Well, both. I mean, I think there's a lot of things that are fixable and obviously the execution has to be better. I think that's in all three phases, you know, when you lose, you know, that's how it is. And certainly offensively, we have to, you know, remain, understand who we are and how we have to stay efficient. And the difference in third and four and third and 10 or 11 is critical.  So, you know, our ability to pick up and convert on possession downs at third and five or less, you know, is really good. And then the third and 10 pluses are two for 25 and that's just too many third and longs. How disappointed are you that your team, normally the more physical team on the field wasn't able to do that yesterday? I'm disappointed that we lost. You know, I mean, this isn't a battle of, you know, being the most physical or throwing for the more yards. It's, you know, again, it's about winning and losing. And I would say that that's where the disappointment is, then why, you know, we lost. We can, we can get into those factors. But in the end, it just, you know, none of it was good enough. And that's why I'm disappointed. Is that just that we lost? You guys were really focused on the officiating after the game. You usually don't like to stick on that very long. You're surprised that they did or would you like them not to? Yeah, free to speak for themselves. That's what I do.   You're going to get beat. So we have to understand that we have to realize why it is that we lost and also realize that you can define your culture by what you look like when things aren't great, when things don't go well. And yesterday they didn't go very well and we'll find out, you know, what kind of football team we have this week and what kind of individuals, what type of people we have here, which I believe in and who we are. So, you know, that was my message. It was wouldn't have a whole lot to say, give them all credit, get back to work and don't think that anybody did enough to help us win.  But it doesn't, two out of three times it hasn't, hasn't equated to winning. No, we know. We talked about that first. Like it was like we did what we set out to do and stop it. Who's that? Jeff Simmons. Yeah. Again, Jeff's free to get a lot of respect for Jeff and Jeff's free to say what he wants to and speak on, you know, for what he thinks. And, you know, we knew in the number one key was to affect the quarterback and didn't tackle him at least four or five times. So, again, we'll stop the run when we need to. We've talked about this. We have to find ways to affect the quarterback and not just on third down. You know, first and second down and, you know, so that that's what we're aiming to do. When you have a game like that where you know you're facing some real studs on the outside, do you have to be careful not to overreact to the one on one losses that were lost on the edges? Yeah, I mean, there were some one on one losses. There were some one on one wins.  I'm sure Ryan wished he would probably not to look the guy off and just thrown it out to Derek, you know, down in the red zone was second and 12. You know, the other ones are third and long situations. One was a second and two that created the third and long. And that's a play action protection that that we've done multiple times. So again, if we can stay efficient and be able to not not turn into a drop back passing game, which against the type of players that they have is no small task. And, you know, I think we'll we'll all be better. So you're doing some shuffling maybe up front or you think you can win? We'll continue to look and see, you know, what's what's best and where guys go. But as it stands here right now today, I don't. Don't see something changing until we have some more time to visit on it tomorrow and see who's available. See who's healthy and see find a way to beat the Bengals. What's the challenge of staying efficient offensively ahead of the change?  And I think against the fast team, I think he realized probably can't bounce that out. But, you know, we give him the ball. We give Derek the ball and, you know, they make the decisions. And so then that created, you know, another third and long, you know, I think we might have picked it up. It wasn't too long, but it's about just making sure that you're capitalizing on your opportunities that you're that you're able to get into drives. If you know if you can't get into drives, then then some of the plays and the formations don't necessarily compliment each other. And that's our whole goal is to is to try to get them all to compliment and be balanced and, you know, have a run game that that helps and, you know, gets Derek what he needs and Tajye can supplement that.  How exactly did you get with Tajye? Were there holes there in the run game that you thought about? Oh, no, there weren't too. There weren't a whole lot. I mean, there were there were some. I just, I meant Tajye as a skill set throughout spring and in the first couple games. And I mean where, hey, you can design a play, but we tell him none where they're not and try not to overcoach a running back that has vision. And so I just was using that as an example that he may have gotten away with it against a couple other opponents. And he realized that, you know, yesterday, you know, when he tried to bounce it outside that they caught up with him. In a game where there's so few yards to be had, Mike, that you cool with DeAndre sliding there. You want a receiver to try to gain every yard he can at the end of the run. I don't think that that I mean made a good catch, you know, like take care of the football. And I'm sure he'll have plenty of chances to catch and run and help us. Is that a body maintenance thing for him in that particular? You'd have to ask DeAndre to speak for him. That drive you had just before halftime. You guys were chipping on Miles Garrett most of the way down and you got in the red zone. You kind of got away from it. What was, did you just have a play where it was supposed to get the ball out quickly?  You know, we'll have to, we'll have to have an answer, you know, for that, something that we know that the ball's got to go in the end zone or it's got to go out of bounds.  You know, that's the end of half and being able to get three points and hopefully come back in the second half, get regrouped, going there with a little bit of, you know, just energy and confidence that you went down there and scored. And so that's, that didn't turn out that way. You have a chance to get Peter back this week and if so, I'm sure there's a chance, but I don't know what, how big or how small the chance is. Yeah, it was a mis-execution. Christian, supposed to cover the guy. Is Nicholas back in the building? He is in the building, yep. And he's allowed to meet. He's allowed to work out. He's allowed to condition, train by himself, but he can be in meetings and he can't be a practice or attend games. What do you imagine that to be like in terms of ramp up for, for the return? I imagine that he can, will be working out and he'll be training by himself with the strength and conditioning staff. I imagine that he'll be in meetings and I imagine that he won't be at the games or practice. With Hassan's case being dismissed, are you anticipating him being removed from the exempt list anytime? I, it's not my, it's not my exempt list. I mean, I would try to help you out guys, I would have no idea. In the past, when back when AJ was here, if you remember he had the issue with, you know, considering contemplating suicide. Chris Hubbard has had a friend who, who he lost the suicide.  No, but, but I, but I will. And I didn't, I didn't know I hadn't been aware of that. And again, we, mental health is critical or ability to take care of ourselves and what we need to, to be happy and healthy and function. You know, again, there'll be a lot of attacks on the Tennessee Titans and our players and our coaches. And, you know, that's just a small example. I mean, we play a game here. So we, we're going to try to win and we're going to do everything we can and we're going to improve. And, but we're also, you know, I'm going to be mindful of, of our mental health and, and our physical health.  He'd been a great addition, by the way. Chris has been a great addition.  I think he's just a veteran, you know, he spent time in two good organizations and spent time in Pittsburgh and Cleveland. Have always seen him from afar, but really respected the person that he is and how he's come in and. You know, earned a position on his team and just continued to work. Sean, the protocol or did he get clear? He was not placed into the protocol. Like the X-play is, that you've given up defensively have all come against your past defenses. Is that a function of how good you are to run, how much teams throw and how much of it when they do happen is a guy making a play, maybe like a Mario on the sideline yesterday. Okay, yeah. Bring it back later. Yeah, I think that there's, you know, unfortunately, that's the categories that we lump them into, right? Did, did we just get beat, you know, were we in, you know, close proximity? Or maybe our technique was poor. Did we have a communication error? Like what occurred maybe against the Chargers? Or did we just have a mental error? Like maybe what occurred yesterday at the end of the game? You know, just playing quarters coverage and, you know, thinking that hook was going to take them and, you know, that's so again, there's no easy answer to that. I apologize. I know that that's not what you're looking for. We know that that has to stop. You know, we talk about making them earn it. You know, part of that is affecting the quarterback with, with a pass rush or getting them off the spot. Or when you do get them off the spot, being able to, to get them on the ground. So I think it all goes hand in hand. It's just not the, just not the guys in coverage. It's the guys up front. And that's how we have to look at it. And that's how we have to coach it. Maybe no easy answer, Mike, too, for the offense. You scored three touchdowns through three games so far. Is it, do you look at tweaking the scheme? Is it just no execution? Is it all the, like, how do you go about trying to? Well, I think we want to make sure that we're as efficient and as confident and as urgent and decisive as we possibly can. You know, so looking through the first three games, what we've done well. Thing that, you know, when we look at it to the players look like they're, they're executing it with confidence, right? Whether it's positive play or just a couple yard gain, you know, but it looks like they, they know what they're doing. And I'm not talking analytics and saying it was a 10 yard game because of Miss Tackle. It's, it was a 10 yard game because it was well blocked. Guys knew what to do. Guys were flying. They could adjust to whatever looked at the defense gave us. And I'm also going to think that, you know, I think the Saints and certainly the Browns are going to be two of the better defenses in the league and the chargers presented their problems.  We were not. So we're going to get back to work and we're going to, we're going to make sure that we're doing everything for our players that, that helped them. And help us, you know, move the ball. Whether it's hitting X play or get down the red zone, you know, be locked in, know that they're probably going to pressure and, you know, after a turnover and, you know, that's, you know, we, for us to win, we have to be able to do that. We got a great turnover from SMB. You got to turn that into a touchdown on the 18 year line. The double moves affecting you guys more so than, than maybe in the past and, you know, anything that can be done more so against them. Um, get, get, get your eyes on your man. You know, that's one way. Get there a little quicker in the pass rush.  