tv Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz on Climate Change CSPAN November 16, 2015 12:40am-1:41am EST
programs to tackle the challenges. much of this money will be businesses as a business proposition in response to the clear commitments that governments have made to d e-carbonized economies. we set parameters. electricity told distribution companies that x percentage of the power they distribute has to come from renewable sources. how they deliver that is up to them. it has placed a premium on the value of renewable energy generated at the beginning. there was a deficit of renewable energy. as the quantity of renewable energy has increased with what you would expect the marketplace to do, the premium has declined
because there is something closer to a balance between the demand from the energy distributors to meet their statutory obligations and the supply of renewable energy into the grip. >> ladies and gentlemen, we have come to the end of the period. i am delighted to have the foreign minister here and thankful to all of you for coming to the session. i would invite you to join me in thanking foreign minister philip hammond. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] the british parliament was in recess much of the week, so question time was not held. question time returns this week on c-span2 on wednesday at 7:00
a.m. eastern and again sunday night at 9:00 eastern and pacific on c-span. watch any time on www.c-span.org , where you can video -- find video of other british affairs programs. ♪ >> c-span presents "landmark vote, a guide to our "landmark cases" series, which includes mark perry versus versus theramatsu united states, brown versus the miranda education, versus arizona, and row versus wade. it includes highlights and the impact of each case. published by c-span in cooperation with cq press.
cases" is available for $8.95 plus shipping on www.c-span.org/landmarkcases. energy secretary ernest moniz on the upcoming climate change conference. then a look at issues that engage millennials across the world. then a look at the supreme court under justice john roberts. on friday, ernest moniz talked about the upcoming united nations climate change conference in paris. he talked about the obama administration's efforts to harness clean energy and took questions from the audience at the conference for international peace in washington. the discussion took place before the attacks in paris. it is about an hour.
>> good afternoon. i am still burns. -- bill burns. it is an honor to welcome ernie moniz to the carnegie. those who have worked with him are familiar with his m.i.t. smarts. those who have negotiated with him are intimately familiar with his toughness. all of you are familiar with his viral late-night tv appearances. i have learned a great deal from him over the years, from his mastery of the iran nuclear program to his debates with our nation's most esteemed
collection of nuclear scientist, the house of representatives. ernie is not only one of the nations most remarkable minds, his a remarkable public servant. i am pleased he has joined us to preview the paris climate conference this month. joining secretary moniz is steve clemons of the atlantic and founder of the energy program at new america. institution who has shaped some of the most significant policy debates about time. i cannot think of a more theequential debate than one over climate change in policy. among the most overarching challenges facing the world, climate change ranks at the top. the facts are as clear as they are compelling. 12 of the hottest years in history have occurred in the 21st century.
volume has risen by three inches in 1950, presenting a real and present danger to the coastline. this has led the department of defense to conclude it poses an immediate risk to national security. in addition to the rest of the coastline and environment, climate change is a threat multiplier that makes nearly all global challenges from poverty to pandemics more severe. under president obama's leadership, secretary kerry, secretary moniz, and their colleagues have spent several years building an international coalition to combat climate change. in paris, they will look to put the coalition to work and hopefully reverse today's very dangerous trend lines.
we are fortunate secretary moniz has agreed to make a pitstop at the carnegie on the eve of the final ministerial meeting in paris. we are fortunate to have the benefit of his wisdom and skill. please join me in welcoming secretary moniz and steve clemons. [applause] you.: thank bill burns. secretary moniz: he is a fabulous colleague in the administration, including the iran negotiation. this last weekend, i was in the middle east. rns sleptays bill bu here in every hotel we go to. thank you for the opportunity to come here today. discussion, we are releasing a report i will come
back to call "revolution now." let me say a few words about our pathway. the administration and the department of energy. i will take as a given the various issues bill talked about , climate risk, and really talk about the solutions. our approach, not surprising, perhaps, is we are going to be technology-focused. theme thatncing the energy technology innovation and the resultant continued cost reductions of energy technologies are ultimately key to meeting our challenges and climate change. for a whole bunch of reasons. first, quite simply, lower-cost clean energy solutions enable
policy to move forward more quickly. in the context of paris, we are at a pretty remarkable place compared to where we were a year ago. the joint announcement of president obama and xi in beijing last year changed the conversation globally. the fact that both countries have moved forward with important, national steps of commitments to their target, the united states with clean power plants, china with its trade announcement, has moved commitments by over 160 countries. commitments that are taken , quite reasonably ambitious. commitments that, when executed, will really move the needle on our approach to climate change.
