining our own priorities. I think the issue is around where the money comes from. You they own you kind of but it shouldn't be that way. It shouldn't be that way. If it's truly equitable collaboration, it must start with the collaboration come from Africa. So this is why we have a lot of problems when somebody says, oh, we're going to test a vaccine somewhere face. Much as it's an excellent research. This is really what we need you know this is really the bullet that's going to sort out the problem. It's not going to be accepted. It's a challenge to accept it. So moving away from always feeling that Africa just money and some research that has ever somewhere else, you know, the days when there was no capacity in Africa over the capacity is there now. And if it's small and even if there are some challenges and research systems and so on, we must starting from the continent. So you think that so what about the funding body such as the global challenges research fund, which is the scheme available. What do you think they could what role can they play should they exist or not at all at this time. What do you think. I would say that that anybody who is funding research shouldn't it shouldn't it's more discussing a more workable way of being truly equitable with this research. This this crisis, you know, well, I do agree with Kevin, but I think the crisis has revealed quite a lot, you know, I think they were there was a lot of pessimism on how Africa is going to manage this hits the poor communities on the continent. Everybody's dying in droves and we've not seen that you know we've not seen that you know we're able to to launch a response where able to mobilize governments where they able to mobilize ministries of health. We're able to mobilize researchers from this continent who we work with every day to respond from different different different disciplines. So really just changing that narrative of Africa's capacity and abilities. Absolutely. And thank you for specifically doing that you're changing the narrative you're embodying that change so thank you so much. And I think I know what you mean in terms of more equitable one one of the things we discussed in the previous events is how funding could be located in a way that is not always given to the UK based institution which is, as you know, a requirement for most GCF calls, especially the thematic calls. How could we make it so that funds are received directly locally and you know because usually the budget holder makes all the decisions and I think that's the reality that we need to admit. And so Robert can I invite you to to tell us what you think I mean what kind of flexibility is there and do you think the UK right could operate differently in some ways, given that you also have to respond to you. There's a lot of policies right and expectations so what kind of flexibility is there. Yeah, there's quite a lot of stuff to discuss there. And so, just very briefly I'll chat on the UK side. So, what's the UK right is quite heavily involved in the UK focus response. And that is a quite rapid response, all from rapid research projects, repurposing of existing research projects and even direct work, you know, looking to manufacture ventilators, our research sites as well as supporting businesses to do so. So we've, and you know, there's a huge number of you know, so research is absolutely the center of this response and we're doing a huge amount of work with the research community and to support the research community and the innovation community to deal with these massive challenges that are facing the UK right now. So it's worth just to let that kind of I guess the primary thing that we are focused on and when it comes to the international side of things. I suppose it's worth thinking that we operate and the Global Challenges Research Fund, but we also have the Newton Fund and the Fund for International Collaboration. And those are just three funds that we use for international collaboration. And we have a network of partners and we, we funded all sorts of different ways. So we fund in partnership with other funding organizations and we also directly fund researchers on some of our schemes doing radio overseas, but that's a kind of that's been going up over time. So it started off very low with just the Medical Research Council doing it and it's of the natural environment Research Council and you can on the Social Research Council and then kind of over time, you know, the whole of you care I can do this now. I don't do it on every call, but that's kind of the direction of travel and there are various reasons and complications around that which I don't have time to go into here. But it's certainly something that we're very serious about. I guess the challenge that COVID-19 brings is this need to act strategically and equitably and really, really fast. And we are under pressure to act really, really fast. I think we've already done some things on the GCRF so the money that goes straight to universities which and that's the QR allocations universities are allowed to do whatever they want with this money, as long as it's within the period of their priorities on the UCRF and it's ODA compliant developing countries, they can repurpose some of that money already. Beyond that, then, you know, things across UKRI, we're looking at things across departments because