Good afternoon, thank you for being with us. Now the goal is to decubinize, keep one and a half alive. For emerging economies, it means mobilizing about $2 trillion annually through 2030, but currently only 20% of what's needed is being mobilized. So there is a funding gap. And according to the IMF, the private capital can fill about 80% of what's needed. And if you take China away from that, then it becomes 90%. The question really is, what are the innovative funding solutions available? And what do you do with questions about transparency, the lack of policy framework? So these are the issues that this panel helps to address. And let me first introduce to you the speakers today. Rick Duke, US Deputy Special Envoy for Climate. Odell Reno Basso, President of the EBRD. Bill Winters, Group CEO of Standard Chartered. Joanna Messing, CEO of Grow Old Climate Fund. Rick, let's start with you. I want to talk about the ETA, the Energy Transition Accelerator. It was, I guess, revealed at COP28, likely to be unveiled, launched, come Earth Day. Give us a sense of how ETA will help the action, boost the action, in emerging economies. So you're very right to start with the gap in financing for the energy transition. And this is meant to help to address that gap. The International Energy Agency estimates that we need to have a 7x increase in financing for energy transition above all in the power sector. And the Energy Transition Accelerator is tailored to bring voluntary carbon market solutions that are high integrity into the picture to help really pick up the pace and make a difference. By focusing on a jurisdictional approach, which we pioneered, I should say, in the land sector with the LEAF program and the Red Plus efforts that are really picking up steam, I should say, and also warrant investment and attention and will help to stop deforestation, we are taking a similar approach here in the Energy Transition Accelerator, looking at a power system-wide approach. And that allows integrity when it comes to additionality. It ensures against leakage. And it also is a way to ensure that governments and utilities can get resourcing to do everything they need to do. They can do transmission. They can do storage. They can do new renewables with that transmission and storage. And so we are thrilled that we have made so much progress in a short amount of time. I want to thank Standard Chartered and Bill for being one of the initial companies really pioneering this work. And we have three pilots moving now in Chile and Nigeria and Dominican Republic. And we have a real opportunity here to make a big difference on a big problem with a high integrity approach to mobilizing finance. You talked about strict enforcement. How exactly are you intending to do that? What mechanisms in place? I mean, how do you ensure that carbon that's being avoided is being reflected accurately? Well, when it comes to the power sector, the data are good. We have a very clear sense of what the emissions are because we can track the fuels that are being burned. And we know when you burn a ton of coal, you get a ton of CO2 if I'm doing the math right. And so it's not difficult to pin down the math at that level of the fundamental question of being able to measure so that you can manage. What, of course, is challenging, and where the jurisdictional power system-wide, grid-wide approach is so crucial, is that you have to make sure that you are actually crediting real reductions that are above and beyond what would have happened without the effort, without the energy transition accelerator. And we can do that because taking a page from the jurisdictional approach from the land sector, from the LEAF and RED Plus programs, you can define a baseline that is clear, incredible, and then you only begin crediting when you beat that trajectory in terms of carbon intensity reductions towards zero, for example. And we made tremendous progress in the last year in mapping out what that would look like in the details. It's been a very inclusive process. It will continue to be so. And we are quite confident that this would be really an antidote to some of the concerns that have been raised about other voluntary carbon markets, which take a more one-off approach, in which do indeed have real problems in some cases. This jurisdictional approach is entirely different. President Renovaso, what were some of the key outcomes for MDBs at COP28? And how is that guiding the reform agenda for MDBs? So I think MDBs, first of all, have been, since a few years, very committed to working with the COP, committing to increase their contribution to climate change and support in all countries in which we are in green transition. A lot of the engagement coming out of the COP, doubling the renewable, tripling the renewable, doubling energy efficiency, and so forth, will involve MDBs, as well as the sort of key objective is cutting metanomission. And for MDBs, this is a really a driving element in the policies. We are implementing. Each of us have different, some are more public. We are EBRD working more with the private sector. But we have all enhanced our green objective. And also delivered in 2015, we committed to some, or 2019, we committed to some deliverable for 2025.  So in a way, we have delivered. But it's clear that we need to go beyond, to accelerate, and to find ways to increase the scale of what we are doing. And in doing so, there is a lot of discussion, and I'm sure we will come to that about the role of the MDBs, the role of the private sector. I really see the role of the MDBs as an enabling element working on the global strategy and the global policy of the countries on green transition, energy sector transition, but also manufacturing transition. And defining with the country, I think the most value we can bring is when we, working with the country, can define what is a strategy? How can they define the objective they want to reach in terms of renewable, in terms of closing coal power plants and so forth, bringing that together, having a framework which is also induces to private investment in terms of regulation, rule of flow, clarity of the objective, roadmap to go there, and bring that together in order to have clarity on the strategy, and possibility, I mean, MDB financing in terms of lending, possible equity, and so forth, bringing also some concessional financing because part of these activities need to be supported by concessional activities, and their philanthropy or countries, ODA can play, I mean, need to play a role, and then the private sector. To give you a concrete example, we've worked a lot with the team of John Kerry on Egypt, and last year, Egypt at the COP, they came with a platform where they had a clear strategy on energy, a commitment to close some gas power plant, five gigawatts, I mean, to be closed, and at least 10 gigawatts of renewable to be developed, and also investment in the grid, so as to make that possible. We worked together, so this strategy was endorsed, announced very strongly politically on by the government. We brought some donor financing in order to help with the direct transition and the closing out of the gas power plant. We financed ourselves the grid, and we have a clear roadmap for developing the grid, and then there will be a lot of renewable, and hopefully, renewable will involve private sector developers and some private sector financing. So I think this is a strategy we want to develop. It's a big strategy, a lot of work to be done. What are the priorities for 2024? What are you looking to do? I mean, for us, increasing renewable everywhere is a key priority. And what is encouraging in a very positive note is that we see all countries in which we intervene, starting from very different point, but all embracing this agenda. And defining, I was before on a panel on Eurasia, countries in Central Asia, like Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Georgia, Turkey, they're all stepping up very significantly their objective of renewable, understanding that the price is much lower, that it's an opportunity. It's also not only good because of Paris Agreement and the need to keep the 1.5 alive, but also because it's important for competitiveness. Because now, if you want to develop to be strong in manufacturing, you need to be able to show that you have also green source of energy. The other priority for us is to, so we are fully Paris Alliance, so all our investments are Paris Alliance. And what we are trying to do is working with a financial institution in the emerging countries in which we work in order to help them bringing this kind of assessment on their project. So developing the governance target for the local banks in order to have this kind of green environmental objective and then deploy that in the way that assess the project. And I think this is the best, I mean, we can have a big impact because then it's not only our financing, but also our local banks work on their own financing to SMEs and so forth. Right, and Bill, you know, a lot of pressure on the private sector, a lot of pressure for to mobilize private capital. I mean, how do you see banks playing a bigger role and what's stopping banks currently doing that? At first, I'd say it's actually probably not a lot of pressure. And I think that's... And that should be more, Bill. The pressure in and of itself isn't gonna create much progress, so we have to put the facilities in place so that pressure can be applied and then realistically act it out. And there's no silver bullet, and I think we've all been focused on this for quite a while now. And let's take a look at the good news first. Our balance sheet has gone from being 0% sustainable finance to about 6% sustainable finance. What should it be at the end of the day? I guess probably something closer to 25% sustainable finance. So it's not that nothing's happened, a lot has happened, but as is always the case, the easy pickings are the low-hanging fruit and the low-hanging fruit. And I'll say that the first bit of low-hanging fruit was disproportionately in Europe. Why? Because the European facilities were in place. There's a function in carbon market in Europe, like a really big function in carbon market with a carbon price that actually makes sense. It's volatile, but it's volatile around prices that we all think make sense. We're talking $60 to $100 a ton, whereas the voluntary carbon market, which we are trading right now, it's something between $2 and $10 a ton, which is clearly the wrong price. So the facilities, we know how that worked in Europe, it's a cap and trade system, so there's a quota. And that's a form of taxation on European industry, which then requires subsequent actions, including border adjustment tariffs and things of that nature. So that facility is in place. There's no