It is indeed a pleasure for me to introduce you to a good friend of mine, peter spoke out ski. Peter this mission in life is to leave a world away are proud of to our children, he is a m. I. T. Educated physicist and engineer. Serial entrepreneur, planter paste, social innovator, and author. He has worked in nasa, at the fairchild slum Artificial Intelligence lab in palo alto, he has taught at m. I. T. , he has developed his own Machine Vision company, automated visual inspection llc. He holds 27 and is on the board of climate a Financial Technology company designed to help complete the global transition to 100 Percent Clean Energy by 2040, by tripling the rate of investment in solar projects. Now, a decade ago, peter decided that a warming climate was the greatest threat to our future. And he decided to devote all his energy, 24 7, to solving this problem. To tell you the truth, peter has the perfect background to do this. As a physicist, he can speak the language to scientists. As an engineer and inventor, he can talk to people working on capturing co2 or oxidizing methane. As a serial entrepreneur he can speak to investors we. Ive known peter for more than 40 years and have worked with him and we in a small way, have helped overturn conventional wisdom. More than two areas successfully. Now, the conventional wisdom of the world, on climate, is that we need to limit co2 emissions. And do a bunch of things to become net zero by 2050. In the meantime, we continue to pour co2 into our atmosphere. Now, peter challenges this conventional wisdom. He feels that we should not be satisfied with such a world. We can do better with current technology. He feels that we can and should return to co2 levels to preindustrial levels. He is quoting the term climate restoration. He launched the foundation for climate restoration in 2017, to work with top scientists, innovators, policy makers and others to create the understanding and policy needed to further climate restoration. And the foundation is creating momentum to help get this adopted as a goal by the United Nations. And even the vatican. Peter helped a number of other entities to help achieve climate restoration, including the climate restoration safety and governance board, the methane action. Blue dot change dot com. And the stable planet alliance. He has been an investor and in many. Companies working in climate restoration. Synthetic limestone, clean energy financing, coal fusion, Ocean Restoration, kelp and methane oxidation. He lives in Silicon Valley with his wife and he has a son and daughter. He just flew in last night to be with us today here. So please welcome peter fiekowksy. Scott, thank you so much. I dont know if i need to say anything you gave my whole talk. But, there are some aspects that should be interesting. First of all, thank you everyone for being here. Thank you for being interested. Actually, everybody is interested in the climate, from here to salt lake city, the Great Salt Lake has begun to dry out. We are worried about the air pollution, about the sun from that. And its due in part to global warming, in part to the decreasing population, in part to the farming practices. But we are all concerned. Now, i left Silicon Valley, i left my house yesterday afternoon and why i have to one year old grandchildren who have been running all around the house and they are pulling books off the bookshelf and my wife, who is sharing the manning, says okay theyre going off to the airport. They waved goodbye. It was great to actually have grandkids that we can take care. Of but this talk is not about grandkids, and yet, it is about our grandkids. And that is the main point. That what makes climate restoration real is the fact that we have our children, we have grandchildren. We have, i dont know how many, probably not many of us have great grandchildren yet or great great grandchildren. A lot of us have great grandchildren, it is about future generations. There is a delight of working on climate restoration, we get to start combining western values of growth with the indigenous values of seven generations. Because we are actually just giving a chance to commit to future generations. So, the way i got involved in this, it started when i was a young adult, 19 years old at m. I. T. Here i am in the lab reading the journal of science. And the commentary on. It theyre talking about co2 levels going up, which we know, about we knew co2 levels were going up in the 19 hundreds. They were already burning coal and the calculations were easy to do. And there was a certain amount of fear there in 1975, but i, said you know, we know how to get co2 out of the air. This is a little after the 1972 growth came. Out implement to growth book said, you know, we are on this ever expanding economy. At a certain point were gonna hit a limit. I thought, well, thats pretty obvious. A lot of us did that experiment in some class where you have a petri dish into you get something growing in, it overnight it takes over the whole thing. The next day the petri dish is dead again. And i thought, well were going to deal with. This weve dealt with everything up until now, until 1975, the cold war, everything else. And by the book, it said the year 2000, things are going to start getting serious. By 2020 they will be quite serious. I thought, well, chemical engineers know how to get co2 out of the air. We have submarines, we have this is the end of the apollo program. We have spacecraft. We could get the co2 out of the air. These guys could be underwater for the Nuclear Submarines could be underwater for half a year at a time. I wasnt worried that they needed more science, they needed more