this isn't just, you know, UKRI sits under the business department, but we also have the Department of Health very heavily involved in this, obviously. And of course the Department for International Development. So we're talking across each other about ways that we can work together. We've had a lot of discussions with our international funding partners who are very interested in this as well. So we're not short of ideas and we are keen to do things. I guess where we are at the moment is trying to make sure that we do these in the right way. So things do need to be equitable. If we do anything, it needs to be safe as well. So, and the fact is that, you know, a lot of our research projects at the moment are struggling because of this crisis. If we're going to fund anything in response, it needs to be able to do it needs to be feasible. And so there are some, you know, constraints around that that we have to deal with. And the other point which was all so brought up is that you're not. Yeah, absolutely. You do not want to throw a whole development agenda out of the window just because of one crisis. No matter how this crisis is, you know, the GCRF is a significant fund. It has a number of priority areas and a lot of investment and we're keen to see those investments succeed. Of course, we pay attention to this crisis, particularly given that one of the objectives of the Global Chandr's research fund is agile response to emergencies. We have to bear that in mind that you know this is an opportunity for the GCRF to make a difference. But you know with all of those different constraints that you know we have to try and get this right. And there is the other issue of where money comes from. So we do have to make sure that money is available and we have to talk to government now. I guess one thing to throw in there perhaps for another conversation another day one thing we are aware of is that our money is part of the international development budget. It's tied to the economic performance of the UK. And so that is something that we are thinking in the future about might mean and that you know the GCRF is a small part of that. But it is something that we've also been thinking about. So I think I've covered what I wanted to say. Obviously, we are keen to do something to do something quickly so you know do look out on the website. I think five minutes are outlined. Yes, it's okay I think we can go five minutes of our board just to note that internet connection has been very unstable so some people are not getting the right audio on their side but we will release the recording afterwards so hopefully you'll be able to I think this is quite short and catch up with the discussion. You can tell you can let your colleagues know. I just listening to you Robert I'm wondering and we have Judy and Kevin here in terms of you know the African Academy of Sciences. Is there any in any effort on parts on the part of the UK right to work with local research bodies and you know funding distributors and delivery bodies. Is there direct contact with the African Academy of Sciences for instance since you're both here. Would that be a way forward in your opinion and what you've seen is it something that you're exploring. There's been discussions with quite a number of so the good thing is that we have partnerships with a range of organizations. So we have obviously the Newton countries and we have also have a partnership with the African Research Universities Alliance. We have a number of partners that we've been talking to in the research side and also on the research into policy side within as well so there's a big range of people. In fact we've had discussions that we've had to put also quite a lot of internal effort into sort of collating and structuring them all to make sure that we can understand the opportunities and try and quickly work out you know how and who we can work with. So we are doing that already. Those conversations are ongoing and very interesting. And I guess it's an opportunity I mean our aim is to bring you together now you know Judy now you know Kevin you know it's good to build that network. And just because we're running out of time. Alex, I think you wanted to save a few more things on how research institutions could respond. Again, on the basis of what you heard so far. You know you have about three minutes. I'll keep it very short. And I think I think you're absolutely right I think you know it is what Kevin was saying we should be doing what we should be doing all along. And I think when I was reflecting on some of the discussions from our earlier events and actually the points that were raised through those, such as you know, you know, enabling sort of international partners to take the lead to identify what how best to run research projects and you know to identify what those issues are was one of the key points of discussion from one of our very early webinars back in November actually. And so to keep it short I think our institutions should be doing more to support you know basically building accessible and long lasting partnerships, based on the evidence or the evidence that we've had with some of our, you know, PIs as such on these large collaborative grants where they spent years building relationships with people. You know they seem to have, you know, have that kind of most robust partnership and able