Okay. Welcome everyone to this evening. I'm Andrew McKinnon. I'm here on behalf of the Faculty of Sciences and also the University of Adelaide. I'm actually in my normal job as I'm first year director of physics, so I look after most of the first year physics courses which includes quite a few. Just before we get too far into it, just a couple of things I like to do is just acknowledge the lands in which we meet. So we acknowledge the Ghana people, the original custodians of the Adelaide Plains and the land on which we meet today. Now, one very small thing to get out of the way to is a bit of housekeeping. If you do need to use the bathrooms, they're basically out the top of the stairs. There's signs showing you, leading you around. They're actually around the other side of the building. In case of an emergency and we need to evacuate, it's quite easy. We just go out the doors at the back and we assemble on the grass. The beautiful thing about that is because I've now told you what we do in case of an emergency, it should not happen. Well, that's the plan. Okay. A little bit of an overview. What we're going to be doing is we're going to be talking about some of the really cool things which are happening in science in particular in South Australia. We're also going to be talking about why would you study science? Why would you study University of Adelaide? We've also got a couple of real or several really interesting speakers. We've got Chris Pearman, who's the Director of Forensic SA, who's our keynote presenter. And then we have several present and past students. We have Jack, Grace, Zoe, and Remy. And they're going to be briefly talking about their sort of experience. We've also got a selection of staff from throughout the Faculty of Sciences. And what we'll actually be doing is we'll be at the end of this session. We'll be opening up to a big Q&A because I know a lot of people are going to have a lot of questions. Also, what we'll be doing is afterwards we'll then be sort of spreading out and you can ask a lot of individual one-on-one questions. So please get ready with any questions you might have. And we'll sort of just wait until the end because there will be quite a few. And the other thing, too, is if you sort of like walk out of here and you go, oh, my God, there was that question I forgot to ask. I'll also be giving some information about how you can get back in contact with us. So don't worry too much about that. Okay. I also would like to thank there's a few people who have actually travelled some distance to come here. So thank you very much for making the effort. And hopefully you do actually get something very good out of this evening. Okay. Now, just a little bit first talking about some of the science which is going on in South Australia and how it's really relevant to basically the studies that you can actually be doing here and also how the universe of Adelaide is involved with some of that stuff. Okay. Now, food security is one of the biggest issues. One of the biggest issues we're facing is a lot of big issues and science is good place to address a lot of those. We've actually got a couple of things going on. We have crop production in Australia. It's only about one and a half tonnes per hectare compared within Europe. Part of that's to do with the soil, the climate. And so there's a real need to actually develop a lot of really smart technology, smart ways to actually go about doing our culture. We've also got the fact that the urban sprawl has finally got to the stage that we can't sprawl any further. So we're going to have to be getting a lot smarter too with how we actually go about addressing the agricultural needs. We've also got a lot of waste issue. There's $4,000 per household, which is quite terrifying, which just gets wasted with food waste. You've got the University of Adelaide involved with CSRO and PERSA. They're actually looking at how can we actually reduce this weight? How can we mitigate some of this waste? You even got research which is going on with some of the alcoholic beverage companies where they're actually looking at, well, their waste, how could you actually produce some premium liquor out of that? So they're actually looking at what is their waste product? How can you actually refine it and make high-quality alcohol? Which is an interesting problem to actually solve. One thing too, which I must say, my area of expertise is atmospheric and ionospheric physics. So probably the one thing which I got super excited about was the announcement of the space agency. That's where there's going to be a huge growth in space-related technology. That covers not just launching satellites, but it's how you actually go about using that information, how you can actually use that to enrich so many things that are being done. We need to be able to have also the understanding of how can we actually predict what's going on in space because it really can affect what goes on at the ground. Solar events can have huge effects. You can basically knock out communication. You can have power stations fail. So having a really good understanding of what's going in the space and the space environment. And Universidad has got a rich history in that. And I like to think it's one of the reasons where we have on lot 14, which is just where the old RH building is, where the space agent's going to be. So it's a hugely exciting time to be, if you're interested in space, which I am. So it is a fantastic time. The medical research, we've got down the road one of the biggest conglomerations of medical research, which is undergoing in the southern hemisphere. We've got Samory II, and that's got some really cool, neat stuff. They've got proton accelerators, where they're going to be doing proton treatment, which is a way of you can actually target cancer. You can target cancer with incredible accuracy, minimizing danger or damage, I should say, to surrounding tissues. There's a lot of research in the University of Adelaide again, where we're on the leading edge of what's actually being done in that area. Energy and resources, it is, we understand that it's one of the big dilemmas we actually have worldwide is the fact that the energy shortage, we're trying to transition and progress into using renewable energies. And probably South Australia is one of the ones which has been at the leading edge. We've had a lot of investment, we've got listed there, you've got the French renewable energy companies invested 12 million dollars into a solar farm. We've got a lot of things ongoing. You've also got the fact too that University of Adelaide together with Alcoa is actually looking at how can they actually use some of that solar energy and refinement processes. So they're looking at some of the areas where we're using a huge amount of energy. How can we actually make that more efficient? It's a real challenge, how you can actually go about doing that. Now, when I sort of talk about careers in science, it's sort of like, well, why would I want to do a career in science? What can I actually get out of it? Well, that's one of the really cool things about why study science, because you get to study that's something that's really interesting. And you also get the skills. And I'm going to be talking more about the skills you can actually get. And they're the skills that are going to get you a job. They're the skills which employees want and employees need. We know that 75% of the fastest growing jobs or the fastest growing areas in South Australia need STEM, need the science. You've got the top five highest paying jobs are basically in South Australia in the STEM area. So science is one of the real driving things behind getting a good job, getting a job which was rewarding, getting a job that you're going to enjoy, getting a job that pays well. Okay, science is a really good way of going about doing that. This was there was a study that was done a couple of years ago by the Office of the Chief Scientist. And they basically sort of went out to employees and said, what skills do you want in the workforce? And these were the top five skills that employees said they wanted. They wanted active learning, critical thinking, complex and creative problem solving, interpersonal skills. And this is the thing is that that is what doing a degree in science gives you. It actually gives you those problem solving skills. So this is where if I look for my own area where you have physics graduates, what do they go off and do? And they end up in this huge range of occupation. So you'll find people who have gone through studying theoretical physics, they go work for the banks. And you might go, why, why would they do that? Because it's given them those problem solving skills, you know, going from modeling atomic particles doing all sorts of weird things to modeling finance, they get well paid doing it. You also get people will go off and they work for the spy agencies. I don't know exactly what they do. They can't tell me. But they go work for those. I do actually have a good friend. I still don't actually know what he does. And part of that is because with science, you get the skills of data analysis, how to think outside the square. And that's what you get employed. You get employed for the skills you'll actually get. So you're fine. A lot of cases, people will be studying something they love and they enjoy. And then they get these skills. And it's these sometimes they're called soft skills. But they're not actually really soft, I think really undermines them. They're actually the skills that are going to get you employed, which are going to end up leading to having a good job. Now, okay, the University of Adelaide. Why the University of Adelaide? It's got a rich history. It's also one of the big performers. It's basically student service wise. We are very proud of the level of student service we give, especially in the sciences. We put a lot of effort into doing what we can to help students. It's a really important thing because there is a transition we do understand going from high school to university, which can be quite challenging. 100% of our stem research is rated at or above well standard.  Has everyone heard of that? Discovering the Higgs boson, the God particle. The other thing was gravitational waves, which were detected really recently.  