Appreciate it. It's coming in the building. Uh, you watch the film, try to learn from the best you can from the mistakes. Uh, there were a lot of them out there, but you just learn the best you can and just you got to move on to next week. That's the thing about this league. It's a, it's a long season. You just got to keep going week by week. Those contested catches down a sideline kind of that you had yesterday and teams made a couple of times. What were the, what are some keys to kind of down with those past? First is trying to get in a good position to get your body to the ball is when you see the ball in the air, just adjusting and getting in the right position and catching. And at the end days, you want to, you want to go out there and make that play for the team, help, help the team the best you can. Uh, this, I mean, uh, DHOP talk about all the time. This is a league where there's a lot of contested catches. So you just have to find a way to come down with that ball. How important are those for you guys given some of your offensive struggles that you make some of those downfield from time to time? I think it's very important. And just like last week, uh, the previous week, the home game, it helped us win the game and any situation that you can. You just got to try to get the momentum for this offense. So there's a play out there to be made. We got to make it find out about your culture, I guess, during tough times. What, what have you, uh, I guess seen in the wake of yesterday's loss and how do you kind of anticipate this team kind of rallying after yesterday? Um, even before this loss, I've, since I've been here, I've noticed a different culture here of just guys who, who love the game of football and who, who want to be great. And just coming in here early, people are already here in the locker and getting their stuff done, getting ready because we don't have means. So total 30. So people, but people are already in here trying to get right and get ready for the next week. So that's the type of culture you see when, when adversity hits, nobody's with their head down. Nobody's out here blaming each other. We're just out here trying to work hard and fix it. Chris, how is the finance line in looking and, and, and trying to improve and fix something and, and beating yourself up about it and, and lingering too long on something? Yeah, I mean, like it's a very fine line. That's, that's just NFL sometimes as players, you know, you're, you're tough as critics. Like when we watch the film, we, we don't take it easy on ourselves. You're, you're in there thinking about that one play you could have had, the one thing you could have done better. But it's, it's, we have coaches that help us to see the bigger picture of how we can improve and not beat ourselves too much. And then at the end of the day, we have another game this week. We have to move on and get ready for this next game. So when you did watch it back today or yesterday, just what were the moments that stood out to you that you guys would have wanted to have back? There's a lot of them. I mean, as personally as an offense, we just had to go out there and execute better. There was a lot of plays we could have made or we just got to just, we got to finish these plays and go out there and just be better. Yeah. I mean, that's not easy for any offense to convert. When you, when you shoot yourself in the foot early in your already putting yourself in the best situation, third down is hard enough to convert to make it even harder to, to convert when you're third and five and plus. It's definitely not easy. Chris, that's a great defense they have, obviously. How many times do you almost just kind of have to tick your cap and say like, that's Miles Garrett making a great play. He's a great player versus what you're talking about in the self-inflicted ones. Yeah.  That's, he doesn't get paid the money does. He's not the player he is. If we were able to just X him out of the game plan like that. But at the end day, when the opportunity is given for us to take advantage of it, we have to. And that's what we fail to do. We always hear it's a 500 lead and here you stand a victory away from, but bringing right where a lot of other people are going to be. I mean, so fans may feel like things are over, but you're a long way from that. Yeah. Like I said, it's a long season. There's a lot of games left. We hasn't, we haven't even played anybody in our division yet. So, I mean, we just got to take it each, each week and just tackle that game first and then worry about what's next later. You've been at this a while when you take the hits to stay confident.  That's when you get the confidence to go to next week. Like, man, that was just that week. That was that game. And this week we see this game plan. We see how we can do better. And like I said, practice is always how I've just got my confidence back going into the next week. Is it defeating it all for an offense when you have that big play to DeAndre and big play to yourself at the end of the half to then come up with no points and how might that carry over into the second half of the rest of the game?  I mean, that was something you definitely, when you're in that situation, you want to get points at the end of it. But I mean, I think we're all pros here. Like you can't linger on that. We go into the locker room and we're already looking for what we can do next. Because we knew we were getting the ball back. So we were out there trying to come up with like how we can get points on this next drive opening out. So I don't think anybody held their head down after that or we're thinking about that. I think we were thinking about what was next. Like how when we get this ball back, we can go down and try to get some points. For you personally, you talk about confidence in a game like that. Do you lose confidence when things are going bad? Or is there just a baseline that you gain confidence when things are going good? You talk about like personally, I don't think I lose confidence. Personally, it's almost like a little bit of frustration because, you know, we can be out there doing a lot better than we are. And you get a little bit of frustration really. But like I said, when you go into next week and you get to wash the tape, you get to see either it wasn't as bad as it was or it wasn't as good as you think it was.  How big of a sense of frustration is there in this building today, knowing you haven't scored a touchdown in two of the three games, and how confident are you that you fixed it this week?  When I was talking about frustration, I was talking about me personally. But as a team, like I said, we got guys who want to come in here and work. And like we have every confidence in everybody on our team that we have the ability to go out there and score points when we need to. We just got to execute when the situation calls for it. And we're going to get opportunities this week to do it and we just go out there and do it. Appreciate it. Yeah, like you said, we knew that he was a guy that can break tackles. He's going to be elusive in the backfield when you get back there. So we have to game tackle him. But he did a great job of just creating plays and making plays. And he just ended up getting in that rhythm, like you said, and then to win in the game. What happened in the last play with your last touchdown with you and Chris? I was just miscommunication. That's kind of how this game comes down to. You have a split second decision. One guy makes a certain move, a movement, and it changes your whole responsibility. So there's a miscommunication between me and Christian. That's something that we get to clean up and we've got to carry on to this week. Molly, when you look at the X-Plays, I think it's 12 now that you guys have given up all through the air. How many incidents of it is a guy making play? Like, maybe one around the sideline yesterday versus a miscommunication or a blow-up? Like, you know, is it tip your cap or is it really concerning what you guys are getting? I mean, obviously it's concerning. You don't want, you know, 12 X-Plays happening at any point in the league, I mean, in the season, excuse me. Yeah, but like you said, it just comes down to a guy making a play. It comes down to rushing cover at the end of the day. Our job is to cover the guys down the field and when the ball is in the air to, you know, make sure they don't catch it. A simple answer, but how do you guys get better at that? How do you get better at eliminating those X-Plays? Just being comfortable with the ball in the air. Don't panic when the ball is in the air.  Doesn't mean you have to get wide eyes.  What would you say is the overall vibe, you know, coming into work today? What's the vibe from your fellow players?   We had a good game plan.  You know, it's only about to be a week four. We got the Bengals this week. Guys are, you know, excited for the challenge that we have and, you know, they're ready to get to work. Some of the guys yesterday, they spoke about the play better mantra that, you know, is delivered to you guys and you guys deliver to each other. Yeah. What's your perspective of that? I think it just comes down to, you know, you got a job to do. We're all grown men. You just got to look at your play.  But I'm at the end of the day, like you said, you just got to be better. It's our job. But do you feel it's getting to a point where it's like, all right, enough saying, we got to be better. We just got to be better. Yeah, exactly. I mean, they just got to do it. The frustrating money, you guys, by this long stretch of being so good against the run, frustrating that hasn't necessarily converted into the, you know, into helping out the past defense? Yeah, I mean, obviously, you know, we want to stop the run. We want to continue to do that. And then just passing the passing game. Like I said, it just comes down to guys making plays.  You feel me? So it's going to go to the offense either way. So we just got to get better down the field. And then just better communication so we can't have those, you know, X plays. You know, they got Joe Burrow. They got, you know, good receivers on the outside. Jamar Chase is one of the best in the league. They're going to be able to challenge you down the field. They're going to challenge you on one-on-one coverages. They're going to run the ball. They're going to mix that in as well. But, you know, Joe Burrow is a guy that can create plays. And they're a team that's been successful the last couple of years. They're yards pretty much through the air in all three games. How do you avoid the finger-pointing with each other of getting it right? Yeah, I mean, I mean, we're a good group of guys. I mean, we're all teammates. We're all friends. So we're not going to be pointing fingers at each other. We're going to come together, figure away how we can, you know, stop the passing game from getting carried away going on to the next couple of games. We're going to come together, we're going to improve, and that's what we're going to do.  I mean, just continue to be a leader the best way that we can, whatever that, every guy takes leadership differently.  But nothing today, like I said, we're all grown men. We all have a job to do, and I'm pretty sure every guy knows that, you know, that they have to be better in what their job is to when they're on the field. PI's, are those the same kind of demoralizing as giving up a big player? Is there something different about a PI that feels personal and more interactive, just kind of what is the feeling?   It's just a fine line. You've got to figure out how the refs are calling the game.  So that's the X play. You think it was kind of a personal matchup for you guys? I mean, because you had your issues with Joe and those guys? Yeah, I mean, I don't know if it's personal on like a personal level like that, but they're a team that, you know, we view as a great team, and a team that we want to show up against and be. And obviously when they come into town, you know, we're going to have a good challenge ahead of us.