to be resilient towards these kinds of external shocks so I think as institutions we should do, we could maybe as you say some of our QRG CRF funding to support, you know, building and nurturing partnerships from the very start, you know, building in the kind of review and reflect processes and encouraging our academics to build that as part of their project timelines. Yeah, and just kind of, you know, continue to try and build awareness with funders in particular with some of the unintended consequences perhaps that come out from the terms and conditions and guidance from all that are sometimes at great pace as we're seeing now. So I think being able to allow those conversations to happen as well are probably some of the key things I think our sort of institutions can play a significant role in. And I think a lot of institutions are having the same conversations currently from what we've seen being in communication with our man the association of research managers in the in the UK. Everyone is sort of asking the same questions what they could do better and I think there is more awareness to be honest about the asymmetries that are ongoing. As you know, I'm also working on understanding our, how we work and what kind of pressure our processes place on our partners in terms of due diligence and reporting which obviously we have to deal with because funders accept so. And, you know, I think it's time for us to think of better ways to do things and there must be better ways, you know, our African and Asian and various other partners are being very creative and this time we should as well as we can. Just we have two minutes to end and I don't see any questions I think it has to do with the quality of the audio at times. And I would, for the last two minutes, can I invite anyone who has any thoughts and after thoughts, or if not a friend to say some into add something to this because you have spoken the least of them. Thank you, but I don't feel marginalized don't worry. You know, this code if I said it has also a side that can change the game that we have in this globe. If not totally, at least there will be change I see a lot of innovation as Dr. Judy said here. Our health system is responding very much. The government system, the leadership is very, you know, rejuvenated. And there are even very young students producing a number of, you know, materials to help people to keep their, you know, cleanliness. For example, a young man innovated a kind of job that can, you know, give you water without touching anything around, you know, simply on the school board. So sanitizers are produced everywhere in the universities this time and above all the government early warned us so that we couldn't reach at this level if you are late. You see, so for the researchers for the donors, it is very good to change the status quo a little bit so that we can be seen as equal partners, because this close this kind of global crisis really pull us together for the good or the bad. Thank you. Thank you for that was very optimistic. I think optimism is good and we need it in our time. And I'm just, I just Alex brought to my attention that there are some questions on Twitter which for some reason I can't see Alex do want to to read that. Yeah, sure. Actually, one of the questions was for Ephraim, which was given the struggles you have described among rural agricultural communities. Is it ethical for researchers to carry out fieldwork in these communities at this time? Is research helpful or does it overburden communities?  Very quick one minute. It is not, I mean, it is not like before, but there are organizations like if pre while working on, you know, or the culture, you can do mobile phone based interview using, you know, local experts frontline extension workers. So, if not, it is you don't you may not get into no contact with people but you can do using this, you know, internet with mobile based, you know, communication. Otherwise, this time it's difficult to step into the parts. Thank you. So I can see that we have about 370 viewers on Panopto. So I'm sure that more people have questions. And because we've run out of time, I'll just ask kindly for everyone to send your questions to me directly if you'd like to or send them on Twitter wherever you are. And then we will try to address them on our list serve, which we use for the series. It's the decolonial h e decolonial higher education at just mail that AC that UK. And again, we can share that with all the participants who have been registered through email. So please keep those questions coming and if our kind participants speakers would like to respond to those later on will make an effort to to gather their their responses for you. So thank you all so much again. I'm sorry, the audio was not perfect for some of our viewers. We will try to release a recording afterwards. Thank you to all our excellent speakers panelists stay safe. Stay healthy. Best wishes for the months ahead and please keep talking to each other, and we will follow up with another session and now led by Oxford the next one led by Oxford by Mario Moominem my colleague there. And we will pick on some of these points and continue discussing them in the next one. So hopefully we'll preserve the continuity. Thank you so much everyone. Thank you, Judy, Rob, Efrem, Kevin, Alex, bye everyone. Bye bye. Thank you.