You can listen to something with the ears. Gravitational waves are like a completely new way to sense the universe. And the last one is the source of these incredibly high energetic particles, which they could not explain. Okay, they're three of the biggest discoveries. Oops, I do apologise. I do tend to have a physics centric point of view of the world. Through the biggest discoveries, University of Adelaide is one of only two universities in the entire world who had researchers that would evolve of all three of those. Okay, that is a phenomenal thing. You actually have, we've actually had cases of, there was a girl who'd finished during her honors, and she got the chance to go across to America. And she was actually at the observatory working on the equipment when they discovered or detected the first gravitational wave. She is someone where they detected something which is like a big moment in history. And she was there. She just finished honors. Okay, she was a graduate student. So there's some fantastic opportunities. For science graduates, the University of Adelaide, we're the number one in satisfaction for science graduates. And we're the top 150 in the world. So of all the thousands and thousands of universities, the University of Adelaide is in the top 150. Okay, and we're easily the best in South Australia for science. Okay, now, what I'd like to do is I'd like to introduce Chris Peerman, who's the director of Forensic SA. Now, Forensic SA, it basically provides an independent scientific and pathology service to the justice system of South Australia in the disciplines of biology, chemistry, pathology, and toxology. A lot of sciences, a lot ofologies happening there. Okay, Chris has over 30 years experience in forensic science as a practitioner and administrator. He is chair of NATAS Forensic Science Accreditation Advisory Committee and member of the executive of the senior managers of Australia and New Zealand Forensic Lab retreats. Okay, I'd like to hand over to Chris. So I'll have a small break. So thank you very much, Chris. Thanks very much, Andrew. So my background's in the natural sciences. And even though Andrew said that his background is in physics, I am going to support a number of the comments that he made. So regardless of what area of science you're interested in, I think a science degree is a valuable contribution to society. Now, Nicole gave me a number of questions that she thought I might like to answer. So just by way of introduction, how did I get into science? Why am I interested in science? And I think, for me, that was really shaped by my upbringing. I had a father who was a geology teacher, spent a lot of time in the Flinders Ranges, a lot of bushwalking. We spent our summer holidays at Port Elliot. And it was there that I developed a love for the ocean. I still remember the first time I went snorkeling, it was one of those great Port Elliot summers days, cloudy, cold, windy, wet. Water was dirty, but I still remember diving under the water and just appreciating the tranquility, peacefulness of being underwater. And even though the water was dirty, you could see the little fish and the sand and rocks and the algae. And I thought, wow, that's fantastic. So I spent the first 20 years of my life wanting to be a marine biologist, studied botanical zoology here at Adelaide University. And I thought I'd go up to James Cook University and do some postgraduate study in marine biology. But I might take a break before I do that. And I was speaking to one of the professors here, and he told me about a job in the police department working in their forensic area. And so that'll be interesting. I might do that for a couple of years. And many, many years later, I'm still doing that. So one of the pieces of advice I would like to give students is to never pass up an opportunity. And I'll come back to that a bit later on. What do I enjoy about my work? I think what we do at Forensic Science is an applied science. So it's an analytical sciences. And we do get a lot of very cool instrumentation. So if you're a scientist and you enjoy fiddling with bits of cool kit, then it's a great, it's a great, it's a great job. So we're using often cutting edge instrumentation and methodologies. We do introduce, at Forensic Science SA, we've introduced a number of techniques far before many other places in the world. And so working in a well-funded laboratory is a lot of fun. And for everyone who works at Forensic Science, one of the things that everyone says about it is that you are able to make a difference to society on a daily basis. So unlike perhaps some other areas of science, scientific research where you could be working on a problem for many years, in our line of work, it's quite easy to see what you're doing on a daily basis and the people that that helps. And as I said, I think everyone at Forensic Science feels that as well. What do we look for employees? We look for two things, graduates who are good students, good academic record. And these days for a career, if you're working in science, then a postgraduate qualification. Now, just one of the things that Andrew was talking about, the five skills that employers talked about. The other thing that we look for, though, are people with those great, I was going to call them emotional intelligence skills, but those interpersonal skills. So we like people who are positive and enthusiastic, but also the necessity to be able to get on with other people. What we tend to do is we employ a number of people who have worked with us. So students who have done perhaps an honours or a PhD postgraduate study with us, or some form of work placement during their degree. When you read a CV, everyone works well in teams and everyone works well as self motivated. But that actually isn't the case. And so being able to see someone working in an organisation alongside your other staff members is as an employer invaluable. The other thing is these days is communication skills. So I think all sorts of scientists are being asked to justify and perhaps validate their work. Being able to sell your message, being able to convey to perhaps a sceptical audience the value of the work that you're doing, if you're after grant funding, or for us it's being able to communicate our results in court. Communication is invaluable. And a lot of universities, and I know Adelaide University does this as well, they have a concept called the three minute thesis where a student will have to get up and talk about their quite complex work, sell it to LA people within three minutes. And there are competitions around that as well. Why would you want to do a science degree? Well, I think Andrew made some great points around that as well. My three points were most of the, a lot of the future jobs will be based in science. If you look at things like artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, biomedical science. And Andrew spoke about the mouth biomedical precinct down its North Terrace. All of the work in the digital economy, it's all based on science. And even if you're not working in the area, being able to understand the science would set you up well. Science is required to solve all of the world's problems, Andrew spoke about food production. I mean, we've got climate, climate change. Food production was another one of my points. I've lost them. I've lost my food one, sorry. But the world's problems, you know, cynics might say that, well, that's good because science created those problems. But it's also necessary for science to solve those problems. And I think science also makes you better at your job. Andrew spoke about all of those, he called them soft skills that you learn, the analytical skills, problem solving skills, being able to think logically, being able to write well, communicate your results. And it doesn't really matter what job you are in. They are invaluable skills to an employer. Now, and just, Nicole was asking whether, do I have any advice for students about to embark on their education and career? So I think, as I said at the outset, never pass up an opportunity. Even if you've got a career path in mind, branching off to experience other things, all builds your skills, all builds your experience, looks good on your CV, and perhaps like me, you'll find a career that you never thought about. I think it's important not to think about going to university simply to get a degree. I'd like to think that you go to university to get an education and to learn, set yourself up for that career. So that means involving yourself in academic life, getting to know the post-grad students, seeing what they do. When you get a reading list for a particular lecture or a topic, then just don't read the compulsory stuff, read all of the side issues around it, talk to other people, really develop your knowledge. I spoke about industry placements, I know at large universities involved in university placements, I'd really encourage people to take up those options, you get to see other industries. But also you learn about how organisations work, those interactions with other people. But just get involved in the organisation, go along to morning tea, speak to people. We've got a very interesting student with us at the moment, so we take on a number of students, but we have a young woman with us from Adelaide University and she's got involved in all sorts of voluntary activities with our organisation. So she's one of perhaps 15 students we've got at the moment and as the director I know her on a personal basis because she talks to me when she sees me, we ask for volunteers, she's got a hand up. So she has really made an impression on our organisation and I think that's the sort of way I would encourage you to tackle any industry placements. My last point is don't let fear hold you back and I know this applies to a lot of people, particularly women, I know when people or particularly women look to apply for a job they go, I'm not going to apply for that because I can't do that and I haven't had experience in that and my advice is just to give it a go, you know you don't know how that might pan out and it's interesting because talk to a number of people in quite high, highly charged, high profile jobs and they all say most, there are a few people who don't suffer any kind of qualms at all, but most people say in their quieter moments they have this thing called the imposter syndrome, you wake up at two o'clock in the morning and you're going really am I really doing this job, how am I going to meet this problem in the morning, so that's everyone suffers from that, 95% of the world suffers from that and don't let that fear hold you back. Thank you Andrew. Thank you very much Chris. I too sometimes wonder what am I doing here and when will they realise I'm not supposed to be here, so that's fine. Now I'm going to ask Jack to talk to you all. Jack's he's just finished his BSc advanced and he's about to do an MFIL which he will find challenging Manikazani's supervisor, which isn't the reason why he's here. Okay, thanks Jack. Hi everyone, so as Andrew said my name's Jack and I just finished my degree studying physics, so I did a double major in experimental physics, theoretical physics. Something I really enjoyed about Adelaide is how well connected it was, I'll keep this brief. So in my final semester I actually did a research project at the Bureau of Meteorology, which for me is awesome because my interest in physics personally is climate and I want my career to move into sustainability and climate change. So already before I even finished my degree, I have a research project in sort of the field that I was interested in slash potentially a employer that I'd be looking to in the future was awesome and it just so happened that my supervisor at the Bureau knew someone else in Canberra for a scholarship that I was applying for and that helped me secure a position in getting a research scholarship for a month in Canberra, which I'm actually leaving for tomorrow. So I've got a lot of these awesome opportunities which have come out of studying here at Adelaide and I actually started in first year science and engineering and that's a nice thing about these degrees is that they're extremely flexible. I thought I wanted to do space when I first came to this degree and it was like yep spaceships that's where