Welcome everyone to this exciting session we have planned for today on the land and water and energy nexus of biofuels. My name is Lauren burrito I am the chief of staff at SDSN and I'll be your moderator today for this very exciting session. It's my privilege to welcome everyone on behalf of both the fund as you know any and Rico my team and the sustainable development solutions network SDSN who together in early 2019 launched an initiative aimed to connect key figures for the global energy transition, particularly engineers, scientists and policymakers, an important group to have a conversation together but a group that doesn't necessarily always touch base and collaborate. The first report roadmap to 2050 a manual for nations to decarbonize by mid century was the result of a joint effort by these two institutions who, along with more than 70 experts operating in various contexts, including international universities, academic institutions, research centers, think tanks, NGOs, public institutions and the private sector, provided critical input for the development of a technical manual address to policymakers to support the adoption of production pathways in four out of the five most energy intensive sectors worldwide. Those sectors were power, hard to abate industries including cement iron and steel production companies, transport and buildings. In the first roadmap to 2050 report biofuels advanced biofuels and synthetic biofuels were identified as potential key solutions for decarbonizing certain transport and industrial processes, notably aviation and cement. However, further investigation was needed to better understand the impacts and interactions between biofuel production and land and water use as well as the breadth of biofuel application worldwide. In the second report roadmap to 2050 the land water energy nexus of biofuels, which was just released today works to identify the impacts of biofuel and bio derived synthetic fuel production in different regional contexts and study their technical application and market implications. We're very excited to have three authors from the report here today to share their findings and results, and we hope you will download the report to learn more after the event, and I'm sure that someone will pop the link in the chat for you if they haven't already. To kick us off today I'd like to first welcome our keynote speaker from theme leadership. It's our great honor and privilege to have Marzio Galliotti with us. He's the director of scientific research at theme. And he's also based in Milan where previously he was coordinator of the climate change modeling and policy research program. He's also a professor of environmental and energy economics at the University of Douglas study de Milano and a fellow of the Center for research on geography resources environment energy and networks at the University of Bocconi of Milan. Dr. Galliotti please the floor is yours. Thank you very much. Good afternoon to everybody. It's three o'clock in the afternoon here in Milan. As I said, I'm the research director of foundation a matter. This is a theme, which is an organization which is, you know, jointly collaborating with the SD as sent for this roadmap project actually is the second such event taking place at an exciting time because the clapping Glasgow is going on. Everybody has been talking about the carbonization net zero emission targets, when and how so it is really peculiar more over today, if I'm correct, it is the cop nature days so it is the perfect time to talk about bio viewers and this research is the collaboration as we said with a research organization able with the capacity of putting in place high level research and researchers doing original work together with the sustainable development solutions network who has a special proximity to policy maker with the ability to support policy support with the sound research basis. So here we're talking today, and we are illustrating shortly a report that has been done on bio viewers and bio viewers are very important because, as I said everybody's talking about the carbonization. We cannot afford to leave out any possible technology source to reach the goal of the carbonization and bio viewers can play a very important role. I think that they could increase their share from 1% up to 20% at least in the net zero emissions scenario put forth by the international energy agency with this well known reports that has been released a few weeks ago. When I was reading in the arena renewable energy job at the annual review 2021 that bio viewers are able to create or they created up to 2.4 million jobs last in 2020. So they really are very important they can play an important role, but they also are characterized by delicate issues concerning the social and economic impacts, the impact on water resources, the impact on land, we are going to hear many things about these aspects in a few minutes So the report really had a dog say holistic approach to the potential of bio viewers as a as a technology for the energy transition and just to complete my short speak I want to spend two words on films activity because the energy transition decarbonization and the energy transition are the overarching team of films new research activities and research programs that we have put in place starting this year we are investigating or we have a program on nature based solutions we have a program on the new energy technologies for the transition we are looking for instance a diagram, which is a very important thing everybody's talking about these days. So interesting and pursuing or carry on our modeling tradition by looking at agent based models in particular, and we are also looking at climate finance and other aspects so that's what is doing, and therefore I will leave the floor to the speakers and who are going to illustrate the details of this report Thank you. Sorry. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Dr. Galliotti. So the next session of our agenda is an overview of the report contents and main goals of the roadmap project. It is our honor to have three of the co chairs with us for the program and they're each going to provide brief presentations on the chapters that they contributed We're also going to have time for Q&A after so while you're listening to their presentations I hope everybody will consider some questions. You can send them through the chat or the Q&A feature in zoom. And you don't have to hold them to the end so you know feel free to send them now we'll we'll ask them all at the end, but feel free to put them on in the chat as they come to you. Our first presenter is going to be Joaquim Ceabra, a professor at the University of Campinas, also called UniCamp within the School of Mechanical Engineering. He has experience in the field of bio based economy developing several projects for government and private institutions in the evaluation of techno economic and environmental performance of bio energy systems, as well as in the evaluation of regulations on biofuels. So please, Dr. Ceabra, the floor is yours. Hello everyone. Thanks a lot for the introduction and the opportunity to work in this very challenging project and talk about biofuels and thank you for the invitation for this event today, a very important date. I'll try to share my screen. Just one second here. Okay, I believe you can see my screen now. Yes, it looks great. Okay, thank you. So, the idea today is just to give an overview about the report. Of course, I invite to invite everyone to take a look at the report we have several references to support what is in the report. To start from the conclusions. Of course, we don't have very conclusive answers about biofuels. We have multiple options. And as I, as Marcio said, biofuels is one of the tools, one of the tools that we have for decarbonizing emissions in the transport sector. I'm very enthused about the opportunities that we have using biofuels but of course there are concerns. So, in, I'm here just, the idea is just to give an overview about the, what we have in the report. So, I'll just set the scene. And again, invite you to see the details that are presented in the report. So, initially, okay, I think now it's working. First, we need to recognize the importance of the transport sector for the global CO2 emissions as we can see in this graph here on the left, we have rising emissions and transport sector is responsible for about 25% of the energy CO2 related emissions. So, it's quite a lot. It's a quite substantial contribution from transport. And more specifically, the road transport is responsible for more than 70% of the transport emissions and particularly the road transport for passengers. And then we have the situations because transport is heavily dependent on oil. So, basically, fossil fuels are used for transport, we have a few options are different from oil today. So, it's important to know that we have a significant challenge for deep decarbonization and transport for all types of transport, but especially in the heart of the sectors, shipping and air transport out in addition to road transport as I mentioned. So, biofuels today is one option that we have for decarbonizing emissions in the transport, but the role of the but transport biofuels still play a very limited role in globally speaking. Today, we have two main biofuels we have