Okay guys, so I'm a little bit under the weather here, so but I had to put out this very quick Recap video or review of the calendars that I took last week. I told you all I was getting into calendars and the whole point behind calendars is Theta decay so what that means is Basically one of the biggest factors in the value or one of the biggest factors that affects the value of an options contract is time time left to expiration. It's one of the Greeks theta and All else being equal meaning if there is no move No significant move in the stock price in either direction all things being equal Theta will eventually decay as days go by towards expiry So a calendar looks to profit from little to no movement and Time decay or the passage of time. So I took four calendars and it was a paper trade. It was just For illustrative purposes because I actually took them if you recall In exactly opposite direction. So I took a target put calendar and a target call calendar So I was expecting the target I was expecting targets right to reach 145 or lower. So I basically bought right It's a buy because it's a debit. What that means is that the the put Contract that I bought which was expiring in January Which is further dated than November Was more expensive and then you sell one against it, you know to basically cover yourself And that's what actually decays in premium. So that's what you want. Sorry I did not mean to say that you buy it to cover this one It's actually the other way around Because this is the one that you're selling but you buy this one the longer dated one to cover yourself and And this one is supposed to move less than the front dated one Okay, so I was expecting target to go towards 145 and lower, which is why as I was saying these You know further dated contracts Or more expensive than the near dated contracts So because this is let's say ten dollars and this is let's say five or six dollars Then you end up paying more Or you actually end up paying because it's more expensive the one you buy than the one you sell against it And that's why it's called, you know, like a debit because you in the overall Transaction what you pay for and what you sell you end up paying more, which is the 341 debit over here At the same time which is kind of you know Like a straddle strangle kind of thing. I also bought the call So I was expecting it to go down But I was also expecting it to come to go up to the 170 call, okay And this one ended up being a 410 debit And I did the same for Walmart and this is because retail sales were out and these both had Earnings, okay, and target came out kind of bad really on earnings Not so much on revenue, but definitely on earnings and Walmart did did surprise. So that was pretty good So That's why I took these two retailers. Okay, so I was expecting them to move Basically not at all. Okay, let me actually switch over To what those things look like which is those by All right Filled oh boy, okay, so this was sorry Let me zoom out to the daily. This is the Walmart play and this was on the daily and we were Expecting Walmart to basically trade inside this range, which you did. Okay, so this is basically the Monday one Sorry, this is in October. This is the November one Over here. So this is what it's done except that today and yesterday it kind of popped because of earnings You know, here's the earnings surprise. It was 13% on revenue and 3% on Sorry 3% revenue 13% on earnings. So Walmart did pretty well But it did basically chop around this level. All right so Let me jump real quick on target That is what we were expecting target to do and that is indeed indeed what it did now what I am Understanding the problem was with this is that the range was too far. Okay, so I went all the way from 140 to 180 So that's $40 So that's too big of a range To to have made the calendar Worked out as expected. What you want is you want very insignificant movement around a particular area You don't expect these things and that's why you sell these before earnings and we'll get into that when we look at what I sold them for or and So this range would have needed to be a little bit tighter than the 40 bucks for the target and the Walmart one was 150 to 116 I was like almost $50 on that one. So that was too big a range. Okay, so what happened Let's go back to what we had. So this is what we paid for each one of these when we bought them We bought the 341 we bought one for 341 for 235 for 269 and for 410 Now what ended up happening? So let's go back over here to our Let me quickly move. Oh, sorry. This is spy. No, it's not what I wanted Spice seems to be on the move here for some reason Okay I guess I'll let's go back to Where I actually took these so here it is. All right And I'll put these up here. So the 341 debit was actually a 323 debit The 235 was actually a 230 the 40 the 410 was a 405 and the 269 was a 271 So here's where I bought these at. All right, and this is what I sold them for so the This is the call target Which was this one right here, right? So I bought it for 405 and I bought it and I sold it for 455 So that one was a $50 profit. All right and then This is the Walmart call And this is the first one that I closed out. So this one I actually closed out four days after and that was Well before earnings. So I was good on that one and The next one was the Walmart call calendar which Is this one right here? I had bought for 271. I sold for 360. So that's pretty much 271 to 360 like $90 so that's a hundred and forty dollar profit right there on those Okay, so that actually moved pretty well Now the next two This one was the Walmart put calendar and then Walmart was pretty bullish as you remember from the chart So here's the put calendar actually paid 234 and I ended up selling it Here it is for 151 So hold on a second. Yeah, I've paid 230 for it Right the put calendar on Walmart and I ended up