silver bullets, but what are the bronze bullets that we can line up? We talk a lot about public-private sector financing. Certainly in the emerging markets, where standard chartered is very active, that's an essential component. It's necessary, but not sufficient. And we know that the amount of capital that's been allocated is far from sufficient. And we can all, and I've sat on this stage and shot my little silver bullets at the World Bank or the IMF, or never the EBRD, but I suppose I could have, and said, you know, we need to, the shareholders need to increase the capital of these organizations by 15 times. And then we need to go from a one-times leverage factor, i.e. $1 of MDB financing is crowding in. Actually, today it's 95 cents of private-sector capital. That obviously doesn't make any sense. Something like 15 would be a good target. Now, I'm on a, with Ajavanga and Mark Carney and Trude Videra and others, a World Bank lab, private-sector lab, as it's called. And our objective is to, a little bit more modest, not increase the aggregate amount of capital of the World Bank, that's not within our remit, although I would call on anybody that has any authority in the world to do that. There's one government that's sitting a couple to my left that could lead the way in that. But I know that Richard's not, you're not the obstacle on that one. But then what we can affect is this leverage factor, the crowding in. So let's get to at least a four-to-one, right? Let's go from zero or a one-to-one to four-to-one. And how do we do that? Well, much more creative use of MDB guarantees and acceptance that MDBs will really provide that difficult to address capital layer. It might be the first loss on a project, it may be the political risk on a project, it may be the foreign exchange risk on a project. But those are things that the private sector has real trouble addressing directly. So if we're gonna use concessionary capital from the MDBs, and this is all of our money, obviously, let's use it in a way that's gonna have the biggest impact in terms of mobilizing private sector capital. So what Ajay and team have done at the World Bank is nothing short of phenomenal in terms of changing a mindset in a very short period of time. Organizations like the Asian Development Bank have actually been ahead of the curve and are already doing, EBRD, let's say Europe is way ahead of the curve. But there's a whole infrastructure in Europe that's supporting sustainability. Unfortunately, that's not where the big emissions are. Not anymore, apart because you've reduced them so successfully. We've gotta get to the rest of the world. A lot of that is in the developing world. Anyway, I don't wanna monopolize the time, but I think public-private partnership is one part. But getting access from the public capital market, so this 80 or 90% number that you mentioned up front, assumes that all those funds that are ESG funds, which are public pension fund money, insurance company money, personal saver money, is actually deployable into sustainable projects. And the fact is today, they're not because it's quite complicated to execute a sustainable finance project. And the expertise is sitting in a pretty narrow group of places, mostly banks. And the capital markets aren't geared up. So we need to standardize. We need to get consistency in terms of what is a good project, what's not a good project, that requires standards. We need to get uniform structures. We need to get elements of legal protection that are consistent across markets. And then we can bring the capital markets to bear. I don't wanna say that my good clients who are asset managers are lazy, but they are. And they're get it by the stuff if it's easy for them to buy. Not because it's the right thing to do all the time. So I'll stop. These are just a couple of themes that are many, many more that we are exploring. Well, pick up on some of your points later by Joanna. There's also a big call for Philanthropies to do more private public Philanthropies working on innovative partnerships. How do both sectors capitalize and make maximum impact? Well, we're here because we feel like the role of philanthropy is to really catalyze innovation, to support higher ambition, and to incorporate in some of those just issues that are harder for capital markets to incorporate. So in terms of ambition, the main message that we're all hearing is that finance and markets are not meeting the moment. However, the finance sector has proven time and again its ability to innovate, particularly in times of crisis. So part of this is to look at how are we going to meet this moment? What is the innovation that we are going to create that is going to enable us to reach particularly issues in emerging economies and to meet this moment? I think part of the challenge has been that we've been talking about things at very large scale, trillions, large terms like sustainable finance. But in order to make the right innovations, we need form to follow function, which means we need to think about where are the projects? What is the kind of capital that's needed? So we make sure that it's the right flavor of capital in the right place at the right time. And so we need to look at the different categories of projects. First of all, there are projects that would provide market rate returns, but because of failures in the capital market system, the right kind of capital isn't there. So when we think about the role of philanthropy there, there's several things that we can do. First of all, policy is a huge area which we've seen impacts profitability. We're hearing over and over again that having a stable policy environment, a stable regulatory environment, improved permitting processes, all of that increases the chance of profits. So that is a role where philanthropy can come in. But also thinking about ways to increase technical assistance, transparency, funds that cut across geographies to reduce some risks and enable access to those projects which really will provide a market return. Talking about low hanging fruit, that's the first place to go. Secondly, there are projects that will provide a return but it's not considered market rate, particularly in emerging economies where you layer on political risk. Or sometimes the kind of capital that's required would add on to debt burden and the country is not willing to take that. This is another great place for philanthropy, particularly in partnership with public institutions, to think about technical assistance for domestic institutions that don't face the currency risk hurdles, for example. Seeding project prep facilities like we've seen with CSAF or ACP. But I also think there's a role for philanthropy to do business planning around potential new products like sustainability linked bonds, transition finance as an asset class, experimentation. And then finally, I mean, there are the hardest but necessary projects which will not give a rate of return that's going to be market acceptable but which are critical, like we've heard over and again, like grids. And so that's again where government and public policy and philanthropy needs to partner to enable it. And in all of these choices, again, going to granularity and locality, thinking about how we partner with people on the ground to ensure that the communities are engaged early on and that the projects meet the needs of who's on the ground. But in the end, our choices are actually quite simple. We can either reform existing institutions by thinking about what are the new products and policies that existing institutions can roll out. Or we can build new institutions that meet the moment that may be public, they may be private, they may be nonprofit, but we simply do not have the choice of saying it's too difficult. And so I'm here to really offer the role of philanthropy to do radical collaboration across sectors and really hope that we can be innovative to problem solve this together. We talk about risk, we talk about policy clarity, we talk about stability. These are the elements that need to be in place for capital to be deployed. How do you see the end of these perhaps helping to address these issues? I believe that this is at the core of our role. For example, working, because projects are not coming, may depend on countries as well, but very often it's a lot of work to get a project. It's a lot of work to convince a country that it's interest to move out from coal to green. I mean, it's politically difficult, you have vested interest, you have a cost of human capital, you need, I mean, it's a lot of work and a lot of risk. So convincing the country that this is the right strategy and bringing them all the information. We are talking about countries also where the administrative capacity is not necessarily the strongest one. So making the, I mean, working on the policy decision is very important. That for example, you know, bringing, we worked a lot, not only in advanced Europe, but also in, I mean, Central Asia and so forth. And we convinced Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan to sign methane pledge. For Kazakhstan is a huge issue because, I mean, there are bigger oil and gas producer. For them, it's, I mean, 40% I think of their CO2 emission are related to methane flaring and so forth. So it's a huge endeavor. It took us two years, I think, to convince them and so forth. But then when you have this kind of policy commitment, a bit like the one I was mentioning for Egypt then it's a very good basis to develop projects and then investment opportunities. And then when you have investment opportunities and projects which can be fine. And then I think how to bring private sector is important because we cannot do all the financing ourselves. And it used to be the MDP model but I think everybody understand that it's not up to the challenge. It will never be up to the challenge whatever level of capital we got. So we need to find ways to, and I think that requires effort on both sides. It cannot be only the public sector absorbing the whole risk. We need to have some big sharing but of course there are some ways. For example, to take, you were saying the first law, I mean, there are mechanisms with the first laws. We can develop framework to finance, we can develop more projects in local currency. For example, EBRD has been working very much on tapping local market financing of ourselves in local currency in order to be able to land in local currency so that you don't have the exchange at risk. You also have the capacity to work, we develop the project, the construction part and then when it's up and running, generating revenues and so forth, we sell it, I mean, then we invite private investors to come in and we recycle our financing. So there are a lot. The challenge I think is that we need to go