Hey there friends. Thanks for checking in. I'm at the range now, and I'm having some problems with the Beretta apx carry I've had this gun for a while at least since it was introduced last year, and it's been fine I've never had any problems now. I have standard 115 green blazer full metal jacket round 1199 right no gouging there bought that last weekend, but my intention was to compare it with the car S9 okay, I wanted to do a range comparison with these but I've got the blazer brass Loaded up right now the problem that I'm having is light primer strikes. So check this out Nothing, so maybe that's a tough primer all right gun is in battery and then another problem So let me go ahead and remove that round Gun is in battery Nothing Now I have to say that That's a problem. All right, so I've got the the car S9 same exact ammo loaded up I don't think I have one chamber right same ammo loaded up So we can't say that it's an ammo issue But let's just say it is because it's always good to Try other types of ammo So I'll go ahead remove that round they do have Light primer strikes. All right, so that is the issue. I'm gonna drop those right there and grab later But I've got some defensive loads now. I have used these with several guns it's never been an issue and They've always worked well with just about every gun I've ever fired it with these are Very nice loads LTCH technologies and shell shock Industries technology one of those but that's what I have here. All right, so that would be the right thing to do to say Maybe it's an ammo issue. Maybe the gun doesn't work well with that type of ammo So I'm gonna go ahead and load up around here. We can see the gun is in battery. Let's see what happens And then nothing. Let me get rid of that round gun is in battery everything's fine and Then nothing so let's take a look Empty mag. Let's take a look at that round and We can see that it has a very light primer strike not sure the camera will pick that up, but that's what's going on with the bretta APX a little disappointing but we'll have to see how the customer service is with Beretta Because I was kind of shocked this is performed very well for me since I had it I can't say I have thousands and thousands of rounds through it But when I when I got it I ran it through its paces and everything was fine Everything seems fine with the gun you know no Issues that that would stand out to be a problem the the issue is light primer strikes and that's it It's just not working today And I don't think it's gonna work tomorrow because I've been checking this out before I decided to make a video I wanted to make sure that I tried other types of ammo, which is the right thing to do and I did that and Nothing but light primer strikes, so I'll have to get back with you guys Let you know how the bretta APX carry turns out We're gonna contact bretta customer service and see what happens if you like videos like this Please subscribe and share I always appreciate thumbs up button. Thanks for watching and you guys be safe


Controlling your dreams is epic. Okay, it allows you to experience and enjoy anything you can imagine in your mind But there's a problem sometimes reality checks, which is one of the ways that you can learn how to lucid dream Don't show up in your dreams So in this video, I'm gonna share with you a three-step process which guarantees that your reality checks So the tests you do to test whether you're dreaming or not will make sure that you they show up in your dreams And then you become lucid it's a very proven easy way to lucid dream and if you get this right It's actually pretty reliable as well By the way throughout this video there are some small awareness tests that I've thrown in So see if you can spot them don't scroll down to the comments because if you scroll down to the comments You're gonna see people who have already found them and it's gonna ruin the whole experience for you So don't scroll down to the comments yet. Just pay attention to this video It's only a few minutes long and see if you can notice maybe write them down or something on your phone or a notepad See if you can notice the awareness. Okay, so reality checks. Here's where I think people get them wrong This is step one. It is not just about a physical action What most people think with reality tests is that what you do is you just try and breathe through your nose while it's pinched Or you try and look at your watch and check if the time changes when you look back at it. It's not about that That's that's just one aspect of it Which really doesn't matter as much anywhere near as much as the mental aspect So don't forget about the physical action just for a second. You need to and this is really step one Okay, you need to pretend when you're doing your reality tests that you don't know whether you're dreaming or not You don't know whether you're awake or not You need to genuinely and maybe this is where some acting will come in or if you've ever done like role-playing or acting drama classes Really really get into character for a second. Pretend that you have no idea whether this is a dream or not pretend It's like a hyper realistic simulation and your job is to try and figure out Is this a simulation or am I actually here right now? This is and it gets quite exciting when you really try and pretend that this right now this experience could be a dream And this is really what you need to do every single time. Otherwise, there's no point. They won't work So then step two, this is three steps The third one's the most important step two is that you need to then on top of that belief and that kind of pretending That you don't know then you build in the physical thing So then you tell yourself and you really need to believe it Otherwise it won't work you tell yourself when I push my finger through my palm if it goes through like that I'm dreaming if it doesn't go through I'm awake and that's the only way that you will know whether you're dreaming or not It's very important. By the way, I have a blueprint ebook that I put together Which tells you exactly breaks down step by step how to master reality x and how to literally guarantee that they show up in your dreams Most times like nine out of ten times and make you lose it So and because there's an art to this it's like a recipe you need to follow If you're interested in that go and check out the link in the description to the ultimate reality text guide Or just go to how to lucid.com and it should be somewhere there on the site So number three the most important is that once you've you know mastered the first two steps You need to really stack it as a habit So you need to do it consistently and not just go through the motions consistently You need to do it in exactly the way I described every time so every time you do a reality test You need to first pretend that you don't know it's a dream and really question look around you in question Is this experience is it possible that this experience right now is a simulation or a dream really try and ask yourself that and then Do the physical test so push your finger through the palm or pinch the nose Whatever and then make sure you do those first two Consistently as a habit apparently 80% or more people who watch this video are not subscribed So if you're watching this now and you're not subscribed It would really I would really appreciate it if you can just scroll down click subscribe like on the video and then comment down Below what is what are you struggling the most with with reality test because you're probably doing something wrong? And I can if you tell me what you're doing I can comment and tell you what you're doing wrong and how you can improve it


So, I use our spec in Cucumber. Enjoy both of the tools. One of the problems we had was it takes about 15 seconds for one of our applications to start up. We load a lot of gems and a lot of dependencies, and this increases the cycle of our tests. We write some code, we go to run our tests, 15 seconds later, we know whether or not it compiled and worked. Very prohibitive. We used spec server, which was also more prohibitive because it relied on the Rails constant unloading algorithm that they've employed. And there's a lot of ways to break that, which we were breaking. And so it would work for a few runs, and then it would get into a corrupted state, and then all of our specs would fail for no reason. This was also unacceptable. So, I set out to solve this problem, and I'd been doing some stuff with forking before, and I said, well, why don't we just fork a copy of the process and run the specs in that fork, so we get the benefit of loading all of your libraries at first, and then you just throw away the copy of that process, and there's caffeine. And you get to do it over and over again. That process never gets corrupted. So I'm just going to do a quick demo to show how this would benefit you. One other thing to note, Spork is not specifically tailored to RSpec or, well, it supports RSpec and Cucumber. It's not limited to that. Support for a test unit and any other framework imaginable can be added. Also, application frameworks. Merb's in the work, so if you're a Merb user, there's a guy working on a Merb integration for Spork onto the demo. I've got here a brief demo app. I'm going to rewind. All right, Script Generate, RSpec. That's how you bootstrap your app for using RSpec. Go into RSpec folder. Here's RSpec Helper. This is great. Create an example, spec, describe, example. It should be true. Something silly, true. Should be true. Now when we go and run that, spec slash example, spec. Let's run it with time. Oh, should, aha. OK, took, oh, I need to load spec helper, also important. I think I got to do this funky business, right? Fair on time, spec, spec slash example, underscore spec.rb. 2.791 seconds. This is OK. Obviously, if spec helper gets lower, let's put a sleep in there just for giggles. Sleep 5, it's going to take a lot longer. 7.89 seconds. Now to get it to work with Spork, we're going to bootstrap our spec helper. This creates two blocks. We've got a pre-fork in each run. Pre-fork is run once. Each run is run every time you invoke your specs. This gives you the ability to discern between what is preloaded and what is loaded every time. Obviously, the advantage of putting things here in pre-fork is that your specs will load faster. The disadvantage is it won't be reloaded each time you invoke your specs. So you would have to reboot Spork, essentially, to get any changes of code loaded here to take effect. So here is our original spec helper. We're going to go and basically sort through that. I'm going to paste it all in the pre-fork. Get rid of this big nasty comment. Get rid of this comment, do some surgery. We decide that we want our spec helpers to load each time. So if we make any tweaks to those, it'll be loaded again. So we'll put that down in each run. Fantastic.  Oh, one other thing. This is an issue with our spec we need to work out. Spork does this for you, so delete the detection of the Rails framework. It has already been loaded. It is freezing. OK, so now time spec dash dash drb spec slash example group or example spec. And down from 7 seconds to 0.816 seconds, rinse repeat. And you have fast specs. So question. One minute. You're the guy that I'm supposed to be asking for time. Well, I'm done. Any questions?