we also know that analysis suggests that, nevertheless, these are not 2-degree centigrade commitments. it is closer to three. here is where the innovation theme comes in again. with continued cost reduction, what we would see is that enabling increasing ambition as time goes on. and that notion has been confirmed by many international partners. -- whyin terms of what the agenda is important, if we -- andate going forward i am not only talking 2025. , 2100.lking 2050 if we are going to bring along
everyone, including the least- developed countries, who have many challenges providing universal energy service too many of their citizens, we are going to need cost-reduction to continue. again, this is a central theme that we will be advocating. and today -- i am sorry. stops inl be two paris. as bill mentioned, next week i will have the pleasure of chairing my annual energy ministerial of the international energy agency. that will be followed 1.5 weeks 21 meetings inop ,aris, including december 8 innovation day, to continue the theme. we will be advocating
continuously through the end of the meetings. and next year, we get down to the real job of implementing the agenda. at the appropriate point, i would like to say more about revolution now reports. about some of the need technology we will showcase. .et me just show one graph there we go. we will not dwell on this right now. graph ofis the first the revolution now report. did shows cost reductions over the last six or so years in five technologies. scale,sed wind, utility
distributed photovoltaic, electric vehicles, and led lights. -50%, -60%, -70%, and -90% cost reduction. a remarkable story. not well known, that is why we are trying to highlight it with this, and the kind of story we need to continue. not only for these technologies but all. steve: let me ask you the obvious question. with this drop in price reduction, if we have achieved such a dramatic drop without carbon, why do we need to price carbon? secretary moniz: first of all, , ithere were a carbon price
said "if there were," it would clearly have the advantage of an economy-wide approach in terms of the least cost approach, probably through market mechanisms. necessary, in my view. but again, these kinds of cost reductions make that policy mechanism going forward certainly easier. some of this is clearly happening in a dramatic way. say, is the most impressive of those reductions. we have gone from very small employments, half a dozen years ago, even though the lifecycle
cost was in your favor. it was kind of a big barrier to put down $20 for a light fixture. now, it has come down to literally months of payback periods with 80 billion deployed. steve: you told me that india was about to go gangbusters on led. that may tilt the universe. secretary moniz: india is making mass purchases of led's. they have a current order for a few hundred million over three years. with that, they had driven the cost down to one dollar. amazing. of course, they are going to use that to distribute to the rural population. they are introducing lighting of this type. it is a game changer, certainly a life changer for families.