beyond sort of generic discussion about risk, guarantees and so forth to very concrete focusing on countries, project and operations. It's also about credibility, Rick. I mean, if you take a look at the voluntary carbon market, it's been settled by scandal after scandal after scandal. How do you build back that credibility? So the answer to that question really is rooted in this jurisdictional approach and I wanna explain why a little bit. When you look at the issues that have arisen with voluntary carbon markets and really project-based voluntary carbon markets, there are real issues around inflated baselines where you have a center, frankly, on the part of the project developer, of course, but in many ways on the part of the host country in many instances to have the math in their favor. And there's not enough clarity, there's asymmetric information and so there's no way to really properly discipline that project-based approach unless you nest those projects in a proper jurisdiction-wide credible baseline that can be established based on some kind of principled approach and analysis. That's what the LEAF program does in a Red Plus framework for landscapes and we've seen two new transactions come out just at COP28 and we have a large pipeline of transactions coming there and that is something which we can really count on in terms of stopping deforestation through those mechanisms and giving governments the flexibility to use the revenue as needed for enforcement, for investment, for whatever it takes. Similarly, in the power sector, with the energy transition accelerator, taking a power system-wide approach anchored in a credible baseline about what it takes to get to net zero in the power sector at what pace of carbon intensity reduction, you solve those problems. You also deal with the leakage issue and it is something where we also need to communicate effectively about this and make clear the distinctions so that we can proceed because there's too much work to do in stopping deforestation and accelerating the energy transition to be slowed down by what are very real concerns about elements of the voluntary carbon markets. We need to get the voluntary carbon markets put to work and let me just very briefly, if I could, thank EBRD for the partnership on both the Egypt Renewables Project and on the methane piece. And just briefly, it was a mere 200 million in deeply concessional grant funding from the United States, Europe, and Germany is mobilizing $10 billion in Egypt. That is going to lead to and has led to them accelerating their renewables goal by a full five years in their Paris Agreement nationally determined contribution just last June following that deal. We are excited about that as a major step forward and it is a model I think for us to pursue in other countries. And then similarly, just a note on the methane front on oil and gas methane, since you raised it, in addition to everything you just said, we have mobilized $255 million in grant support to help low income national oil companies do the upfront work to be able to then invest with confidence in flaring, venting, and leakage reduction. And when we get that job done in places like Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, which are now engaging with us on this diplomatically and commercially, when we get that done on a global basis, that is worth a full 10th of a degree of avoided climate change right now. And we can get it done, we're working with EBRD, the World Bank, and partners, including in private finance to make it happen. Bill, you wanted to add? Yeah, well, just on the very last point that Rick meant, it's, sometimes we bemoan the, frequently we bemoan the lack of developed consensus on really impactful things. And the methane agreement in COP was really impactful. And it's a little bit expensive, but it's the best bang for the buck. And it was prioritized, and the best majority of methane emitters now in the oil and gas industry have signed up, so that's great. I wanted to pick up on some of the voluntary carbon markets, just to expand a bit, because I completely agree with Rick's diagnosis of the voluntary carbon market is tiny today. Its reputation is in tatters because of the number of projects that fit exactly the description with either an inflated baseline or inadequate enforcement. Many, many, many sort of avoided deforestation projects are good. The forest is still there. The baseline was quite ugly. So what prompted me and 450 other people three years ago to set up what was originally called the Task Force for Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets was the belief that without restoring credibility and confidence in that market, we'd have a hard time protecting the existing carbon sinks of the world, much less investing in new technologies that are on economic to avoid carbon emissions in future. So this group of 450 people, which included I'd say the world's leading scientists on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, the most active NGOs who were interested in developing this segment of the decarbonization agenda, the biggest polluters of the world, airlines, oil and gas companies, the biggest project generators, conservation, international, World Wildlife Fund, Nature Conservancy, and then a bunch of intermediaries like banks. So 450, we came up with a set of standards that were intended to restore confidence in this market. Say we got to a level of detail that was about 15,000 feet, 5,000 meters. We handed then over to it to a totally independent board called the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Markets, which is operating today. There are 22 members of this board supported by 60 of the world's leading climate scientists. They're taking those standards from 15,000 feet, 5,000 meters, to let's say 1,000 meters. So quite detailed at a methodology level. The verifiers who were discredited in the earlier regime, so take Vera Gold Standard, I don't mean that these are bad people, but they approve transactions that were subsequently found to be inadequate, are refining their methodologies to be consistent with the ICBCM standards. And at the outset, very few of the projects, of the nature-based projects, will qualify under the very stringent guidelines of the Integrity Council. But as the methodologies are developed and as the governance arrangements are put in place easier in a jurisdictional environment, but not limited to jurisdictional situations because obviously most of the carbon sinks that we have today don't have a jurisdictional framework. And if we say goodbye to the Amazon and goodbye to the enormous carbon sink in the Congo, I'm afraid there's no amount of direct air capture that we can do that's going to prevent a two-plus degree increase in temperature. So jurisdictional or not, we have to make this work. And the objective of the Integrity Council is very simply to say this is a good credit. You can have high confidence. And the bet that I'm making and that a lot of other people are making is that once that confidence is restored, that huge body of private sector money that's saying, oh, why on earth would I buy a carbon credit? Well, I'm one going to use my shareholder capital and two, we criticize for it. That's a lose-lose. I'm not going to do that. So of course the market's small. If we can flip that around, that will bring the pressure back on banks and corporations to say, no, there is something you can do about that. Yeah, of course you have to go through your own transition pathway. But for all that difficult or impossible to abate along the way or impossible to abate at the end of your process, you buy offsets. You better buy offsets. Because if we don't predict the existing carbon sinks, doesn't matter what else we do, we're not going to get there. Joanna, yeah. Yeah, I think one of the things I'd like to just follow up on this is to say one of the reasons I think we need innovation in the market is any one particular solution might end up not getting us there. And so what I'd like to discuss is in parallel what are some other pilots that we can run? And talking about low-hanging fruit, one of the things that we've seen is that we have not picked all of the low-hanging fruit. And so one of the questions or challenges that I'd put forward is can we make a commitment over the next couple of years to pick all of the low-hanging fruit? Cover all of the abandoned coal mines, the industrial rooftops, the brown fields, the abandoned industrial sites with renewable energy. Those are not going to meet with community protests. Can we make lighthouses that show how this works and create positive stories about the jobs that are created, the energy that's produced at the same time that we're exploring other models? The other question I would ask is how can we update the financial models that are actually being used for evaluation to reflect some of the broad ranges of risks, both some of the physical asset risks that are happening with extreme weather events that actually changes the profit viability of existing assets, but at the same time, looking at which policy innovations would make these renewable energy projects more viable and see how we finance those. So I think in addition to the conversation that we're having here, what are the other experiments that we can run? Let's open the discussion to the floor. If you have any questions, just raise your hand and we'll send a mic your way. If there are any questions? Yeah, please, right in front. Hi, I'm from Brazil. I'm a social innovator, so I'm on the ground feeling the effects and trying to help. So I was wondering, how come we don't see the developing and emerging markets on this table, for instance, and shouldn't we be a part of the discussions ourselves? So wanted to hear your comments on that as well. I don't have an emerging markets accent, but that is the business I'm in. So the center charter operates across Asia, Middle East, and Africa, actually with a nice business in Brazil as well. So these projects that are driving our sustainability agenda are almost entirely in emerging markets. I'll just add that the point made earlier, I think by Bill, that when you look at where the challenges and opportunities are on climate mitigation, increasingly it's in emerging economies and in developing countries more broadly. And certainly the United States recognizes that as a government. President Biden has a goal working with Congress to reach $11 billion in public climate finance by next year, and we've done over $9.5 billion in 2023 on that path. We are, of course, through energy work, trying as much as possible to do both country-led, specific efforts like the Egypt effort, but also the just energy transition partnerships that we have in Indonesia and Vietnam and South Africa with G7 