it's at and by about second year I realized that that's not what my passion was my passion was actually climate change and it was extremely easy to just move into that and it was in second year I started working with Andrew and yeah really realized how fun it was. So yeah I think that's probably where I'll leave it. Thank you. Next Grace, who's doing a Bachelor of Viticulture and Allianology. Hello, so my name's Grace. I am this year going into my fourth and final year of the Bachelor of Viticulture and Allianology, so sort of winemaking. So we are slightly different to a lot of the other science degrees because we are based out at the Wake campus but one of the great things I sort of found about the degree is first year you're here at North Terrace. So people often think you're going to miss out on the university life and the experience but trust me you don't. First year is all about going to all the events and getting idea of it all and using all the help services that are available to you before then moving to the Wake campus which is really, I don't think you haven't been, unusual spots would have plumped in the middle of the eastern suburbs and they have a winery on site, a vineyard and at that point you get to be really nice and hands-on at that site. One of the great things I found about Adelaide as well, I looked into all of the other degrees around the world that offered the same thing so places like Bordeaux and Chargent and I found that Adelaide offered one of the most research-based degrees so you have the opportunity to not just end up being a winemaker which a lot of the other degrees did sort of suggest, you can end up in the research field as well which is possibly what would be one of my interests, hence why I'm doing honours this year but we'll see how that goes. One of the other great things is they do offer study tours so you get to go to places like Switzerland and Spain, the US and all of that is kindly funded by the university which is always nice and you do get to do a lot of tastings, we do about four tastings a week at university which is very hard work as you can imagine and again that's all wine that you would not be able to access on a student budget so again great, great bonus. My degree is obviously very different sort of it's quite social, we have only probably 60 students each year that we sort of get to know so you do have really great friends that you get to meet again with sciences sometimes it can be quite intimidating but a lot of those friends come from first year and things like that. For me after my degree I think again one of the great things about viticulture is you get to travel and so I'll be scooting off somewhere elsewhere on the globe and getting paid to sort of work and make and drink wine which is also good yeah again it comes back to the it's a really really good highly recognised bachelor in this area so yeah that's me. Thanks Grace, Zoe. So greetings hi I am doing my honours just wrapping it up I was actually supposed to finish in November but as you are aware I've worked with animals and animals don't care about your schedule not at all and so I did my undergraduate in Bachelor of Animal Science which is based up at our Roseworthy campus and so for those of you that don't know where it is it's probably about 45 an hour north of up here around situated around Gaula and so we run a fully functional sheep stud cattle stud we've got pigs we've got chickens we've got pretty much any animal you can think of we've got it there somewhere if we've even got like fish they're kind of around the corner but they're still there and so I've chose to come to Adelaide because their animal subjects were more hands-on than the other ones that I've found in South Australia and so in first year in animal science and in vet science we're up at Roseworthy and so you get one day a week so on Thursdays you're up there you're doing something with the animals whether it's working with the pigs or talking to the alpacas you're doing something and so that's what's the main draw for me because I've come from a livestock background I still wanted to have the hands-on experience with my animals instead of going into a behavior degree where yes you can look at the animals and stuff but I still wanted to get in there and you know have a go at it and so probably the biggest thing that I can talk to you guys about is the Roseworthy campus one of the bonuses up there is free car parking that no no seriously like the biggest problem people have I talked to everyone they're like oh catching the train finding car parks at Roseworthy I was ten minutes away from campus or you can live on campus and there's not that not no problem and it's also you meet the staff and the faculty and it's just sort of a bit more laid back you can run into your lecturer in the cafe and just be like oh yeah I had a question for you you don't actually have to be intimidated and knock on their door you're just like can't wait hold up I'm here too and so it just you stop in say hey and it's a friendly easy-going atmosphere so oh and my with my project I managed to get a scholarship attached to it and so part of that scholarship I went to a number of industry functions and stuff and so I would go out to a show day or I would got sent to the Gold Coast I've been around to farms and I've pretty much been all around South Australia and up and down the Gold Coast and so what's really good is I managed to get some industry contacts and so that is I've got potential for two or three jobs once I finish up my degree so it's all if you have the opportunity there grab it talk to people don't be afraid come to events like this you never know who you'll see thanks Zoe okay now we're going to hear from Remy McGraw who's a recent graduate and is a process process technologist from Maine Farmer hello is it the titles a little bit fancy than what I actually do but my name is Remy and I literally just finished my degree in November and it was fabulous so I studied biomedical science here at the University of Adelaide and I made it in biochemistry and genetics so I came out of school and I was like oh my gosh what I want to do and I always gravitated towards the science and originally I thought I want to do medicine because that's where that's where I thought it kind of that's as good as it could get and that I love people and that's why I chose this degree because I chose this degree because I saw it as an opportunity to get into medicine later on which a lot of people actually end up doing but why I chose Adelaide here specifically was because I saw that the campus was amazing the opportunities here are amazing the extra curricula that they have whether it's your sports whatever but they also included just recently I did the women in STEM program which is awesome and you get to meet amazing people and have these programs that you can attend and functions and it was incredible but it was the extra curricula stuff that I knew I also needed later once I finished my degree because I knew at the end of the day my degree was amazing but it's what the else the university could provide me that would help me get a job and so I just kind of started university and it was amazing and I made some amazing friends along the way who I still keep in touch with and it's just it's an amazing opportunity the all the events that they have here on campus are very cool so anyway I finished this year and it got a bit daunting and yeah I finally managed to get a job which was awesome so I currently work at main farmer which for a lot of you is to be the old folding so it's out on main north road and I didn't really realize where I wanted to go with my career I changed about five times and that's the amazing thing about my biomedical science degree was because I knew that I didn't want to actually go into research I love science and I love it all but I knew that for me lab skills were not my best skill so I had to work out what else I was going to do and you can choose so many different things with especially my biomedical science degree I was looking at genetic counseling which is an option at other universities and yeah there's so many different things and then and I ended up here and I think my goal for the future now I don't really have goals because I changed my mind so often about what I wanted what I want to do so I just I just I'm taking any opportunity I can get and yeah it's amazing so guys thank you and remember you finished last year like it's just okay it was just funny because you go I finally got a job after a whole month of okay okay high expectations um okay now what I'm going to do is just go through some of the commonly asked questions so we know some of you might have a few questions so you know we will definitely give you an opportunity to ask lots of questions now when we talk about our degrees you often when you look up there you look and you think oh god that's really daunting that's that's overwhelming I don't know what to pick I know there are some people who had as their first preference first preference one of the name degrees and the name degrees that are a Bachelor of Science which has a focus in a particular area and you may have not quite got the ATAR you're hoping so you haven't yet heard anything yet now one thing which a lot of people don't realize is you can go into your normal BSC in Bachelor of Science and if you've done the right courses and you're going well you can transfer across into the name degree so you may have not got into the name degree yet in some cases it could be you didn't have the courses which were pre-rex which you can make up in a lot of cases but you can always transfer and that's one of the really cool things about a Bachelor of Science is once you got your foot in the door you can move around quite easily so for that in particularly for those who perhaps sort of went oh yeah I was hoping to get into space science national physics there are other things other than physics okay you can transfer across probably the one thing you want to make sure because I know some people have already enrolled and they've already picked what subjects you're doing you want to make or we actually call subjects at university we call them at Adelaide we call them courses so the terminology is one thing you need to get your head around to make sure you pick the right courses we're going to have some student advisors so Jill who's down the front won't be for long at the end should be up the back with an iPad so if you're not sure if you've picked the right courses because of course if you're going to transfer across you got to make sure you're doing the courses which are actually part of that name degree so definitely speak to us because we'd hate for you to then discover it semester two oops I'm supposed to be doing that in semester one okay so definitely ask questions now the other thing too is there's a lot of other things with majors and double majors the beautiful thing is you don't need to pick what you're going to do yet really what only defines your major is your sort of one of your areas of study is what you actually doing your third year so one of the great things about science is you don't need to decide you know you can actually change your mind as you're going along the other thing to which I want people to understand is