of course, the idea is with /6 the power,ng 1 it dramatically reduces the electricity for the lighting. people in the energy world see the transitions you are talking about as a big cost to the u.s. economy, leading to decreased competitiveness. this came up in the gop debates when marco rubio said, we just cannot go down that path. without being specific to rubio revolution, is this thinkonse to critics that retrofitting of the u.s. economy around next generation technologies is not a plan, as they would argue? secretary moniz: it is certainly a big part of that. that any ofphasize the reliable economic models of
that going suggest , very carbon has a very small impact on gdp. macroeconomic impacts are very small. however, there are distribution effects. that is where one gets into the politics, the economics, etc. in a societychange has some dislocations. but society has to adjust. that is where the administration is sensitive to the idea of needing to provide assistance to certain kinds of communities and areas with distribution impacts. this isy, the idea being a drain on the overall economy is just incorrect. steve: is this a "hair on fire"
issue? predecessor was with me in abu dhabi. i went through the panelists, and it were talking about iran and syria. jessica says, we have to focus on climate. i raised the question at that time with, why is the climate issue seen as a swishy issue? could it hold its own as a topic? i am asking a question on urgency, whether you feel this issue we are preparing for in paris hangs with the other major national security issues of the day. secretary moniz: the answer is yes. we take 2y is that
degrees. we have cooked in a lot more. it takes quite a while for the atmosphere to come into equilibrium. what are the consequences? is, insimple one to see fact, rising sea levels. , puttingn easily see aside for the moment the drivers of extreme weather, putting that aside for the moment, you see the amplification of the impact because of piracy levels. higher one example -- sea levels. we know the amplification effect. we know that the patterns of ought areainfall and dr
exactly what was predicted decades ago. we know that leads to issues like extreme wildfires. we know that leads to disease vectors. i will talk about my beloved , with thingsts like beetle ranges. is why we cannot afford to sit back and expect the characteristics 50 year timeframe for historical major changes in the energy system. you just can't do it. we don't have the time. by the way, when president obama
put out his action plan in june of 2013, he started off by saying look, we would love to work with congress on a legislative approach. something that could have an economy wide impact of the type we discussed earlier, have a market-based optimization, but then he also added we don't have time to wait. in the meantime we are going forward with using whatever administrative authorities we already have for an aggressive program. this is inherently a sector by sector approach using authority rather than the economy wide approach we could have if we can work with congress on an appropriate legislative solution. >> what is the mathematical equation look like overtime when we have such a dependence today on fossil fuel sources of energy and we were with the leaders of that energy the other night but
even with this you are not to reach the scale that displaces the overwhelming dependence on fossil fuel for many decades. how do you deal with that as this dirt of the whole portfolio? what is the equation equipment can go faster because of this or is it simply an incorrect assertion that wind, solar and other cannot achieve a greater scale than predicted question it. >> first of all, by the way on the technology side clearly for solar and wind in particular, the scale, even much more dramatically than we have now does require other solutions whether it's a combination of grid storage, smart grid, all of these possibilities. let me go back a step. as you know some like the expression and some don't, i personally never tire of it, the
all above approach. there are too many people who like the some of the above approach and some mean my favorite technology as the silver bullet. that's not going to work. there is not going to be a single low carbon solution for the world. there won't be a single solution for the united states. we will have a dramatic regional differences. we say all of the above but let me make very clear, all of the above starts out with a commitment to low carbon. now the statement is that we need a certain department of energy responsibility to advance the research and development demonstration for all fuels for a low carbon world. so for coal, for example, it's very clear. that means advancing and engaging in the same kind of cost reduction or carbon capture