engineers, and the secret is that we we dont think were that smart. I thought, im not gonna have to be a chemical engineer. Thank god does a Chemical Engineering department here at m. I. T. God bless. Them i continued work on astrophysics. I got to do chemistry and a galaxy that is 50 million light years away. I actually figured that i wouldnt hurt anyone if i made a mistake, no one would die. And i figured that smarter people than i would deal with getting the co2 out of the air and make sure our grandchildren and great grandchildren would have a fine planet to live on again. And so i go to college, move to Silicon Valley, get my business started, and it was only a few years after that that i met scott. We were both full and hearing with this Organization Called revolt. It was open since 1970, nine working to address hunger and poverty issues. I learned an important lesson or shun with scott and the others. In 1985, unicef came to us and said listen, we have made a promise in 1975 to vaccinate all the worlds children. At rotary, that sounds familiar. So, come 1985, the politics did not look very. Good they got about halfway there, the last half was the hardest. I expected to see some heads nodding. And there was a demonstration, the likelihood of getting foreign aid for Something Like that didnt look good. But we did it. And we actually got the funding and the global vaccination rate, went from 8 85. Its stated 85 since 1990. It wasnt 100, but it changed the future of our planet. It was one of the big projects that rotary has taken on, the immunization. And then we took on microfinance. Then again, we made an ambitious goal to discover are the hollered things about it. And achieve the goal of getting half the worlds population on those living on less than 1, day get them involved in microfinance. And we didnt. And the thing i learned was that if you want to do something ambitious, when i was young, president kennedy said, were gonna land man on the moon and bring him back safely by the end of the decade. Even for a sixyearold, that was clearly impossible. Not 100 impossible but if i had been a betting boy i wouldnt have been on it. It produces miracles. If you look at anything in the room, its influenced by that program, president kennedy started that. By 2010, it was clear that the progress we made in hunger and poverty was ending. Harvests were getting difficult, places like syria, you, know we think of it like a terrible war, and its a terrible war in syria. But it started with global warming. The severe drought started and no one knew how to deal with it. People in the rural areas came to the city, the politicians didnt know what to do about it and the appropriate things seem to be to have a civil war, which has been going on there. But it started out with global warming. And i can see that things are only going to get worse. And i figured, you, know its been 35 years since i decided that chemical engineers should work on this. And so i went back to the Climate Community and, oh, ken scott and i had colleagues who had started citizens final lobby. It was easy, we walked across the hallway and asked the question. I asked the, question, well how is it going . You are moving the co2 from the atmosphere so we can give our children a healthy climate . And it was silence. Remove co2 from there . Thats not our job. We are reducing emissions. And i said well, thats strange because we cross the threshold of what the science is telling us is survivable in 1988 when co2 went above 320 parts per million. Some of you recognized that number, 300 parts. Million if you dont, you should read about. It but it was well known that thats the level above which the survival of our species becomes it to serious doubt. And we stayed on that tangent, reducing emissions, which made since the 1960s. And sort of made sense in 1975. We need to keep reducing emissions, of, course but were way beyond that to solve the problem. How many of you have ever heard in experts say that if we fulfill the goal, get to net zero emissions, essentially eliminate the emissions by 2050, how many of you have heard in experts say that that would be enough to ensure the survival of our humanity . Okay, probably no one. If i asked to her today, that you probably couldnt give a name because the experts know that it doesnt. Everyone that i suggest, everyone the same thing i did in 1975. He said someone else smarter than i is going to take care of this. And about 2014, after four years of grappling with that i said, okay, good im gonna declare the goal of restoring the climate just because its the nice thing about having an m. I. T. Degree, you can do stuff like this and people dont look across side at you. Last cross identified and have that. And then we establish the field of climate restoration. Which essentially is bringing co2 levels back to what they were preindustrial. Doing it while we still can, which we said was 2050. This is as logical as president kennedy, saying by the end of the decade. It just made sense. Originally we said by 2080, because i wasnt quite as ambitious. To many people look to me cross eyed and said, i dont think thats going to work. I said great, well do it by 2050. Many of you have built houses or done we built a car or something. You just make a goal and you figure out how to do it, and you know it takes longer than he thought. So for the bottom line, everybody, and ive been working on this for ten years, everybody wants to leave a world that were proud of to her children. A world that our children will survive. That involves getting co2 back to levels that humans can survive the last 10,000 years. To develop agriculture and