that with preferences if you haven't got the preference that you would have liked don't worry yet there are a lot of other ways you can sort of approach it okay now this is the one thing you need to know that the first round of offers will basically email to the address which was on your sat hack application so if you've moved house hopefully you forwarded your address or it might have a little bit of trouble of getting to you you'll receive the offer for the highest preference that you qualify for okay now and there's a couple of different options you can actually do you connect you can accept that preference you can accept it and be open for more preferences you can sort of defer it be open for higher preferences or you can reject it and be open for higher preferences now the one thing I want to make sure you understand is that if you don't explicitly say that okay I'm going to accept it but I still want to be considered for other higher preferences we won't actually offer you a higher preference unless you do say that oh yeah I still do want to be included okay does that make sense for people who have accepted their preferences yet okay so that's got the six possible responses if you're happy with your offer or select accept if you get an offer for a lower preference you can still select accept that you wish to be considered for higher okay now the other thing too is there could be some people who didn't quite go as well as they would have liked in years 12 and they haven't actually gone in offer that didn't quite get the what the cutoff was now one thing which will actually be occurring is that we'll be actually looking at people who maybe didn't quite get the ATAR you needed but what courses did you do and so that's when we look in and if you for instance you know had done quite well with some science and mass courses but you picked something else that you didn't go that well and that's what dragged you down we'll actually look at you and we'll actually be organizing so do people need to contact us okay we'll be contacting you to arrange an interview like our appointment to come in so we'll actually talk about you because in a lot of cases it could actually be science is a place for you you just didn't quite pick the subjects which would have really shown what you capable of a year 12 so don't you know think it's the end of the world definitely the number one thing is definitely talk to us


To begin, I'd like to acknowledge that I'm on the traditional lands of the Comox people, and I am grateful for their stewardship of these lands. Now, comments in J. Very simple, especially one-liners. NB period signifies the start of a comment. Anything to the right is ignored, so you can put anything in you want as a comment. Anything to the left is executable, so this would be executable. Very simple for working in the terminal, but that's not usually where you end up using comments. Usually you end up using comments is over here in the editor where you're creating the scripts, and it becomes something that gives you a bit of extra functionality. So, for instance, I see these two first lines here. I want to make them into comments. What I can do is I can select both of them, and then I can go over here when I'm in the edit menu, then I can go to selection, and I can toggle comment on, and immediately now they're both comments. Additionally, I can use shift command L to put a line above, and shift command L to put a line below, and I've got things kind of pretty, so that's kind of a nice thing to do too. What else can I do with comments here? Well, here I've got two verbs. They both do the same thing. They're both named the same thing. This is a task at one liner, and this does the same thing, and it's an explicit verb. What it's going to do, well, we can do it step by step, but let's first just execute this, and we'll see what it does. There, it gives us two numbers. Well, what do the two numbers do? Well, let's take a look at this. I could put comments here on each line, but for this, for my purposes right now, I'm just going to debug it. I'm going to use debugging to try and figure this out. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to select these last two lines here, and I'm going to comment them out. Now when I load this, I've got the same verb there, except that all it does now is it just does the first line, and it's going to, after that, this parentheses, it's just going to send this value out to me. So what happens if I run this again? It gives me 9 and 56. Well, looking at the script over here, I see that it's giving me the greater of the X and the Y. Well, on the X side here, I've got 9 and 6, and on the Y side, I've got 4 and 56. So it's giving me the greater of 9 and 4, which is 9, and then the greater of 6 and 56, which is 56. Makes sense. I'll take it the next step. I can toggle this one off and load again, and this time I'm going to do two sentences before I ditch out. And now it gives me 4 and 6. Well, over here I see what it's going to be doing is it's giving me the lesser of the two. So it's giving me the lesser of 9 and 4, which is 4, and the lesser of 6 and 56, which is 6. And then when I finally get over here, I can comment this out again. Comment this out again. I went and loaded it. Now I'm going to load it. Command L, by the way, when you're in the editing area, Command L will load it, and then you've got access to actually running the scripts that you've got here. So and then I back over to here, hit Return, and I'm back to where I was. I've loaded the whole thing. Now the other thing I can do here is what's happening here is I've got this one verb that's tacit, one line, and no variables. It's all, what do they call it, point free. And here this is explicit, so it's using variables. A little bit easier to understand for some people. This is, a lot of people think this is more elegant. But in any case, right now the small divides big. I can see what it's actually working on. And I can do this just by naming the verb, hitting Return, and it'll actually return the verb for me. So I can see that that's the verb I get. That's this one I'm working with, but I'd like to work with this one. What I can do is I can highlight the whole thing, command slash, and I can comment them out. So same thing I was doing is that I'm taking the whole verb out. I'm going to show another way I can do this. At the same time I've got this all highlighted, if I go back over here to Edit and Selection, I can also toggle a note. And a note is something that just makes this whole verb into a comment. It's no longer a verb. It's a comment now. It's a noun. It's not going anywhere. So I've just sort of isolated it and made it into a note. I can, in these quote marks, I can put any information I want. Take it out. I guess I shouldn't have done that when it was highlighted. Let's try that again. There we go. So I can put any notes I want to myself in there. They don't do anything, but it's just taking that whole declaration of that verb. It's no longer a verb. Now when I load, I'm going to get this same as before, but this time when I go to find out what verb I'm working with, I'm working with this. And it's because I have taken this whole section out. And the only thing that gets recorded as small divides big is this tacit verb. So that's comments and multi-line comments because you can use notes for multi-line comments, or just highlight all the stuff that you want as a comment and use command slash when you're using the JQT environment.  But that kind of makes sense because you really want it when you're in the edit mode. And when you're in edit mode, that's when you get selection. You can do all this tricky stuff. Hope that helps. See you later.


And welcome back to The Creative Life on Think Tech Hawaii developed by the American Creativity Association. I'm your host, Phyllis Bleece, and our co-host is Darlene Boyd. Today on the show, we'll be discussing who killed creativity and how do we get it back? Our guests are Andrew Grant and Dr. Jaya Grant. They are a husband and wife team who co-own Tyrion Innovative Solutions, which is based in Sydney, Australia. They have co-authored two books. One is the innovation race, how to change a culture to change the game. And secondly, somewhat epidemic for our show's title today, they've written a book called Who Killed Creativity and How Can We Get It Back? So Andrew and Jaya, aloha, and welcome to The Creative Life. Tell us, why did you write a book called Who Killed Creativity and How Can We Get It Back? Well, we had been teaching creative thinking and design thinking for many, many years. And whilst we were very passionate, as all of us on this show are, about the concept of creativity and the importance of using creative problem solving to solve problems, many of the people that were sent to our workshops by their boss couldn't see the need for it. And so we thought there was no point in teaching more steps or writing another book on creative thinking unless we could actually deal with some of the issues. And we discovered it wasn't so much their lack of willingness to be creative, but it was the journey that many people had been on that they discovered they were creative as kids, but they seemed to have lost it. And there was no point in teaching anything more about creativity until we could address the issues that were blocking the creativity. So we worked with a neuroscientist and a psychologist to really validate some of the things that we'd come up with in workshops of what was blocking people's creativity and how could we help them discover those blocks and before we could get it back. And of course, then we had to put a theme around the book because no one wants to write a book on creativity and not actually be creative. But we wanted the theme to be more than a gimmick. We wanted to be really memorable and we wanted to be genuine in terms of making a crime scene because when you think about it, if we were creative as children and we've lost it now as adults, maybe there is a crime scene just to play with the metaphor a little bit. I was intrigued to see that your book was based on, as you pointed out, neurosciences and psychology. And here in Irvine, we have a colleague friend that's been studying psychopaths. And he determined that there is a pattern among psychopaths, serial killers, Lizzie Borden, all of our famous repertoire, that there is a part of the brain that they share. And I'm not a neuroscientist, so I wouldn't dare to explain that. And we know from the discussion of creativity that our brain, it is implied right brain, left brain. But in your research, perhaps this is a question for you, Jaya, did you see or come across any traits of our brain that indicates a propensity towards creativity or being more creative? Well, I should clarify, I'm not a neuroscientist either. We worked alongside a neuroscientist. My specialization is in innovation in organizations. So I've looked at the individual, the ability to think creatively and then also looked at the organizational culture and the blocks in the organization. But in terms of what we found out in our research in writing this book, was that there are indeed parts of brain that are able to be more creative. But what we were particularly interested in, and then some people can tap into those more easily, and