ethanol and we have biodiesel. Bioethanol, it's heavily used in the US and in Brazil and a couple other countries, but in general, we are talking about a very limited contributions for transport. But it can play a very important role in the future. The potential of bioenergy and biofuels is quite huge and harnessing this potential, it depends on the conditions that we have to produce these biofuels. And the conditions are there, but we need policies to define these expansion of biofuels. In future scenarios, assuming very aggressive options for decarbonizing our economy, of course, they need or they point the directions that we need to use biofuels. Biofuels again will be a very important tool for decarbonizing our transport sectors and bioenergy in general to help the decarbonization process in other sectors, other energy sectors as well. And there are of course very important reasons why biofuels have the potential to provide multiple benefits for our economy. Again, of course, it can bring multiple contributions for GAG emissions reductions, especially in those sectors that are hard to obey, as I mentioned, shipping and air transport, but also important contributions for road transportation as well. Another important aspect of bioenergy and biofuels in particular is because we can combine bioenergy with CO2 removal through BEX, carbon capture and storage in the bioenergy industry. And this can be very convenient for our zero emissions future. So biofuels have the potential to enhance air quality because of the lower emissions of local pollutants. And biofuels can improve the energy or the engine performance, for instance, and we can blend ethanol to gasoline to improve the energy performance of our vehicles. Biofuels can also help improving the energy security in different parts of the globe. Really, as has been already mentioned today, biofuels have the potential to spur the economic development in rural areas. So these are all very important and strategic reasons why we should export biofuels as an alternative for the decarbonization process globally speaking. And of course, there are risks when the implementation of biofuels are not well planted. And here I mentioned for process for concerns that we had and I believe, Christina, we will address all these points. We have the potential competition with food supply, the deforestation process, damage to ecosystems and the reduction of carbon stocks. And again, these are very important risks if the implementation of biofuels are not well planted. So in order to have a good assessment about the sustainability of biofuels, it's very important to have a good life cycle performance. The life cycle performance of biofuels will be key for the expansion of biofuels. And again, it's important to recognize that bioenergy is part of the terrestrial carbon cycle. So the life cycle contributions in terms of greenhouse gas emissions come from other contributions, not because of the combustion of the biofuel. So as mentioned here, the net contributions from life cycle emissions of biofuels come from the use of fossil fuels for the production of bioenergy or biofuels and because of the utilization of fertilizers and potentially because of land use change emissions. But when we combine all these contributions, what we have for most of the biofuels is that in general we can say that biofuels have the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to the fossil fuels, considering all the contributions from the life cycle. Within the life cycle of biofuels, it's especially important for us to consider the contributions associated to the biomass production. So of course, it will be important to take a very close look to the regions where biomass is produced, the carbon stocks in that areas, the utilization of fertilizers and the utilization of fossil fuels for the production of biofuels. Combining all these elements, we have still the conclusions that okay biofuels can reduce greenhouse gas emissions when displacing fossil fuels, but we need to pay close attention to the efficiency and how biofuels and biomass is produced is cultivated. More specifically, we have to pay attention to the land use change emissions and in this case we can have contributions, more emissions and or to increase the carbon stocks in the soil, because of course we don't One thing that we don't want is to cause deforestation for the production of biofuels, of course deforestation can lead to huge emissions of CO2, but when we cultivate biomass in degraded lands, we have the potential to actually increase carbon stocks in the soil. In this case, I think it's important to separate two different concepts, the direct land use change and the indirect land use change. Again, life cycle performance will be key for biofuels and I believe Cristina will address this point further in the next presentation. So here I just want to highlight that this aspect must be considered when assessing the sustainability of biofuels in general. And talking about the sustainability assessment of biofuels I think will be very important to use the sustainability schemes, the sustainability initiatives as a tool to address this topic. We have multiple initiatives to evaluate the sustainability, certificate and verify the sustainability of biofuels worldwide. We have regional initiatives, we have national initiatives, we have international initiatives and multistakeholder initiatives. Many of them are still in place so they can have or they can be used for the assessment of the sustainability of biofuels. Usually these sustainability schemes, they address of course the potential of greenhouse gas mitigation from biofuels, but there are other concerns they address too. The social economic contributions or the potential contribution for the food market and so forth. So to close my presentation here and again you can see the details in the report. Sustainability schemes will be again very important tool for the sustainability assessment of the biofuels. But the compliance with certification does not mean that we have a sustainable production. So for the expansion of biofuels will be essential to have investment in research and development. The implementation of good governance to create a proper environment for innovative business model so that we can expand the production of biofuels in a sustainable way. So with this very short presentation, this closing remarks, closing remark, I just want to thank you for your attention. And of course, I'm totally available to the Q&A session and discuss any of these elements further with you. So again, I invite you to take a look at the report. Thanks for the opportunity. And Laurie. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Dr. Sebra. I see we do have some questions coming in. Again, I encourage all of our participants to feel free to throw them in the chat or use the Q&A feature. We will be taking them all at the end. The next speaker is going to be Maurizio Massi who is a professor in applied physical chemistry at the department of in the Department of Chemica. In the, I'm sorry. I should have taken it only in preparation for today. The materiali in January, Giulio Natta of the chemical engineers. So he studies reaction kinetics and chemical reaction engineering and production processes for advanced and organic materials of micro electronics and photovoltaic applications. So he's a great person to be speaking with us today. And I will just flag as well, Dr. Massi, we do have a question that I think you might be answering in your presentation but if not maybe it's worth taking just a minute right now to do it. The next question is asking about the definition of biofuels that we're using for this report. Okay, I don't want to preempt your presentation but that might be something that we want to we want to take early the floor is yours. Okay, so let me first of all share the screen. Okay. Okay, for us during the report biofuel was everything was produced starting from a vegetable like raw material so something that can be cultivated or can be a waste from the food industry. And now we can extend I think the definition also to all the fuel that will be recovered from the general waste that we have in our urban life because that are very rich of carbons and those kinds of ways so it's possible to access to extract fuel from waste and that it will be a really new opportunity that really decrease the life cycle assessment of this kind of fuel in particular with respect to the use of water and the use of land. Okay. So now. Let me see. Okay. Practically to talk about the process to produce biofuels that we have a really a rich garden we can really take many process that starting from different biomass can be converted in biofuel. But as I was saying before, actually, today, bioenergy so bio the energy that we obtain from biofuels accounts only for about one 10th of the total energy supply, and about 10 more than 90% is coming from the first biofuel like the bio so bio I don't know today is the leader for the production of biofuels, but it has been saved very clearly by joking and I think we must stress again this point, different biomass availability is a classical regional problem. So, many social factor about production of vegetables that can be used to produce biofuels and that are really regionally dependent. So it's impossible to find a single optimal raw material. So the real point of view for addressing the role of biofuel in the energy scenario is to think locally instead to think globally so global optimization is depending by the local globalization. And another point that is really important that we must consider the energy is an additive state function is also a commodity. So on the lower the cost the better.  