selling it for 151 so I lost 50 $80 so out of the hundred and forty minus It's my calculator here 140 minus the 90 so I'm left with $50 profit and then the last one which was the Walmart put calendar sorry the Here the target put calendar, which is the one I sold today when after Let me show this on screen here Here it is the target Daily All right, so this is what target did today and this was Actually, this was the only one that I rode through earnings Or I held through earnings in a gap. Look at this huge gap. It's a gap basically from 178 all the way down to 149 or so so that was like a $30 gap right there on target Because it missed obviously, so let's go back here Here we go. All right So this one was actually also very profitable. So that was the put calendar on target, which cost me When I bought it 323 I sold it for 493 All right, so I had $50 493 is what I sold it for and it cost me three Yeah, three twenty three, so I made a dollar seventy plus the fifty bucks So I made two hundred twenty dollars on those calendars. So I'm I'm just gonna be throwing some of these things in here because it's a Just you know, it's something that I want to get into because it gives you a lot of leeway in either direction You know in such a way that you don't Lose too much when the ticker goes against you and Even if the ticker doesn't make that big of a move it it simply won't it'll the time the time decay will actually still You know make use some money Even though the ticker isn't moving very much and that's why you take them in before Earnings, but you definitely want to get out You know you definitely want to get out of them Before the earnings are announced, which is not what I did in this case because I did expect I actually expected both of them to miss I expected target and Walmart to miss Not sure I haven't looked at the details of the Walmart earnings call. So I'm not sure how they pulled it off but You know, they might have just had like so much excess inventory I'm not sure but the point is you're not really supposed to hold them through earnings And then the other thing that I'm definitely gonna do for next time is I'm gonna do it right here. I'm gonna clone these The range definitely needs to be smaller You know for these things to actually Be more profitable so so like this, you know the put or the call on The high side it just it needs to be closer So, all right, so we will look at another calendar Play probably all the way until December. So November I'll just use it to close out Excuse me to close out my existing Defensive plays and then December will probably oh, no, sorry Actually, that's gonna be probably until March unless I find some other opportunity before then but So I will see you guys in the next calendar Spread video or possibly other types of vertical and diagonal spreads. All right. Have a good one


Greetings and welcome to the Introduction to Astronomy. In this lecture we are going to talk about orbital motion and how what we've learned over the past couple of lessons as to how we determined orbits in the solar system can actually be applied and learn some definitions here as to how we look at the specific orbits. So let's go ahead and get started here and what we see is, let's give some definitions here first of all and I've mentioned some of these before but let's go ahead and look at them again. Parahelion is the closest approach of an object to the Sun. So anything orbiting the Sun will have a Parahelion. Earth will be closest to the Sun at its Parahelion which is in January. Now Apheleon is the furthest object is from the Sun. Apheleon for Earth would be in July that's when we're furthest away from the Sun. Now we also see the semi-major axis labeled here that is half that major axis across the longest diameter of the eclipse. Now we use Apheleon and Parahelion note the helio section there which means Sun so that is the closest and furthest approach from the Sun. We can also talk about perigee and apogee if we're talking about things orbiting the Earth such as our moon or satellites. So let's continue and look at some of this. How do we determine orbits? Well orbits of an object are determined by Newton's universal law of gravitation and his laws of motion. This gives extremely accurate positions for the planets and we find a number of different things. First of all this was far more accurate than any of the previous models and now that we have an exact understanding of what that underlying cause is in terms of gravity. We find that planets closer to the Sun move faster and we saw this in Kepler's third law. We see that the orbital eccentricities for planets are small. None of the planets have highly eccentric orbits. We note that all planets orbit in the same plane and in the same direction. So we see those here if we look at the planets here the inner planets labeled for you can see Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars and this image goes out to Jupiter a little further out.  Mercury being the most deviant from a circle. The blue asteroids you can see their orbits are a little bit different that they do have more eccentric orbits and the red orbits of comets can be even more extreme. So even more eccentric orbits for the comets and the asteroids. So when we look at satellite orbits how do we put something into satellite? Well we look at Sputnik launched in October of 1957 and if we launch something with a small enough velocity of course this is not how we launch satellites but if we launch something or throw something with a small velocity which would be position A here it returns to Earth. Gravity pulls it down. If we use a little bit larger velocity it continues further along and if we could could send it with a high enough velocity it would actually go into orbit and come all the way back around and strike you again. Now that only works if there's no atmosphere