I think we're ready to go, so good morning and welcome to all of you to this session. On the new climate context, I'm Linda Yu, I'm the BBC's chief business correspondent and presenter on BBC News. It's my pleasure to host this session, which is going to look at how the renewed attention on climate change, how that's changing as the US, the EU and China and other nations look again at what could happen in the future and where businesses could become involved. And I have just a superb panel here with me. So the structure of the panel is that I am going to ask the panelists initially to give their perspective on this context. And we will have a discussion around some of the key issues about what kind of global framework might emerge in the next year. We'll have a discussion about the role of the private sector and some of the debates around the climate change agenda. And then there will also be a chance for you to pose questions in a Q&A in the second half of the panel. So we'll come around and get your perspective on the issue as well. This session is being live-streamed and there will also be a chance to take questions from the online audience. The hashtag for this session is climate, hashtag climate context. In Chinese, it's hashtag qi hou zheng shi huan jing. So please, for those of you watching online, do send in your questions and we'll try to get those in as well. So without further ado, let me introduce my superb panel and then we'll hear from each of them in turn. I have on the stage with me Mr. Xie Zhenhua. He's the vice chairman of the National Development and Reform Commission of the People's Republic of China. I also have with me Rasmus Helvick-Petersen. He's the minister of climate, energy, and building of Denmark. Also, we have Louis Alberto Moreno. He's the president of the Inter-American Development Bank. And we have Mr. Faiki Sabesma. He's the chief executive officer and chairman of the managing board of Royal DSM of the Netherlands. And we have Mark Haremma. He's the co-founder of New Light Technologies. So let me start off by asking Mr. Xie to open the session with some comments about how China views the climate change agenda. The session is, obviously, many already have your headsets. They're going to be simultaneously translated. So please, Mr. Xie, give us a speech. Good morning. I'm very pleased to be able to have this opportunity to have exchanges with you on climate change and the roles of businesses. As the chief representative for the Chinese government on climate change, I have taken part in the meeting of the Conference of Parties for eight years. This is a multilateral process. All responsible governments and business people need to take active part in this process. And we can't only keep talking about climate change. The government of China ties climate change to the development of China and the development of ecological civilization. It is inherent requirement of our efforts. So we have taken active actions. Like many other countries, we have taken measures to improve energy efficiency, to develop sustainable energy, and to encourage carbon exchanges so that we can control the emission of greenhouse gases and to respond to climate change. We have committed to 20-20 goals, that is, a goal that we are working actively towards to meet our commitments. And we have taken effective measures, for example, the improvements of energy efficiency. We have taken many measures according to World Bank estimates. From 1990 to 2010, we have saved 58 percent of world energy savings. We are developing sustainable renewable energies. We have installed 24 percent of world capacity of power generation through renewable energies. And when it comes to hydropower, from 2005 to 2013, we have doubled capacity. Wind, we have increased it by 60 times. Photovoltec, 280 times. So I think when it comes to responding to climate change, China hasn't just expressed its positive attitude, but we have taken concrete actions and we have seen real results. Based on the assessment of some international organizations, by 2020, the world collectively have committed to actions to have developing world to take account for 65 percent of the effects and 35 only by developing developed countries. When it comes to after 2020, what China is China will do, I have, we have heard from Premier Li Keqiang yesterday. He spoke at the plenary. He discussed the actions China will take after 2020. I'm not going to repeat his words. I will be happy to answer your questions later on climate change. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. On what's happening with the EU in terms of its ambitions for climate change. Certainly. Thank you. It's a pleasure being here. Obviously, Denmark has been actively involved and very ambitious when it comes to climate issues for a long time. And we want to emulate some of our experiences on a European level. What we have seen is that creating a very stable political framework with a very long perspective has worked very well for Denmark. We've come very far. And these very long term political frames around businesses has helped them to create the solutions we need to combat climate change. So we believe firmly that when there is the stable framework surrounding businesses and the transition from black energy to green, then you'll get a lot of results. We're now working on the EU 2030 objectives. But Denmark is pushing for already now stating that we want 40% reduction of emissions compared to 90. And we want a set target for energy efficiency, et cetera, et cetera. Because we believe