So we had to consider that we are planning our future in the next 30 years. And so we still will face innovations. And so we can also look into our world that we know it is not possible to electrify all the comments. It is also not possible to to construct pipelines for hydrogen in all the plants. So the use of liquid fuels is really a part of the game. And as all the people say from centuries, when we are facing a very big problem, we must move with all the caution that is possible. We are using the old quote, don't put don't put all your eggs in one basket. So let's have a very short review of the technology so the classical is the biochemical platform. So the digestion of vegetables raw materials for the production of bioethanol that is a really very well established technology, but the real problem that we have here that we are producing a very diluted ethanol. So we must make the distillation of water outside and so we are losing part of the energy in obtaining an eye concentration ethanol, and usually it is adopted as a blended to gasoline so they eat and 10% ethanol. We can use residuals municipal wastes and so we are sure that we can avoid the competition of food. In changing the lingo cellulose biomass so we have to consider most of them are refractory to fermentation so we need pre treatment. The biomass digestion to buy your gas has been exploited in many waste water treatment plants. So the fermentation of many, many wastes from waste waste water treatment but the real problem you have a production of only our gas is only for 50% Methane while the other rest is carbon dioxide. We can improve the concentration of methane through the methanation process so using a catalytic process but we are constrained on purity and also when we are thinking to use municipal waste to buy your gas. We are also to consider you need to mobilize may huge amount of mass and so we need to really have a logistics that must be fair. The other traditional platform is the one that involves the fatty acid and fatty acid is metilator exploited for blending up to 20% but the production is strongly is really localized nearby the production of the oil and we have a very heavy by product that is glycerin that is producing high amount so glycerin may be valorizing chemistry in pharma but then food and paper sector, but the mass of glycerin that we are going to produce in the energy sector is huge with respect to the mass that is needed by those market and also fame are characterized by poor behavior a low temperature so they cannot be used in the aviation sector that will be probably the leading sector where biofuel will be used to replace batteries in an airplane and also hydrogen is not so safely used at the low temperature that we have in the high atmosphere where our airplane will fly and also if you consider the hydrogenated vegetable oil we can obtain high performing fuel but that can be used also for aviation and the problem is that they can be produced already in the existing infrastructure because we are using the same process that are typical for the industry and so we can really operate using co-feeding so we can have a transition in time with really low investment cost and risk of deployment but they by product that is obtained is propane that that is easier to valorize because propane is a nice example. Now we have the thermochemical platform thermochemical platform is rather new. We have a practically three process the pyrolysis where we eat up up to a decomposition temperature and so we have the possibility to gasify and obtain liquid a fraction liquid solid and gas fraction as well as the composition products of the biomass and all these fractions can be upgraded through hydrothreading to jet fuel so that is a nice a nice route. The other alternative route is gasification that can be exploited user for methane production. And all for the main route that I see today, they are obtaining or seeing us then we proper purification and when we have seen gas that is one of the bricks of the petrochemical industry you can do whatever you want. The Cinderella part is given by the hydrothermal liquefaction that still quite neglected, but because it's not so developed up to now, but it provide a very nice single liquid up with low oxygen content. And here we have already a plant from ENI in Sicily. And I am pressing two tables simply to have a summary of all the process that can be analyzed in the report and really I suggested to go to and read the report. But the my final statement are bio for biofuel production should not be assessed again for the fuel on or against electrification for the transport section is one egg that we must put in the basket. So they are not in competition by a part of the a part of the of the game and can be really thinking about the intermediate platform. We are making a transition and the transition cannot be a shock transition. We must change during the years so also they can really help the electrification because practically they have the same role of a battery. So biofuel are natural accumulator of energy. Now we are facing all the challenging when we need to change the scale of our product. So they centralized versus centralized approach that depend only on the logistic that you have in the country. And if it is possible to develop combined approaches, because we can produce the biofuel together with high value chemicals that can enhance, especially in particular country, the revenues for the people that are working in this kind of plan. So thank you for the occasion that we have to talk about stop weeks and also to work on these topics that is really important in the next future for the decarbonizing of our plan. Thank you. Thank you so much Dr. Massey and thank you again to our participants we see your questions coming in and we'll be getting to them shortly. This is a question from Dr. Maria Christina really. She's a full professor of hydrology and water and food security at the Polytechnico de Milano, where her research focus is on the interaction between hydrological processes and humanity. So she's been investigating the impacts of food and water security, the impacts to them from global climate change. She has a wealth of experience in this area. I know too there's some questions coming in on the chat specifically looking at some of the trade offs here with food systems so hopefully she'll answer some of those questions and we'll turn to the rest of them in the Q&A after. Dr. really over to you the floor is yours. Thank you, Lauren. And good morning, good afternoon and good evening to everyone. It's a pleasure for me to invite you to present the chapter three of the roadmap. This chapter is devoted to the analysis of the nexus between water land and first generation biofuel. Let me at first thank to the colleagues who helped me in writing this chapter. They are Paolo do Dorico from the University of California at Berkeley here in this room. Nicholas Galli from Polytechnico de Milano, Monia Santini from the Bureau of Mediterranean Center of Climate Change, John F. Delangelo from the University of Amsterdam and Joaquin Seabra from the University of Campinas. So, in chapter three, we looked at the environmental impacts of first generation biofuel pay attention in particular to the competing needs from land and water resources by food and biofuel sectors that are we can say at the forefront of the energy food debate. Due to this competition, a number of questions on the land food and energy nexus have been rising during the last years, including those related on the effects of the security environment and on the displacement of land use. In the paragraphs of chapter three, we try to address those issues. We describe the main crop use for first generation biofuel production where they are produced and where they are consumed and also the extent of land use for the cultivation of biofuel with respect to the land available on our plant or plant cultivation. Because some of the main crops use for first generation biofuel are so called the so called the flexible crops that means that they are edible crops that can be used as primary food for humans or a speed for animals, or a speed for producing bioenergy. We analyze the role played by first generation biofuel on energy and food security. We highlighted why the competition for natural resources use is emerging in the context of food and energy security pointing out that it's due to the fact that the growing society demands for food and energy really on on the same pool of limited natural resources. We analyze so the pros and cons of introducing biofuel highlighting that they have the potential to decarbonizing society. Also, they may contribute to achieve energy security in countries like lacking direct access to secure deposits and also they can enhance higher profits from the use of the crops than those obtained from the food market sale. But then we pointed out that, however, the sustainability of