so of course atmospheric resistance would cause these so even something with a very high velocity would lose so much energy in its trip around the Earth that it would never make it that far. But paths A and B will give you a circular or sorry object will return to Earth that we can get a circular or an elliptical orbit if we get it far enough and if you give it an even larger velocity it will actually escape from Earth. But note that it does not escape from Earth's gravity. Gravity never ends. It goes on forever so no matter how far away something is from Earth you can calculate how much force of gravity is pulling on it. It could certainly be negligible enough that it's never going to pull the object back but there is always a force of gravity between any two objects with mass. So we can put things into orbit this way and we in order to get away from the Earth we do need to achieve what is called escape velocity. So things like the Voyager spacecraft here achieve escape velocity from Earth. Now even though it's out in the depths of the solar system way beyond even the strong influence of the Sun now they still are being pulled on by Earth. They're moving fast enough that Earth can never slow them down enough and they will never return. But we can use to send something interplanetary we just have to achieve escape velocity to get it away from Earth. We can then use gravity to modify its orbit. So in order to make things more efficient you could make a really high powered engine to accelerate something very fast or you can use the energy of the orbits of the planets. So if a craft heads out towards towards the moon it can go around the moon and get a boost in gravity. So it can accelerate the craft a lot and the moon loses a tiny bit of its orbital energy. However because of the gigantic distance between the mass of the moon versus the mass of the spacecraft the moon will never notice it. And Voyager 2 used this as it used a gravity assist from Jupiter to get to Saturn and then another one from Saturn to get to Uranus and finally from Uranus to get to Neptune. So because of a gravity assist like this Voyager 2 was able to visit all four outer planets fortunately because of their positioning in the solar system at that time. Now when a mission gets to a planet it has two choices. We can either plan a fly by mission or an orbiter. Fly by missions are far easier. You pass by the planet take your pictures and continue on. In order to get into orbit you need to lose some energy to get into orbit around the planet. So it requires more fuel at that point to be able to adjust the orbit or again multiple orbital maneuver maneuvers to get the to adjust the speed to the correct speed to bring it in to an orbit. So we tend to use orbiters now certainly because they can stay for a long time and study that study the object for years and even a decade or more. Whereas a fly by mission a lot easier in terms of energy and planning only gets one chance to observe that object. Now what if we look at more than two objects? Well it gets very complex as we look at more objects. Here we see a globular cluster and if you really want to figure out the orbits here you need to look at every pair of stars and calculate the gravitational force and step forward in time and do all the calculations again. If there are hundreds of thousands of stars there are billions of different pairs you can look at and you have to calculate all those gravitational forces. Now when we look at things within the solar system it's a little bit easier the main influence for gravity is of course the Sun. So unless an object passes close to one of the other planets its gravity is its orbit is pretty much determined by the Sun. But passing close to Jupiter or Earth or any of the other planets can adjust that orbit and this can be very difficult especially for very small objects like comets whose orbits can be significantly impacted by a passage near one of the planets. So let's see how this could have been used and how it was used. Uranus the first planet to be discovered was discovered in 1781. This is less than a century after Newton published his work on gravity. As we tracked its orbit we found that it was not orbiting exactly in accordance with Newton's laws. Big question is why? Why was it wrong? Did Newton's laws not apply at that far out in the solar system? Or was there another planet out beyond Uranus that would influence its orbit? Well astronomers Adams and Laverier calculated the position of this potential planet and Neptune was found in this area. So a great triumph for Newton's law of gravity in that a prediction was made in terms of its orbit. Now this was tried again with Mercury when Mercury wasn't quite following its orbit and it was postulated that another planet might be orbiting closer to the Sun than Mercury that had never been discovered. That would be a hard planet to see and people did the calculation and look for the planet but never found anything and in this case we found out that Newton's gravity was wrong and it took general relativity to be able to explain what was happening there. So let's go ahead and finish up as we do with our summary. We talked about Aphelion and Parahelion which were the furthest and closest distances to the Sun of an object orbiting the Sun. We looked at escape velocity which is you escape from the object never to return you're going fast enough that the object can never slow you down. In reality everything is much more complex you have lots of objects interacting together and finally we looked at the discovery of Neptune predicted to exist because of deviations in the orbit of Uranus and it was a great triumph for Newton's gravity. So that concludes this lecture on orbital motion. We'll be back again next time for another topic in astronomy. So until then have a great day everyone and I will see you in class.