Okay, good morning and good afternoon everyone and welcome to the research panel on the energy resilience challenge topic. And this is the third webinar that co-hosted by April and the Stanford bits and what's, and together to discuss the challenges opportunities on the energy system resilience issue and how the AI can help. And a little bit background, as we are speaking the electricity sector is going through Titanic shift due to the urgency to decarbonize improve the resilience against extreme events. Like what we have been in the last several weeks, all the hurricanes in the southeast area, and also provide affordable and equitable access to the at risk communities. And the traditionally modeling simulation post approach has been used widely by utilities to design the infrastructure. Then we think that AI could be a powerful additional approach be used to analyze large amount data and identified patterns and the trends. And by seeing that over the last 18 months, you know, every launched the AI initiative and been working with Stanford and the many other organizations put together a ground challenge of AI application for the electricity sectors. And the way identified five ground challenges. And the one of them is how the AI can help to address energy resilience issue. And also I'd like to introduce my co-host Sarah from April. Sarah and I have been doing this over the summer. And the beginning of the summer June 21. Together, three US utilities from both west from west coast from east coast from Texas, and the shared with us all different kind of climate induced vulnerability assessment down at different utilities. And how they collect the data, and what kind of use case they have been using the AI approach to address the resilience challenges. And a couple months ago, we invited the two European utilities and from from Italy from spender and the Portugal discuss how they are using different approach to address the climate resilience challenges. And today, we are very glad to have both April and the Stanford are going to share with the audience. So existing research effort going on at these two organizations. And without further ado, so let me do this way why not I introduce Alex, then you can introduce my colleague around how's that. Very good. So, we will start with Alex to share with us at Chris climbing the ready initiative. And Alex is CEO chief of staff at electrical power research Institute, where he supports the CEO's enterprise strategy and operations. In addition, over the last six months and a year. Alex is co lead at Chris newest strategical initiative called the climate ready. We are with the officially launched in April 2022 with a goal of developing a comprehensive and holistic investment framework on climate vulnerability analysis. So with that, I will stop sharing my slides and passing back to Alex, Alex. Thank you, I appreciate the opportunity to be here today I appreciate everyone's attention and the opportunity to talk to you guys a little bit about whoever he is and the kind of work we have ongoing. As we said, my name is Alex so me I serve as chief of staff for CEO. I'm based out of Charlotte, North Carolina, and I've been with the effort team for about 11 years. I have a nuclear and materials engineering background. Just a quick aside on who every is and what we do for those of you who may not be as familiar with us. We're a nonprofit independent think tank for the electric power industry. We're conducting research and advancing technology on every aspect of electricity from the generation of electrons to the transmission delivery all the way down to the end use of electricity so any and every asset asset and aspects are a facet of the utility industry we have some sort of ongoing R&D. And ultimately what we're trying to achieve is work collaborative collaboratively to advance and develop the technology and mature to a point where utilities and customers can ultimately apply it in their homes for the benefit of society and for the benefit of the world. We do utilize a collaborative approach. So we bring together stakeholders utilities vendors OEM consultants academia national labs from across not just here in the US but but across the globe with that singular purpose of advancing technology and science. We represent over 400 global utility members and execute roughly 450 million annually and research every year. The most important and key takeaway with regards to whoever he is is that we are purely an objective science and technology based organization. We don't advocate policy we don't we don't recommend policy. And as a result we believe it gives us a unique and really a highly credible position within the industry and within the broader discourse to inform policymaking and to inform dialogue with external stakeholders and ultimately important utility strategy. All that being said, I will speak a little bit today about climate ready for climate resilience and adaptation initiative. And I promise to only use one slide during this and before I even throw up that slide I want to I want to set the stage a little bit on the need the opportunity and the barriers that ultimately led us to launching this initiative and initiating this work. The need which which Lang has alluded to is really in two parts. The first is around extreme weather. We are all having this shared lived experience of extreme weather, not just here in the US but but really around the globe, and we're seeing extreme weather events increase not just in duration intensity but but also most notably frequency. What was once a one in the thousand or one in the one in 100 year event is now becoming a one in one in 20 or one in 10 year event or even more frequent. You can see this also we an organization attracts the number of individual billion dollar weather disasters each year just here in the US. It has massively doubled in the past 10 years and quadrupled in the past 20 so there's this this undeniable lived experience around extreme weather and the consequences of it. In tandem to this is this rapid decarbonization transition we're all undergoing, which is driving and accelerating the growth of electrification. It's on electricity for its final energy source is rapidly growing. It's currently estimated today that roughly 20% of our final energy use is from electricity that's expected to double or even triple by 2050. So we already have this exceptionally high bar for reliability and resilience, and it's only going to grow even higher. And not only do we have to maintain it, but we have to improve upon it as society becomes more and more dependent on electricity. You know, examples of this are stuff you're seeing customers you customers have in their homes electric heat pumps, water feeders cooking appliances.  Just over in California where where liang is right now they recently passed the law saying by 2035. All new electric all new vehicles have to be electric so it really, I think put the fine point on the need here, both from an extreme weather point of view and then also from society's growing dependence on electricity. So, you know, taking a positive look on this it's not all not all bad or sad is that there's with need comes opportunity opportunity for change opportunity for advancement and development. So our opportunity here is really rooted in science and technology, as I would argue most opportunity is as a as an engineer are climate science or modeling tools are capabilities. They have advanced and mature to a point where we can start having meaningful conversations and projecting out. What does the climate look like in 10 years in 20 years and 30 years. How does that climate, these fundamental variables translate into strict the probability of extreme weather events. And what these tools and what these insights do is they ultimately enable us to take a fundamentally different approach to resilience. This different approach is going from a reactive to a proactive thought process around how we invest in resilience in the electrical grid. So if you think about it historically, some would argue that the utility industry has been gotten quite good and fairly effective that reactive approach to resilience. And I'll give an example when when Hurricane Harvey hit the hit the Texas coastline in the Gulf several years back. It caused significant flooding in a number of areas that really hadn't seen it and the local utility came in and spent half a billion dollars to elevate critical infrastructure to ward off future flooding events in that area. And that's good and that is a success in some regards in the in the fact that we were responsive to the event. But what we also we need to do recognizing that that climate climate change and the these new extreme events are becoming a reality that we're living in. This is a proactive footing towards resilience investment we need to and we can with these new tools and methodologies anticipate these new extreme events and and these untested vulnerabilities within our on our electric grid. So the study I saw that I think really puts it into perspective is that it estimated that transmission and distribution infrastructure owners would save roughly 2.5 billion that's billion with to be annually every year. By the end of the century, simply if they use projected climate data to inform their design standards, instead of historical climate data. If that's not strong enough, quantifiable justification, I'm not sure what would be there's other studies that point to similar quantifiable impacts of us adopting a proactive approach towards resilience investment. Not only does it have this fiscal impact it has a direct impact obviously on the communities and society itself. The consequences of losing electricity as I mentioned earlier is becoming more and more dire more and more severe so there's a there's a quantifiable and then a qualitative reason to be exploring these these options and these solutions. So we've got these clear needs. We have a defined opportunity based on the science and technology capabilities, capabilities open to us. What are the barriers what's holding us back, and this really gets to the crux of why every has launched climate ready is to address these barriers. The first one is, is the approach, the approach right now is the spoken inconsistent. We have universities, national labs consultants are the organizations like every across the US and across the globe, all providing their own unique and custom analysis and methodology towards projection and then downscaling and localizing of climate data and then applying it to individual assets. And it's not to say that any one of these methods is right or wrong it's they all have their pros and cons they all have fundamental value to add to the equation. But we need to set some ground rules we need to provide some some guardrails you might say some consistency around the fundamental assumptions that we applied. So we as a group when we talk about this and we talk about it with external stakeholders, we're all seeing it from the same same sheet of notes so to speak, and we all have a similar understanding base understanding to guide the conversation in the discussion. And with that inconsistent approach, the other key barrier is simply the lack of transparency. Because there's this bespoke and individual approach across the board. There's often a lack of transparency, and so you have utilities and other the operators and owners trying to make informed and justified resilience investment strategies. And just as just as viable and just as justified questions from key stakeholders from regulators from others around, have you benchmark this, what's your maturity right now have you thought about these other tools and these other options that are out there. And so this all this, all this talk and all this, you know, these these needs this opportunity and then these barriers, ultimately leads us to this, this new initiative that we've launched back in April. So I'm sharing my slide hopefully everybody can see it here it's called climate ready ready as an acronym with an eye stands for resilience and adaptation initiative. And what climate ready seeking to do is ultimately provide a framework that points to the landscape of tools and capabilities that is out there and provides a step by step, sort of how to guidance document for our industry to coalesce around which to ultimately assess vulnerability to our assets and to our system and then make informed and most cost effective decisions around the mitigation and adaptation strategies that can be applied. So within this initiative, which, as I think I mentioned kicked off in April this year, we have put the work out into three distinct work streams. These are not happening in serial these are happening in parallel and iterative with the