biofuel has been questioning in the recent years in connection with the food versus fuel tradeoffs and with the water and land consumption issues. In fact, biofuel affects food security through we can say two main ways. At first they would food and fuel compete for the same natural resources used to support food production. And then the structure of bioenergy interventions can have an impact on agricultural product productivity and also they can affect food security outcomes. It has happened, for example, in the case of the transition to monoculture for biofuel production that often results in an intensive use of fertilizers and also in an over consumption of water resources. In addition, we look also to the food and energy tradeoffs by means of the four pillars of food security. So in this context, we analyze the effect of biofuel production on the first pillar that is the availability of food. And we show that some studies in the literature are reporting that land management practice like, for example, the mechanization of agriculture that are aimed to increase biofuel production for maximizing profits could boost also crop production so allowing the crop demand to be met. But then we show how the use of natural resources or producing biofuel crops means also the subtraction of natural resources to food production so in turn bringing to the competition from the natural resources. Then we study the effect of biofuel production on the access to food that depends on the equilibrium balancing food supply and demand over time. In fact, over time food prices could drop due to investments in mechanization does balancing the market, but if supply does not keep pace with demand can also happen that increasing food crop demand for different uses than food can increase crop prices. We then analyze the pillar of food stability that is the pillar looking to the availability of the time of crop supply. We showed that from one hand, biofuel markets can improve the security of farm incomes and also the energy subsurface from one hand, but from the other hand, fluctuations in food supply can be such a big insecurity conditions. Biofuel energy market can impact diverse food crops from the food sector to the energy sector, making the food system less resilient to shops, for example climate shops, like plants, droughts, and so on. Then we analyze the effect of first generation biofuel production on land use change, considering the direct and indirect land use change, and we also expand the implication of direct and direct land use change on greenhouse gases emission. We consider also the fact that the consequences of indirect land use change can be delayed in space and time, so generating a variety of spillover effects and socioeconomic externalities. In fact, the land claim to expand the range land and crop land in response to food crop diversion from food to biofuel production, this places the effect on people and ecosystems to other locations from those that could benefit from biofuel production. Moreover, the marginal land that can be used for low emission land convention in the reality may be vital for the subsistence of some farmers. Then we move to analyze the current water use for biofuel production and the pressure on water resources. In this context, we described in detail the physical processes through which water is used for biofuel production. Then we described the metric recently used for accounting the water use for biofuel production, this metric is called water footprint, and the three components of the water footprint were described and the environmental implication of using the green, the blue and the green water were deeply analyzing. And in analyzing the water use in biofuel production, we paid special attention to the source of water use for growing biofuel crops, so if it is rainfall or if it is irrigation water, and we also pay attention to the pollution of water associated to biofuel crops. And the use, the analysis on the type of water use is really very important from a sustainable development point of view, because it allows us to know, to make some analysis on the, if the renewable water is possible. Then to answer to the question regarding the possibility of increasing agricultural production, we analyze the two main strategies that are the agricultural intensification and the agricultural intensification. Highlighting the need to move towards the sustainable intensification that can have positive effects not only on the biofuel production chain, but also on the food system and school. Then we pay particular attention to analyze the ex-sensification of agriculture, and the reason why is because some scientists advocate the use of marginal land for biofuel feedstock production. And even if we acknowledge that from a purely economic point of view, there are yet some uncertainties on the availability and on the productivity of the marginal land for biofuel, we saw that the main issues are rising if we consider the social impacts of the use of the marginal land. Because the use of marginal lands can have really dramatic effects on indigenous communities. In fact, what we call unused lands or marginal lands often is vehicle for indigenous communities that benefits from the ecosystem services provided by those lands. So it emerged that the pension is due to the scale of the benefits of using marginal land. Then we look to the impact of climate change on bioenergy crop cultivation. Now, we analyze the sources of uncertainty or of the climate scenario, so looking to the type of climate change scenarios to the socio-economic development pattern to the different crop and regions, and to the uncertainty in the model young folk and constraints. Then we analyze the expected impacts in terms of the extent of the land suitable for crop cultivation. Then we conclude our report, our chapter looking to the social impacts and to the controversies of biofuel expansion. So we analyze the impact of biofuel production on the global agrarian development, we analyze in particular the phenomenon of the large scale and acquisition, and in the context of the large scale and acquisition has been observed that in many instances, the lands that has been appropriated through these investments is transformed from small scale, semi subsistence, traditional farming to large scale industrialized commercial agriculture. So we look to the implication of biofuel production on the commodification of agriculture and on the transformation of the agriculture itself. So I want to conclude to thank for this opportunity. I am available to answer to all the questions and please write me the chat or write me by email. This is my address. Thank you. Thank you so much, Professor really. So we're going to turn now to the discussion portion of our program. I'm going to ask all of our authors and speakers to come back on with their cameras will have some, you know, discussion questions between us and we'll take some comments from the floor. And I'll apologize. I know that Dr. really will be with us with us for a few minutes but she's going to have to sign on off a little bit early because she has some classes to teach today. So we're also going to welcome Paolo Dorico to join for some of this conversation as well. Yeah, I'm doing the floor to Paolo. Paolo is my co-author in the chapter three so he will be very happy to answer the question and I will be happy to if someone wants to write me an email. Wonderful. Thank you very much. So we're going to start with a question that I'm going to pose to everyone, and maybe we can take it in the order in which you spoke to go around the room if you will the virtual room about what you see is the key challenges for scaling biofuels from each of your perspectives. And I'm going to try to get through a number of questions so I'm going to ask you to keep it brief and maybe just pick one or two key challenges I know there are a bunch that we could talk about but you know let's prioritize it that way. So please the floor is yours. Start with me. Yes, please go ahead. Yep. Okay, thanks. Well, key challenges to keep it brief. Research and development investments in research and development because we need to increase efficiency. In the whole supply chain so and and policy, we need to implement policy to support biofuels and investment in research and development basically this is, I think these are the main key aspects for the development of biofuels. And we need somehow to recognize the positive externalities of biofuels so the environmental product that we have associated with biofuels, for example, the carbonization. Okay, I. Another remark on what I can say because to really have the price of the fuels related to their impact. So not only the production price. So, what is saying some way the carbon tax, the carbon tax for biofuel cannot be the same for fossil fuel. And that is something that we must address because that is going to shift the investment. Because now, if we start to add a cost to fossil fuels, all the other alternative we can competitive. We don't want probably to have incentive in the production of biofuels, but simply to have some disincentive in the production of the very impacting energy media. And that is really, I think, what is really possible and also the regulation, because to change to do a new investment, especially in a country like