So I was talking to Jack yesterday and he said, you know, really ask the gentlemen about how they're going to get these rare earths to the permanent magnets. That's Jack's favorite question. So Mark, do you want to take a run at that first? Well, step by step, right? You got to have all those steps in place. So I think the relationship that Energy Fuels has had with Neo and Constantine and his team, we've been creatively looking at how do we create integration, starting with our main focus is on monazite, monazite sands, securing the monazite, going through the cracking and leaching, shipping the carbonate to Neo and, you know, looking at these various steps on how we can have that full integration. So, you know, I think the unique thing about the relationship with Energy Fuels and Neo, I think we've done more to integrate that anybody else out there in the world outside of China. But anyways, it's a short period of time and being creative with the infrastructure. So, you know, we're excited about that. But there's a lot of work to do because demand, again, is increasing quicker than people can respond. But some of us can respond quicker than others. Of course, that's my favorite series of questions. I mean, I don't know how we're going to meet this demand. I mean, every day I turn on the television, 3.7 billion, you know, company A, 4.98 billion, you know, Ontario government and the critical materials, rare supply chain, GM, Ford, everybody's committing to all these EV vehicles, but we don't have the materials. So, let's talk about this relationship you two have put together. Constantine, you're known as being a brilliant strategist. How has this relationship evolved since you've been together now for what, two years? A couple years. You were kind enough to provide an introduction a couple years ago to Mark and myself, and we took it from there. I always felt that monazides, because historically we're a big part of the source of rareness for the industry, the monazides which were not being used up until recently, really were the game changer that once you can get your hands on monazides and you can process them correctly and responsibly, then you could go a long way alleviating the resource availability problem. Monazide is a fantastic material, but it comes with typically uranium and thorium radioactive elements, and that's when Mark and I had the conversation. We realized that between the two of us, we had all the pieces of the puzzle that we could put together, a very full supply chain. To go back to Jack's question, how do you get all the way to magnets? So, Mark is buying monazides that are a byproduct of existing mining operations, so you can effectively say the mining cost is very, very low, if not zero. And then we've worked together, Mark has put together a flow sheet at Energy Fuels in Utah where he takes out the uranium for the uranium business for his customers and recovers the rare earths in a way that works for us, and then we take it into separation, we separate the rare earth elements, then we turn them into metals, alloys, and finally magnets, and we're in the process of finalizing the design and engineering of a new magnet facility that we're planning to build in Europe, in Estonia, next to our existing rare earth processing facility, hopefully with a lot more material that we can get from Energy Fuels. Mark, you want to add anything to that? You know, I think it's been a very productive relationship. I think both companies are comfortable working with each other because we are doers, not promoters. We're trying to accomplish big things by actually doing it on the ground. I think there's been some really good information exchanges between the two groups.  We still have an agreement with Kimors for their monazite in the United States, but we've recently got binding agreements to secure a very large land position in Brazil. We're still doing our due diligence, but I don't see anything coming in the way of that from what I'm seeing right now. But that will increase our supply, we believe, substantially increase the supply of monazite and due course, which then can go through the mill and turn into carbonate. So I think that when you look at both companies and how we complement each other, how we're working together, you know, I think it's a remarkable relationship. And we're really tied together by supply agreement, but it's more than that. It's more than that. So just watch this space as it ramps up. I mean, I think that collectively our goals are to be world significant in terms of the integration. I mean, we're world significant what we do already. For us, we're small commercial. We've got to ramp that up. But we're looking at a world significant integrated supplier of rare earth products from the beginning to the end, really, magnets. So let's talk about the timeline. What kind of timeline are we looking at? And why don't you just toss in? Is GM going to make these exceptional objectives that they have communicated to all of us? They're going to give us electric cars by what, 2035? Well, I think he who has the elements is going to win the race. He who doesn't have the elements isn't going to win the race. So yeah, I think people underestimate how long it takes to get the flywheel turning. But at the same time, I think that where we are, where Neil's at, we've got such a head start on others that we can move faster. But still, it's still going to take a few years. It's going to take three, four years, five years to get that momentum up to where it needs to be to really start making a major difference. We're making a major difference now, but to get the scale ramped up. Well, Tracy, listen, I always have said whenever I speak at conferences or in your program that demand creates supply. It's not the other way around. So last November, Mark and I were summoned by a massive European automotive manufacturer who basically said, we love