that when you have a long time frame where you know what the objective is, then that is what is needed to make business decisions, to make investment decisions by businesses. So it's simply a matter of what we've seen working for us. That's what we want to implement in the EU with this very ambitious set of targets. And we're actually quite optimistic of getting there prior to the next round of climate negotiations. Thank you very much indeed. Louis, could you share with us the Latin American perspective and perhaps touch a little bit also on the challenges of financing? Well, thank you very much. And I'd like to perhaps build on the words that the vice chairman, Xi, was mentioning. He was referring to the urgency to come together as the world will have to. Not only in this month, when later in the month the Secretary General of the United Nations will have a meeting of all the heads to talk precisely about climate change. Also later this year, a committee of the parties will meet in Peru. And this is very important because to Latin America, we are a region where, for instance, 70% of the electricity consumed in South America comes from renewable sources. We represent about 10% in six countries, Brazil, Venezuela, Colombia, Peru, among others, Mexico, represent 10% of the landmass of the world and have 70% of the world's biodiversity and 50% of the rainforest. So in essence, the storage of carbon is in Latin America. And the destruction and all these challenges that we're seeing on climate have come from outside of Latin America. And therefore, without getting into a North-South debate, we've had to take on and tackle many of these issues because the results of climate change are evident for everybody. They're evident to a farmer in the north of Mexico that is seeing tremendous droughts or to a farmer in Venezuela that two years ago saw huge floods. And these changes in fishing and all the kinds of impacts that come as a result of climate change have begun to force governments to look at this in a very serious way. We're in essence a financial institution. About 22% of our total lending is devoted towards climate change related issues. We work very closely with, for instance, the government of Denmark in doing what they have done, which is a very interesting initiative, so-called 4G, which basically focuses on the responses that the private sector can do in terms of how it can begin to clean its own energy matrix through what they do in their own companies and across their supply chains. So we've very much encouraged and done a variety of programs precisely around this. But I would go back to the words of Vice Chairman and say that this is something that the world needs to act. And all the parties have to come to the table. The meeting in Peru, the Committee of the Parties this year, but more importantly in Paris next year, there has to be an agreement. And I think the sense of urgency is, I think, really, if anything, the most important thing right now. Thank you very much indeed. Faiki, could I get you to address some of the role the private sector might be able to play in building on what the visitors said? Thanks. Let me first go back to the Copenhagen climate consensus. And I don't know who of you follow that, but it is scary if you see the consensus of the major important scientists in the world about climate change. 10 years ago, there were still a lot of skeptical people. But if you see slowly, and if you follow the website of it, the consensus of most leading and most important scientists, they all agree climate change is there. Climate change is mainly coming from greenhouse gas emissions and it is mainly mankind induced. OK, if that is the consensus, if that is the situation, we need to act. And I think one of the most important things I had of us is the climate conference which we have in 2015 in Paris. I think the United Nations, a lot of countries, including the United States, is pushing very much in 2015 to come to an agreement globally of how to combat and how to address it. That includes, of course, target setting, very important. Here, all parts of the world differ a little bit of opinion. We just heard from the Danish minister, situation in Europe, pushing very much for target setting. Different areas in the world look slightly different to that. But next to target setting, we will discuss also carbon pricing and hopefully a more stable carbon price, because one of the problems in carbon trading, especially in Europe, is the fluctuation of the price and it does not help investments, it does not help the private sector, it does not help the whole move the issue forward. But next to that, and coming to the role of the private sector, I mean, modern Earth is not only helped by target setting and having good intentions, but real innovations to change things. So here you see that the private and the public sector, and you mentioned that also those, need to work together. That is the only solution. The innovations are mainly in hand of the private sector. So here we come also that it is an opportunity for the private sector, if you are new energies and all kinds of things. But it is also a responsibility of the private sector. And the private sector need to take up some public responsibilities in order to take care that next generations also have good life on this planet. This is a little bit of a blurred model because in the past it was so easy. We had the public sector who took care of all of us together. We had the private sector take care of the economy and we had international