Italy is very difficult. And for example, we have all the refinery plant that can be converted in bio refinery. So they are already for them is already possible to accept as the neuro material biomass is always instead of oil or natural gas. But the regulation now is making that very difficult. So, in many cases, it are the rules that are not following the progress of science. And Dr the order we go. Yeah, I would add that the big problem for scaling is the environmental constraints. So if we want to scale it up and the meet the current demand for fossil fuels with biofuels we don't have enough resources for that we did the sum back of the envelope calculations years ago. It will take all the water, all the evapotranspiration from all terrestrial ecosystems to sustain to replace the fossil fuels with biofuels because with the fossil fuels basically we are using water resources from the past that have been stored below ground virtually. And so we don't have the resources we can do the same calculations will land we have done that. So we would need to replace all agricultural land. So, it's a very short blanket. So if you want really to scale it up. We cannot do that. So overall biofuels can be just a little bit more than a drop in the bucket. Before they started really encroaching food systems. And we saw that we had in recent decades some problems of food availability global food crisis, escalation of food prices, and clearly there is a competition with biofuels is strong. So one thing that emerges from this report that I think is of great value is to see that they either they use of waste of non food. Non first generation biofuels could be very interesting. And also the combination of biofuels with the back systems to do the carbon capture and storage. And so useful to see this is not to replace fossil fuels but to do something better than that. So these are very interesting avenues that can really lead to more than a drop in the bucket in the system. Otherwise, all the other things that we've seen tend to be a little bit limiting the also the whole discussion about marginal lands is always very controversial because someone is using those lands. And also the idea of having some sacrifice zones at the disposal of the energy system is not necessarily a good one. But again, to scale up I think they this new technologies coupled with the biofuels would be very interesting. So if I can add something to power is that if you consider that in Europe, but now every citizen is producing almost a ton of waste. So organic waste. And we are consuming almost a ton of fossil fuels. So if you consider waste to fossil fuel is almost an equivalent. So from that we are not using land. And that is the real new perspective. That's a great segue to what was going to be my next question which is which technologies and feedstocks do you think are most likely to play a role as we move to a 2050 net zero world food waste being an excellent example of a feedstock that could play a big role. Well, I'll give each of you a chance to answer this as well but maybe we'll change the order we'll start with Dr. Masi then Dr. to order we go and then Dr. Seabra. What I think really for me is the waste is the new raw material for the next century, because we have a huge mining that is there because we accumulate a huge amount of waste if you think to plastics for example. So from my point of view plastics, food are practically the same things. When I'm going to classification when I'm going to pyrolysis that is almost no difference. And that are perfect material for the biorefiner. Still, I cannot say no to the use of vegetable biomass because it's local. In Europe, probably in US we have a huge amount of waste, but there are community, especially rural community where the waste are really limited. So if they have wastes that are coming from the agriculture after we extract what we had to eat, that is nice. Yeah, I don't have much more to add I think the food waste is a big one is one third of the food production has been estimated to be wasted. There is a lot of agricultural waste. So these are really really great options. And this whole idea of circular economies to reuse things that before we, which anyway the disorganic material would be sooner or later be re-inspired and then CO2 into the atmosphere so we better get the energy out of it. Then there is also known food related biofuels. Here in California there is a lot of problem as you know from fires and this is due to the bad forest practices of forest suppression. There is a lot of biomass that can be done through forest thinning can be removed and can be used for biofuels. So I'm sure in other places around the world there are other opportunities that are again not crop, but other forms of biomass that could be interesting to use instead of putting it more useful on the point of view of the energy. I think this is my turn. Well, I have a different perspective from what has been said. Of course I totally agree that wastes are one of the main options that we have for bioenergy. But from the perspective of a developing country with a large availability of areas, we do have a huge potential to grow crops for energy without compromising other uses because we do have land. So high efficiency crops, for example, sugar cane, this is one example, we can produce first and second generation biofuels in the future. So I do believe that we still have lots of room to expand biofuels using first generation technologies combined with second generation technologies using high efficiency crops and biomasses. In addition to waste, of course, I'm not denying this fact. And also because of the rule of development we have several potential implications, positive potential implications for local economies associated with bioenergy and biofuels. So this is one aspect that I have to bring here, but just to be clear, we even here in Brazil and other developing countries, we do not expect to replace 100% of the fossil fuels with biofuels. No, the potential is not quite there, but I think the contribution can be huge, can be very important, not 100%. Thank you. We have a couple of questions that have come into the floor about different feedstocks and I will throw them out there and I'll leave it up to you to decide who would like to answer. So, we have George who's asking about the use of cow dung or I'm going to include you know manure from other sort of industrial livestock scale operations. What are the possibilities for that as a feedstock. And then Christina Tonito is asking very similar about if we can turn wastewater and other sort of wastewater sewage waste streams into biofuels. I don't know who would like to take that if you wave I can call on you or you could just jump in. Okay, thanks Maricio. Good start. Okay, but I don't get very well that the answer is because I was looking to read in there. I use a cow dog to be promoted, yes, because it's already in process so we are using a lot of this kind of a waste as for example in Italy for the production of bio gas. So, so bio gas is naturally produced by the waste of the animals so it's a process already in line. And anyone want to take the sort of follow up on human sewage or wastewater as well. I don't know if there are operations to do the same with that for bio gas or other ways. No, no, no, yes, yes, because in the production of waste in the wastewater treatment, you use a lot of biological treatment. Now you are adding the microorganisms that are grown, they are practically capturing the easing, the waste, the organic content and the end of their life cycle so they die. Then when you obtain a mud that is mostly not made by the mud of the wastewater is made by the micro organism that we have inside. And those microorganisms now we enter in the fermentation, we are feeding them to other microorganisms to be transformed in bio gas. Bio gas the problem is that 50% is methane and 50% is carbon dioxide. So you need to purify, and then you can have a catalytic process that is for methanation to transform the CO2 in all in methane but there are many examples, even the wastewater treatment plant on Milano as these kinds of plants. There's much more to add because the thing is that there is production of gas but one of the other products by products of this process is some fertilizers or materials can be used for fertilizer. So they also the city of DC has a huge water treatment wastewater treatment plant that produces this digest gas and also fertilizers. I agree, I don't have much to add, except that again, we need policy support to give the right direction and the message that investors can engage in this type of investment. And other stakeholders can look at these and invest in this type of process. So again, I think policy support is essential. And I'll add for my two cents as well. One of the people who asked one of the questions about that as well sort of raised the issue around infrastructure so in addition to your comment on investment I think making sure that you have the infrastructure as well to do some of these things on older wastewater treatment plants or you know farms and manure ponds etc is important. This is a really exciting conversation and I also want to remind everyone that this is just one session of part of the zero emission solution conference and the one that is following this