civilization. Obviously the right level. We want to have a sustainable population. We know how to do, that you know how to have families i will not talk about that here. Its in the book. Having a small family is not rocket science. Most of us know how to do, that its a matter of knowing where we are going and having the ambition to actually say, we are headed to humanity flourishing. To restoring climate and a sustainable population. So, Everyone Wants it, and it turns out we can do it. We have the technology and the finance. This is something you probably have not heard before, we have the technology and the finance to restore the climate and restore sustainable populations. We can do it by 2050. And you are probably saying, thats crazy because if you read the news, if you read the news you are thinking its gonna cost 100 trillion dollars. Which is the global gdp. Set that, aside because theyre looking at the wrong goal. 1992, the goal we have now was established the United Nations, which was to stabilize great houseguest levels. Co2 and methane. At the end of this, what you will get, is our job is to convince the United Nations that the goal is to restore and stabilize original levels. To restore. It made since the 1992, we dont need to restore it. But a lot has happened in 30 years. And it takes people, like, you to go to the officials which can include President Biden, includes people at the United Nations, and say listen, we actually want to restore the climate. Why do i make it sound so easy . Because nature has done it ten times last million years. You know about the ice, age i imagine, we teach our kids about them and there was that movie that they have now that we didnt have when we were kids. About the ice age. S and nature, before and i, sage removes the amount of co2 from the atmosphere that we are going to remove between now and 2050. A trillion tons, 1000 gigatons of co2. If you look at the co2 graph overtime, over the past million years its gone up and down, when the co2 is low, and i, sage one its high, its a warm period like weve had. Not superhero, because were way above anything weve had in the last million years. But that is the trillion tons. 130 parts per million. We know how nature. Didnt it took until 1992 actually understand it. Because the trick is subtle. But its photosynthesis that alas the co2 to go up and down and make the ice ages and get out of the ice ages. But its not the co2 that you are thinking. If it is not. Trees trees are, great im all in favor of trees, keep planting trees. But trees, as we all know, die after a certain number of decades, and then they either burn or brought. The carbon goes back into the air. We need something that lasts more than a few decades. What nature does, its in the ocean. The ocean is three fourths of the surface of our planet. Theres lots of area, there is an abundant water, nutrients, nitrogen, except for one. Most of the ocean is blue. I love blue, ocean going to those beaches in the caribbean and hawaii. But blue isnt green. Our green ocean is what we need. Green is where you have photosynthesis. In the, ocean when the plants grow, there is algae basically, when it grows, the animals that eat it die and sink into the deep ocean, where theres no oxygen. And dont, roth and thats how i say shoes are able to sustain for 50,000 years. Because the carbon is stored in the deep ocean where theres no oxygen. Somehow the current changes in the oxygen starts to become available and the co2 comes back out. The question is, how do we turn the beautiful blue ocean in certain critical spots at certain critical times grain . What nature does is have the magic nutrients that is missing in iron. Because the iron is not soluble. It tends to sink down to the bottom of the ocean. It is a phenomenally small amount. The Scientific Method only allows the scientist to measure it in the 80s. And 1990, they came up with what they called the iron hypothesis, which is the explanation for ice ages. Theres a lot of gray hairs here, we grew up we had no idea what caused ice age because we only were in 1990 when they discovered. It the iron on the sea floor, at the beginning of the ice, age it was dust from dust storms, blowing across the ocean. Occasionally from volcanoes that triggered the removal. We can do the same thing. I think you probably know is they have no phds on this payroll. Major has no computers, no scientific journals. Nature just did this randomly, getting the dust storms a certain amount of dust which had a certain amount of iron. A test was done 13 tests of this have been done in the last 25 years. The last one, about ten years, ago was a pretty good scale. It was about over 100 square miles, 100 mile diameter area in and eddie in the gulf of alaska. And it it is a question about 100 million tons of co2. So they know it works. Interestingly, if you are a little scientific you can go to what is called the killing, curve you can google, that which is a graph of co2 measured since 1958. A scientist whose name was keeling started doing measurements on a mountain in hawaii. And the curve is going up up up, ever since 1958. And of, course before that, to but they didnt have those measurements. But it plateaued only one time, and that was after mount could to, both 1950, one it blew so much dust and the ocean that it increased the iron in the area and it absorbed all the co2 that we admitted in that year or year and a half. It was 25 billion tons of co2. So, that is how we will almost certainly do. It majors been doing it for millions of. Years we know that that kind of changes something nature has adapted to. It is safe. And its been done 13 times. No ones ever seen a