institutions taking care of the whole world. And this becomes a more blurred model. And I'm advocating also that the private sector stands up and takes the lead here. Partly independent of what is happening in the public sector and the negotiations, you cannot hide yourself in the private sector behind the lesser progress sometimes made in the public debate. However, at the end of today I believe the solution is a good collaboration between the private and the public sector. A few examples, if you look to the potential of solar, it's enormous and we are just in the beginning of the black T-fort in terms of solar. The potential we can still get out of it is so huge that we need a collaboration here. But let me give you another example of second generation biofuels. Royal DSM, my company just opened the first big scale agricultural waste conversion into biofuels in the United States. Technology developed in Europe, exploited in the United States. Why? Because the United States is providing the regulatory framework that we can exploit that technology. And therefore we don't do that in Europe at this very moment. So here you see that sometimes innovations are there but we need to help also of the public sector in order to make them come true. Thank you very much indeed. Mark, let me give you a chance to tell us a little bit about what your company is doing on the innovative front. Sure, absolutely. First, thank you for the opportunity to be here. So my name is Mark Haram, I'm the CEO of New Light Technologies and what New Light does is we take carbon emissions and we turn them into plastic. So to give you a little bit of context as far as what we've grown up in, 20 years ago there was a movie called The American President came out, I think it was in 1994 around then. And sort of the big concluding scene is where the president finally says this is what we're gonna do about climate change. Well this is back in the early 90s. So the urgency to do something about climate change has actually been there for quite a bit of time. The problem has been in the US that two sides can't really agree on how to address it. I think the science has gotten to the point where everyone knows you put more heat trapping gas into the air, the air heats up, that has consequences. What's been missing however is some solution that bridges the gap between people who say this is something we need to address and people who say don't tell me that I can't put more carbon into the air to grow my business. And so about 10 years ago I came across a newspaper article about carbon emissions and the sort of light bulb that went off was why can't we use that carbon to make stuff? And second was if that stuff that we made from carbon emissions could actually out compete on price you could in theory have a market driven solution to capturing carbon and combating climate change. So after about a decade of work we finally scaled up to commercial scale last year, in August of last year. And we're now turning carbon emissions, combining them with air and turning them into plastic. So we launched this with Sprint back in May. So this phone case is actually over 50% captured air and carbon emissions. And what's really, really exciting about this product is it's actually less expensive than its alternative which will be made from fossil fuels. So what gets me very excited is that in this product and the bags launched by Dell, the chairs launched by KI we have products that are out competing on price and on a net basis sequestering carbon. What that means is while everyone in the US can continue to debate what we should do about it you now have industry that's taking it into their own hands and sequestering carbon. So that's very exciting to us and something that we look forward to talking more about. Thank you very much. Rasmus, you wanted to jump in actually. Yes, I did. Let me bring you back in. Well, there was a comment on some of the stuff that you said Fiji, which says, first of all, you need stable carbon pricing. I think that's very important as a framework surrounding this development. That will also be very much to your advantage with the business you're developing if the carbon price was stable and on a high enough level really to spark some business. But I believe very much that the innovations we need to get where we want to go will come from the private sector as soon as we provide the stable framework and the high carbon price. I have absolutely no doubt in that and we see it happening all the time. We get wonderful technical solutions from the private sector. It's not a thing we've planned. It's not a thing we've asked for. We've simply delivered the framework and here you go. So that's very much what we need to do as regulators. That's not to pinpoint exactly which developments we want, but simply to create the stable framework and the stable carbon price. And then the businesses will do that bit. Thank you. Thank you very much. Vice Minister Xie, do you want to say something? I'd like to ask Minister Peterson, just now you talk about the stable carbon price. But the carbon market in the EU is not stable at all. In the past, every times of carbon is a dozens of euro and now the price has dropped to about three euro. The reason, what is the reason when I had dialogue with the ministers from 28 member countries of EU, my view is that you have a very low carbon market because of the ineffective emission reduction efforts. And also you have allocated too much quota to the businesses. As a result, the businesses have no incentive to reduce the