immediately after us is also about food and waste and anaerobic digestion that'll start about 30 minutes after we close here so about 50 minutes from now, and we'll be able to get into all of this in a little bit more detail. But kind of keeping with this vein as well. We have a couple questions that I think are related around some of the challenges with this. So we have one question about issues with biofuel production, possibly having some negative effects for biodiversity loss and nitrogen runoff into waterways. They want to know if that's true. I'm going to expand that to say are there solutions that can kind of prevent some of those negative effects from happening. And I'm also going to link that to another comment we got from Edward asking if you know more small scale production might be a solution as well versus some of these more large scale industrial production production scale in addressing some of these concerns. Again I'm not sure who wants to start first but feel free to jump in. I can say just a few words about the biodiversity I think the main concern here is when the production of biofuel happens in conjunction with land use change, habitat destruction, which is the big driver for loss of biodiversity. So we know that there have been concerns, for example, they, I don't want to pick exact particular cases but some areas have been affected by deforestation induced by directed by the production of oil palm. So those are problems that now the international community is sensitive to and there is some attention to production of biofuels that don't induce this land use change or directly but we have seen that there are also indirectly land use changes with the biofuel crops displacing food production systems, range production etc that then encroaches into natural habitats so this indirect land use change is much harder to track and to document and so that can be one of the undesired effects. Of course when we switch, and again this was part of this question, the production of biofuels from the production, they switch from traditional farming systems to industrialized production of biofuel crops. Often there is a use of fertilizers that has this mental environmental impacts if it's particularly if it's overused. So they, one of the questions was suggesting whether it was possible to use a more traditional or small scale farming systems without. I assume we can use that put that under the umbrella of sustainable farming, agriculture etc to produce biofuels, of course that that is something that is always an option I don't know how the economics would play out because overall the production of biofuels needs to be done in conjunction also with the presence of refineries and other industrial systems so I'm not an economist I cannot comment on that. If I cannot comment and not on the biodiversity, which I am not so an expert to discuss about that but there is a sector where we can use biofuels in decarbonizing very heavy industrial sectors, like for example the cement industry. In the cement industry you have some part of the CO2 that is unbeatable because it's given by the reaction from the carbonate to the calcium oxide that you are releasing CO2 if you want to produce the cement, you are emitting the CO2 but all the CO2 that is coming to the eating up your kiln, your raw material is really important to be a biofuel because in that case you are not adding other CO2 to the process. You are producing in molar-based two molecules CO2, now your cement process that is fed with biofuel is going to emit only one more CO2, so it's a 50% advantage. Okay, just quick comments here about the biodiversity, of course we are all very concerned about deforestation and this is a primary aspect so we need to avoid deforestation period and we don't need to cause any deforestation to expand biofuels production and this is an important message and should be respected and once again we need policy support to avoid deforestation and a proper track of the land use change in countries and regions but I think the message is there is plenty of room to expand biofuels in several parts of the globe without the need for deforestation. The potential is there, we have lands that are suitable for bioenergy production and when I say suitable, it means that we can have access to the suitable amount of water without causing any major damage to the ecosystems. And so we can provide food, feed, energy and other products from this piece of land without causing major damage to the nature so to keep it brief that's the idea and we have several references in the report that explore all these aspects in detail so again I encourage people to take a look at the report, thanks. Thank you Dr. Seabra, I think I'll follow up with another question that's targeted directly to you as it concerns sort of the on the ground experience in Brazil. Andrea is asking how the Brazilian energy transition will happen. She's saying with deforestation and the current increase of fossil fuel prices, could this scenario cause a momentary economic crisis, inflation with reduced industrial production, and how could this affect the transition process in Brazil. I hope I caught it all I hope it's clear. Okay, yeah, well indeed we have a very difficult situation here in Brazil, not in Brazil, but we do have inflation we have some constraints in terms of the supply. So deforestation hasn't risen, not because of bioenergy and biofuels we have several other problems happening at the same time. So I think it's important to de-attach one process to the other. So deforestation is a separate problem in the country, and we do have this problem to face. But again, policies are already in place in the country for the expansion of biofuels in a sustainable way so avoiding deforestation. It's already there to expand the biofuels in other renewable sources, not only for the transport sector, but we need we do need these policies to be there, but the good news they are working. One example that I can give for the Brazilian case specifically is the new biofuels policy and not appeal or run of a bio. So the idea is to expand the use of biofuels, not actually to expand the use of biofuels but to expand the decarbonization process of the transport sector using biofuels. More and more efficient biofuels avoiding deforestation. So that's the main idea. But again, it all comes to the policy support giving the right direction for investors. I hope I have answered the question, but in case there are more, we can discuss. Great. And I'll also just flag that one of the outcomes of COP26 already has been this big commitment by, I believe it's about 100 countries including Brazil to achieve net zero deforestation by 2030. So, you know, hopefully we can achieve all these ambitious goals to both expand biofuel use but also halt deforestation. I think we only have time for one more question I regret to all of the participants that we couldn't get to every single question that was sent they've all been very good. But I'm going to close with a bigger picture question that comes to us from Connie. She's asking about the regulations that frequently limit new feedstocks and or new biofuels from entering the market. It seems that most biofuels are first generation perhaps because new technologies have regulatory challenges and getting approved and entering the market. I think that's a good question to close on about this issues around regulation and governments and how we can support this transition. Again, you know whoever wants to jump in. Okay, you're right. We are facing now more legislation barrier than technological barrier, especially in Italy and the rest of you. I think that in the other counter the pro by us you are more free, but regulation in Italy, they are not in favor of the transition. I just wanted to comment for a moment to do the implications of that because of this means that the muscle of the day production remains the first generation by your viewers with all the problems we have highlighted. And also we shouldn't. Of course, they, the concerns about conflicting with production of food and other systems, particularly if when in periods of global shortage can be real. And I agree with Joachim that they, there is the option of using marginal lens but we shouldn't think that there is a unlimited potential there. The land of the planet is finite. Many, a lot of land is already used by local communities indigenous books around the world that we shouldn't push for additional land grabs around the world. So marginal lens sometimes some of these analysis don't don't account for the fact that they are not suitable for cultivation. We have a long history of putting under the plow land that was not meant to be the American with Midwest with the North Plains with a dust bowl is the typical example. And many other examples around the world so not all land is suitable for being cultivated and can be rather used for as a pasture for other uses. So when we account for these different factors in addition to the fact that there is the need for water and and either rain water irrigation, then the options remain of course are there but they're not as big as we think of so they all this the plan for renewable energy needs to really to hinge on non on non fuel based renewable energy. And with the fact that the report clearly shows that there is a, the advantage