utilization sequestration. what about natural gas. it is natural gas part of the problem or part of the solution? the answer is yes. [laughter] right now it is clearly part of the solution. it has a major role in co2 reduction through its market-driven substitution for coal in many places. however, not in this decade or the next decade perhaps, but as we go to a trajectory of ever lower carbon emissions, then natural gas will be to carbon heavy and go to sequestration. in terms of fossil fuels, what we need to think about is that if you look at solutions to climate change, typically what
you find is number one, and again i'm not talking short-term like ten or 15 years, i'm talking going out many, many decades, that the demand side of energy efficiency conservation always have to be a big part of the solution. i don't believe we can supply side our way out of the challenge over the long-term. supply is still important. what is the next sector, if you like, where you will cd urbanization? where you will see decarbonization? many industrial processes are very, very well tuned, or have
processes that are amenable to carbon capture. you have an ethanol plant or a natural gas plant, they tend to have, getting slight in slightly technical, co2 that is slightly cheaper to capture. the transportation sector is likely more challenging. for one thing, you have smaller mobile sources rather than large point sources and the reality is there is no higher energy density per cubic foot than a petroleum-based fuel. that's just a fact of life. that is obviously very convenient for transportation vehicles. nevertheless, we have a three-pronged strategy to address that. one is efficiency of vehicles. part of that are café standards
but a lot of it is standards of efficiency. >> biofuel and electric vehicles. there you go. >> tell us what it was like for you when you heard about the volkswagen scandal. in the end to the epa has to investigate. >> obviously, given the apparent evasion of some of these measurements, it's something we can't tolerate and we won't. i think the epa is correctly moving. >> how many do you think are out there? >> i hope none, but obviously the epa will move toward mobile testing to do the measurement in
real world drive cycles in use. we are driven to that. hell volkswagen resolve that issue with the regulators here --dash but it did take you off? >> well it was not nice. >> i did read a report which i hope folks will pick up and i understand that, i want to go to the audience real quick, but the doe role in this is you know you're working on vehicles and truck efficiencies and there is a fascinating array of things. it's always interesting when i meet people like you, i know you know the things in the energy field that were not talking about that we don't even know about. you know what the moon shots are that are cool. i like that part of the report that flirted with some of the
things that were coming on in the future. can you share with us a little bit about what's not in the report and what's a little further on. >> next week in paris, i mentioned technology showcase, these are technologies, but let me go quickly, how about flying wind turbines. >> i didn't know he was going to do this. >> about a 50-megawatt nuclear reactor that can be built in the factory and just taken over the highways to a site? how about a great efficient outside fuel shell? how about a great driver. how about, i was looking at the audience, approximately a quarter of you, you should remember this is the 50th
anniversary of the shelby core. this is. >> well i'll take you for a ride. >> our laboratory and companies, but this displays a 3d printed car. >> this is an electric vehicle but the point is, things like new manufacturing processes are highly efficient and that's going to part of the light waiting whether it's applied in a cold plant or a nuclear plant, and many thermal plant dramatically increase the efficiency of the plant. this is a hybrid solar thermal technology. it is an novel thing.
those are examples. >> how did you know i was going to ask that question. >> thank you. actually those are going to physically be in paris next week so that we can display to the ministers who are there why ambition is a good thing in addressing climate change and this will be part of the solution. >> that's an amazing thing so when you sort of look at all of that, what is the doe, how does it actually work how does the r&d system function? i do know your role in the nuclear arena. it's very well described but not very well understood. >> first of all it is highly varied and let me give you a different example to highlight that. let me start by saying this is
by no means our full research effort but certainly, we have 17 national laboratories and they play an essential role from everything from energy to nuclear science and our security responsibilities. in terms of how it works it is quite varied. if i start at the very basic research and, we have currently a net worth of 32 energy frontier research centers. this is use inspired basic science. first we bring the community together. 1500 scientists defined the course science challenges that would underpin future technology breakthroughs. each one of these centers is addressing one of those problems and doing it effectively. our three was created in 2009.