emission. That's why the market for carbon price is very low. Those of you. Thank you. About the instability of the carbon market, I think Faiki, did you just want to jump in before Rasmus replied? I saw you. Yeah, I think Mr. Xie is very correct in his comments when the carbon pricing was introduced in Europe, we were talking about 30, 40 per tonne and today it dropped to three. First of all, that enormous fluctuation does not help at all because the private sector does not know on what scenario to base their future investments on. So the whole fluctuation is not of help. The fluctuation is partly coming from the whole regulation that the market is totally freed up for trading in carbon and are even already sure to decrease of derivatives of carbon trading. And I'm advocating for a much more market control of the carbon pricing because the carbon should not be a new toy in the hands of the financial world to speculate and to trade with but it was meant to reduce the carbon emissions. And that means that the carbon trading need to be much more controlled by the European government and that not can be, and I'm from the private sector and I'm advocating here to limit the freedom of the private sector in this one. All right, Rasmus. Thank you, Mr. President. Okay, vice minister Xie. I totally agree with you. Just now several representatives from the businesses talked about the stability of the carbon market. I think this has a direct relation with the progress of the multilateral negotiation process. If every country and the whole process of the climate change negotiation can establish a very stable and long-term emission reduction targets and accordingly the governments can provide incentives, then the businesses can see the prospects for the development of the carbon market. Therefore, they would be motivated to make investment and thereby we can reduce, we can make a tender goal of emission reduction but the problem is the effort is not strong enough. This is one of the main deficiencies. Rasmus, I better let you have a chance to answer by now. Well, I can only say that I'm guilty as charged. Obviously, the carbon market in the European Union is not working the way we intended. I also agree very much with that and it is a question that needs to be solved politically which is a point we take very seriously from the Danish government and we want to fix the European carbon markets because it's a wonderful tool, it's deficient right now and we need to fix it. So, very much guilty as charged and I'll do my best. Can I ask you, Mr. Chair? You talked about the importance of the stability of the market. Do you support an international market for carbon? Well, as I was saying, globally the multilateral process has set the target by 2020 the commitments by the developed countries and the set action plan for developing countries. One thing is missing, that is the developed countries. They need to make robust commitments based on the Kyoto protocol. But before 2020 and I think it's something that the Lima conference needs to address. But by Paris next year, we need to set the 2030 global reduction target and we hope that this target will be based on each country's situation but we should all propose a robust target for reduction. If that can be done, an international carbon market is possible but there needs to be differentiation as well. There will be the trading of carbon, trading of carbon emission rights. So, there needs to be an institution that's established, a system that's established so that a global market can be established. Open it up because I know that this is the topic that generates a lot of questions and queries and just as a reminder for those of you who are watching the session online, you have a chance to submit your questions via social media. The hashtag again is hashtag climate context. In Chinese it's hashtag So let me, there'll be a roving microphone that comes around. If you'd like to ask a question, please raise your hand, introduce yourself and ask your question and then let us know who you would like to answer your question. To get it started, let me take a question from social media. There's a question that's come in that says how can government work more closely with businesses to address the climate change issue? So, I'd like to go around the panel and say if there was one concrete thing that you would like to see, please do share it. Luis. I think this is the most exciting part of what we see today. Take for instance what, as I was saying earlier, Denmark and other countries have espoused with the so-called 4G conference. What you see there is some of the things that the FICA was saying. The huge innovation that is taking place in the private sector around solutions absent any agreement. I mean what the chairman and FICA and the minister and others were saying is we need a mechanism, a global agreement to put a cap and trade, to put a price on carbon which is the only way where there's going to be sufficient death to a market that you at least know where the price mechanism will work. But independent of that, and this is really the issue, is how business through its supply chains for instance, how in its own manufacturing processes are all using technology and ways to reduce emissions. And the price that is affecting there, for instance, is all related to energy efficiency. I give you an example. We've done a project in the city of Bogota to eliminate close to 7,000 tons of carbon emissions basically with Chinese buses that are electrical or hybrid. And basically this is the way to