of these biofuels are for integration insistence so for carbon capture and storage to have a negative emissions so that would be the way forward. Well, I'm not sure if I pressed the question here on because compared to the first generation biofuels I think regulations around the world are more they will. I think they're more suitable for the second generation biofuels but the problem for example here in Brazil and other developing countries is the economic problem here. In the second generation technologies they're not able to compete yet with the first generation biofuels, but they are quite there. Here in Brazil, we already have a couple examples of planting of new plants they are starting the production of second generation biofuels and the policy support is more or less there. Okay. But of course this. This is a local situation and local regulations need to address the local problems. So if there is a big constraint for the expansion of bioenergy using first generation crops, of course, regulations must take care of this, but in parts of the globe where we do have the potential, we must combine first, second generation advanced technologies to use all the elements that we have all the tools that we have to decarbonize emissions in the transport. So in this case, I believe new regulations that are out there in place. Again, I give the example here for the case of Brazil. I think there's a very good room for the expansion of advanced second generation technologies, but the problem is the economic performance at this point. Thank you so much. So, regretfully, we're running short on time. This has been a very rich discussion that, you know, I'm sure we could continue for hours on such a large and complex and important topic. Thank you so much. Unfortunately, I think we're going to have to leave it here for now. I want to introduce Filippo Tissari, head of the Office of the Executive Director of FEMA, who has worked with SDSN on both the roadmap reports, the first one and this new one on biofuels, and he's going to share a little bit about the vision forward and our next steps on this partnership and this project and what you can expect to see from us in the future. Thank you very much, Lorraine. Also, I want to thank all the attendees and the coaches for the fantastic effort that allowed us to be here today, despite all the obstacles we had to go through in the last year and a half. This is a global issue. And let me also mention the solid and critical contribution received by more or less 100 experts from key public and private institution what tended the 2020 workshop, and give additional consultation and giving feedback, comments and hints, providing an holistic perspective to our work. I just would echo the comments made by Professor Galliotti in his opening. It is a great pleasure to follow on the path of roadmap project along with SDSN. We consider it's a valuable partnership with great results in terms of outcomes. The motivation is still the same since the first report released in 2019, that is to provide a technical guide to be intended as a compass for policymakers to design and foster the implementation of the carbonization pathways relying on available technologies. Taking into consideration their applicability, such economic impacts on different contexts and cost effectiveness of their deployment at a large scale. Now, we are entering a crucial phase where every decision needs to be made extremely urgently but at the same time very carefully. The post pandemic recovery plans are offering huge opportunity of unprecedented investments aimed to reach the net zero emission by 2015. The European Green Deal is one in the European framework. And for this reason, it's important to have a clear vision of the wide range of effective action that can potentially be implemented. And this framework works dealing with mitigation technologies as the first two chapters of the roadmap surely are crucial. But on the other hand, it might be also important not to underestimate the value of identifying adaptation solutions in order to effectively fight climate changes of today and simultaneously plan and design solution for the carbonization in the medium and in the future. So, there are many key topics on the table. They are several and we are as foundation and I recommend they determine it to continue fostering the global dialogue on such teams through our collaboration with the European Green Deal for now and also in the future. So, for this reason, just a little spoiler but we are already brainstorming on the direction of the next year's effort. We will look forward to see you again hopefully in person in 2022 and please stay updated with the work of this very fruitful partnership. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. Once again, we are so grateful to all the participants who joined us today. It's been my honor to be your moderator and it's been a real pleasure to listen to such wonderful presentations from our panel of expert authors. I hope you'll continue to engage with us online, download the report, enjoy it, and I hope to see many of you online as well for the next session of our zero emissions solutions conference starting in just about 30 minutes. Thank you so much, everyone. I wish everyone a wonderful rest of your day and stay safe and, you know, decarbonize. We're going to get there. Thank you so much. Thank you, bye. Thank you. Bye bye.


Hello there! This is Jimmy Powers coming your way with another story from The Tumult and the Shouting. Hi there! This is Jimmy Powers transcribed with another chapter from Grantland Rice's memorable life story, The Tumult and the Shouting. And so with a warm salute to the every young spirit of Granny Rice, I take up the narrative in first person. As we look them over in the big corral, as the years march by, as they rise and fall, here's to Big Pudge, my pick and my pal, the greatest Roman of them all. I witnessed my first football game in 1892 back in the sports stone age. Pudge Heffelfinger was boyhood's idol. His feats of strength even then were legendary when poets were moved to write such lines as, Linger O. Linger Heffelfinger. The granddaddy of the old blues was unquestionably the most amazing football player I have ever known. Pudge was the only football player in history whose active playing career extended over a 50 year span. Think of it. Football. 50 years. When he was 48 years old, for example, he returned to New Haven to tutor the Yale line and handle the varsity linemen so vigorously in scrimmage that they had to order the old man out of there before he wrecked the team. When he was 54 or thereabouts, Heffelfinger played 58 minutes of an all-star charity game in Columbus, Ohio, mostly between Minnesota and Ohio State graduates, the majority of them just out of college. Even a sprained shoulder couldn't force him off the field. The late Bo McMillan played with Pudge that afternoon and to his dying day attested that the old Yale immortal was the fastest man on the field. He was absolutely unbelievable, McMillan told me. At 54, he came out of the line like a thunderbolt. Heffelfinger played in his last game in Minneapolis at the age of 65 in a pro-charity benefit.  The valiant never taste of death but once. When you looked at Pudge, you almost expected to see in the background the mystic figures of John L. Sullivan, Pop Anson, Snapper Garrison, Harry Varden, Barney Oldfield and other unbelievable of the bygone sports era. Joe Williams, the sports columnist once said that he had heard and read so much about Pudge that until he actually met him, he was certainly old boy never existed. There never will be another Heffelfinger. Old Pudge, Mr. Football. He was the greatest guard of all time, certainly a member of my all-time all-American. A fine old gentleman they still discuss in odd whispers under the elms at Yale. In any football gathering, Pudge gave forth an aura of shining light, a special ageless glory. He was the living symbol of the game, indestructible and forever young. Olsters and youngsters alike worshiped him. Not long before Pudge died in the spring of 1954, he received a fan letter from New York that included the following quotes. I have seen you play on the field many times, it said. I have seen you with two of the opposition hanging on but still you plunged forward. You were indeed a one-man army, signed Bernard M. Baruch. Pudge had much to do with founding the New York Touchdown Club. In October of 1933, he got together with Charlie Pearson, John Heisman, Red Cagle, Alex Smith, and Bill Langford Jr., son of the football rules maker, at the Downtown Athletic Club in Manhattan, and discussed the possibility of forming an organization to aid intercollegiate football. The idea was to bring about a fraternity of those who had scored a touchdown in college, hence the Touchdown Club. From that first meeting spawned what is today one of the most unique football groups in America. Pudge's recollections, like mine, span a lot of football eras. They take us back to the misty canvas-jacketed era, bring roaring across the gridiron in all their glory, the delightful likes of Pa Corbin, Snake Ames, Lonnie Stagg, Gil Dobie, Hurry Up Yost, Newt Rockney, George Gip, Red Grainge, Jim Thorpe, Bronco Nugurski, the Four Horsemen, Ernie Nevers, all of the immortals. And here are a few of those