iteratively with each other as they inform one another. The first one is all around the climate data science and modeling itself. It's around identifying what data is out there what's the suitability of that data. If you're looking at wind speeds for your wind turbines turbines will you care about it at 10 or 20 meters not at two or five meters so the applicability of climate data what's the suitability of it and what are the gaps of it. And therefore, your particular region is is a critical part of the equation. Once you've projected out and you've assessed what the quality of data is and what you what you can and cannot infer from it. That's when you jump over to work stream to and you can begin to assess what is the vulnerability and what is the risk on specific assets within your system. Based on that vulnerability and that risk, what are the mitigation options what are they, what is the suite of adaptation strategies that are out there. And so you can lay them out side by side and begin to compare which ones are going to be the most effective for you and most relevant for your situation. And then what are some of the design criteria you should be one should be planning for as they think about their system operating in the weather of the future 2030 40 years from now. All this bubbles up into work stream three where we take this information these knowledge blocks, if you will, and we build out a system level perspective around the vulnerability. And around the adaptation and mitigation solution so that ultimately at the end of the day, a utility is able to provide do a risk informed probabilistic cost benefit analysis on all of the solutions. And come come to some sort of consensus and agreement around what's going to be the best approach, and then and then have a informed and much more efficient conversation with external stakeholders to help bring that adaptation strategy out into the public side. So we, we envision this is a three year initiative we envision it culminating with this framework that I've described. It's not a prescriptive framework it's not picking winners and losers it's pointing to all the options out there and highlighting their capabilities along with their pros and cons. Along the way will be coming out will be providing a number of deep dive technical assessments briefings informing the public discourse in this area, providing a network of pure network for the industry and external stakeholders to engage and talk to each other. And, and the, and then there's three sort of key tenants associated with climate ready that I think is important to highlight here. One is this framework needs to be comprehensive and needs to include all of the different assets types. Generating electricity transmission and delivery of electricity down to end use the electrification I talked about, plus some consideration for equity environmental justice and other community priorities that might be of importance in a particular area so it needs to be comprehensive. In terms of the assets needs to be comprehensive in terms of the weather variables and the weather student the climate variables and the weather events that needs to be considered. And then comprehensive in terms of the utility activities this is looking at planning through operations and maintenance of the electric grid. It needs to be consistent. And I say this also recognizing it needs to be flexible. This is a big problem but it has hyper local solutions everyone situation is unique and different. We need to be able to leverage a framework that consistently brings us to similar solutions or at least has the same assumptions built in so that when we talk and we benchmark and we attempt to do some sort of, you know, pure maturity, modeling, we are, we're doing an assessment of the levels comparison. Last and I would argue, probably the most important aspect of this entire initiative is that it needs to be collaborative. I talked earlier about everyone taking their own approach and the lack of transparency behind these approaches. What the government ready is doing is convening a stake of a what we're calling affinity group members really external stakeholders. This includes regulators, this includes government organizations national labs DOE includes academia this includes consultants OEMs financial and insurance organizations. We want to bring everyone and anyone who has a stake in this in this discussion to the table to provide perspective to point to solutions and methodologies that they're aware of, and to ultimately incorporate their thoughts and ideas into the broader framework. So that at the end of the day, when a utility leverages the framework, there is a fundamental level of kids if not consensus at least agreement on the baseline assumptions that go into the conversation. Well, all that to be to be said, we're very excited about the initiative. We've had significant success success so far in terms of participation and engagement. We have 33 utility members that have signed up for it with many more ongoing conversations. We have dozens of external stakeholders participating in the effort we are having our first in person workshop next week in New Mexico. So, yeah, I think that's, that's laying out probably pause here and open up the questions but I would encourage everyone and anyone the phone that if you have interest and you want to participate in this initiative, please reach out to us and we very much welcome your engagement. Wonderful Alex thank you very much. We have a lot of information here. Then, I think we're a little bit behind the schedule so let's move on I will have a cell to introduce another panelist here. We are honored to have in addition to Alex Professor Ron Roger Roger go Paul with us today. He is an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford and the co director of Stanford spits and what's initiative. He directs stand the Stanford sustainable systems lab focused on large scale monitoring data analytics and stochastic control for in strip infrastructure networks. And in particular and what we're focused on here today. We have power networks renewables integration smart distribution systems demands I data analytics R&D. He holds more than 30 patents several best paper, paper awards and has advised for founded various companies along the same lines and power network R&D. Thank you for joining us today Ram, and please go ahead and get started. Thank you so much for inviting me for this session and I just have a few slides to share and go quickly based on an ongoing project we have here at Stanford but illustrates kind of the value of the AI and this conversation about resiliency. So here's the team for a project, which if you look across it covers many different areas and backgrounds and the faculty are listed below here. You know everyone was aware of the Texas power crisis, and it was one of these big climate related grid events that we have had recently. I remember that I really wanted to focus on was the kind of the human impact of this event you know 70 deaths, 5 million people without power, 12 million people with water shortages. And if you look here at the outage map of Houston you can notice that a lot of the areas where power was cut off were of those most vulnerable people, the low and middle income folks that really don't have any alternatives of where to go and so on. In terms of damage, it was a huge issue so one of the questions that we started out here in the campus was, well, in order to help utilities and the rest of the ecosystem to address this. What do we need to do to be prepared for the next time, exactly like Alex was describing. And our kind of approach though since we have the benefit of being in academia was maybe let's start from kind of the bottom up and when you do that, you know, we said well, we know that the energy system will need to be decarbonized. And what we are asking is for it to be resilient to climate change and extreme events. That's great. But the one aspect that is very key is that it needs to serve everyone, and it needs to be aware of how it impacts people and communities. So rather than taking a infrastructure centered approach, how do we take a community centered approach in order to better manage our system resiliency, as well as the carbonization. So typically the way we have designed infrastructure is we look at the aggregate of the demand we predict the demand and when we say we build the sufficient infrastructure capacity to satisfy that. But by looking at the average demand when it comes time to do resiliency and things like that we don't really know how it is individually impacting different people in different communities. And in consequently, you know, the kind of human impact and costs that we saw before. So how do we start moving towards a design that's much more people in community center. To do that, we first need to establish metrics, and we thought of four very high level areas where we need metrics so the first you know they're shown here. First, of course, we want the system to be equitable, meaning, if you're going to have any sort of resiliency to climb it in the system, it should be distributed equally among all everyone. Second, it should be inexpensive, but we need to also define what inexpensive and equitable mean. You know some more recent definitions of grid costs are urging for us to consider costs as a percentage of people's income. That's not how traditionally we have looked at that. So we want the grid to be resilient. As Alex pointed out, particularly to these new classes of events, the climate induced grid events. And finally, we want it to be 24 seven carbon free. So we started from this big picture, you know, vision and said okay what is needed if we were to try to do this in practice. In order to design such a grid, you need to take certain steps. The first one is, if you want to build that resiliency, we need to be able to map the climate risks at the level of communities. Not at the aggregate level, not that the level of infrastructure alone, but also at the level of communities. And how do we do that in a scalable way. So there's a lot of work in the climate science community, but typically the information they produce is not necessarily the information you need when you're calculating kind of impacts on people through, you know, other infrastructure, you know, be it electricity or gas. The second thing you need to do is then take these inputs of these climate risks and transform them into climate, in first induced infrastructure vulnerability on a community basis so I can take a census tract in California and say things like you know this is how it's like you are to have an outage during you know these type of situations. This is how much extra demand you will have when when you see a heat wave, and so on so forth. So, you know doing that connection at a very granular level is very important and how to do that. And finally, in order to kind of mitigate the impacts of these climate events. So based on the idea of adaptation or preparation. Of course, there is a lot of other steps, even during the event while it's happening and then opposed event and so on so forth. But the question we had is, what are approaches for a more equitable infrastructure adaptation, because typically as we look at the infrastructure adaptation in the grid. And it's focused again on average performance metrics across the whole footprint of the grid. And behind that you can actually hide a lot of these nuances of local populations their needs and the impacts they might have. And we also made it a priority that anything we do in this kind of project we have out here is shared in the open through the energy data commons. And we are also partnering with various organizations including every to do this. So to test these steps here and actually come up with some concrete ideas. We're going to look initially on extreme temperature events because those are the best understood ones, according to climate modeling. As well as wildfires. And I'll just show you some motifs that came out of our research and then we can have a discussion. I'm just going to click through these so you can see the slides later. And then is we tried to map kind of what is the risk of having a very hot or extremely hot day, according to temperature humidity happening in any given location in a map in California, for example. There's two ways to do this. One is you do take station measurements information and do some sort of local interpolation based on the historical patterns and try to say what's that temperature. One is through the reanalysis of satellite extrapolated data so you use weather models and so on. They are at a much coarser spatial level, and then to make it granular, you use reanalysis to do that. There's a very nice report