some people have a bias or an ability to use those parts of the brain more easily. But what we became really interested in was what blocks that part of the brain. And so we started to look at the stressors that could impact creative thinking. So we looked at how, for example, when you're under stress corticosteroids are released, and they can impact the hypothalamus and they can impact the parts of the brain, the hippocampus, where you rely on your creative thinking. So you need to tap into those memories to be creative. We found that brain cells are killed when we're under stress. So you have that fight or flight mode. And instead of being able to think of creative solutions, we suddenly our brains shut down and we use the primitive stem of our brain, instead of using the prefrontal cortex and relying on that more creative, critical thinking that can really come up with different solutions. So there's a number of ways in which the brain is impacted when we're under pressure. And that stops us from accessing our creative capabilities. We just saw a slide quickly come up there and we'll talk a little bit about the game we've developed later on. But as I mentioned, we came up with to keep it simple, seven suspects, seven locations, seven weapons, seven rescuers and seven rescue strategies. Again, to keep it simple. And of course, one of the big ones is, is, you know, going to the boss's office and how many times have we heard people say they went to the boss's office with this great idea. And look, many ideas are silly, we already know that, but the boss completely shut them down. And it wasn't so much that the boss said no, but it was the way the boss said it. And that really killed their creativity. And it means they might come up with another great idea tomorrow, but they're not going to come back to the boss's office. And so we use the example, you know, similar to the game of Clue or a murder mystery, you know, was it was an excess stress with a weapon of noxious negativity in the boss's office? Is that what kills your creativity? And of course, when you say that you see a lot of people nodding or was it, you know, bureaucracy in the finance department? Look, we're not there to point fingers at anyone. But I do think it's quite important that we do create some sort of diagnostic tool where people can genuinely talk about some of their fears. And we're going back to the psychopaths. Unfortunately, there is more research. There are more psychopaths in corporate offices than there are in English prisons in leadership positions. So we won't go into that in any more detail other than to say that control is a big killer of creativity, and it often finds its way to the top. That explains some of the experiences that perhaps we have had with our bosses. Exactly. And we need to be careful. As I said, I'm not here.  But if you're not a boss, then we'll just think about what are the workarounds? How are you going to stop those voices getting into your personal head and killing your own creativity?   And that's what the book and the game is about. The book is research on it, and the game is a chance to explore it in a safe environment. No one's going to go into their boss's office and say, you killed my creativity. But hey, you play a game, a couple of cards, a bit of fun, and all of a sudden someone anonymously slips that card through and says, yeah, we do feel a bit like this in the boss's office. I'm a boss. I played it with my team. I got that card and it was very sobering. Oh, so you use the cards as metaphors for the real life issues that are coming up, but they take the edge off and make the point. So yeah, I'm having, I want to get to the game, but I am struck with the gravity of what you are bringing out, Chaya, about the anxiety and the blockers to creativity, like we've been doing all year with COVID. Whatever the anxiety-provoking cues are for psychopaths. It's a really serious subject. And I'm feeling a little drawn between exploring that some more and then looking at the game that you played in order to talk about this serious subject with lighthearted metaphors and icons. And I'd like to come back and touch on the research and innovation-based information that you've got because you're very valuable for us. And we're going to have, just so the audience knows, we're going to have Chaya back in September on a show to allow her to share with us her breakthrough research on creativity and innovation. But for today, let's look over at your game that I got to play with you in Austin, Texas, Andrew. And you've stimulated a lot of conversation and laughter around it. And tell us a little bit about this game that is, became the book or the book that became the game? The book became the game, actually, because, again, we really wanted to just start by helping people understand it. And my background is education. So we developed a game called Who Killed Creativity, and it is based around a mystery. It's not a competitive game, so there's no testosterone involved in it. But it really is a clever metaphor as a diagnostic tool to help people understand some of the killers, some of the suspects, and as I mentioned, some of the rescuers and where they might feel creativity is being blocked as they maybe walk around an office or walk around a schoolroom or walk around wherever their workplace is or even at home. And what we did is, as I mentioned, we came up with, we sort of brought it down to seven suspects, seven weapons, seven rescuers and seven rescue strategies, and then locations. And all we're asking people to do is is discuss each of these at one at a time, talk about where they feel it happens. Like I said, it might be control in the boss's office. It might be bureaucracy or might be your KPIs. Or on the positive side, I feel much more creative when I'm out in the playground or the classic, you know, the research of Google's canteen, that Google didn't make a canteen just to be nice. They knew that that beautiful canteen is where ideas meet and clash and bang together. And so we wanted to really put that in a game board and then have the opportunity for people to talk about that game board. And we've now put it online. I think there's a video coming up just to show what the game's like. So we were also disrupted with the recent crisis that we've had. So we used to have a physical game board and people would come around and play that game round a table. And again, it was a chance for people to discuss and talk and share ideas in a safe environment, hiding behind metaphoric characters. Now we've put that game online, so people can download it and just play it with their team with a professional facilitator or if they're feeling game, just let it practice. The instructions are all there. So that's a COVID creative outcome where you went from in-person game, being the game master to online gaming, which of course connects very well with social media and our millennials and everyone else. So have you had good success with our people giving you feedback about how what it's, of course it's new, isn't it?  What kind of success stories do you have for people who play the game? How does that port over into their daily life or their work or their play life? We've had people in companies say that what's taken them two or three years to solve a problem trying to use a design thinking methodology was solved in a couple of hours. And that's because, as we said, once you get rid of those blockers, you can't just give people pizza and coke and tell them to have a hackathon on a Friday night if you've been oppressive all day or all week or all culture. But all of a sudden you give people a chance to talk about it and share about it. And then when it comes to actually being creative, they've realized, boy, I really was held back by fear or I really was held back by pressure or I've been very narrow minded. And once we get those off the table and say, right, they're behind us now, now let's try and be creative. Here are the rescue strategies. It just flows so much quicker and so much easier. Significantly changing people from it with problems. I can give you a specific example of an organization that we worked with that had real creative thinking challenges.  And the team just wasn't able to come up with these solutions. So I spent a long period of time with this organization. We started with this sort of diagnostic exercise. And the first thing that we realized was that the boss, although he wanted creative thinking in his organization, he wasn't able to draw out that creative thinking and those creative ideas. And we realized it was because he was shutting down ideas when they were raised. He didn't know that. So as soon as he realized that there was this fear in the room and this anxiety, and that that was stopping the generation of creative ideas, we were able to change his patterns of behavior, his leadership style to open up and allow more freedom. And you'll see that we had amazing results. The team then became more confident individually. There was up to a 25% improvement in individual creative thinking in team culture and in organization culture overall. People felt like there was a lot more opportunity to express themselves and to have their ideas heard and then to actually go ahead and implement ideas without fear. And so we could see that that followed through consistently in terms of how individuals felt about their creative thinking capabilities. And we gave workshops that helped develop specific skills. We had mentoring sessions. We had specific coaching and guidance for the boss. And overall, there was a huge improvement in the culture. So you can see it works. You just need to provide those opportunities to open up those discussions and make it a safe place and then a safe space for these discussions. And then you can see the results. You can see on slide 12 is another, I'll just show you slide 12 is another company. As I said, we don't want to say which company doesn't matter.  