memories. When I think of Midwestern football, my mind flashes back to Bernie Bierman, builder of champions at Minnesota for years. Coach Bierman coached solid teams because he stressed sound fundamentals. I believe, said Bierman, that fundamentals such as blocking, charging, tackling and ball carrying, to mention only a few, are more important than plays themselves. I favor a calm, determined team rather than one keyed up to a hysterical pitch for a game. Bierman laid the foundation of great gopher teams on the theory that his lads could run and could be taught to block. If you like to see our ball carriers trot across the goal line, he told his lineman, you men must clear the way. Our running game pins its faith on sound, crisp blocking and plenty of it. When I think of blocking consciousness, I am reminded of Jimmy Coffes, who played right half back for Stanford 20 years ago. The Indians were up against Southern California in 1935, when one of the plays ended with a Trojan man on the ground, temporarily disabled. Little Jimmy, much concerned, rushed to the injured man and started massaging his leg vigorously. The fallen gladiator responded in time, took to his feet and tried the leg gingerly. He flashed a smile of thanks at Jimmy and trotted back to his position. How come Bobby Grayson accosted Jimmy as the latter jogged back to his place? Gee, Jimmy said, I didn't want to see that pigeon leave the game. He's the easiest guy to block I've ever bumped up against. Bronco Nagersky, Minnesota's 1929 All-American, could play any position to the hilt. They used him at fullback because of his line smashing power, but I think he was even greater at tackle. Nagersky probably had more leg drive than even earning Evers. One Saturday, he exploded across the Indiana goal line with such momentum that he crashed into the concrete wall beyond the end zone. Doc Spears called him to the bench for a rest. How's their line, the Minnesota coach wanted to know. Still somewhat dazed from the crash, Bronco shook his head. We could write tackle, Nagersky said, but that linebacker on the short side is sure built solid. I enjoyed George Trevor's description of his first meeting with Michigan's great coach Fielding Yoast, a close friend of mine. It was Yoast who established Michigan as a national football power back at the turn of the century. As I waited in the ante-room of the Ann Arbor Fieldhouse, which Yoast had himself designed, strange thumping sounds came from the great man's office. Crashes as though a gang of house movers were hard at work. Recall the late football editor of the old New York Sun. Don't worry, his pretty secretary assured me. That's only Mr. Yoast interviewing a newspaper man. I hope you brought your helmet and shoulder pads with you. Nobody escaped unscathed from an interview with Yoast. He believed in personal demonstration and loved to fling the chairs around his office as he illustrated football strategy. When the noise gets real loud, the secretary explained to Trevor, we know he's demonstrating his pet play, old 83. Antiques think of Hurry Up Yoast as the man who built those unforgettable point-a-minute teams at the turn of the century. Boss Weeks was the quarterback, and Willie Heston was the all-American boy. It was a deadly combination. Heston was a stick-out halfback, one of the most amazing runners ever. In 1902, Willie and his Confederates all but demolished Stanford 49-0 in the Rose Bowl. For years, Coach Yoast fretted and yelled because the score was omitted from the Pasadena records. He didn't rest until it was finally added to the archives. Michigan slaughtered Little Buffalo College 128-0 en route to the Rose Bowl at 1902 season. In the third quarter, Yoast discovered a battered Buffalo player huddled among the Michigan subs on the bench. What are you doing here, son? He asked, you're on the wrong side. No, I'm not, the boy said. I've been in there for 40 minutes and I can't take it anymore. I'm on the right side now. I never saw a man who loved and lived football more. I once saw Yoast block traffic in the middle of the street while he diagrammed a new play with a piece of chalk for Bottle Thompson, the Michigan fullback. From the fiery Yoast to urbane Fritz Kreisler is a cycle in Michigan football. Both dramatize themselves while building all-conquering teams. Kreisler's spinner cycle offense was really something to see. It demanded expert execution, matchless timing, and flawless faking. Such an accomplished attack could not be taught to run-of-the-mill kids, but then Fritz didn't have ordinary material he had the best his bird dogs could find. Ironically, Kreisler will be remembered longest at Princeton. He coached the unbeatable Tiger teams of 1933 and 35 before moving to Ann Arbor for the games he lost. Yale upset Princeton's of 34 and 36, and Fritz will never forget it. Perhaps Kreisler talked himself out of the 1934 contest, which the great Larry Kelly won on a pass from Jerry Roscoe. Fritz got so emotional during his pre-game pep talk in the locker room that the Tigers walked onto the field quivering in every muscle. Fellas cried, Kreisler, you have 60 minutes for redemption and a lifetime for regret. The Princeton players were so worked up that they fumbled seven times in the first quarter. I hope the Rose Bowl has handles on it, just as Larry Kelly. The 11 Yale's who started that day were still in there at the finish. Not one substitute was used. Well, that wraps it up for this time. So until we meet again to take up another chapter of the Grantland Rice Life story, the tumult and the shouting, this is Jimmy Powers transcribed saying, So long.


Now, we talked at the beginning about scripting, and I said, you know, I don't like using scripts. It's not that I don't like using scripts, it's that I don't like canned responses that you use for everybody. People don't buy from robots? No, robots. Robots, you can tell when somebody's calling you and they're using a script. Hello, sir. My name is Dave. I am using a script to call you right now. Would you like to buy this? We do like to buy this. No, but what we do is we create our own scripts. We create our own habits. We create our own verbiage that we use, and I'm asking you just to pay attention to that. So really what you need to do is you need to write this out on what you're going to say, or you need to use one of our scripts and make it your own. Absolutely. Or whatever the case may be, but it won't have likes like in there. It won't have honesty, honestly in there. It won't have trust me in there. I can guarantee you it won't have those things in there. It'll have a lot less words than you're used to saying. I believe in getting to the point, not pausing, not pausing until you've asked a question, rather than, hey, I saw you wanted life insurance, and then pause, and then crazy. I read an article this morning that talked about tone of voice, and how important tone of voice is. Sometimes sales presentations, we do a, some guys have a habit of going up at the end of their sentences, and it's these implied questions that leave space for things. Whereas we talked about the other day that the whole tone of your, of your intro and down goes right into a smooth question. It's a tone thing too, and you can kind of get into that. The best way to really grade yourself is to record yourself doing these presentations, or doing this script, or whatever the case. All in the phone, any of it.  I used to have new agents go and read the script in front of the mirror before they started making calls, or I would hang a mirror in their cubicle. Yeah, absolutely. I think that's, we don't like listening to ourselves on recordings, but you will get a lot more out of this. That's one of the biggest reasons people won't. Get pride out of the way, quit whining, and just get better. You will improve much faster if you listen to your own recordings. And listen to it with somebody else and whatever the case may be. Douglas says just enough words to get the appointment and in the door. I love it. Get the appointment and get off the phone. I love it. Get in the door and yeah. You're right, Douglas. Thanks for joining, brother. Don't over talk. Don't put too many thoughts in. Hey, make sure you get some free leads. Make sure you call in A3340 agent. Make sure you go to the website, secureagentmentor.com, and check out the free page on how to close our leads. I mean, there's a ton of free training on that. Yeah, absolutely. You'll learn something. You'll learn how to close our leads. It's becoming one of the biggest hits on our website right now. Because it's actual truth. It's actually how. This is what's going to get you the best response. This is what's going to get you the most sales, the most closes, and this is how to do it. And I think we're, I got told you before, we're on the front edge of this wave of digital leads and how to really close them and getting rid of the bad habits. I believe the words that we use are important and the habits that we have are important. And if you can, because, you know, when you go through a slump, you've talked about going through a slump and what do you do different? Sometimes you just need to listen to yourself, record yourself on your presentation because you've got a bad habit in there that you didn't have six months ago. Back to the basics. And you don't realize it.