detrimental side effect. Whats very cool is when they did in alaska they knew the algae was food for. Fish they are hoping to increase the cast of i forget which salmon, they discovered it was actually a different salmon that the following your quadruple because the salmon had food. Now, different species, the scientific knowledge is still were still learning a lot about the migration of fish, they also discovered two years later that orca whales started having babies. Again they hadnt had any babies in eight or nine years. They had food. And so the female orcas got pregnant and actually delivered babies two years later. So theres a lot of beneficial side effects. The cool thing is that the fishery impact the numbers i saw was it was about 100 times more, from alaska salmon, the time is coming for them to start again. Theyve been working on it and hopefully in the year, maybe year and a half, they will do that again and do it in other parts of the world. Why is it taking so long . That is why were here, and that is why i wrote the book. We have got to think about the future we really want. That is not the one that we think we are weve been living in this world for 40, 50 years. Climate has been a political issue. Its the left versus the, right the good people in the bad people. No. We all want the same thing on the climate. And when you realize, that you say okay, what we want is to restore co2 levels so humans can survive. And we can do it, and it frees up the money and the courage to do it. Other organizations i started last year, which didnt make it on the, list i gave it to, scott is the climate restoration safety and governance because what we discovered is we moved forward over the last five years or so, that as social beings we are not comfortable doing this without some sort of governance. With that because the u. S. Is still living in 1982 in terms of the goal, they are not in position to govern restoring the climate because its not part of their commission. So we said okay, we will form an interim government. It make sure all the projects that are acting to restore the climate are done safely and effectively, legally and ethically. That is a very interesting thing that we discovered. What it means to do unethically is to address all of the communities who are interested in the outcome. Thats pretty much all communities in the, world but some of us focused on indigenous versus commercial versus certain state groups. Anything. And political whatever people do have to be acceptable as liberals and conservatives. For bringing all of them and to look at the cost and the benefits, the risks, so on. To make sure that the communities a description of the impact of restoring the climate on those communities. So members of the community can say, okay, someones researched, someone smarter than i has dived into the climate world and made for my group, alaskan, catholics, any group. So im going to wrap up here, the bottom line is we all want the same thing. Set aside the politics, once you realize that we can actually do it, the politics dissolves. Because politics is sort of like the rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. If you think that you are not going to make it, then the natural human thing to do is to fight against the other person, against the other team. Montour all on the same, Team Everyone ends up working together. So we all want the same thing. It is right there in front of our nose, the second thing is in addition to ocean fertilization, which is life. I dont want to take too much time on that. But i say just happen over hundreds of thousands of years cycles, over hundred million years, 99 99 of the carbon on our planet is on the bottom of the c is limestone. The skeleton shell of sea animals and plants. And theres a company in Silicon Valley that makes synthetic. Once it does the same thing that oyster does make an oyster shell. Its not rocket science. But, again its only coming into light now because more people are saying, oh we want to restore the, climate we want the co2 the limestone is sold out the main ingredient for concrete in our buildings. The scale is about right for restoring it. But that is another story, you have to read my book. We all have a few readings to go to today. So we can do, it we have the technology and finance, we have plan a, plan b, plan c. What is missing is the political will to go beyond the 1992 goal. And this is the group of people to work on that. And so, my invitation to you is to work with rotary and other organizations are involved with. There is the environmental physical yeah thats right, the sustainability rotary action group. I talked to them yesterday and their language is actually right on the path to climate restoration. Theyve gone beyond the yuan already. In fact, its actually the First Organization ive seen where maybe people i know can help to. That but their language already goes beyond stabilizing the co2 levels,. It actually brings it back to safe levels. So i urge everyone to strengthen them and support them. Go to d. C. And go to the u. N. One of our targets this years President Biden, trying to get him to declare a u. S. Commitment to restoring the climate for future generations. That sounds easy enough. And it is easy enough if he has support of people like you. Because its such a nobrainer. But at that level you cant stick your neck out the way i can. Not at that level. So what we can do here is we can work with that to support the administration, but you know, its nonpartisan. Its not even bipartisan. Its just nonpartisan, working together, submitting bills this week promoting how its going to provide funding for Ocean Restoration. For