partners, but with the host country driving the discussion in every case, bringing in private finance, including standard charter, thank you, in the conversation in an effort to do three things that I think are worth briefly noting. The first is actually to work on the policy context because these things have to be country-led to succeed because the policy in country is the prime mover. We need transparency for utility sector about what their financials look like, why they are or are not investing in renewables when renewables are increasingly by far the cheapest way to deliver electrons, but in many cases, you have fossil interests that are incumbents that don't want to see that happen. Second thing we need is to make sure that we're creative about these financing solutions and public, private, even philanthropic blended approaches to mobilize more capital more quickly at a lower cost of capital. And then finally, we put the just energy transition partnerships in mind in place with a view to encouraging and really insisting on engaging civil society in these efforts in country so that we can make sure that the transition is equitable and just and that we work on what happens to those that we're working in the fossil sector or in coal power plants, et cetera, during the transition. And so, agree that we need to have that as an inclusive conversation and I can't comment on the panel composition per se. Do you wanna? I think it's a critical point and one of the things that philanthropy can do is change the conversation a little bit from investment only in technology to also this transition is about investing in people. And for too long, there has been an underinvestment in people in the global South in particular and also female leaders by the way. And so I think that one of the pieces of the conversation that we can also introduce is what is the investment that we are going to make collectively in talent? So we've launched this last year a climate talent initiative which is meant to bring people from outside of the climate sector into the climate sector but also to support transition leaders and particularly to support the talent that exists in the global South so that in future panels, we can have all women from global South perhaps. But I just, I think it's also, I just wanna reiterate the importance of remembering that these changes happen from leadership and investing in those leaders will enable the innovation and the trust and the solutions. No, I will not comment also on the panel because we are not part of the deal. But just what I want to point is that we started with COP and one of the very, I mean, useful tools in COP I think is all the national strategy, long-term strategy, national contribution and so forth because this is contributed even and this is what very much is the basis for action in the climate area decarbonization and so forth, driving everything that takes place around. So I think that's where we engage very much in countries in what, I mean, can be the ambition, what is realistic, what can be done in terms of NDC and long-term strategy. But I think the ownership of the country is at the core of what needs to be done and this is very well reflected in the COP processes, I think. Please. And it's the day of the social innovators. I'm a short social innovator too from India. Just wanting to say that we have support from USAID. We are building women's collectives in bamboo. We're gonna work with a million women across 10 states, 300,000 hectares. Bamboo is the highest and fastest carbon sequestering plant on the planet. It's gonna be done with all biodiversity, et cetera in mind. The next thing we could do is seaweed. So Mr. Winters had spoken with Marisa and your team. So they said, seaweed. I said, okay, we'll get to seaweed next. But there's huge examples happening in the global majority where communities are getting involved in not just being victims of climate change, but earning money and at the same time becoming highly carbon sequestering. There is a huge potential in NBS, phenomenal. And Ms. Bessing, thank you so much for speaking about the staggered and the need for a very strong capital stack. We need the capital stack starting with philanthropy because we are results of the funding we got from USAID. Thank you. And on the policy front, the government of India, they don't know it unfortunately, but they need to understand. They've got the largest amount of government funding going into the national rural livelihood mission, which builds rural women's collectives and we'll be working with those collectives enabling them to plant the bamboo, which will feed India's bamboo industry, right? So, I mean, there is so much that the government is actually doing, but they don't know that there's such a strong link between equity, climate and gender. And I think doing more of these even in the global majority countries is important, but I think a bunch of this will come up at the COP in Columbia. The need for more community involvement. And it can't always be about EVs and mass manufacturing. Yeah, thank you. That was a question right at the end there. Hi, Rich Powell from Clear Path in the US. Question, I think for Rick, but maybe everyone. Rick, you give us a great taxonomy a few minutes ago of all of the different approaches that have been tried, some attempt to sort of standardize with the JETPs, the multilateral Egypt tax-specific agreement. I'd add bilateral tax-specific like US-Poland nuclear deal maybe to that taxonomy. What you're doing with the accelerator is tax-specific, but global, applying to multiple. So we're trying a lot of different things. Are we learning enough to eventually converge on something that can then be repeated 50 more times across all of the additional developing countries or are we going to continue doing the spoke deals across all of these? And I say that with the obvious concern that doing a bespoke deal one time a year every year will not get us to net zero globally by later this century. Yeah, thanks for the question, Rich. And I think it's a good push. I think we do need to hold ourselves to account as a community that's involved in this work to do that learning and to take on the lessons and change course as we learn by doing. I will just say, and you know as well as anyone, that we should not lose sight of the learning by doing that has brought us to a point where solar and wind and other solutions increasingly even nuclear are the cheaper answer to deliver electrons and electric vehicles are the cheaper way to transport people and so on. So we have a great technology foundation to build on. And you're absolutely right, we are still working through the institutional approach, the diplomatic approach, the financial approach that's gonna make things move as quickly as we need. And there are so many dimensions to this, but what I would come back to is the role of philanthropy and helping to ensure that learning occurs and helping to ensure that the policy prime mover really is addressed because it can seem a little dull, especially here in Davos to talk about policy and government and bureaucracy, but I can tell you that if a utility, which in most cases is a natural monopoly, doesn't have to explain what it's doing and why it's doing it, then incumbent interests are going to tend to dominate its decision making about coal versus renewables, even when renewables are cheaper as just one example. Then there's fossil fuel subsidies to talk about. There are management of local content requirement and tariffs to talk about and a whole range of other policy drivers. And we do need to do the hard work on that dimension above all I would say for the financing to flow. And we do need to do the institutional learning as we try these different approaches. I think you hear some real enthusiasm for some models that are clearly working. The EBRD project in Egypt as a very interesting model because you had in country staff from EBRD that got things rolling, got things to a place that was clear on the policy front. We could come in as governments with some essential deeply concessional funding to get it over the line and some diplomatic engagement. And then it all fit into that Paris Agreement beating heart of nationally determined contributions when they updated their NDC based on that support and that 10 gigawatts of new renewables that are coming this decade because of it. And so that's an example of a model. And I'll just say one last thing which is I do think the Paris Agreement itself is driving an extraordinary amount of progress. We were talking about as much as four degrees centigrade before the Paris Agreement in 2015. We're now talking about two and a half degrees. And of course we need to get to 1.5 or get back to 1.5. And so there's a lot more to do but it is driving that target setting at a national level that every government really is taking seriously and increasingly covering all greenhouse gases as China just committed to do and the world just encouraged itself to do at COP28. And then that flows through to the policies that are so essential that can then drive the finance. Oh, I know we're running short on time but if we're looking for examples, it could be repeated. The live example to me would be the credits coming off of early decommissioning of coal-fired power plants which Rick and the U.S. led in terms of the JETP together with private sector participation. Now nobody knows how these credits are gonna work. Who's gonna pay for Indonesia to shut its 40 year life coal-fired power plant 20 years early? We all know someone should pay. It's a good thing, it's a good credit but there's no mechanism for that. If we get that right in that one case in Indonesia with some public-private partnership, Singapore has come in to say, yeah, we'll buy those credits. So I mean, that we should be able to replicate hundreds of times. Of course if you fail at the first pass then you don't get a second shot at it. So I would say that's just an example of some of the things that we are, we can actually make repeatable events if we get them right in the first order. Where's the runner-up question? I think we are making good progress in understanding and among MDBs and with bilateral donors and so forth on how we can work together.  So I think we are making good progress there. We need to keep in mind that it will remain country-based and each country, I mean decarbonization is different in each country so it will remain specifics but we can still have a sort of model, financing resources, way to cooperate, how to approach the objective and the project and so forth that have well functioning and then deploy that country by country. And on that note, President Renovaso, Bill, Joanna, Rick, thank you so much for your insights today and thank you for joining us.