rpe was created for higher risk investments. for example that hybrid solar things was one of the rpe projects. i might say we believe that program is underfunded by a factor of three in terms of innovation and american capacity to innovate. let me take other examples. sequestration, we have a set of demonstration projects. they are risky but a a couple of them that are already working and we will have a cold plant turning on in 2017 with carbon capture, we have an industrial plants and we either use the co2 for enhanced oil production or
we put it into a very deep formation. finally one of those technologies that we had at the beginning with the cost reduction was utility scale solar. that fell by 60% in cost over that time period. 2009, this country had zero utility scale meaning greater than a hundred megawatts. now, another mechanism our loan program which has issued over $30 billion in loans and loan guarantees provided debt financing or backed debt financing for the first five utility scale projects all successes and that's all were doing. that's all we need to do because now there are 21 additional
projects with peer lee private financials. you have to get over the hump to show that these projects can get out there and work. that they are finance a bowl and etc. it's everything from basic science to high risk technology and low programs. i'll throw in one more in the solar arena. >> it sounded so much cooler than i thought it was. >> i've already emphasized the technology developments. you know, costs have now fallen so much for modules that the dominant costs are not the modules anymore. it's really the other stuff you have to do, particularly if you want to put a pv system on your rooftop. labor, material, another very
different thing we did is something called, son shot. it's about getting solar costs down to certain targets by 2020. in that program, besides technology it has a program that just works with cities and towns in terms of how do you streamline permitting. how do you get a permit down from a month to a day? it's technical assistance to do that. >> let me ask you a couple quick questions and then i want to go to the audience. >> how does this play out politically question what you are in a political position. has anybody drove across kansas recently? you get to that wet side of kansas and there are windmills forever. there must be 70 miles of
windmills. i had no idea. that is a red state. i happen to be born there. >> you don't have this graph here but that's the coolest graph. i wish i could show it's all view but maybe you should describe it. the point is when you lay that out over there, i was very was very surprised to see such an investment by someone over a vast expanse of land in western kansas. how did that happen? and does kansas know it? first of all the united states has a fabulous wind belt that runs up the middle of the country from texas to the upper great plains. this is a wind. there may be just a coincidence that at least a large part of that has a rather low population density because it's pretty windy but its enormous wind
resource and clearly the major load centers tend to be far away. building up high-voltage transmission is absolutely critical. we are talking about that again. texas has pretty much an isolated grid and they have an enormous wind resource and of course big load centers. if you get from oklahoma up through north dakota, then a big part of the job is moving the winter market. for those of you who can't see it, there are a number number of graphs in this one that i'm showing just demonstrating a staggering decrease in the wind capacity taking off. it's something i find fascinating. of essentially the same figure is there for all of the technologies. we live in washington which thus
far has not proven able to untie the political not that we are in and direction is hard to find. we been working a lot with cities and states and nonfederal players. recently the atlantic can do something called city lab when you bring in mayors from all over the world. they all have their climate plan do you interact at all with this nonfederal level and help give guidance, support and look at him innovation with what similar cities are doing? >> absolutely. just recently i was with mayor garcetti in los angeles. i was helping dedicate a novel solar system being installed in fire stations. it's emergency power for them but it's also emergency power for the neighborhood. you have to get yourself on charged up. if things are down for a while, the cities are doing a lot of
creative things. the mayor's conference, a couple years ago, the former basketball player, they are just innovating tremendously. i cannot underestimate how important that is. not just to the united states, but globally. our mayors are are being very active in partnering with other mayors across the globe. but the globe is going to be 70% urbanized. why do you rob banks which mark that's where the money is. if you want to address these issues you better go where the people are. that requires a big urban focus over the next several decades. part of that, especially in the united states, were not going to be building a new major metropolitan area. we may be enhancing the ones we have, but in other parts of the world, they are going to be
starting closer to scratch. what i hope there is that we also think about it genuinely new solution of how you design an urban environment. i'll just give one example i've always kind of liked. if you think about, imagine a city that is roughly speaking pretty much all electric, the vehicles are electric vehicles, and you say, quite correctly, no tailpipe pollution. but what then we don't say is zero by the way, very different noise levels. i have very different noise levels and maybe i i don't need this in my buildings. this can actually open up new
businesses for integrating our water our water and infrastructure in ways that are good for the environment but also provide a better quality of life. >> what are the oddest moments in the democratic debate was when hillary clinton talked about how she heard the chinese were in the parking lot and then they were over here and there was a scramble to find india and china at the last minute. to think paris will have any fun like that? >> first of all, despite the nature of the copenhagen conference, i want to say that i believe the copenhagen conference will go down as an important turning point as establishing important principles for the future negotiations. in paris, it's well known that
the inverse approaches being taken, that is the leaders will be there at the beginning at the conference charging the conference and their negotiating teams and the rest will be left the negotiating teams. >> let me open it up to the floor. it's been fun. wow, so many, is jim hsu told here? >> about to this gentleman right here. i will bring you the microphone. there are millions of people watching. tell us who you are and make it short. >> i'm a reporter and during the climate negotiations, how do you leverage future innovations? how do you bring into affect future solutions for current problems and get other countries on board and what should we expect this week?