research, to bring more data. And we know it works. But the data is not published because there wasnt any money to publish it because it wasnt part of the plan. Climate restoration share it with your family. Imagine sharing it with your grandkids. Say, we are restoring the, climate you can count on these guys. If you get into trouble, you come to me. But really, you know, it changes your whole worldview. And you can do what i did to get involved. About the time that i met, scott i sort of making monthly donations at the time where we with both volunteers. I recommend the foundation from climate restoration. Any organization, but the monthly note on your credit card bill is reminder, the way the brain works, regulatory mind or telling your brain that you are committed. Because we forget. And once you are committed then you will start sharing it with more people. And then President Biden will share it. Okay, President Biden says, i want to take care of future generations. I work closely with a lot of indigenous nations. They love it because since the beginning of our country they said, look were committed to seven generations. Seven generations principle to make sure all of our decisions work for seven generations. That allows us, and the u. S. , to be in harmony with the nations that were here before we got here. And will eliminate a lot of disharmony that has played plaguing us for centuries. Cher clement restoration, read the book, and i will have books for sale here and you can also i have a qr code if you want you can find out or just go sign up. Foundation for climate restoration dot org. And just give a monthly donation, it could be small, it could be big, its up to you. With that, i will take questions. Yes . I think theres a little bit of dynamics here that i would like you to explain. For example, we want to have grass that can absorb carbon dioxide, but then theres a movement to conserve water, so we want to get Artificial Grass which will release back carbon dioxide. And then you want to go to electric cars, but theres a problem because electric cars can use the batteries that are hard to dispose, so they create a waste problem which creates other contaminants and those types of things. So how do you balance those two factors that youre trying to accomplish because i dont i think people are more concerned about not having water then worried about if theres a possibility of Climate Change. Especially when the attitude is we have a Climate Change problem. I think we are asking is there are a lot of small things that we do, like the cars, artificial turf, planting these, trees or those, tree so on. All these little decisions that we make, and how we make them, is the face of restoring climate. Thats what youre asking. Its a hard question. Its also an easy question. The fundamental thing is this, in the history of humanity, always been able to count on Mother Nature to take care of us. Like when i was a kid, i made a hole in the carpet and my mom took care of it. It was a long time later. But when your child, mother and father take care of things. Humanity has been a net. In our childlike, days motto nature takes care of. It we have the pottery barn rule, which is you break, it you own it. We broke. It and that becomes a turning point, you become. Adults youre like oh my, god i have to be responsible now for the future of humanity. And the thing, is this is the first time in its history of our planet, certainly the history of man, where we actually are responsible for the future of humanity. In the past, if the roman empire fell, then another empire took over. If one country, fell another country takeover. It was no big deal. Its like playing cowboys and indians when i was a kid. Whoever, one it doesnt make a, difference we would come back and that period is, over or no one. Humanity we have to create the narrative that we are creating a future of humanity. What has been missing is weve been playing this carburetor all these questions weve been asking, which is a childlike way to do it. Its appropriate, thats what we have been like since the beginning of our species, and probably before. We have to start the new narrative of saying, we are going to have a sustainable climate in a sustainable population. Everyones going to get educated, or everyone can expect to get educated and helped. Thats the way its gonna go. Once you do that, the answers to the questions dont matter. My answer to do, is do whatever you do, inspire, yourself thats one thing it will make a difference. This is a question from zoom, where can we read more about the Alaska Project . My book would be the best place to do it. It has been about comfort reversal for many reasons. So the question, is where can someone read more about the Alaska Project. We have a chapter on that. And theres a lot of spatter ing the most comprehensive is in the book. Yes . To have anything to say about the modular new Color Program that people are trying to get established . Yeah, i can say a little bit about. That i think yes, thank you. The question, is what about the modular new Trailer Program that could get momentum and attention . And it will do what it does, so, i dont i recommend spending much time worrying about. It people who are working on it, i know quite a few of them, theyre working hard. There will be places where that will probably be the right way to go. For example, we have submarines that use those new killer modular reactors. Technically thats not correct but in your imagination that is correct. And they are going to be places that will use them. In fact, the cost is about ten times higher than the cost of solar and wind. So its not gonna