listed in the bottom of the slide here on the that shows that if I look at, you know, a certain percentile of the temperature on a particular location. There's a difference of 30 to 60 degrees centigrade depending on which percentile 95th or 99 percentile, depending on the method you used. So what should you do. So we started with that question. You know, we tried to understand, okay, maybe the right thing to do with risks is to kind of fit tail probabilities. The difficulty of hitting tail probabilities is you don't have a lot of extreme data points. So can you combine the principles of some climate science and statistics in order to do that. And one methodology is to use clustering and be identified these bands where weather behaves similarly throughout history. And now I take the data across those bands and build tail probabilities for that. And that allows me to calculate these, you know, risks in a stationary hundred year level event for a period in the future. Now, all of all of this, you know, shows the importance of knowing what data sources you have and then producing predictions that are appropriate for the application you want to have. And the benefits of combining data with some sort of weather models. We also have been using AI to try to do temperature distributions that are hourly so that you get the actual temperature during the day which is very important to analyze anything to do with electricity because demand and planning depend on hourly demand. Sorry, planning depends on the hourly demand. And our conclusion is that you can build methods of this type. The next thing I wanted to skip to is now I want to take this extreme weather events and then project them into impacts on the infrastructure. The last of things that that one can develop is, for example, how does the actual electricity consumption response to changes in temperature, and then project that with respect to climate, like Alex was saying, and the trick to do that is really to understand your past very well and build a model of your past and then take a moment where you have a change and say I'm going to use the model of my past to say that's how I should have behaved. There's a difference with respect to that. And when we do this kind of analysis one of the things that we learned is that identifying the right metrics for comparisons is very important. So in a particular demand study we looked at, for example, how much extra CO2 emissions will be caused by the growth in demand due to climate risks and climate change. And we also have looked at, you know, during heat waves, for example, how much additional demand is required in different counties or zip codes in California for residential consumers and for small and medium businesses. And it's, it can be quite a lot. I mean, between 20 and 40%. It also leads to a lot of adoption of air conditioning. And again, this increase is not really equitable so whenever we do these analysis we also looked at the distribution of the impacts across the population. And the last thing that we are doing is we're kind of collecting a lot of data from utilities, both taking existing data that's reported and collected by the federal government and then combining with data that is provided to us when we do utilities so that we can build an outage model that would allow us to calculate the risk of outage due to climate events in any location in the United States. And when I say a location, we are thinking about census tracts eventually. And now we have collected data from about 102 electric utilities in almost all states and covering almost all counties in the US. We now correlate that information with the extreme weather database from the US to shell this data. And another important insight about applying AI and using this information, the electric utilities report together with their outage information, which type of event caused that outage so it could be, you know, an extreme, you know, hurricane or something like that. What we learned was, there is also what climate scientists consider extreme events, and that's actually a larger set than what utilities consider to be extreme weather events. So taking the climate science definition and applying it here, you can start to build these models that explain reliability, and it's very, very interesting. This is still ongoing work, but some early insights are that of course investments on the distribution network pay off, and they certainly reduce your safety and safety due to extreme weather events. But for example, if you have a lot of wind and solar in your footprint, that actually makes you a little bit more sensitive to, to extreme weather events, and you have to think about how to contract that. But hopefully we will be able to do more of these models, particularly partnering with many who are attending the webinar today. And the last thing I wanted to share was about adaptation. And the first thing we did in adaptation was, we took one particular case study we wanted to understand how can we adapt the urban grids to with respect to wildfires. And the challenge in doing that is like we wanted to know, okay, what is it beneficial to do should I do vegetation management. Should I replace wooden poles by metal poles, should I underground the lines. Well the challenges, a lot of this information is not publicly available. Particularly for example in California we don't know the under grounding status of the distribution lines that's data that is owned by the utility. What we did was we used Google Street View information and we use computer vision to kind of map which lines are overground which lines are underground we correlated that with the existing publicly available maps for the distribution grids in California for SC and PG&E. And then we combined the, so that allowed us to calculate an under grounding rate per census tract in these, you know, Northern California and Southern California census tracts. And then we combined that information with other sources of information. The fire publishes a fire risk map, which is their annual wildfire probability prediction over a certain period of time. So we can compare that to where the, you know, the under grounding rates that you obtain. So, undergrounding rate means, what is the fraction of miles of your distribution lines that are underground. We use three canopy cover data that's published as well, and we can then compute the canopy cover and how close it is to the distribution line. So that gives you an idea high level idea of vegetation risk. And then based on a particular data set provided by PG&E last year to the public, we were able to also look at the asset risks and polls and transformers and so on. So let me show you what this uncovered, which is really interesting. The first thing is that vulnerability of the grid is not equitable. So if you look at under grounding rates, that's the first figure here, and I stratified according to wildfire risk. You can see that undergrounding is always lower for lower income community census tracts. So the fraction of lines underground. And particularly if I look at high wildfire risk, and that is definitely true. Now this is obviously not meant to be done in purpose, but this is the result of us using tools for planning that look at things in the aggregate. The second thing that we learned is for example if you look at the fraction of overhead lines that overlap with the three cover within 10 meters. You can see that again, it is much higher for low and middle income communities. And similarly if I look at transformers and their ages, you know the transformers tend to be much older in low and middle income community regions, and finally the same for wood poles. So what we saw was, well there is this issue happening of the more exposure to risk for low and middle income communities. And so how do you go about fixing it? So we worked with a policy expert here on campus, Michael Wara, he also writes a lot about wildfires. And the idea that we had is really you know the most effective, one of the most effective mechanisms is line undergrounding. Of course you can't underground all the lines. So we use an algorithm to determine where are the critical lines that need to be underground. So if we have that then we have to figure out how to make the costs of this more equitable. And we use a definition from equity that has been proposed in the last five years by Severin Bornstein from Berkeley that says well we should start looking at these costs as a fraction of income. So we wanted to make sure that the increase of what you pay for electricity as a fraction of your income remains the same no matter where you are. And the method then it's pretty simple you look at the sense of strats where you have to bury lines.  If you are above that cut off then just the local community shares the cost for that upgrade, and that basically equates and makes it much more flat, you know the percentage increase of everyone's bill. And the next thing that we're trying to do now so so this shows you know the way we think about the solutions need to change if you're going to incorporate the impact on the population and this issue of equity. The next thing that we are doing is also looking at DRs. So that's kind of our labs main focus along the years have been distributed energy resources and how to integrate them to the grid and provide support in various ways. And the idea that that we are looking at now is, if I want to have resiliency using DRs what should I do. And so we set we took data that's available for basically across the US, you know, both residential and commercial data. And we were able to take utility rates in all these different regions and different costs of installation and everything and optimize a mix of diesel batteries storage and PV. So this is preliminary work we're also incorporating now a natural gas genset and see what is the optimal mix that a customer would have that's lowest cost, given that he has the goal to have a certain reliability level, a certain likelihood of outage, given the local expected outage rates based on our previous model that I just discussed. And one of the key findings is that, of course, with the cost of what technologies are today, you use a lot of diesel. But there is regions where you have a lot of adoption of solar and battery. And if you go out, I think 10% of the census tracts where you see a substantial number of consumers, basically, having more than 80% of their consumption being self produced. So once this model using all the NREL projections for costs of different technologies, what we found is that actually can grow and about 30% of all of these census tracts will have that so just a different view to resiliency and more bottom up. So, thank you very much, and we'd love to. Very good, then let's bring both Sarah and Alex back to the stage. For all the audience online, I would encourage you to type your question on the Q&A. I do see two excellent questions there, and we're going to address them later. I think both Ram and Alex, you mentioned Ram, you talk about a lot on the community resilience solution, and Alex, you touch a little bit on the environmental justice and equity will be very important part for AAPRIS design of this investment framework. So the question is how can AI, you know, data analytics approach to really bring this EJ and energy equity issue from just a concept to reality because from my perspective, I'm relatively new to the EJ and energy equity area. I'm learning a lot recently by talking to my colleagues here. And also, you know, from Ram's example is there's a lot of public available social behavior, social science data, like the income and the race, you know, from the census data. How this data can be leveraged to help you to make the investment decision. So probably, I think, let's, Alex, you go first, then Ram can chime in later. How's that, Alex? Great question. And I'll confess, I'm in the same boat as you. I'm learning a lot about EJ and equity from my friends and peers here at FRA. It's a fascinating topic, and it's especially for engineers because it's so qualitative and kind of squishy and subjective sometimes. That's not to say that it isn't just as incredibly important, but it's not as black and white as we might be used to. I think my initial thoughts here would be around the social science data itself and how AI can fill in some of the gaps and provide more granularity and depth around that data, particularly from a locational point of view. Ram touched on in the beginning of his presentation around the number of vulnerable and disadvantaged communities that were impacted by power outages or power disruptions. And so being able to understand where these communities are can directly translate into the types of resilient solutions that are going to be most cost effective and useful for them, whether that is undergrounding, whether that's micro grid, whether that's putting in more feeders or changing the type of distribution pool that you're using or simply vegetation management. All these different solutions can be viable, and each one is going to be different depending on the unique characteristics of their location. But I think it's important for us to inject within the conversation this fundamental understanding. And, Rob, you related, I think, highlighted well that the impact to a disadvantaged community with a power disruption is massively more significant than to an effluent community. I would be so bold as to say most of the people on the phone here today can lose power for a day or two. We could lose all the food in our fridge, and we could, you know, jump in our Range Rover and drive 300 miles to go stay in a hotel where they do have power. It would be inconvenient. We wouldn't like it, but we would be fine. We would be able to move on and continue on with with our daily lives. That's not the case for the disadvantaged communities losing a fridge full of food for them can have a significant impact on their bottom line.  