>> in terms of the negotiations, several things, one is we will be looking to make strong commitments in innovation among a set of countries. that will include the opportunity to do more collaborative work. i'll give you one example of a natural, take india, india clearly has a tremendous need toward distributed generation as do we have a tremendous interest in distributed generation. we have more than we can do this. i think the ind c, the targets are pretty much that for this first round. we can talk about how we can work together on innovation to get more ambition so that when it comes time to revise those targets. that to me is how i am thinking about that. next week it will be about getting the innovation set up to
roll just a week and a half later. >> just a quick 32nd follow-up on your question, will other countries bring these ideas themselves #other things other countries are doing that we can learn from or anything you have seen that would be a shocker? >> absolutely. there is is a lot of innovation going on. >> what's the coolest thing you have seen? >> there is a lot of interesting work going on in the electrical vehicle space in other countries. there are also other alternative fuel vehicles. that is one area that there is quite a bit. we also could have said in our international activities, a lot of country have an interest in
our consultations with building an innovative system. there is a lot going on elsewhere but we are viewed as being in the forefront of that. we've done a lot of work in trying to understand what works in our country and a lot of that, research institutions and laboratory networks, we are trying new things. >> why would we give that knowledge to someone else? >> because we have a big global problem to solve. >> i'm an mit grad and a aaa fellow. my questions dems from what you were just saying as far as consultation. you also said earlier that we
need cost-reduction to bring everyone along the i was wondering if you could speak to challenges around intellectual property and technology transfer , especially in regard to developing countries. you also mention so many interesting technologies and i was wondering if you had any thoughts on trans atomic power for nuclear fuel for additional energy. >> trans atomic power, blah blah blah. >> i thought that was a transatlantic pipeline, but anyway, the most, what was the first question? >> intellectual property. >> that's right, we have worked out some very suitable ip arrangements in our collaborations.
for example china, we have significant program and a specific threat of that was working out ip arrangements which worked quite well. we are doing experiments at berkeley. this is a spin in approach in which our laboratory provides essentially investor and inventor opportunities. third, in terms of the trans atomic power, i have been briefed on that at mit but i won't go into any specific technology, but i will say this thought, a very interesting thing has happened. i show that nuclear reactor
scale, but there is something like 50 companies in the united states with private capital looking at innovative nuclear fission and nuclear fusion technologies. we don't need more than one to work. two would be great. it's amazing, it's a new way of innovation looking at nuclear because of its carbon free characteristics. >> the president put out a statement about the importance of nuclear. >> right. there was a nuclear power workshop particularly because of the president's interest in that we have 1 billion people who are hungry in the world, many small farmers and many in africa who live on marginal lands. how do we get a fraction of them to adopt next generation biofuel
crops to put it into the transportation network? >> that's probably, to be honest, a question a question that some of my colleagues in agriculture might be able to answer better. clearly what we are doing, as you know, we are doing the research and development for many different kinds of biomass feedstock and we are looking at, as you said, biomass on marginal lands, salt tolerant because of salt water invasions, etc. cetera in certain areas, we are doing that research. we have outreach with our renewable laboratory, but i'll be honest, i think the biggest
outreach on that happens through other agencies more effectively. we are trying to provide the tools. >> everybody is knotting me and i i will not write back. >> will go between here right here in the front. just make it brief. >> i wish i could. >> it's gotta be brief. >> i know. the issue here first of all, the economist magazine is ruining the closing of nuclear plants. that was interested in that. the recent article is suggesting there are places where if you buy an electric car your actually increasing co2 emissions. can you discuss that. >> bill gates talked about places we can invest in renewable vehicles but in the process you are actually increasing carbon. >> i think that depends very much, in this transitional