be many places that will be useful. I, and a number of other, people are working on coal fusion, if you know that, is great, if you dont, dont worry about it. If that works the way it looks like it. Will that will displace a lot of that. A lot of smart people working on these things. The governance is actually quite. Good i recommend dont worry about it much. You mention the alaska study. You saw some benefits, but did you also see any negatives . Im guessing thats in your, book but can you tell us a little better now . People have worked hard for a negatives. A couple of things people, wrote but they said, well the closest thing to a negative was, someone wrote, and i dont know who was, i cant tell you where to find, it but i was told that someone wrote that they did this 250 miles offshore. And somewhere on sure there was a plankton bloom. But it seems to be unrelated. Again, this is something natures been doing for millions of years. There are scientists have done test for 25 years and no ones ever reported. People have updated it but theres been no data. No demonstration. Go ahead. Okay, i find this very interesting because really, first of, all theres a lot of people who dont believe that tsai mcclain is real. And thats just the nature of. Earth but what youre saying here is positive, not necessarily its climate, change but what i understand is change in life, and also taking away economy. So what you have percentage is an increase in economy for people actually feeling they are not a lot to do stuff. My question to you, present this as a way to increase fisheries, water and oceans, to help bring people around versus the opening on the resistant part thats already there and not completely understand. Yes, so the question is, there are people who say Climate Change is not real. But this is a very positive approach. How do we make use of that . The interesting thing is, i have yet to meet someone who really claims that Climate Change isnt real. My relative, who seem to be climate deniers, i talk to them they say essentially what you pointed to, well, i dont think its worth giving up the whole economy for a rumor of some impact that will have. The answer to the question of what do we, do we have to reframe, it because climate is not controversial in the 19 80s. Reagan had to make a decision to go with science, or go with the Market Economics. He decided that free Market Economics was more effective at solving problems. So he went that way. It turned it into a political football. No one thought about that we would have to reassure humanity for our kids. It didnt occurred anyone because since the beginning of time, for hundreds of thousands of, years millions of, years you could always count on the planet continuing. But that has changed. Now now we can actually and ive had no problem telling everyone that we all want to store the. Climate so we can promote it and, again, thats why we have people like you here and thats why i wrote the book. Because we want to start spreading the message. Because its hard to record round it, weve been fighting this for 50 years, i mean, we can stop fighting now . Yeah, we can stop fighting now. We have another zoom question. Has this restoration project proposal if so, and if, not with our Industry Leaders who will oppose this . Yes, so the question is, has this been proposed to President Biden or the administration . And other people who will oppose it . So i dont think its been its probably been proposed biden, secretary of energy has mentioned climate restoration back in the summer. It didnt produce any waves either. Way but we have given the book to members of the administration. As far as i can tell they are waiting for gray hairs like here to tell them, listen, you should do it. And then the flipside is either, well funded industries who would oppose it i know that some of the biggest potential funders are conservatives. Republicans, people who fund a lot of republican causes. There is a lot of progressives also would love to fund it. The questions are, are there any potential losers . And you know, the only people whove been opposing it so far has been the Scientific Community, in part because if climate worse ofd we would lose a lot of scientific. Jobs a lot of money going into climate research. If we were just solving, it the very brilliant women and men might have find new areas to research. And so, at this, point my major focuses how to bring in the Scientific Community into the fold. We have great support from indigenous communities, from those republican and democrat equally strong. Lets do it together. The last thing needs to be bringing in the Scientific Community. I think it will be easy once we line things up. They are my brothers and sisters, i dont think its going to take long. Yes . Renewables, versus carbon generated co2. You seem not too worried about the adoption of renewables. Talk about that. The question, is renewables. We have a lot of attention put on admissions and renewables and how we deal with reducing emissions. I dont put a lot of attention on that. Chapter two of the book, the math is simple, fast forward to 2050, we are essentially cleaning ourselves from fossil fuels. What is a look . Like, well it looks like all the energy we need to travel and cook and heater houses is coming from renewable energy. From non fossil fuels. Okay, good, how do we get there from here . Well, we know how much energy is needed to run our cars, our planes, our trains, factories. Its 20,000 gigawatts. I know that means. But its essentially 20,000 large power plants of Clean Energy Generation needs to be built. Oh my, god how much does that cost . Well, if you go google, it will find out it costs roughly 1 per what. So 20,000 gigawatts would cost 20,000 or about 20 trillion dollars. That is 50 , because everything gets more expensive. So make it 30 trillion dollars. 