So the extent to which AI can can help us leverage the social science data from a locational point of view and inform our understanding of the location of these vulnerable communities. And then also help us prioritize some of the response strategies when there is an outage. I think that's another important part of this too. We're not going to be fail safe necessarily all the time but but say fail is maybe a better way of thinking about it. Sometimes it's going to be more cost effective and more appropriate to recognize there will be failures on the grid. And we're going to design a response around those or anticipate them in a way that allows us to bring power back in a faster and more effective way so you know traditionally we look at feeders and prioritizing feeders back just a number of customers but with this sort of data we can instead overlay the types of customers and the severity of impact to them on which which feeders we necessarily you know prioritize and coming back from some sort of outage. I agree with what Alex said and maybe just summarizing and emphasizing a couple of his points. The first thing is you need to define which metrics you want to compute that capture these notions of equity and environmental justice and impact. When you're defining these things you know part of it is being able to compute them at scale across your entire footprint. And part is, you know, the, they need to be metrics that you can eventually actually, you know, take actions upon them, and meaning you can incorporate them in some planning and optimization. And that's another place where I think AI in the near future will be very helpful as we start to optimize with the goal of incorporating these metrics as an objective function. Another aspect that I think is very important when dealing with this issue of social justice and equity and so on is the ability to access data openly. And part of understanding equity is you need real the real granularity on on what's happening. And that means you need data. So that's been one of the challenges we've faced when trying to do that. And I think this data is not just sitting at any one entity so there will have to be a lot of coordination across many entities in the grid to. And outside of the grid as well, you know, building information and cities and all of that to provide the information. Great. Thank you for those responses. And we're going to move on to a second question. When we think about the challenges of integrating AI into systems and businesses. What are the key challenges that you both see in integrating AI into your practices. We may start with with profession with Professor Roger go Paul, while you're up on. Sure. The key challenges that we see in using AI, I think is the availability of high quality labeled data. So sometimes you have no data available, then sometimes you get some data, but the data doesn't have the appropriate information you need to build your tools and we spend a lot of time basically doing that, you know, adding that to the data. Just so you have an idea and all of these projects I shared today, maybe 90% of the time was spent on kind of finding organizing labeling the data. That is the biggest challenge. And, and I think a second but smaller challenge has been around the access to the, you know, different pieces of information that are disparate and putting them all together. Excellent. I was just saying I agree wholeheartedly with with ROMs points there and I might build a little bit off of your point around the data format itself. One of the things that we're going to be trying to do within the climate ready framework is take the downstream needs and data requirements and provide those to the data generators themselves. There's going to be a slow and painful and there's going to be iteration involved inevitable iteration on the data requirements and getting them to the place we need but we can at least short circuit some of it by taking a bit of more of a proactive approach and identifying and understanding better how the data is being used and what the data needs are, and then informing the data generators on how to implement those. And so that's that's something we'll be doing within the climate ready framework itself that will be will be trying to advance that conversation. The other aspect you mentioned to around data access I would build upon that in terms of data privacy and data security, owning the right to use the data and then aggregating it in a way that maintains and an enmity is not trivial. And then throw on top of that this massive requirements growing around cyber security. I don't know how much you guys are seeing it in your world. But in our world almost every facet of our business now is having its own individualized and unique requirements for cyber security that are becoming really quite paralyzing and burdensome. And that's not to trivialize their necessity they're absolutely it's actually very much required but seeing us as an industry in a society rally around some sort of standardization for cyber security data requirements would I think really open up the floodgates and enable us to be much more efficient. Excellent. Yang I'm going to pass through one of the questions that we had come through chat. I had a link shared with us by Craig Lewis, an article about a market mechanism for financing community micro grids, namely a resilience energy subscription, RS straightforward approach. And I think this goes to consistency of approaches ability to provide transparency defensible decisions more easily defensible. The question from Craig is why not simply prioritize resilience based on the type of facility with consistent application across all communities. And Alex if you care to provide any comments. Yeah, it's interesting article Craig and I did note that and I'm going to read into it in depth, a little bit more to better understand the premise there. I guess my immediate reaction is it's, you know micro grids not always going to be the most cost effective or, you know, really reasonable solution for for built for providing resilience and certainly one of the options. But there might be simpler and more cost effective options out there so I would want to better understand the context of when this would maybe this is after you've already identified that my group is definitely the best solution. And you can provide some sort of community financing which sounds like a really interesting idea. I appreciate you sharing the article and we'll be looking at it in the context of our climate ready effort. I think that when most of the analysis I've seen and even the ones we're doing out here at Stanford, they do take into account the load prioritization and the different levels of importance and different types of loads. In terms of solutions. I do agree there is a diversity of solutions, but one of the things that will impact which ones get adopted is going to be the speed and the scale at which we can deploy things. And for example what we see in California is I talked to several friends that have been subject to outage and if they have enough wealth, they go and buy a natural gas little jet and sat and they have their solution right there. It doesn't really matter it's way more expensive than the grid power for them. So, I think how do you incorporate these kind of concepts in your picture in your planning picture. I think this is a new type of challenge for power systems, and it's super exciting to to to to figure this out, you know bring ideas from from public policy sociology and so on so forth into this mix here. Very good. We only have two minutes left and have a still have a couple questions in the kill. So, let me pick one of them. I think it's an excellent question. This is from Lawrence Garwin. And it's a long question. Let me go to the point specifically so talk about by direction EV charging so are you are you like a electrical public utility commission and the utility effect in the imminent direction EV charging into their infrastructure planning. And with the background on the electrification transportation side electrification building side know when to charge the car. And I also want to add whether or not the EV itself can be utilized as a reasoning solution for the homeowner. I will open the floor anyway, anyone want to go first run Alex. I was going to say that Alex is, is, you know, working with all the utilities at every so I just thought you could say something. I could take a step. Yeah, it's, there's certainly awareness, and there's a lot of discussion around this, this opportunity here, it is a, it is not trivial. The market design required the technology required just in terms of the communication with the grid. It's, it's going to be it's a big problem. And it's, I'll just say this, I don't want to be too, too negative, there's awareness of it. And we are, there's not just awareness but there's a sense of urgency, because it's obvious that adoption of electric vehicles is only going to be exponentially increasing. It's clear that there's some type of opportunity here, how we execute on it and how we get over some of the hurdles with the different manufacturers and they all have their own unique approach they want to utilize. Again, they can announcement recently that they wanted to challenge Tesla and, and, you know, providing energy store energy back to the grid and in some regards, it's, it's, it's not going to be easy. I think one of the areas where we have started to play around and do some demonstration, where it can potentially be the first first area we kind of adopt this sort of thinking would be around fleets and electric buses. For example, where they have these particularly large energy storage capacities, and there's these highly defined times when the buses are being used and not being used. So those might be some of the earlier adopters or at least testers of this type of philosophy. Yeah, I, I just wanted to add to what Alex said I think when you are considering particularly vehicle to grid. One has to remember that these technologies are quite expensive. Many of the homes require additional things like you know panel replacements and so on to support this so there will be issues around the equity of an availability of that because the person has to have an electric vehicle and infrastructure due to connect back to the grid. In terms of the one way charging and kind of alignment of solar, which is kind of was also commented on on that the question. And Liang and I just had a study that came out that shows that definitely, you know, putting emphasis on daytime charging is a good thing. And it's a very simple way to kind of increase the lower the cost of adaptation on the grid. And I think one question that's left open is does this also increase the resiliency intuitively the response seems to be yes but that's a study that we will have to carry out to to see if it's true. Excellent. And really great way to end this webcast because if we talk about the most challenging of the biggest challenges, just all kinds of great interesting stuff for us to be digging into. Great places to start. So want to thank everybody who was able to join us today for the webcast. And in particular thank you to Alex and Ron for sharing with us your experience and also closing out our webcast for the year. And to send a follow up email that gathers all of the diverse and distributed resources from our webcast to share those. And we thank you very much again, and look forward to seeing you as we move this work forward. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you very much. Thank you.