Live from Barcelona, Spain, it's theCUBE, covering KubeCon CloudNativeCon Europe 2019. Brought to you by Red Hat, the CloudNative Computing Foundation and ecosystem partners. Welcome back to theCUBE coverage here at KubeCon CloudNativeCon. I'm Stu Miniman, my co-host is Corey Quinn and happy to welcome back to the program Mark Shuttleworth, who's the CEO of Canonical. Of course, the orange shirts of Ubuntu are seen all throughout the show. Mark, thank you so much for joining us. Great to see you. Great to see you. All right, so for years actually, we've had these conversations at the OpenStack Summit. And it's interesting that every time you mention it around this show, you get snark online as like it is dead, Kubernetes killed it. And it's like, wait, no, no, we're talking about a couple of open source projects. I've been talking to people, especially in the telco space, that's like, oh yeah, well no, we just run OpenStack underneath and Kubernetes on top and put all things together. So give us a little bit your broad view of some of these big trends and open source monoliths and microservices and all these pieces like all kind of fly together. Yeah, I think if you're in the sort of Reddit sub channels then it can feel a bit like sort of turf war and gangster type free software riffing, right? But the reality is OpenStack solves business problems for people, they want large scale virtualized infrastructure that's cheaper than VMware. We are deploying OpenStacks in enterprise environments at double the scale and double the speed, in other words, like twice as many every month as we were a year ago. I think people have gotten comfortable with the idea that Kubernetes is an application operations construct. I think we will see virtualization blur into the Kubernetes lines, but mainly for security reasons, right? So I want deeper isolation of applications that come from third party vendors, for example, and I'm willing to trade performance for isolation in circumstances where I'm bringing in third party code into my sort of private infrastructure. After we see a couple of significant security compromises, I mean, we saw the GitHub compromise, right? And if you just, if you shave that yak, it gets to a very uncomfortable place of what are we actually running as route all over our data centers with Docker and Docker Hub. So people are going to want that kind of isolation of containers, the Carter containers work is going to bring that, but that's very different to the proposition of essentially give me large scale machine virtualization, which OpenStack addresses. OpenStack hasn't done itself any favors, don't need to go into that here, but nonetheless, as far as we're concerned, it's straightforward to deliver large scale, low cost, enterprise virtualization infrastructure for telcos or IT use cases. Yeah, so I want to get in, let's get into this ecosystem here. And I want to say the cloud native ecosystem.  You know, Kubernetes is a platform against platform.   We've seen some of the various pieces. I saw making a big intent on the, on the keynote. And I was like, I seem to remember a certain article that you wrote poking a hole in the big tent thing.  What's your take on this, you know, is it an ecosystem? Is it Kubernetes and friends, as Corey has like to say here? You know, what's your take? Look, I think we still trying to figure out what are the appropriate labels to attach to this kind of forum. It is a forum, right? There is a tremendous amount of value attached to being here, to the ideas that are getting bounced about, but I wouldn't call it a simple community in the sort of traditional open source sense. The reality is there are this very serious money behind every sort of project that's being framed as a community project. This is a new kind of consortium and that brings with it, you know, certain sort of delicate political, you know, posturing and so on. But nonetheless, it's a valuable sort of place to be. It's definitely staking out important concepts and operational sort of platforms, ideas, regimes, whatever you want to call it. This is going to be a fun week. Yeah, I started off my career in the Linux world. As a Grumpy Unix administrator because there really wasn't any other kind. And then I started dipping my toes into the Linux world and something that struck me almost immediately about Ubuntu was how welcoming everyone was in the community.  And it was, people were very eager to embrace newcomers into that. It was one of the absolute best things that I saw coming out of Canonical, in addition to the software itself. I love that you're here as a part of this. What is the larger picture? What do you see in the cloud-native ecosystem that's resonating with what Canonical's doing? So the big thing that we do is essentially try to figure out what's possible with open source that's hard to do and then make it really sort of straightforward so that more people can do the important stuff easily, right? That doesn't stop people from doing kind of all the kind of crazy stuff at the periphery that you can do with Ubuntu. It's generally easier with Ubuntu than any other platform. But we try to make the really most important things really easy for everybody. That's the first thing. And the second thing is we're a little non-judgmental about the fact that there are different perspectives on the same stuff. So in the Ubuntu ecosystem, we make a point of saying that the GNOME guys and the KDE guys and the LexQ guys and the Mate guys, the Ubuntu ecosystem is where they actually meet to hash out how they can do stuff in a way that means users get really a real choice between those, right? And there's a very similar role for us to play in an environment like this, right? It's kind of acronym soup out there, right? Like 50 new projects every KubeCon. They're all interesting. They're all important. There's a lot of overlap between them. There's work for us to do in figuring out which ones are going to be really more important in the tent. We did that very effectively with OpenStack. The people who kind of rode the OpenStack wave with us, you know, haven't had to abandon their OpenStacks because the stuff that we really chose to make sort of central and easy turned out to be the stuff that was the important poles in the tent, right? And we'll do exactly the same stuff here with Kubernetes. So to put that into context, I got, you know, it's been real fun to be on the booth. We've had just tons of people coming up and saying thank you for MicroKates. MicroKates is a single package of Kubernetes that works in lots of Linux distributions. It gives you like in about a minute it gives you a standard Kubernetes environment that's pure upstream that for a developer just lets you get productive, immediately figure out these new development application operations constructs. You can use it on an airplane, you can use it on a train. And of course it's compatible with all of the public cloud. So that's the second thing that we're doing. We work with Amazon, with the EKS team. I spoke at their event on Monday. We work with Azure, the EKS team. We work with Google, we work with Oracle, we work with IBM so that essentially making sure that all of them offer Ubuntu worker nodes for their Kubernetes SaaS offerings. That means that the developer who's doing stuff on their workstation with MicroKates can take those containers straight to any of the public clouds. So we're not trying to force people to use a particular solution. We're saying in all of these environments there are going to be choices people have. We want to make that as easy as possible for them. And we want to avoid unnecessary friction in that process. That kind of underlining culture is coming through in this forum as well. Yeah, so we've had many conversations about how you've always tried to make the job of that developer really easy. One of the things we always look at at the show is how much of it is the infrastructure people or the platform underneath and the developer and how much are they coming together? Anything different about this ecosystem or your customers here that you can share? Kubernetes is an application construct. You can think of it as kind of a next generation message bus, right? It's how components of an application find each other, communicate with each other, essentially coordinate with each other. And so that makes it very tightly woven into the developer experience. By contrast, you know, you can be sitting writing a Java application inside a bank and not know or care whether it's going to be running on a physical machine, a virtual machine, or an OpenStack cloud, right? Like you just don't know, you don't care, right? It's too far away from the application. Kubernetes is right there. I think that's one of the really interesting things is that it's bringing those infrastructure brains together with the application app dev brains in a very interesting way. It's going to be challenging, right? Like I wouldn't underestimate it. There are a lot of people sort of wandering around here feeling a little confused, but that's okay. You know what I mean? The stuff shakes out. So something that's been a recurring theme here has been the idea of going in a multi-cloud direction where people are talking about wanting to build workloads that they can seamlessly deploy across different providers. People talk about that periodically as a strategic goal but I'm not seeing people do it very often in the real world. You're much better positioned than a lot of us to see that. Is that something you're seeing people moving towards as an adoption? Well, yes, because we work with all of the major public clouds to optimize Ubuntu there in a way that I don't think any other Linux does, right? So you get an optimized Amazon Ubuntu on Amazon. You get an optimized Azure Ubuntu on Azure. Going very deep in the Amazon ecosystem, most of my customers are using Ubuntu far ahead of anything else out there. And it's the right answer for what they're doing. That's right. It gives them essentially the best of what Amazon's offering. It still gives them the ability to feel like if they want to go somewhere else, they can. And that actually works well for Amazon, right? In the early days, I think there was a little tension between us and the cloud guys, sort of because they were saying, look, if people use Ubuntu, then they could go somewhere else. Yes, but in a sense that makes them more likely to be relaxed about starting wherever they choose to start. So we don't advise enterprises as to which cloud to use, right? We advise them to engage with those clouds and figure out their differences. They are different. Amazon's really good at some things that are different to what Microsoft is good at. Oracle is really good at some things which are different too. And what we're starting to see is a level of maturity in the sort of enterprise governance process. They know they want to work with multiple clouds. They initially thought that was a straight kind of commodity exchange competition thing. They now realize that it's a bit richer than that, that there are actually business reasons to have deeper relationships with particular clouds based on what those clouds are prioritizing and what they're prioritizing, right? So we're not going to say you should use this cloud, you should use that cloud. Obviously we can draw a distinction between the clouds where we're deeply engaged and the clouds where you just don't have the benefit of that. But more importantly we can say, here are the set of practices that you can adopt internally that will give you comfort that you're getting the best out of those clouds, the ones that you've chosen. And you have the portability that you really need. The key turns out to be enabling your developers to use multiple clouds and challenging the developers to do different phases of the development life cycle on different clouds. So develop on your private cloud or your workstation, use microcades for example. Do tests on one cloud, do staging and production on a different cloud, right? And so now you already know that that whole seamless ecosystem works. If you want to go use a high value proprietary function effectively on a cloud, that's a business decision and it's not a bad business decision. You know, there's some spectacular capabilities from Amazon that are unique to Amazon or from Microsoft that are unique or from Oracle that are unique to Oracle, right? They're spectacular. Those are business decisions to use them. There's other stuff that effectively you can give yourself optionality on. I wouldn't be black and white about that. I'd make smart, put yourself in a position to make smart choices. And our best customers are getting that, right? PayPal, they're operating on Ubuntu in a very sophisticated way across multiple public clouds and private infrastructure. All right, so Mark, we're five years into Kubernetes now. We've seen adoption grow. People feel there's a certain level of maturity here. There's always that concern that we've reached that peak and we're about to fall off the cliff. What do we need to worry about? What does the ecosystem need to do to make sure we continue along the stability and security that customers are looking for? Look, there will be an overshoot regardless. I don't think there's any sort of leadership or governance approach that could avoid that. It's a little bit like, if your stock is going crazy, on the one hand, you're kind of happy. On the other hand, if you feel it's overvalued, it's a difficult sort of thing to say. You can say, guys, we're humans too. We've got our challenges to work through and no one likes volatility, but to a certain extent, there's always speculation and overshoot and over-enthusiasm and hype, right? Kubernetes will overshoot, right?  