And we know that the right idea comes from lots of ideas. So they had done the hook your creativity, the prelude to the diagnostic tool. And then by the afternoon, they were just charging through. There was no politics. There was lots of trust. Everyone was aligned. Everyone was focused on the end goal. A lot of companies asked me, we want to do creativity, but my team's dysfunctional. Well, we've got to get that functionality back because otherwise, all these other things creep in and people hold back. So it really is about doing this free understanding of the concept before you then move into the creativity side of it. You have a repertoire of successes, extensive successes and not all consultants or practitioners in introducing some kind of banter. Do you think your success, is there any connection to the fact that you two are a team and work very intensively together versus if it was one or the other of you? And how long, how long did the game take to develop? Well, I think there's always to be many, many years to develop. But I think we have to practice what we preach. And if we're going to teach people about collaboration, we need to be able to demonstrate that. And, you know, that's not always easy. And we are authentic and we're quite open when we're disagreeing about something. And when there is that creative collision, because we're both very strong in what we think and our creative ideas. But we want to demonstrate that it's through facilitating these as positive, constructive processes that where there's respect and where there's open dialogue that you can come up with really creative and innovative solutions. So the research has found that heterogeneous teams or teams made up of different people with different backgrounds, different ideas, different beliefs come up with faster period and more creative ideas than homogeneous teams or teams of like-minded people. But here's the catch. It will take a lot longer to come up with these ideas. So homogeneous teams come up with ideas faster, but they're inferior. They're more simple and safe. Heterogeneous teams take a longer to come up with a good idea and they need to be facilitated. That process needs to be facilitated because they often can't do it on their own. They need to be really conscious of this need come together for this united goal and to work together towards a solution. So I think that's what we've had to learn to practice in our own marriage and in our own working relationship. We're constantly battling with that. But to answer your other question, as Andrew said, it's taken years and years to develop this material. We really have been working for over 35 years. And for the last 25 years in particular, we've been developing creative ideas, playing with them and finding about the last 15 to 18 years, our clients came to us and said, how are you so creative? Can we learn how to become creative ourselves? And we thought, oh, actually, that's a really good question. How do we come up with these creative ideas? And that's when we started that deeper process of research, of studying the material that's out there. And then I went into the PhD research to really try to understand how can we be more creative ourselves? How can we tap into that potential? And how can we understand how to make teams and organizations and communities that are more creative and that allow for that creative freedom? When you mentioned the heterogeneous groups having more success, do you find that their solutions have sustainability more so? Yes, because they're more thought through. The whole idea is, we often look at those great breakthrough ideas and think, oh, I could have done that. But I don't think we realize the culture that was there to make them happen. And the number of bad ideas that have gone before it, before you get to the good one. But if you've got a controlling person shutting it down or you've got too much pressure or too much fear or you become too apathetic, you'll never get to that really, really good one. So we look at these really good inventions or creative ideas as history and hindsight thinking, oh, they're great. But we just don't realize how much work and experience has gone into them. So the ideas that are the most thought through and have been through a process of creative problem solving or design thinking, by the time they get to the end of that process, they've been tested, they've been prototyped, they've done the what if, what went wrong, what could have gone wrong?  And there's too many stories of companies that have had very expensive failures in the real world. And you wonder, how did they get that far? Because maybe there was a culture where people couldn't feel comfortable to share and say, hey, I don't think a foldable phone will work unless we, when Samson brought out the foldable phone and people were trying to peel the foldable screen saver off it. They thought it was a screen saver. I don't know why that wasn't done in the lab and someone had given it to an average person. And that's back to Jay's issue of diversity. I think it's really important that we get people looking at from every perspective. You can't have all the same people looking at a problem. I'm curious, you've talked about spending months with that, one of the companies, maybe both of the companies that got very productive in your proof of concept case studies. And I'm wondering how that you introduce other modalities for preparing them to play the game. Are there, I don't know what your consulting process is around the issue of creativity and innovation. But is it always related to the game? Or do you do other things and then play the game? Or does the game come back in different iterations until you get to the fight? When you said by the end of the day, they were really idea producing. But in the morning, they had to do the trust building. And are there trust building exercises? Are they in either of your books or online? What are some of the other tools?  But helping teams become functional. And as I was speaking to a client the other day, and he said, I want to jump straight into being creative. Actually, now they want to jump straight into innovation because that's the new buzzword. Creativity has become a little bit old fashioned. And I said, well, actually, you can't come up with innovative solutions until you're first of all got a creative mindset. And you can't have a creative mindset within the company if your team is dysfunctional. And as I mentioned, there's lack of trust or politics or alignment or just poor communication. So he wanted to jump straight into Jaya's innovation workshop. I then talked to him about the importance of the creativity one. I then back, back, back, back, blocked that and said, we need to do the game. And then I said, actually, we probably need to do some just basic team dynamic stuff to see how the team's feeling. So yes, sometimes you need to just keep going back until you find out where it is, because a dysfunctional team, or people that have got these, as I said, these challenges in their brain, they won't, it's going to be really hard to be creative because you're going to be using the base part of your brain, which is the fight flight or freeze mode. Yeah, which is a great part of our brain to help us survive an emergency when a crisis we've been through two bombs and living in Indonesia. And you know, when the bomb goes off, you don't have time to be creative. So that that back of your brain is really good for an emergency situation. But unfortunately, too many people at work, live in that back part of their brain, they live in the fight flight or freeze or the stress mode 24 seven, not just meant to be a quick escape. So until we can bring people into the prefrontal cortex, which is where all the creativity happens, where they can actually start to feel comfortable to explore ideas. As we mentioned, you can watch as many YouTube videos and read as many books as you like on how to be creative. But we've got to get the people feeling comfortable and the right environment. Once they're in the right environment, both up here and culturally, then the creative ideas, then all the design thinking, then that can happen well. But I was going to say that the game itself can also trigger that. So it's designed in a way that we don't jump straight into, you know, what kills your creativity or what kills your team's creativity. We actually start with what do you think in general impacts our creativity. So we talk about the problem in general with, you know, how as Andrew said, we 98% of two year old scores creative geniuses on divergent thinking tests. And yet, by the time we're 25 and over, if that's dropped to 2%. So something's happening over our lifespan, and that drops quite rapidly during the school years, you can see a graph there. So that by the time children are 13 to 15 years old, it's only 20% of children who are creative thinking geniuses on divergent thinking tests. And so school is almost, it appears to be killing our creativity rather than encouraging it to thrive, which you wouldn't expect it to do. And so we've got this, this general issue in the population. And we can talk about the statistics, we can also talk about the trends from the 1990s. Creative thinking as compared to IQ, or CQ compared to IQ has been dropping. So up until the 1990s, DQ and IQ were both rising. And then in the 1990s, there was something called the Flynn effect, where IQ continued to rise because we have these wonderful rich environments. And at that time, CQ or the creative quotient started to drop. And so you can look historically what's happening there. Maybe it was the impact of technology. And maybe, as children, as humans, as people were spending more time immersed in other people's ideas on the internet, or watching other people's ideas on the television, they were spending less time outside playing, experimenting. And so, there's these general trends that we talk about. And that gets people thinking, oh, yes, I've noticed that. I've seen that. I've felt that. So we talk generally about it. And then that gives us the opportunity. Well, that then brings it into the game. And as Jay said, the game is not a hard landing. It really is the opportunity to just very gently explore, set the scene. Again, we love starting with a very safe metaphor where there's no threat. People feel very comfortable. I know Peter Stenge used to talk about creating a safe space before that word became trendy. He used to talk about creating a safe space where people could feel comfortable to talk and share and not feel threatened. And the game then very carefully guides them through to the point where they do go, oh, yeah, this is how I feel. And we want to do it in a non-threatening way. And then start to bring it back and talk about the rescuers and some action planning. That's on slide eight, is the action planning. So then really, we've got to get a wall up and get people to start saying, well, okay, we've gone down. We've explored these challenging ideas. Now we can start, whether it's sticky notes or the online version, now we can start putting up some strategies, some actions of what we can do differently. And maybe I'll just finish on slide 13, because that is the whole model that we've put together. And maybe if you're watching this non-live, you can pause this model and have a look at it. It'll probably bring everything together that we've talked about. On the inside, you've got the journey of the suspects. And on the outside, you've got the life cycle. I don't want to be too negative today. It's a vicious cycle and a virtuous cycle. Yeah. And we do see this in companies. We do see companies, if we've worked with companies for many years, we do see them going through these cycles. And one of the questions is, which one are you on? Because they're not just independent things. They do tend to lead to each other. Well, that was perfect timing, because we're down to our last minute. But I really want to thank you on behalf of American Creativity Association for all the training you've done within our ranks. And then again today, we'll have to leave it here. And to let the audience know, you've been watching The Creative Life on Tink-Tek-Kawaii. I'm Phyllis Guice. Today, Darlene Boyd and I have been discussing who killed creativity and how can we get it back with Andrew Grant and Dr. Jaya Grant. Mahalo for participating, Andrew and Jaya. And thank you to the viewers. We will be back in two weeks with another edition of The Creative Life. Dr. Jane Horan, who hails from Singapore, will be talking about the intersection of creativity and our life cycle. So we're very much looking forward to that. Aloha.