Welcome to Toffy TV, this video is sponsored by One Football. One Football's app helps you keep up to date with the latest transfer news, stats and score lines all in the one place. To download the One Football app simply click the link in the description below. The app is free so why not get on it now. This is the three things from Everton versus Lincoln City. Let's get straight into it. First point I want to talk about today is players wasting their opportunity to impress. I touched on it slightly in the math reaction but for me today there was players there that had an opportunity to really let Marco Silva know that they should be considered for starting places in the Premier League. This team is very much in its infancy in terms of getting moulded and how we go forward and there was players there that I think had an opportunity today and blew it or certainly didn't do themselves any favours, blew it maybe a touch strong but certainly didn't help their cause. Players like Jeng Tolson who came on a halftime, I like Jeng Tolson, I think he's got goals in him when he's on it, he didn't look confident. Now that might be because he's not had many minutes of late but he came on against Leicester a few days ago obviously in the New Year's Day defeat, didn't do much then he didn't do much today. He had 45 minutes today or 50 minutes with the stoppage time up against League 2 defenders and they cope with him very very comfortably. One of those two Lincoln City centre backs you'd think there's nothing about him, he's an international centre forward and we've just had a very very easy afternoon with him there because he didn't do anything. Other players that really disappointed me Tom Davis, anyone who watches this channel knows I'm a big fan of Tom but I don't think he did anything really today. I think he tried at times to play nice little one twos but the first half when the game was going away from us and I don't mean going away from us in terms of losing the game or things like that but when it turned a little bit when they scored, neither of Armour field two got hold of it. I didn't just give the ball away all afternoon, great at winning it, oh superb at winning it back but after time it's because he's given away. Tom Davis didn't do anything to influence that. John Jo Kenney was okay but I'm not sure. Adam Ola Llywchman, some lovely bits of skill and tricks but other times just a passenger. I don't think he's certainly off the right hand side, I don't think he does anything, I don't know that to me isn't his best position. I think he's either got to play off the striker or play on the left hand side. I think on the right the game just drifts by when he doesn't really offer that much so that was a little bit disappointing. I'm going to Calvert Llywchman, massive disappointment for me today, great assist for the goal but it literally took a ball into his feet and laid it off and if that's what we're getting in the team to do over the space of 45 minutes then we aren't pushing these players to do very much are we? He's come off, I don't think he's had an inch of date on his kit and all that doesn't really define whether a player has had a good game of course, it doesn't but he should be in there mixing it. This was his chance up against Lee Too defenders, he normally destroys these teams, he normally scores against these teams and there was one where he had an opportunity to get out of his feet and knock it past Aladdin going, he didn't. The other time he tried to run someone he stood on the ball and went behind and he just, I just don't think he grabbed the opportunity today and that to me is very very disappointing. As we move forward, how many opportunities are you going to get? That's the things, when you get something you have to get in there and grab it, it's got to be the thing that consumes you if you want to become a top player or if you want to get into a side. It has to, you have to have that drive and I'm just not sure enough of our players have that drive. Attitude of the players and I don't mean bad attitude, I'm talking about within a cup tie. Now we started this game really brightly, we've done something Everton don't really do which is score early against these teams and then we backed it up with a second goal, great little goal from Bernard but then the attitude to me just seems to drop off. Everybody started walking, people were doing little flicks that way and coming off, we would break up to the area then stop, stand on it, walk back, pass it back to it and it's almost, it's almost like we felt sorry for Lincoln but I don't know, I don't think that is, I don't know whether it's an arrogance or but the best teams just go for the kill. That attitude is spot on and they go for the kill, Tottenham 7-0 last night teams like that just get you in that position and do not let anyone out of it and we had the opportunity to put 3-4-5 past them in that first half because they looked shell shocked at 2-0 and we didn't, we took our foot off the ball, they all of a sudden get a goal the next minute they're out running us. Okay, second half we had total control of the game, they were sporadic threats and up although to be fair to them they almost equalised so it's just that for me that little thing of attitude where we have to be able to get older again and have that killer instinct to say we want this and we're going to make sure this tie is over and we're going to hammer into submission. We scored 2, we could have carried on with that intensity and that zipping it around and getting in the box and bang having shots, we'd have put the game to bed and we didn't, we made it very very uncomfortable for ourselves and I think it was to me, it was not a killer attitude and we have to have to. Finally is the need for a leader, we just haven't got one again, this is something I've briefly mentioned in the match reaction but to me we need a leader, we need a player that's going to challenge us. We need other players, grab other players by the throat and say are you doing enough? Where are you? Why aren't you stepping up for us? Why aren't you dragging us through this game? Why aren't we in it together? Because I see a team that's full of lovely footballers, I think lots of ability technically wise but I don't see a team that is organised, I don't mean they're not set up organisational wise because they are, if you watch the way they fall back into the patterns that they're supposed to but there's no accountability for me to others, I see players moaning at each other after the event which is fine but that should be a prerequisite anyway if those players wanting to do that. They should be pulling each other into position before something's happened, it's okay, you can see the goal that we should have and then you'll have a goal with each other, fair enough but they should be having a goal with each other anyway or leading each other through the game. I see referees giving poor decisions, I don't see any of our players around them, I don't see any of our players trying to referee games, it's a key element of football and we just don't have it. We don't have leaders when we're under the course and come on last week and do this and getting their heads in the way and I think Marcel Brander's got a difficult task on trying to get that. We've had that in the past, we've had players like Alan Stubbs, when he was there, Tim Kale, really dragging people through. Maybe Jack Elkhid did it by just actually putting his body on the line but I'm talking about players who, even Phil Neville to be fair, he was very limited but he was great at pointing but he would rally the truth basically because he'd experienced Roy Keane doing it at Manchester United. It's something I feel the best teams have and I think if this evidence side could get a character like that you could tell really once that he was at the referee, at his own players, keeping everyone ticking over, keeping everyone at it. I think it'd benefit the whole side because I think it's something that we're missing at the minute. We've seen it in games where the spares game is a big example for me once we went 2-1 behind and 3-1 behind. No-one was there going last, let's stay in the game, keep it, do this, do that, do the other. We just chased around and they just went bub bub bub go and we looked shell shocked. So I don't know how we get that or is it a type of player, we have to go and get it. I think for me it's a type of player that we have to go and buy but that's over to Marcel Brander. Anyway, there's the three things from Everton Tube, link on one. Check out the match reactions, check out Perth's match reaction and his player ratings and have a fantastic weekend. If you haven't subscribed, please do so now and if you want more videos, get over to Patreon. Enjoy the rest of you. We can see you later on Toffy TV.