My job, our job is very sort of calmly to sort of sort of sort through the week from the chart. Make sure that it's possible for people to experiment with everything, but that the stuff that we think has legs, effectively, is nicely integrated for people that they have that for the long term. They won't regret things. We have a good track record of doing that, right? We've done it in the Linux desktop. We've done it in, we did it in OpenStack. We're doing it on public cloud. We've done it here in the cloud native world. I'd say things like AI are going in the same direction. Again, tons of complexity, tons of new options. Helping people effectively navigate through that is what we do very well. Yeah, one of the questions that I start to see as well as we look at the way that these technologies continue to evolve has been that for better or worse, when developers are writing applications now and even infrastructure people are working with a lot of the things that they care about, what operating system, let alone what distribution they're using is increasingly slipping beneath the waves. People don't think about that as a primary area of focus anymore. And as, I guess, one of the foundational Linux vendors in this space, how are you seeing that evolving? And how does Canonical remain relevant in a world where suddenly people in a serverless future, I just throw some code over somewhere else and it runs is the limit where most companies get involved? Yes, of course we can point to the servers, right? And on the servers we can point to the operating systems and inside the containers we can point to the operating systems and underneath the serverless code we can point to the language runtimes, right? So the reality is that those things matter less and less to the developer. Yes. They still matter to the institution, right? And so I'm super comfortable with the language that says, you know, the OS doesn't matter. What it means is that that whole tangle is getting professionalized and abstracted, but to be confident in the abstractions someone needs to do a lot of work, right? So I know how much work we do with Google, with Amazon, with Microsoft, with Oracle, with IBM to make sure that nobody else has to feel like the OS matters, right? That that stuff essentially just works. You can extend that out to what we do with VMware, what we do essentially on bare metal, what we do on developer workstations, what we do with the Windows crowd effectively and Windows subsystem for Linux so that developers really can just build on Windows subsystem for Linux Ubuntu effectively and ship that container straight to Amazon EKS and have it just work, right?  Like it's containers are all kind of a fiction. The fiction breaks if those pieces don't line up. So being Ubuntu effectively and being able to be consistent in all of those places is a ton of work to enable it not to matter for anybody upstairs, right? That's allowing developers to go faster. It's allowing them to be more productive. It's allowing them to be more heroic and it's allowing the people who do worry about the middleware to have sort of far fewer nights scratching their heads as to, you know, why didn't this version of this library tie up to that driver with that kernel, right? All of those things are still there, right? When you drop that container onto Amazon, we've got to connect the GPGPU in the hardware through the hypervisor to the guest OS up into the container, right? And there's code getting injected all the way up. It's only the fact that we can typically have Ubuntu everywhere there that essentially allows those pieces to line up without, you know, some spectacular fireworks. It satisfies me when people say they don't have to worry about that. It's a victory condition. All right, Mark, want to give you the final word. What should we be looking for from Canonical, you know, through the rest of the year? So for us, this has been a big year in terms of visibility in the enterprise. In terms of penetration, Ubuntu is everywhere in the Fortune 500, everywhere in the global 2000. What's changed this year is the CIO suddenly is like seeing Ubuntu on their desk for two reasons. One is IBM Red Hat, right? The CIO suddenly wants to know, okay, what does this mean? What else are we running? Where else can we get 24 seven SLAs? Where else can we get long-term commitments to Linux and so on? And the fact is Ubuntu is already in the building. So that's one sort of easy connect. The other thing is there's sort of really interesting new workloads that Ubuntu leads in the enterprise. Obviously, the container story, the multi-cloud story. Edge, right? It's not just telcos. Every retailer, every logistics company, anybody that has kind of physical distribution is now trying to say, well, how can I automate compute in my sort of physical world, effectively? So Edge is super interesting. And IoT beyond that, like people transforming businesses through taking a Raspberry Pi with Ubuntu and putting a snap on it is really, really cool. Which of those is going to sort of drive the biggest headlines or the scariest headlines? Like I can't tell you. We're just trying to take care of security performance and operations across all of them. All right, well, Mark Shuddleworth, always a pleasure to catch up. Thank you so much for the updates. Great to see you. All right, for Corey Quinn, I'm Stu Miniman. We'll be back with lots more coverage here from KubeCon CloudNativeCon 2019 in Barcelona, Spain. Thanks for watching theCUBE.


At this point we've got success coaches in our program who are putting our content pretty much every 24 hours, so make sure you subscribe and don't stay stuck with your business. Now if you want to reach out to me to schedule a free 15 minute call, you can do that by visiting the calendar link in the description of this video. Go on there, book your free 15 minute call, we jump on Zoom, I can ask you some questions with regards to your business, see where you're at, see where you want to get to and I can show you some actionable steps to take this week to grow and scale what you're doing, right? If you don't want to do that, you just want to send me a question, you can do that to my email, you can send all the questions to makemoneycoachingsportsatgmail.com, I make it a mission every single day to respond to all the coaches who reach out to our company. Now today I want to talk about why PE teachers make great business owners. So over the last year, we have onboarded a lot of coaches into our program. We've also connected with a lot of coaches in multiple sports and one thing that I've noticed is that some of the most successful business owners who I have spoken to have a history or have a past in PE teaching, right? They've either been a teacher or they've been a PE teacher in a school, okay? So they've worked in either a school environment or they were a PE teacher. Now I wanted to create this video because I know that this is going to be really valuable because I know a lot of PE teachers do watch our channel and a lot of them do ask us and they connect with us and they ask us, I Leo like, I'm currently in PE, I want to start my own business, how can I do it? What do I need? What qualifications? What experience? Okay, so I want to try and answer all those questions in this video and I want to try and make it short. I don't want to make it a long one. So if you are a PE teacher and you are considering jumping into the private training industry, I would recommend that it's a fantastic opportunity for you. Now I've worked as a PE teacher before in a school and I want to be completely honest and this is just something that was personal to me, but personally it wasn't something I enjoyed, okay? I'm based in the UK so working in a school I had to do a lot of the admin side of teaching which I didn't enjoy. I also had to work with really big groups, okay? Most PE teachers here in the UK work with up to 30 kids in one class. So and sometimes what I notice is sometimes depending on what school you work in, sometimes the schools don't have the correct equipment for the amount of kids you have to work with, okay? And a lot of schools don't have PE as an important subject within their school which means you kind of get left at the bottom. So there's not enough funding for new equipment. Your classes are sometimes very overcrowded with a lot of kids. Most kids don't really like physical education so they become very disruptive. For me personally, and this is just a personal experience, it wasn't something that I enjoyed. I didn't enjoy it and I can say that every single day when I went into work I hated what I was doing and to be honest with you I didn't last very long. I think I lasted a couple of months and then I quit it because I couldn't do it anymore. It was just, it was an environment that I just didn't enjoy. I didn't see any, I wasn't adding any value to the kids because of the overcrowded environment, because of the lack of equipment I was being provided from the school. And also a lot of the admin stuff which had nothing to do with what I enjoyed which was the coaching. So PTChim was not for me, but it was something that helped me to build my business.  So a few things is, number one, structure. So if you are a PT teacher then you understand that there's a curriculum that you have to follow with your students. So that means that you have to be very structured with your lessons. You have to plan your lessons out in advance. And that's fantastic because when you learn to plan your lessons, when you become a business owner you have to plan your sessions as well. So that's one skill that if you are a PT teacher you can take into your training business. Structure and stick into a school curriculum that is required.  You're coaching them through that curriculum. So how to build and how to follow curriculum is one of the skills that will make you a fantastic business owner. Second one is the administrative side to the job. With PT teaching there's a lot of forms, a lot of paperwork that you have to do and that is a skill in itself. Because if you have 30 kids in a class you have to make sure that everything is organised. So all documents are in alphabetical order. You've got to make sure that all the kids complete their homework. You have to make sure that you sign the homework off, that you mark the homework. All of that requires good time management. It also requires a lot of organisation from your end. Because if you've got a lot of students then you have to make sure that your time is valuable and you're using your time wisely to make sure that you're marking all of your students' homework and tasks that you set them. This is a transferrable skill because when it gets to business it's the same principle and it's the same concept. Because if you have 50 to 100 clients that you're working with and you're setting them homework on a weekly basis or you have to go out and watch them play in their matches and you have to provide a report for them. All of this is organisation and time management. And this is why PT teachers are really really good at this aspect of business. Because when they're working in schools they're used to it. They have to be at a lesson at this time. They have to make sure that all their students are dressed by this time. They have to make sure that the session runs until this time. So everything is structured and everything is organised. And they have to make sure that all the paperwork is in order so that students can get their grades or whatever it is that they you have to fill out. And that is the same as in business. So in business you have to make sure that your clients all have contract signed. You've got to make sure that their payment system is in place. You've got to make sure that you have time to get on sales calls with parents. So the skills are transferrable. And that's why I think PT teachers do make really good business owners because they're used to working in higher numbers. And they're used to having a lot of paperwork that they have to then complete. And this is the same in business. Now the next one is, PT teachers are used to working with large groups. So if you start your own training business and you want to go into the camps or clinics environment, you want to start your camps or clinics training.  Then being a PE teacher gives you that advantage, right? Because if you're, for example, like here in the UK, where most PE teachers have to work with up to 30 students at once, right, if you're used to working in big groups, then ultimately when you start to run camps and clinics, then it's easy, right? It becomes very easy, it becomes very manageable. And you know how to do it, okay? Something I see with a lot of coaches is that most coaches struggle with big groups. All right, most coaches don't know how to manage big, big groups, whether that be in soccer, whether that be in basketball, whether that be in baseball, right? Most coaches don't know how to manage large groups such as in camps or clinics, okay? PE teachers have that advantage, okay? Because they're used to working with large groups, they're used to working with kids of different levels, okay? And when you run a camp or clinic, it's exactly that, right? You're going to have large groups, you're going to have kids at different levels, different abilities, okay? You're going to be working with boys, girls, right? If it's a mixed camp. So being a PE teacher gives you that experience in that environment, working with large groups, working with different abilities, and essentially that experience, if you take it into business, you can run really successful camps and clinics, okay? And you will be very comfortable running, you know, those type of camps or clinics of that size because you're used to doing it with your PE lessons, okay? So I hope this helps. I hope this gives you a little bit of an insight into the skills and qualities that PE teachers have that they can then take into business, right?  Contact me, get in contact with me. So visit the kindly link in the description below, okay? And we can book a free 15 to 20 minute call, jump on Zoom. I can answer any questions that you might have whether you're in the UK, whether you're in the US or wherever you are in the world, right? I speak to every single coach that reaches out to me. Okay, so it doesn't matter where you are in the world, okay, the principles of business are all the same, okay? So get in contact with me, love to connect with you. And if you don't want to book a Zoom call, then just send me an email to makemoneycoachingsportsatgmail.com, okay? Thank you for watching and I'll see you on the next video.