reduce those emissions and we in essence create a great enhancement by using a loan out of the climate funds that is a 40 year loan, less than 75 basis points, and that in essence allows the incentive for people to transform from the old technologies to the new technologies. I think this is where the revolution is going to be. One of the most fascinating issues that happened, I remember in this discussion, was in the so-called Rio Plus 20 meeting. And when you saw the room full of country representatives, it was a race to the bottom. When you saw the mayors of the 40 largest cities of the world, they were agreeing on standards. They were agreeing on a much more ambitious agenda. And this is a question for the global system. And this is a question that requires political commitment and desire on the side, especially of the larger countries that have a big say on this issue. Europe and the United States at the center of that. Thank you. Mark, what's the one thing you would like to see in terms of cooperation between the private and the public sector? Well, I think if there was just one thing, it would be a requirement for transparency. So a lot of times consumers don't really know the sort of carbon footprint of the things that they're doing. And so in the same way that we have to disclose ingredients and different chains of supply, why not disclose what the carbon footprint is of our materials, allow consumers then to choose? I think that one thing would have an enormous impact on the kinds of decisions that everybody makes. And that in turn would drive people in theory towards lower carbon products. I think the second thing is just simply stability. Up, down, left, right, it doesn't matter, but there needs to be a game plan in place where people know what it's going to be like for the next 20 years, not five, not 10, at least 20. So from our perspective, more requirements for transparency on carbon footprint, because you talked about things like biobased products, do those necessarily reduce carbon footprints? Not necessarily. So we have to decide what's important to us. And if it's carbon footprint, let's decide that. And then if we need to mandate certain transparency, let's do that. And the second thing is stability. Thank you. Although I think I already know what you're going to say. You want a long-term framework and a stable carbon price, which perhaps the EU will fix, and China could join in if there was a global framework in place over the next couple of decades. Of course, a stable carbon price and a good control of that market is important. But I would like to echo what Marcus also said. Anyway, stability. We've seen it in several European countries. We've seen it in countries across the world. A new government, a new leadership, and a new change of policy, and a new focus, and new rules, new regulations is not helpful. So stability in the system is important. And let's be clear, with this whole climate situation, we are living at this moment in the Fossal Age. And that's not that long. We only live in the Fossal Age now for 150 years. When we started digging coal, later on oil, and later on gas out of the ground. Do we still live in the Fossal Age 150, 200 years from now? No, of course not. Do we live in another age at that moment, the bi-renewable age? Yes. Will that take a couple of decades to come from one age to another age? Absolutely. But we need a vision. We need a policy how to come to that new age. And once you have defined it globally as governments, you can work backwards what need to be done. And I'm admiring what, for example, the United States government is doing of pushing biofuels, second generation, using agricultural waste. There's so much agricultural waste around the globe. And we can upgrade that into useful 90% reduction CO2 fuels. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Mr. Chair, if there's one thing that can help businesses work with governments better, what do you think would be the most effective measure? I think we need to take a higher level look. Governments or businesses, if we need to respond to the climate change challenge and take that as an opportunity to change the way we live and the way we develop, the government needs to develop economy, alleviate poverty, improve livelihood, and respond to climate change. We need to find a circular development path so that we can achieve common prosperity. And businesses need to see profit, but they need to also meet their social responsibilities. They have to meet a way to achieve common prosperity. If we all do that, we will be able to respond to the climate change challenge and turn the world into a more beautiful place. And we can align these objectives. We need to find a fundamental approach, a path, to adjust our methodology of development. Thank you. The single area you think would you be most fruitful for cooperation? Well, obviously, I agree very much that we need to recognize the need for profitability when we do our regulatory work. I found that providing the framework is one thing. Research is quite another with funded loads of energy research with beautiful results, both for the companies and for the CO2 emissions. But then finance is a final point, which I find is very interesting, business finance, where we need to engage private finance in climate investments. And we try to do so simply by having seed money from the public sector, for instance, to release large amounts of pension funds into long-term climate-friendly investments. So there is a number of things you can do in the toolbox. But I