30 trillion dollars i dont have that in my bank account yes, im giggling. We do have that in the bank account. After the u. N. Climate meeting a year and a half, ago it was promised 130 trillion dollars for the transition. We got the money to do. It we had the technology to do it. Its going to take a few decades to build all of that infrastructure. A lot of people will be changing jobs from fossil fuel to clean energy. I dont worry about. It think on we have millions of millions of people working on. It please the forking on it. Have a really good time working on it. Thank, you scott. Yes . Two questions, one, from your recent comments, if this Technology Works and perhaps we dont need to clean ourselves from fossil fuels. Therefore the fossil fuel companies should support the technology. Number two, can you address the scale and magnitude . When we talk about co2 erupting and how that causes what percent of our shallow sees what we need to apply the technology to . Okay, remind me if i forget the second question. Short Attention Span here. Now i forget the first question. It seems oh, we might not need to wean ourselves from fossil fuels if we can remove the co2. Why would we need to remove our fossil fuels . Well, first of all, they are really unhealthy. I dont know when the last time you sat in front of the back of the diesel truck, enough said. Our children, we dont want our children riding in diesel buses anymore. The Health Issues are huge. Environmental issues, i dont know if youve seen the coal mine, but in fact the area of land we need to use solar is half the area of land weve used for coal mining. So just ignoring climate and the environmental Health Issues, theres plenty of reason to eliminate fossil fuels. The other is that its much less expensive. We all know hes free. Sunlight is. Free if you want to buy Technology Electricity these days, generally two thirds of the cost to install solar farm or wind farm, its simply buying your energy from coal plants or natural gas plant. Its just cheaper. But it takes a decade or two to build all the infrastructure. That is the reason were still doing. It because its more expensive right now to use fossil fuel, but weve got the infrastructure. And of, course we have the laws which encourages makes it harder for them to do the transition. But were getting. There and i really encourage our rule makers to make better rules. Great question. The second question was how much of our seas so how much of our shallow well, none of the shallow seas are needed. So the ocean fertilization, the Ocean Restoration happens in the deep. Ocean and shallow ocean, you dont need it because you have runoff from the shoreline. It gets the deep, ocean where theres no shoreline nearby, and theres no iron that can make a difference. And, good question, 1 . So if you do the calculations, the 80s where they will publicly do it, because we want to exactly duplicate how nature does it. The dust storms are localized in intermittent. So we know nature knows how to do. That we want to do it, localized, and we can do it in an eddie which is typically hundred miles in diameter. That keeps it contained in that region for about eight months. And then it goes shallow, between the storms or forming. You want your field to go fallow if you want to keep your land. Healthy when you do the calculations, about 1 of the ocean is needed for that. Yes . And you absorb too much co2 that they lose a lot of their billety to absorb . More is that true . If it is true, how does adding iron does that take co2 out of the ocean as well as out of the air . What does it do to the equation . So two, questions one is as the planet warms, up the oceans ability to absorb co2 get left. Thats true. And what is the impact of that . Its not too much. Because the plants in the ocean, the phytoplankton, that will pull the co2 out no matter what the temperature. Is so thats not a problem. So if you ignore the green phytoplankton, then it becomes an issue. And i certainly worry about that ten years ago when i entered the field. Turns out its not significant because the plans are converting the co2 into sugars and so on. I was the second question . It is adding iron to the ocean, whats that going to do to the level of co2 and their . So, the iron has almost no. Impact its the ratio of 1 million to one of iran to co2. So it all falls down to the bottom within a year. So the impact on the ocean, it will be pretty much like the ocean was before going to the last ice age, probably. The good news is that all of these affect our short term. So as soon as you start putting iron in the ocean, six months later its back to normal. 6 to 12 months later is back to normal. Okay. Thank you. How about a round of applause . Peter, thank you for that enlightening presentation. Its material that five will say none of us have heard. Before i look forward to learning more about your science and your program. And 1840, eight husband my fabric on a journey of self emancipation. Disguised as a wealthy disabled white man with a servant, the crafts left georgia avoiding slave traders, Law Enforcement and even, friends well while trying to conceal their identities. The author of master, slave, husband, wife, recounts their harrowing journey north. And the impact of a fugitive slave law passed twoday years later. Sunday night at eight eastern on cspans q as. You can listen to q a and all of our podcast on our free cspan now app. We the afternoon, on the preside