Hey guys, what is up? Welcome to my channel. For today's video, I'm going to be reviewing the two newest additions to the Vizier Art Palette line. We have the Midsommar Palette and the Solstice Palette. I have a tutorial using both of these palettes today. I'm doing some swatch comparisons with other palettes in the Vizier Art line. And then of course, giving you my overall thoughts on these. So if you would like to see that, then just keep watching. So these aren't super new, so I was very, very close to not reviewing these. But as you guys know, I have a very large Vizier Art collection and I know a lot of you look to me to do Vizier Art reviews. So I'm sorry it's a little bit late, but it is finally here. Just so you know, Vizier Art did send these to me. They did come in a little bit later, which is why this video is a little bit later. Fun fact, Vizier Art was actually, I think, one of the very first brands that was like really big in my eyes, one of my favorite brands to send me products. So I'm eternally grateful to Vizier Art for seeing my worth at such a small channel. Yeah, so it's always so exciting to receive a PR package from them. Anyways, let's talk about the individual palettes themselves. So like I said, these are available. You can get them on the Vizier Art site, though it looks like they are sold out last I checked. Beautylish as well. And then I always suggest MuseBD Pro, especially right now.  So I would get these now if you want it. But the deal is if you buy any two of the Petite Pro palettes, you get an ESOM G29 free, but the catch is you get that free brush and any two Petite Pros that you want for $48. Now, they do have a bunch of different colors in these little Petite Pro palettes, but particularly if you want these two, this is the best deal you can get. $48 for both of these and a high quality brush. I'm putting some urgency on it because this is one of the best deals that you can get on Vizier Art. Individually, these are going to run you at $30 a piece. So if you get both at $60 normally, but then with this deal, you get it for $48 and a really high quality brush. I do have an affiliated link down below. If you want to shop the MuseBD Pro sale, I always suggest getting Vizier Art during that sale. Anyways, those are just the places you can get it, $30 each. So let's just get straight into it. If you don't know what the Petite Pros are or how the packaging works, basically it's a typical Vizier Art fashion. It's kind of like a little mini easel is how they do it so you can fold it any which way that you want. And they're so tiny about the size of a credit card. They're perfect for travel. I love the Petite Pros for that reason. These are the palettes I bring with me if I just want to throw something in my purse or if I'm going away for the weekend and I'm really trying to minimize the amount of space that I'm packing. These are some of the best because inside they do pack eight shadows and palettes I feel like are always really well thought out and they have everything you need. I do do swatch comparisons later on in this video and a lot of the reasons why sometimes the shades are very similar to other shades in palette is because these palettes always contain the shades you need to create a full look which is a light cream shade, a deepening shade. Normally chocolate is what they do. It's not in this palette but they'll normally have a defining shade, a light shimmery kind of champagne peachy shade. So that is why you will find a lot of dupes within these little edit palettes but the beauty of them are the fact that they are so tiny and they have every kind of shade that you need. And then also the last thing about the palette that is great besides the mirror that you get is each of these shades are interchangeable so you can just easily pull them out. They are magnetic. You can mix and match with the other petite pros and they have the edit which is I believe 12 shades around there that are also the same size. So these palettes can be very customizable. So let's take a deeper look into each of the palettes. We'll start off with the Solstice palette as a very nice peach cover here and then when you open it up you have the eight shades. You are going to get four mattes in here and then four shimmer shades. One of the shimmer shades is a duo chrome. The second shade right here has almost more of a celestial finish. There's no glitter in it but it is noticeably more glittery and has a multi-dimensional finish on the eye which you will learn about in the tutorial. And the other two are your traditional shimmer shades. Just reading the nice little card that they sent me here. This has a selection of all new earthbound tones. It's a bliss of rich sun-drenched colors and I think this palette is just beautiful. Now initially looking at it especially online I was pretty underwhelmed by it but now that I have it in my hands it actually it's not as warm as I thought it was going to be especially when comparing it to the other palettes that I have. Those are really warm. This has almost a more cooler toned peachy undertone to them which makes this palette more unique. It's the same thing with both of these palettes. They look underwhelming but their undertones are so different from what they already have in their existing line and it's really special on the eyes. With this palette in particular I think it's very special on the eyes because it's very muted. You do have this really cool duochrome shade right here. This one is like a violet to light blue. There also is a duochrome shade in the mid-summer. I do want to compare them for you so that you can see they're very very similar. So this is the mid-summer one. This one is a solstice. That is one thing. If you get both the duochromes that they have are very similar. You get a beautiful array of different finishes here. I really liked this one a lot more than I thought it would and I was underwhelmed by it at first but on the eyes it is gorgeous. Taking a quick look into the mid-summer palette. Just so you know the inspiration behind it is enchanting mid-summer evenings. It's supposed to be very ethereal and fairy-like. This one has a bit more mattes. You have six mattes. One of them is one of those matte shades where they have very subtle glitter particles in there but those kind of rub away and then you have two shimmers and one of the shimmers is a duochrome. So this one is more matte. This one obviously is the more cool-toned mauve one. This is normally my typical kind of color story that I absolutely love. I thought that this is one that I would love more. When I show you the tutorials you'll see a deeper look into each of the palettes but I do think I prefer the solstice palette. But this one is still gorgeous. I do think kind of the fault in this palette could be that there's just too many mid-tone transition shades. There's not a lot of depth in this particular palette. These kind of run very similar on the eyelid. I do love the pops in here. I think these pops make all of the difference. I mostly use the pop shades for this look and I absolutely love it. The shimmer shades are gorgeous and the quality in here is fantastic. I just am missing some depth in here. You have this one which is the deepest shade and I have it basically everywhere and you can see it's just not that deep. So I do think if you have a medium to deeper complexion this can be a little bit harder to work with especially the shades right here are gonna look very similar on the eye. But I do think the mid-summer palette has a lot more depth and I do think the shades in here each have more of a purpose in the palette whereas here they're kind of very close to each other. So I'm gonna show you the look first that I did with the solstice palette. What I want you to pay attention to is how different each of these shades look on the eye and I just love the look. So let's get into that. So this look is going to be with the solstice palette. I'm gonna start off with this creamy peach shade right here. This is going to be applied right underneath the brow bone. I love how usually they'll incorporate a simple cream shade like this. I like to lay it down right there. We're gonna work our way down this way to build the gradient. So we're starting off with this light peach shade. If you have a skin tone deeper than mine this might struggle to show up on your eyelid for me and those who are more fair than me as you can see it does add a light warmth to the eye. Next we're going in with this warm almost mauvey orange. It's a very unique shade. This is when the color and depth really begins to be brought into my eye. So I'm starting it off really in the outer corner and then whatever is left over I'm bringing it into the crease and then also gonna run that just along the lower lash line. With an even smaller brush we're going into the chocolate shade. Dark browns for me are an essential color and I love that Vizier almost always has a dark brown shade in all of their palettes. It's annoying when I do swatch comparisons though because I'm like oh yeah this is a dupe but for me it's just a color that I reach for in every single look almost. So I'm applying this mostly on the outer corner of the eye blending it into my lash line to have a little bit of depth there and we're gonna slowly work this out. It's working out very well for me. This is a nice quality deep brown without being too deep it's buildable. With my finger we're going into this bronzy shade. This is going to keep the depth in the outer part of the lid and the shift on it is more orangey bronze which really pulls nice warmth into this look. Next we're going into this shade. Now this isn't as pigmented as it may seem it more so I would say has a pretty sheer base to it and this is kind of one of those shades so it's more so about the dimension that it brings to the eye almost like a celestial shade. It's really stunning so I'm focusing the product on the