agree very much with the overall view as presented by the vice chairman. Thank you very much indeed. Question there from the audience, the gentleman there, and then the lady in front. So again, if you could tell us who you are, pose your question, and do your worst. My name is David Christian. I'm from Australia. This is a wonderful discussion. I thank you very much. I have two quick questions. First, there are still some governments in the world that appear not to accept the urgency of these issues. What is the view of the panelists, and this is directed to all panelists, about the likelihood of a viable consensus emerging soon enough, which means within a year or two, I guess. My second question is about education. And it's the younger generation that's going to really carry through these transformative changes. So it seems to me, another equally urgent thing is education on climate change. And at the moment, I think education systems throughout the world are not doing a very good job on this. So I'd like to hear if anyone, if you know of any initiatives in education so that a younger generation understands these issues, understands the science, understands the economics, and understands the urgency of these issues. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Terrific questions. Who would like to have a go first? Rassus. Well, thank you, Rix. Obviously, we need to have a solution soon enough so we have to remain optimistic. I was in Greenland last week visiting an ice measurement station on the inland ice. This particular station had dropped five meters from last year because the ice below it had melted away. We have the IPCC coming up with a new report in Copenhagen next month, which will probably be very conclusive. There are a lot of evidence out there, and we are starting to realize it, I think, collectively. And yes, I think that we shall realize this soon enough to take collective action. As for the next generation, obviously, the world is moving very fast, and we need to make our educational systems and efforts follow suit. And actually, it is quite difficult. Though I feel that the next generations are much more aware of the challenges and less stuck with the old solutions than are we the elder. So also in that, I remain optimistic. Actually, I've just engaged with a body of weather presenters across the globe to try to get climate education into the weather forecasts, which is, you know, I find that pretty neat. Probably an example that could be emulated in a lot of other places. We need to be innovative also in our way of sharing this message. Thank you very much. In terms of conservation, for instance, speaking of Latin America, it is the indigenous communities who have seen the tremendous tensions of climate change.  That's an example. And as a result of that, there's been an increasing growth of discussions at the level of schools throughout our hemisphere, where the issue of climate change is very much at the center. The other parties on the financing part that the minister was mentioning, there's a lot of financial instruments being developed around energy efficiency. And more and more, this makes sense for business in the reduction of emissions because of cost of energy basically begin to address part of the solution. It is more difficult when one looks at adaptation. How countries adapt to this. And here is perhaps where we still have a lot of bigger challenges. Thank you. Xie Zuxi. Just now you talk about the possibility of a reaching agreement on September 23rd. There will be a climate change summit held by the UN. And most member states of the UN will be attending the meeting. That meeting is aimed at increasing the political impetus for reaching an agreement for next year's meeting. So I hope this conference will be a great success. And then next year we will have a new agreement so that we can have a single set of rule of the game and has a consensus so that all the world and the society will take actions to deal with climate change. And also about the scientific basis for the climate change theory. We need to promote the education because of the serious impact on mankind because of the climate change. So people are increasingly realize the scientificness of a climate change. According to the estimation of AGCC, about 95% of the scientists believe climate change is a fact. But there are still a lot of people who do not believe that, who are very skeptical about it. So we need to present more facts to educate people. And thirdly, to deal with climate change. Politically, we need to develop the economy and to reach a women's situation with the economic growth and dealing with climate change. But the fundamental issue is the technological innovation. And also in the multilateral process, the financing issue is a very important issue. The financing for climate change, in particular financing for the developing countries and for small island countries and for the least developed countries and African countries, how to provide funding support for the developing countries in dealing with climate change is also very important. So if we can solve all of the above mentioned issues and then reach consensus on that, I believe we will reach agreement on climate change. Lady there. Hello. Thank you to the panel for a very interesting discussion. My name is Ines Azevedo from Carnegie Mellon University. And I guess starting with the education to get at the core of the question, there is still a very, very large misperception towards how greenhouse gases in CO2 compared to conventional