Okay, we're back, we're live, we're here, and today we're doing Community Matters with Mike Hansen, and he runs the Shippers Council, the Hawaii Shippers Council, which involves people who ship things, especially on the ocean, to and from Hawaii, and he follows what's going on for the Shippers. Hi, Mike. Thank you for coming down. Oh, thank you for having me, Jay. I enjoy being here. And your piece this time is about LNG and the Jones Act, and a move that is contemplated by the President Donald Trump. Can you talk about it? Sure. Basically, it is the President proposing to make a Jones Act waiver of 10 years to allow for a foreign flag LNG or liquefied natural gas carriers, those are a kind of ship, to transport LNG from one place in America to another in contravention of the Jones Act. Yeah. The inter-coastal trade. But, you know, one thing I get is that seems to assume, go ahead. The inter-coastal trade is a legal term that applies to trade from one part of the United States to the other through the Panama Canal. Ah, okay. Thank you for that. Okay, that would have a big effect on things if it works. But let me just say that, you know, when you frame it that way, it seems to make the assumption that the United States is not in a position to build LNG ships. Is this true? Right. First of all, let's maybe a quick review of the Jones Act for people who may not remember. The Jones Act is a common reference to various maritime, domestic maritime laws that is used informally. If you look in through the U.S. code, you'll not find a single statute that includes the term Jones Act. So it's an informal term. What's the legal term? Generally worldwide, these kinds of laws are known as maritime cabotage, and in American jurisprudence, they're known as the coast-wise laws of the United States. But everyone uses the term Jones Act. And the general rule of the Jones Act has been since the 19-teens somewhere, 19 what? 19-20. When Jones Act is used in the narrowest common sense, it generally refers to Section 27 of the Berkshire Marine Act of 1920. That applies to the carriage of cargo by water between two domestic points. And you can't do it unless the ship and the crew on the ship and the flag on the ship qualify under the Jones Act. There's two parts to that, really. One applies to the vessel, which is the purview of the coast guard. And that is, the ship must be built in the U.S., registered as a vessel of the United States, i.e., U.S. flag, owned mostly by U.S. citizens and crewed mostly by U.S. citizens. A small part of the crew can be green card holders or resident aliens. The other side is done by customs, or the customs and border patrol today. And that is the movement of ships and cargos domestically, and they're in control of that. And basically, a foreign flag vessel can make multiple foreign calls in the United States on a given voyage. And it can discharge foreign cargo loaded at a foreign port. And it can load export cargo for a foreign country. But it cannot deliver cargo from one port to another. It cannot load domestic cargo at one U.S. port and transport it to another. And the purpose of all of that? Well, the purpose, people think that this originated in 1920. It didn't. It originated in the – there's two laws early in our history, in the country's history. One was passed in the first session of the first Congress after ratification of the Constitution. And that was basically a law that established a customs service and a vessel registry. And to register a vessel as a U.S. vessel in 1789 required that it be built in the United States, owned wholly by U.S. citizens, and mostly crewed by U.S. citizens. Cabotage. That was not a cabotage law. That was for any vessel to be registered U.S., whether it was in domestic or foreign trade. Okay. 1817, after the War of 1812 there was a dispute between the U.S. and Britain regarding U.S. ships taking cargo into the British West Indies, which was a big trade in colonial times. The British had – after the Revolutionary War had excluded the U.S. from that market. While the Americans had continued to allow British ships to carry cargo domestically within the United States, finally the U.S. – they attempted several times to work out a treaty to sort this out, didn't work. And so in 1817 the Congress passed a true cabotage law that excluded foreign ships from domestic trade. So between those two laws we have the parameters of what we know today as the Jones Act. But the Jones Act in 1920 you said was at least in part for the preservation of the shipbuilding industry in the United States, right? There were 39 sections in that law, two of which were cabotage. One was section 27, which applied to the movement of commodities and goods by water. And the other one which extended the coast-wise laws to all of the island dependencies of the U.S. Okay. So moving from there to LNG, we now have a huge LNG supply in this country. Our technology has found it and can process it. There are global markets which are worth billions upon billions. If we can deliver LNG overseas. And we can't manufacture – we just don't have the capacity to manufacture the big tanker ships for LNG. Domestically that would qualify under the Jones Act. First of all, LNG refers to liquefied natural gas. And to ship natural gas you need what's known as an export terminal. And an export terminal, an LNG export terminal, marine terminal, consists of a liquefaction plant to take natural gas from its ambient temperature and pressure to liquefy it. Make it a liquid and then you actually store it as a liquid on the ship. It will have to be stored on the shore first. So when the ship arrives there's a cargo there for it to load. And the LNG now is at minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit. And you have to keep it cold. It actually keeps pretty cold itself. Most of the LNG carriers, these are the ships that actually carry the LNG, are basically giant thermoses. And those are tanks, round-circle tanks. That's on the ship. Those spherical tanks are old style and the new ones are not in that configuration. What do they look like? They're actually rectangular. They are above deck or below deck? Oh, below deck, yeah. And they've got special kinds of insulation so that, you know, if the LNG ever touched the steel in the hull, the steel would crack so cold, so it's got to be insulated. And so for an LNG, not only do you have to make an LNG transaction by water, you need the export terminal where you can, it turns natural gas into LNG, stores it for loading on a ship. But then on the receiving end you have to have an LNG receiving terminal that will receive the LNG cargo, store it. And then we gasify it so it can be used as natural gas. This is really, this is very important to the American economy because we have so much of it and because it's such a market overseas, we could make tons and tons of money. Are we making any money with LNG overseas now? How do we do that? There are three operating terminals, export terminals now, LNG export terminals, two on the Gulf and one on the East Coast. So we're already doing it? Yes. And what kinds of ships are we using to move it? It's all moving by foreign flag or foreign LNG carriers. So what's the point of having the waiver so that you can move the LNG from port to port around the country? That's correct. That's the point of it. Well, you can have the foreign flag come in, pick up the LNG and leave again. The natural gas is moved by pipeline across the contiguous U.S. That's the lower 48 or the mainland U.S. As gas. Right. As gas. It's usually moved under some pressure, but normally at ambient temperature. And there's no real gasification process at the other end. So you save all the money of those processing plants? No. You never have to liquefy it. Turning it into an LNG is very expensive. It's much more economical if you can simply move it by gas pipeline. Aren't we able to do that right now, moving it around the country? Yes. But of course, the non-contiguous jurisdictions, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, don't have pipelines too far away. So you have to use LNG to reach them? It has to go to LNG, on a ship, and then to them. Is that what this waiver is about? Well, there's also places in the United States that are not really served by gas pipeline. For example, New England. Much of New England is not served by gas pipeline, or not sufficiently served. And they end up having to import natural gas from foreign sources. And we have so much of it here, that's really silly, isn't it? And the one that raised everybody's hackles is last year, they actually imported a cargo of Russian gas from the Arctic. When we have so much gas right here. Right. And so you don't have any way of getting the gas from the export terminals that are already in existence to receiving terminals, whereas, for example, Puerto Rico uses a large amount of gas for electrical production. And they have a receiving terminal on the island. And most of their gas comes from Trinidad. And yet on the Gulf Coast, which is, what, less than a thousand miles away from Puerto Rico, you've got two operating LNG export terminals. But no ships. At a much lower price than you can obtain this stuff from Trinidad or other places in the world. But no ships. So why isn't an American entrepreneur a shipbuilder, and there are shipbuilders in, what, Louisiana? Why don't they get some plans to have these container ships fitted for LNG and move it around on an American hull? And not a container ship, but a cargo ship. The LNG carrier is a highly specialized cryogenic tanker. And we don't have any of them? There are zero in the Jones Act fleet. Now that's worth thinking about for at least one minute. Let me say it again. I'm just quoting you, Mike. There are zero LNG carriers that qualify in the Jones Act fleet that qualify in the Jones Act. Think about that. Zero. This is the most economically productive and successful country in the world. We have zero LNG carriers in the Jones Act fleet. We'll be right back after this short break. Aloha. I'm Cynthia Sinclair. And I'm Tim Apachella. We are hosts here at Think Tech Hawaii, a digital media company serving the people of Hawaii. We provide a video platform for citizen journalists to raise public awareness in Hawaii. We are a Hawaii non-profit that depends on the generosity of its supporters to keep on going. We'd be grateful if you'd go to thinktechhawaii.com and make a donation to support us now. Thanks so much. Thanks so much. Aloha. I'm Lauren Pair, a host here at Think Tech Hawaii, a digital media company serving the people of Hawaii. We provide a video platform for citizen journalists to raise public awareness in Hawaii. We are a Hawaii non-profit that depends on the generosity of its supporters to keep on going. We'd be grateful if you'd go to thinktechhawaii.com and make a donation to support us now. Thanks so much. Back to community matters with Mike Hansen, who leads the Hawaii Shippers Council. So yeah, I'm thinking about it during the break. It's no less stunning after the break that we have zero Jones Act LNG ships, zero. Why? Not only do we not have any at the present time, we've actually never had one in the Jones Act fleet. And we have no plans, either. That's correct. Why? One of the factors that make that separate us from the possibility. First of all, you have to be able to qualify as a Jones Act ship. It has to be built in the United States. That means that you have to have a shipyard capable of building this vessel. Don't we? We have at least two major shipyards in Louisiana that build military ships. At some kind of a commercial cost that's palatable, you know, otherwise. Too expensive. Yeah. It doesn't pencil out. Well, not only does it, there are, in the United States today, there are seven what are known as major shipbuilding yards in the United States. And these are yards that are capable of constructing self-propelled, sea-going ships of a thousand gross tons