phase, it depends very much on what the mix is of fuels. so, for example, this is simpleminded but let's say an electric vehicle in the northwest versus one in the upper midwest is going to have a more positive carbon impact because it's drawing upon hydropower, for example, whereas the marginal benefit, and i'm not arguing against these being deployed everywhere, but the marginal benefit of an efficiency investment will be higher in the upper midwest than in the northwest. it really depends how the technology and fuels are matched to what's going on regionally. now course, i argue that the electricity sector in particular is going to be pretty much, in my view, the carbonized by the time we get to mid century and
some of those geographical affects will not apply. >> in the beginning of your talk you mentioned china. as i observed, when there is a state meeting between the u.s. and china, they have a topic called climate change. people call it, what is it now compared to a few years ago and how have you worked with your chinese counterpart before the paris meeting to ensure the substantial result from the meeting question. >> first of all, again i have already said the joint announcement last november, about a year ago, was clearly a major turning point and that has now been followed up in just about every meeting with president obama with additional
progress here in september. the two presidents basically announced, more or less, the targets for paris at the same time and we are working together on that. at the same time, the announcement last november, if what looks at the background papers points to a significantly expanded role for the department of energy collaboration with china on energy technology, it also added it both enhanced the scope of what we were already doing in some areas like carbon capture and buildings, etc., but it also added a completely new line of activity in terms of the
energy water nexus as a focus area. i might also add even in the areas we were already working together in, like carbon capture, even there we added new focal points, for example, the big utilization right now of captured carbon dioxide, as i said earlier, is to enhance oil efficiency. in the united states we are producing about 300 barrels of oil per day from co2 flooding of mature reservoirs. now what we added, and it's in the document from last november and moving forward, is enhanced water recovery using co2. the idea is there are lots of uses of water and we are in the
middle of selecting a site for our first enhanced water recovery project. >> that is something with china. >> it's kind of an antiquated group, is in a? it sort of leaves china out and other big energy players out. is that a problem that you are going to hang out with the folks that aren't the problem? how does china build in in the weekend coming up question that. >> we are going to hang out with chinese as well because they will be present. so the iea membership by its construction in the 1970s, in response to the oil shocks, however the world looks different today than the 1970s. the iea is a number of of dimensions looking to do some modernization. that clearly includes, among other things, the idea of
welcoming dialogues with the big economies in the big energy companies. we expect china there and india and indonesia, quite a few countries that are not two-day members. and our friends from brazil. >> regarding hydro-policy efficiency act of 2013, what has been done and what is the next status and what comes next? how will that affect the next five, ten or 20 years? >> in the united states? >> yes. >> that's a hard one to answer, to be honest. i don't see that we are going to build any big maggot dams in the united states. there is a lot of interest in small hydro.
this also has a lot about, if i remember, i'll get it wrong, i think this may be incorrect, i think there think there is an order of 100 megawatts of opportunity for powering small unpowered dams. for example a lot of that is with the corps of engineers and those kinds of projects so we can research in some of the novel hydro and also hydrokinetic technologies. >> this gentleman here. >> with the reduction in the cost of production producing these technologies, our government subsidies still
necessary even with consumer demand? >> good idea. what if we took away all subsidies for all energy requirements? what would that look like? we believe that because of necessity of dramatically accelerating low carbon transition, we still think some of these well-placed renewable investment tax credits should continue. now forever? probably not. would that be helped if we had in stead something that internalizes the price of carbon emissions? yes, but where we are today, today, we think a need those and be there is an issue of continuing major credits in the fossil area which are little bit more difficult to defend.
just in closing, i just learned learned recently that you are an avid soccer player. what position do you play and you have any games lined up? >> avid should not confused with good. i play anywhere. our season is over. >> you have anything lined up in paris? >> no. >> ladies and gentlemen, thank it >> it may, the issues that to engage millennial's around the world. issues combating extrm.