air pollutants. CO2 has a very, very long residence time in the atmosphere. The type of problems that we're creating today are going to be around for centuries. And compounded with that problem, we have the association of the CO2 emitting from basically the electric power sector where we have an infrastructure for the plants that are going to be built today that are going to be around for 50, 60 years. So I would like the carbon footprints and the labeling of the products and the carbon price will help a little bit. That by no means is going to get at the scale of the carbonization that is needed in the power sector and to some other extent in transportation. So I'd like to hear the panel about specific strategies for the power sector that would be needed moving forward in Europe, in China and in Latin America. Thank you. Thank you. Mark. So we're not in power production, but it's a great question because the question is, how do we scale this thing at the kind of speed that we need to actually solve this problem? And I think you're right that I think labeling products, carbon footprint, isn't going to get there. There's one thing in my view that'll get us there, and that's by developing technologies in power that out-compete the incumbents. So if, for instance, solar was far cheaper than coal or natural gas, nobody would wait for anything. This thing would proliferate in the same way that every other technology that out-competes in some other fashion proliferates. So the question is, before will we get an agreement? And I would say, as a scientist, all the facts point to me to say that that's probably not going to happen in the US anytime soon, unfortunately. So let's change the debate. What if, instead of talking about carbon pricing, we were talking about what's the cost of carbon capture or carbon sequestration, or what are our targets there? And then it's focused on the technology. Because I think we can all agree that governments can incentivize new step changes in technology, but ultimately it comes down to the private sector. So to your question, I think the only possible way that we're going to get decarbonization of the power sector is through technology advancements. And I think that is what governments should be focusing on. Thank you. Faiki, you wanted to come in. Thanks for your question, because it's totally spot on. And also the framing of your question. And it comes back to my earlier statement. At the end of today, we need to transition away from the fossil age we live in for 150 years already to a new age. And like Mark is saying, the new age provides new forms of energy. We need to get away at the end of the day from coal, oil, and gas for exactly the reasons you indicated. By the way, also in that order, first coal, then oil, then gas, if you look to CO2 emissions. That means to switch to new age with solar, with wind, with bio, et cetera. By the way, we did that for thousands of years before living from the same resources. We can do it in a much better way by innovations. And of course, at the moment we get solar and bio competitive and cheaper than the original resources in the fossil area. Of course, the transition will go very fast, especially in the energy sector. But let me add one thing next to innovation, new technologies. The pricings we have are not just coming out of the blue sky. The emissions go up in the blue sky. But prices of technologies are also partly conventions. I mean, if I make a provocative remark, but there was a period in the United States where labor was much cheaper due to slavery in other parts of the world as well. And by convention we said we want to get rid of that. We want to change it. And that increased, of course, the cost of labor in some areas. But that is what we wanted. So it is not true that competitive pricings are there just as they are. We can make conventions with each other to change that transition and to get a situation in which that transition runs much more rapid. So this technology development, but also governmental policies together. And we are really short on time. And there are three more questions I'm going to try to get in. So I will get all three of you gentlemen. If you promise me that you will say who you are, ask a short question. I'd be so grateful. OK, so we'll start here. And then we'll go to the second row and go to the back. So right here. OK, thank you for having me this time. I'm a reporter from Xinhua News Agency. And I have a question for Mr. Xie. There are some insiders that Chinese do not have a strong punishment on those who already discharged for the carbon market. So will China plan to publish a law on the climate change to strengthen the authority on the carbon market? Could you give us a timetable or a schedule? Thank you. Thank you. OK, question there. My name is Reina Toyberger, South Pole Carbon Switzerland. My question to Mr. Xie. In Europe, we hear often the argument we can't do much more because China is not moving on carbon. Now we work in China, we know it's not true. The Chinese government does a lot to combat climate change. What are your plans to improve communication of your efforts in Europe and America? And the short one to Mr. Moreno. Latin American governments are doing also a lot of new policies in the past few years. Don't you think it would be time for Latin American governments to unite and become a strong voice in the upcoming Lima Climate Conference, running up to Paris? Thank you. Thank you. You cheated, but that's OK. They're good questions. Last question there. Hi, my name is Kaname