and over. Three military ships that are that big? Yes. And of the seven, four build only for the Navy. Okay. Two build only commercial. Why don't we have more? Isn't there any money in this? I mean, other countries are building ships like hotcakes, Korea, for example. Yeah. Well, two can build, two build commercial. And one of those is attempting to convert itself from a commercial shipbuilder to a military shipbuilder. That's the one that delivered the last two new mats and container ships. Because the Jones Act fleet is built out. The problem that we have in the United States is our shipbuilding industry, major shipbuilding industry, is very inefficient. Our cost of construction is about five times that of South Korea. And it's never going to pencil out. And the only way, and for example, this is the Philly shipyard in Pennsylvania, which delivered the last two container ships for Mattson, the Daniel Kanoi and the Kaimanahila. There are no more commercial orders available for the yard to build. Wow. Because you have to look, the major shipbuilding, not tugs and barges, but the major shipbuilding industry, self-propelled seagull and ships. This is like the airline industry. You have around the world, you've got what, Boeing and Airbus building the big planes. Right. You have to be able to build for export and sale on the international market. These, between Japan, South Korea and China, they build north of 95% of all of the large seagoing ships in the world. It's extraordinary. You wonder why we don't have manufacturing in this country, because we're inefficient. Well, in this particular sector, yeah, we're efficient in some other sectors, but not this one. Yeah, and we wind up building for the military, and then that means the military is paying way too much, doesn't it? That's why we can't maintain the fleet level we need. Because each vessel consumes so much of the budget that you don't have anything left over. Let's take a magnitude issue on this. If I'm building, say, a Matson ship, I don't know, what is that, 1,000 feet, something like that? Yeah. A 1,000-foot Matson ship. What you want to do is talk about the capacity. The capacity of the last two Matson ships was 6,600 20-foot equivalent units. That means the ship can carry 3,600 20-foot shipping containers. So that ship, 3,600 20-foot containers, what does it cost me to build it in the U.S. or the U.S. shipyard? What does it cost me to build it in South Korea? Those two ships were delivered for 205 million a piece. The shipyard lost 60 million building those two ships. How did it lose 60 million? Because they underpriced it. It would have been more had they priced it correctly with their own costs. Exactly. It would be 235 million a piece. What about South Korea? You can buy that same ship in South Korea for around 40 million. So that's 25 percent. Yeah. Wait, I get that right. Wait, less than, it's like 15 percent. It's less than a fifth. Less than 15 percent. Less than a fifth. Then would you have to pay in the American industry shipyard industry? No. The ships, the two ships that were delivered by Philly Shipyard to Massive, they were designed by a shipyard in South Korea. The main engine was provided by that same shipyard. Most of the deck equipment and other equipment was purchased from Europe. What I get out of this is that our ship industry is propped up by building military ships at way too much money. And commercial ships for the Jones Act. Commercial ships for the Jones Act because they have to be built that way in the U.S. for Jones Act. No. The GAO estimated you can get a large LNG carrier built in South Korea with about a two-year delivery time for around 200 million dollars. If it were to be built in the United States, nobody knows what the cost really would be. But the GAO is estimating 700 million. What I hear from you is that five years' delivery. And I know people who are going to pay that. I know people who are in the business of ship construction and that sort of thing and know both U.S. and South Korean yards, they say it will be a billion. Oh wow. Nobody's going to pay that. It's not going to pencil out. It's not going to, you know, you get no return on your investment. And the delivery's on the never-never. So who knows? Yeah, yeah, yeah. But 200 million is a lot of money in South Korea. And that what you're really telling me is that to build an LNG ship. And wages in South Korean yards are comparable to those in the U.S. today. Interesting. So the inefficiency is really rampant in the U.S. Using the same wages, see, they're over the hill. It's what it is. They're over the hill. I've done some tracking on the production of these large ocean-going self-propelled ships. The U.S. has since 2000, the U.S. has delivered around 2.75 commercial ships per year. In Asia, there are dozens and dozens of them. World production is 1,500 ships a year. 1,500 ships a year. Not dozens at all. Yeah. In fact, it sounds to me like we've lost that game. We've probably lost the expertise, we've lost the infrastructure. Unless you can X, you have to be able to build for export because you cannot rely on the Jones Act market. Right. It's insufficient. It's artificial. But it's insufficient. Yeah. The business of building large commercial ships is a worldwide business. We've lost it already. We're riding on an artificial momentum and the world has taken our industry by storm and it's our own fault. Anyway, let's go back to the main point, though. We don't have the ships to do the inter-coastal, may I use that term again? Coastal. Coast-wise. No, coastal. Coastal trade. You've got coastal, which refers to east and Gulf Coast. You've got Pacific Coast. Yeah. And then you have via Panama Canal inter-coastal. Inter-coastal. And then you have non-contiguous trade. Okay. All right. But within the United States kind of trade, okay, however you want to classify that. We don't have the ships to do it. Yeah. We don't have really any ships, zero ships to do it. We must rely on foreign carriers, foreign ships that don't qualify to the Jones Act. And therefore, this administration is contemplating a waiver of those ships, foreign ships, for carrying LNG. Right. Okay. What is the reason for all of that? What is the administration saying about it? Where is the political pressure coming from? Can you talk about it? Political pressure is, well, this was all started by a request from the governor of Puerto Rico, Rosello, who needs the gas to run electrical plants in Puerto Rico. That's correct. Lord knows they need fuel. Yes. And they can source LNG cheaper from the existing two LNG export terminals on the U.S. Gulf Coast, as opposed to importing it from ... And Lord knows they need to save money. They don't have any money. From Trinidad. Yeah. Yeah. And then there's also in New England, during the winter, they have insufficient supply of pipeline gas, and they have to import LNG. And instead of importing LNG from foreign sources, they would like to be able to buy the LNG from the Gulf, which is a very reasonable thing. Yeah. Okay. So the administration hears the voices, and they're persuasive voices, I guess. Well, not only are there people who are interested in receiving the LNG, but there's also the people who produce the LNG. Want to sell it to Asia. They would also like to sell it to other U.S. citizens. Got it. Got it. Into those inaccessible places. Right. And then there's a question of Alaska. Alaska is developing a gas pipeline from the North Slope to parallel the oil pipeline. They've got enormous reserves of conventional gas on the North Slope. But no pipe. No pipeline and no export terminal. Right. So if they're going to build an export terminal, they've identified a site on Cook Inlet. They would like to be able to export LNG to California and Hawaii. Made in the U.S., yeah. And Hawaii, for sure. Okay. There's so many reasons. It's really tragic that we have to rely on foreign ships to do this. But I guess that's the motivation. It's sad that we don't have our own ships. It really is. Why 10 years? Is this supposed to be a significant window in order to permit them to do it? Are we going to be able to catch up in the 10 years? This was the request of the governor of Puerto Rico. They requested 10 years. And the reason they did that is because they have to sign what are known as off-take contracts from the export terminal for the fuel, for the LNG. And they need to be able to contract shipping. And much of this has to be done on a multi-year basis. And so by having a 10-year window, they can accomplish this. Now, this means something to Hawaii, because if you start giving a waiver, well, first of all, we have a waiver on LNG, even though the state of Hawaii, under David Ige, doesn't like LNG, there's still a possibility under another governor, another administration, we would get to like it. Well, we want to take a look at the AES Coal plant whose permit expires, I think in 2023, I think it is. Yeah. They're the low-cost producer, very low-cost. They're the ones who are keeping a cap on our electrical rates. The AES Coal. Yes. Once they go away. We better find something else. We're going to keep the prices down. Yeah. The people are leaving to go to the mainland now. So we would benefit, assuming we can find a way to accept LNG and leave Coal. You have to build an LNG receiving terminal. Like 10 million, 20, 30. Closer to half. Half a bill. Half a bill. Because you have to have the birth. You have to have the storage tank and the re-gasification. There's a big problem. That's a lot of bread. And then you have to have the pipelines. Huge. Huge. And it has a bridge fuel for us, right? But there's companies in the world that will install this. Mitsui's one of them. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. But it's still so much money. But over time and the amount of fuel that it's ... Okay. All right. I'm sure it's a large amount of money. One last question before we break, before we finish. As you said at the beginning, this would be a good move by the Trump administration and quote, if it works, there's some question about whether it would work. Yeah. What they're talking about using, there's an existing statute waiver of the navigation and coast-wise laws. And under that, there's two sections. One that applies to military cargoes and the other one that applies to commercial cargoes. And basically on the commercial side, it says if there are no existing coast-wise eligible ships, then you can get a waiver. And it doesn't state the period of time. It doesn't say how restrictive it has to be. It's really wide open. All the waivers that have been issued in the past under this second section, which and the first waiver was just after 2000, the year 2000, have been very short term. They've generally specified where the load ports were, where the discharge ports were, and given a week or two to complete the process of loading and discharge. So very narrow. Trump administration is looking at, since there are no real limitations in the statute, we go ahead and do a blanket waiver for 10 years. And if during the 10 years, we could find qualifying ships? Someone would have to build it. So would somebody oppose this? Would somebody take this to court? Of course. The Jones Act industry will take it to court. And they'll sue the administration. Oh, the shipyards. Not all the shipyards, but the shipowner, the Jones Act shipowners, they're all represented by an organization known as the American Maritime Partnership. And they would oppose it? They started life as the Maritime Cabotage Task Force. And they would oppose any exemption, any waiver of the Jones Act they would preserve it everywhere? They generally oppose any waiver that's even granted now under very short term. They should lose that case. Right? Mike Hansen. You're the lawyer. Hawaii Shipyards Council, thank you so much for coming around and helping us understand this. We'll see what happens. Thanks for having me, Joe. Aloha. Okay.