what you're doing. We need you now to make magnets for our EV drivetrains. And you can get a better manifestation of demand than that. So Neil is very focused on getting our phase one and then eventually phase two magnet production up and running in Estonia. We expect to have an investment decision this year, hopefully sooner or rather than later. And then we'll start building by the end of the year and hopefully we'll be ramping up in 2024 because the European automakers have made it very clear along with their supply chains, with their tier ones that Mark and I had been meeting with that by 2025, they won 50% of their critical components, the high value added components for their EVs to come from European circular, transparent, resilient sources. So there really, there isn't an awful lot of time to do this, but I guess collectively, energy fuels and Neil, we have all the missing pieces. So Mark is processing the raw material, he gets it to the point where we can use it. He also has plans to separate in the United States, rare, which is a good thing because Neil is a net buyer. A lot of people don't know this, but in addition to separating our own materials, we are buying an awful lot of separated rare earths. So we would love to work with Mark on that front. Then we already, as I said earlier, we turn rare earth oxides into metals, alloys, and eventually magnetic powders and magnets. So if anyone can get there sooner, that's probably the combination of the collaborative effort between energy fuels and ourselves. So we're looking at a couple years down the road to be in position. Whether GM and Ford and Daimler and Volkswagen will be doing what they said, what they're planning to do. Usually these big folks do the things that they said they were going to do, and given all the momentum that exists, not only in EVs, and EVs is a large market for rare earths, but the whole energy transition. I can't say it effectively enough, but we need more rare earths extracted, we need more rare earths recycled, we need more rare earths produced, and we need more rare earth magnets. And there is going to be room for a lot of players in this field, but we kind of like the position that both of us are in the supply chain and within the largest industry. So of course, that brings me to my last and favorite question, which is there's a lot of promoters out there, everyone's going, I've got some rare earths, you know, and everyone needs rare earths, you've got to buy my stock. Can you give investors, Mark, I know you're an investor as well, some advice as they're doing due diligence on some of these companies that claim they have these critical materials? Well, like the rare earth business, like the uranium business, there's a lot of wannabes, a lot of people that like to talk about what they're going to do. You know, I believe that you've got to look at who's going to get it across the finish line. And a good place to start is people that have the track record of doing that, have the technical skills, have the infrastructure, have the ability to respond and deliver, okay? I mean, I think if you look at our two companies, we have those track records. You know, it's interesting because I always laugh when people declare victory on the rare earth business or the uranium business because they did something in a beaker, right? And they say, we've done it, we know it was successful and, you know, all these great things, but a beaker is a beaker and a beaker isn't representative of doing it at commercial scale. You know, we're doing stuff at commercial scale. Certainly, Neil's been doing stuff at commercial scale for decades, but most projects that I've dealt with in the world from the beginning, the ones I've dealt with have been successful, but most other projects fail. They fail. They don't achieve their objectives. So, you know, I just, I think there's two kind of investments you make. Speculative investments that you kind of get into stock and out of the stock and stocks that you get into because you know they're actually going to achieve something. And I think that's what an investment is, and particularly our company in NEO, is we're going to be doing something and making contributions based on the fact that we have the ability to actually deliver. Tell you, that makes me misty-eyed. Constantine, do you have anything to add to that? I think that was a wonderful piece of wisdom. Tracey, unfortunately, there are no easy answers. So, people who decide to invest in the rare earth space, they need to do a lot of work. We all, or most of us, remember 2010-11 and you know, what happened around those times when prices increased by an order of magnitude, driven by purely artificial supply constraints from China, export restrictions. So, this time around, this environment, I think, is driven by much better fundamentals, which is demand. So, how do you invest in the space? Well, look at, you know, the various, I mean, if you're looking at the upstream of deposits and so on, look at tonnage and grade. I mean, that's true for every commodity, but then look at mineralogy and millergy. How easy is it to take the rock from the ground into something useful and then look at the commercial acumen of the people involved. Are they close to their customers? Do they have relationships with the people who ultimately will buy their material? Because rare earths are not gold or copper or nickel. You're not going to sell them on some exchange and pricing and commercial relations are not transparent. I mean, you need, it's full contact marketing, one customer at a time, the contracts in place, pricing negotiations and so on. So, it takes an awful lot of work to pick the winners and losers and what sort of companies you should be investing in. So, sorry, no shortcuts. So, thank you both for joining us today. I hope you enjoy PDAC and we always appreciate the updates. Thank you. Thank you, Tracy.