Tajima from Japan, member of the House of Representatives. Very interesting discussion regarding renewable from the fossil age to renewable energy transition. But I wonder what is your each of your stance on nuclear power generation, because it was not mentioned by anybody here today. OK, they're terrific questions, but you guys get 30 seconds to respond. So I'm going to start with Xie Zhuxi. Two questions are directly for you. Time is limited, so please be short. As for the question raised by people from Tsinghua News Agency, China is planning for the legislation on the climate change. This has been put onto the agenda, and we are starting work in this regard. About the question raised by our friend from Switzerland, actually China has done a lot in climate change, but we seldom communicate about it. So it is true we need to do more communication work, as I mentioned just now. We want to conserve the energy and reduce the energy emission and increase the forest carbon sink. And our energy conservation accounts for 58% of the whole world, and also our renewable energy power generation increased most rapidly in China, but we didn't do enough in communication. So we need to do more in the future about nuclear power generation. In China, we still need to develop the nuclear power generation, because we need to ensure that nine-fossil fuel share need to be reduced to less than 15%. Nine-fossil fuel need to be raised to 15%. So we need to develop a nuclear power generation. And now the existing nuclear power station under construction is the highest in China. We will continue to develop that. Regarding the question on Latin America, certainly I think as it was stated here before and the vice chairman, this meeting in the United Nations later this month is an very important impetus towards the meeting in Lima. The reality is that, yes, there could be variations on what is needed by Latin American countries, but the biggest variation is by the large emitters, which are basically the ones that have to do the tough policy choices. And I'm talking here about the US and Europe and China and others, which little by little have to come together around this. Thank you. Rasmus, on the nuclear question. Well, thank you. The question for Mr. Kajima was what we wanted to do with nuclear. When I see people choosing the nuclear option in Europe right now, and we look at the total cost of energy over the lifetime span of a new plant, then it's probably twice, maybe three times, as high as what we can do on wind. So pollution aside, we have an economic case that says that nuclear is expensive and much more expensive than other stuff we could do. So. OK, thank you very much. I'll keep it very short. The whole transition from the fossil aids to the binary renewable aids is not something which is happening without our control. We can shape it ourselves. And let's remember, we cannot be successful, nor call ourselves successful in a world that fails. OK. We are pretty much out of time. I'm just going to give a final quick fire round to the panel. We've discussed a lot around issues, challenges, areas of cooperation, where the efforts are not enough. But it seems to me an overriding question is whether there will be a global consensus to act by next year in Paris. What probability would you put on that happening next year, Lewis? Well, I should hope so that there is an agreement. I would like to be on the optimistic side that that agreement takes place. I think the fact that we don't have an agreement is terrible for humanity. OK. Mark, are you going to give me a probability or? I'm not going to give you a number, but I can tell you that from in our community, we just assume there won't be one. And that we need to figure out how to fix this problem, assuming that is the case. So that's our challenge. Thank you. It need to be, it will be about 50%, because we need such an agreement. The UN Secretary General put all his effort behind it. And also, if you see the efforts of the Obama Administration, of the Chinese leadership, and of course, of Europe, I think everybody is committed to see whether we can come to an agreement. About 50%, please. Thank you, Xie Ning. I can only tell you that in the negotiation with various governments, I haven't heard any oppositions from any government about reaching a consensus. So the probability should be very high. Anyway, the Chinese government very much hope that next year we will have a new agreement and we will do our efforts for that end. Well, I agree very much. We're all committed, I think, to reaching an agreement in Paris. And that's not where it ends. That's where the fight starts. OK. I'm going to do a poll of the audience. What do you think is the probability there will be a climate change agreement to reach globally next year in Paris? I'm going to do it by deciles. So 10% probability, raise your hand. 20%? OK. 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100%. I'm afraid the audience is a little bit more pessimistic than this panel. But I think that actually points to me to why it is this issue is so challenging. And it's good to see the leadership and the optimism on this panel from the public and the private sector. But I think the public have rightly raised issues about you can't just do the talk. You've got to walk the walk. But you've done a lot of great talking, which we appreciate. And I personally learned a great deal from this panel. So please join me in thanking a terrific panel. And thank you all for coming. I know you have to run to your next sessions. Thank you.