inner half and then I'm taking whatever's left over and bringing it over because it does have such a gorgeous shine. Lastly I'm going in with this peachy champagne color. This is really stunning and very flattering on the eye. I'm just brightening up and lifting the eye. So this is just the shadow I'm gonna do liner and lashes so you can really see the final look. And with lashes and everything here is what the Solstice palette looks like. Very self very pretty just hints of warmth. I think it's so stunning. I ended up really liking this palette more than I thought I would. Like I said, I think what's really special about these is how they look on the eye because the undertones are more unique. Compared to when you just look at it and it is underwhelming. So the next tutorial we are going to go into is the mid-summer palette. I really like this palette because I love the tones in here. These are my absolute favorite tones. I wish we could have replaced one or two of the transition shades for maybe some more shimmer or something a little bit more fun but it is a really soft romantic palette and I really do love the look that I got. So let's get into it. We are gonna jump into the mid-summer palette. I'm going to start off with my cream shade. This one has more of a pinky base compared to the Solstice palette. Next I'm going to go into this shade right here. This is going to be the transition color. We're going to take the pink shade right here. I really wanted the pink to show it through and kind of just bring some vibrancy to this look because this palette can be very toned down but if you incorporate some pink that's what's going to help make this palette stand out more and I want to focus that color on the lower lash line. Next we're going to take the shade right here. This has the most depth in the palette but I do find that it doesn't add a lot of depth so I don't think this palette in particular is going to be very deep skin tone friendly. There are little glitters running throughout it. If you apply it like I do and kind of blend it out you will find that the shimmers fly away. Make sure you blend everything out good. I've had to play with at least one of the duo chromes so we're going to use the one in this one. This one has a fun blue twist to it. Now it's not a really strong duo chrome. You'll see that this is more of a sheer application of color but it is more so about the finish and the gleam when the light hits which there's something to be said about these formulas as well which are very nice and just soft which is a general theme of these palettes. You see how pretty that is when the light hits. Finally we're taking the lightest shade and you know the drill with this but this would be really pretty all over the eyelid if you just play with the crease colors as well be a really nice soft brightening look. Alright so I'm going to finish line your lashes and I'll show you the final look. Now here is the final look for the mid-summer palette. My blush doesn't match because I'm still wearing it from the first look but I did change the lip and I really love this look. You guys know I love these tones and this is such a fun nice soft look. I know a lot of you also like the cooler tone purples so this one is still definitely fun to have. The thing about these palettes is that they are very soft. If you don't like a soft eye you probably don't need these palettes. These are very different than what is out on the market now. The type of palettes or makeup trends that are popular have to do with more pups, more vibrant colors and it's all about pigmentation. You're not going to get that with these palettes.  These are made for people who really prefer a soft look. I would describe both of these palettes as very romantic. I would suggest solstice of course if you like a little bit more warm bronzy looks and then if you like the more mauvey cool tone looks you have mid-summer even when I looked at these online. I didn't think that they looked too different from each other but they are two complete different palettes on the eyelid you guys. And I'm standing out for these palettes because they are just the type of palettes that look bleh in the pan but they are so gorgeous, flattering, soft, romantic on the eye and I really, really do like these. Now of course when I did look at them online I was like hmm these kind of look like some palettes that they already have. I did do a little comparison section for you guys so let's get into that. All right you guys so the first pod that I wanted to compare to the mid-summer is the Paris edit. Now the Paris edit is one of my favorites of the large edit palettes and you can see it's a very close color story so if you're into these cool tone kind of color stories you're really going to like this one especially if you liked this one. This one obviously has more shade. It was hard to pair shade to shade because this one has more mattes than this one has. So like this one has a lot of cool tone neutral kind of mattes whereas this one just doesn't have that many transition shades. There's a lot more shimmer. I did swatch to the closest shades I could find. So the bottom here is the mid-summer palette and these are the closest I could find in the Paris edit. I would say it more so has a similar color story but I really couldn't find dupe for dupe with maybe two of the lightest shades and you can see nothing really is identical. I don't think you need both but know if you have both they're not going to dupe one over the other and they just have different things to offer if you ask me. Like the mid-summer just has more transition shades of really for a more simple eye look whereas you're getting a little bit more of a full look more options with the Paris edit. I also did want to take a look into the Rose edit palette another one of the bigger ones. Honestly, I wouldn't say these are comparable. I didn't even swatch them side by side. There are maybe a couple of shades that are similar but those are the shades that you're going to find in every palette. You know, like a light shimmery color a mid-tone transition color but for the most part I don't really find these to be very comparable. So I definitely thought Solstice had some similarities to the Apricotine palette. Even just looking at them side by side you can tell they are kind of very closely related. Apricotine definitely has more pops of oranges that just can't be found in the Solstice palette. So down here is Solstice. Here are the comparable shades in the Apricotine. Definitely these are closer than anything that I could find to the mid-summer palette. You have very similar deep dark brown and maybe some of the transition shades could translate similar. However, these ones are just more peachy orange. Not exactly the same but definitely in the same family if you know what I'm saying. I mean, you can take a look and see what you think if it would be worth getting but the only dupe for dupe I would say is a dark brown and I just use dark brown so much that that's okay with me. Just different tones really. This one has a little bit more pinky mauveless to it. I also took a look compared to the spritz. The spritz has more pops in there as well. They have similar transition shades that would translate almost very close on the eyelid but I don't think these are really that close. This one on the eye really pulls so much more neutral mauve that these palettes just can't replicate and then also for comparison's sake, take a look at the warm edit. Again, maybe like these two shades appear very kind of normal shades for any palette are going to be close but this one it's just more muted. That's all I have for comparisons of the busy art shades. So my final thoughts to finish up these videos. I mean, these are very good palettes. They are very great quality. I do get asked a lot of times if these are the same formula as the regular 12 pan palettes. I don't think they are at first I did but the longer amount of time that I've owe my busy art palettes those 12 pan full side palettes are very very special but they're very very pricey. These aren't quite as good as that phenomenal formula that they have but these are very very good and I hope that you can see in the tutorial how easy they were to blend. So these are still a fantastic representation of busy art any of these in the little mini palettes these particular color stories do I think you need to run out and grab them? I don't think so but if these have a color story that you're interested in I do recommend them. I think they are very pretty. They're probably not my favorite color stories that they have like they just came out with a petite pro with Shu Shu and you can see how fun that was. So I don't think these are the first ones that I grabbed for but when I put them on the eye I really really like them so I don't think you're going to be let down if you like these color stories. So that is all I have for today's video. I hope you guys enjoyed it. If you aren't subscribed to my channel already I would love it if you would consider taking the time to do so and I will see you guys in the next one. I guess have a good one.


Every day versus every day, what's the difference? The two expressions every day and every day, are frequently used in English but often confused. Take a look at the below infographic to find out the difference. Every day, one word, always used before a noun. Meaning, used or seen regularly, ordinary. Example sentences, social media has become part of everyday life. Everyday crime is a serious issue in some cities. These are my everyday shoes. They're very comfortable. Everyday, two words, meaning, each day. Example sentences, I drink coffee every day.  People all over the world check Facebook every day. Please subscribe by clicking that button down here and click on any of the videos here on the left for more interesting teaching tips for getting certified to teach English abroad and online.