Americans interests. Like somehow they are running silicon valley. The reality is we started this 70 years ago as a radio enterprise. We still do some radio. But our ability to provide resources behind it is certainly there. We are no different from any other media company. The New York Times just has well has done a fantastic job. That is our mission is to shift resources, energy, focus and strategy to be more in the peertopeer conversations instead of the onetomany. So we can shift away from the stodgy old media to the new media. We cant leave people behind. Today is a good day to discuss north korea. The potential of a Hydrogen Bomb to have been tested. The only way to get into north korea is with shortwave radio. We do a very good job with that. We should not abandon shortwave radio just because its the only way. We recognize there are parts of the world where next Generation Media is critical, but other parts where it is not the time yet. Ron can you be critical of the u. S. Government in your reporting . John i think critical reporting is professional journalism. It requires any reporter to ask good questions, whether it be the federal government or any other issue or policy. Thats on both sides of the aisle. When the iran deal was being debated on capitol hill, we carry that live on both sides. That is our mission, to tell americas story on every side. John lang thing is the new ceo of the broadcast board of governors, which includes radio asia,urope, radio free and the office of cuba broadcasting. You can read run nixons reporting in the New York Times. Gentlemen, thank you for reading on. For beigng on. Cspan, created by americas Cable Companies 30 years ago, and party was a Public Service by your local cable and satellite provider. Cspan takes you on the road to the white house and into the classroom. This year, are student cam our student cam documentary contest asks students to tell what issues they want to hear from the president ial candidates. Follow our road to the white house coverage and get the details about our student cam contest at cspan. Org. It has been a month since the u. S. And nearly 200 other countries met in paris for a Climate Change summit that resulted in an International Agreement for reducing carbon emissions. Epa Administrator Gina Mccarthy recently spoke about the implications of that deal and other Environmental Issues at the council on Foreign Relations in washington dc. This is one hour. Admin. Mccarthy i know that 25 will go in history as quite a year. It was a year where we began significantly to turn the tide on a Climate Change. There is no doubt in my mind and did many others that that is the case. I am convinced that 2016 is not going to be a year where we will slow down. It is a year where we are going to keep building the momentum on the basis of the historic year past. Last august, the president announced our clean power plant at epa. It is a historical rule that cuts domestic Carbon Pollution from our power plants. The reason i mention this in an International Discussion is because in paris, when it nearly 200 countries when nearly 200 countries came together to announce a universal agreement on climate that is groundbreaking. The clean powerplant was one of the foundational issues that was brought up that allowed that success to happen. I am not saying that just because i want to give kudos to epa, although we did a great job. It was certainly a concerted effort. It was a concerted effort to take a look at where the energy world is heading. And to work with those in the energy world that are both producing the energy, that are using the energy, and those that are regulating it. It was an opportunity for us to show domestic leadership. Wastask as to why it successful as opposed to eluting us, like it has for the past years, was the result of 3 things. We can get entities in much more detail. Get into these in much more detail. The inevitability of taking action was quite clear. We do not hear from climate deniers at this meeting. We did not hear any country saying that action should not move forward. There was a certainty about inevitability to act on climate, and the immediacy of that need that was quite palpable and very different. Secondly, it was about u. S. Leadership. I can get into this a little bit more. It was both the president s leadership not just in setting an aggressive domestic environmental agenda, but in his constant nurturing of this issue over the past few years. We went to paris felipe appeared for a deal. We went to paris full prepared for a deal. Its also the work across the administration. It put the u. S. Back in a leadership position in a way that we have not been for quite some time. It allowed us to speak with a credibility and an energy that we had not seen before. If you look at these issues, why do i know that there was certainty of action . When i went to paris, it was markedly different than any conference i had been to. Many of which i would rather have been helmet doing christmas had been home doing Christmas Present shopping. It was a positive level of energy but i dont think any of us had felt before. There was a collective motivation to come to a Decision Point here that would finally address an International Effort that was commenced rate with the challenge was commensurate with the challenge we were facing. I spent a full week in paris. Many thought that i shouldnt, without it was a long time. It proved to be a valuable opportunity. I got to listen to that energy world. I got to talk to many countries, i got to talk about in detail the issues relative to how you do a transparent system. Has epa done this similarly for with countries . With countibefore res . I saw there was a big difference in the way this meeting was handled. First of all, we went in to there with 180 countries already pledging commitments. That has not happened before. When we stepped off the plane, it was different. Years, we had World Leaders come at the end of the meeting instead of the beginning. This time it was the beginning. What that did was two things. One, it allowed us to recognize the work that has already been done in the past year by this president and others to get the largest World Leaders and economies to the table in a serious way. It also charted the course that the rest of us needed to follow. That meant that every day after that was substantive instead of a preliminary discussion prior to the World Leaders speaking. It was a vastly different way of structuring this meeting and it resulted in vastly more substantive discussion. Which shows in the language of the agreement. The other thing that became very clear, as i have said before, was the leadership of the united states. We were not just at the table, but we work managing we were managing many of those discussions and putting them forward. We know that president obama made a big difference when he reached agreement with countries like china and brazil. When he had such rigorous conversations with india. I know in talking to all of those folks at the table that their job was to get an agreement. Their job was to make a good on those discussions. It showed. I also know that one of the challenges i had going in was to make sure that i could articulate the domestic agenda effectively. I wanted to make sure i talked about our clean powerplant. It turned out i needed to do a lot less talking than i thought. I had the utilities there doing thats talking. That is quite a change. They were the ones talking about their ability to meet this. Its consistency with the way in which investment is happening in the u. S. , and how this is the direction that we need to take in order to get investment once again in our energy infrastructure. That way we can meet the challenges of today and tomo rrow. There were private sectors beyond the utilities that were already on board in making pronouncements. Including investments communities. This was an opportunity for us to double the Research Capacity funding made available from governments, but also to have the private sector stand up and announced opportunities for investments and new technologies. While this is a great agreement that we fully expect to produce terrific results, we know that a lot more needs to be done. We know more solutions need to be driven to the table. And the right people were around the table saying, the only way we are going to get those investments is to get an agreement, is to keep moving forward, is to find an interagency, International Way in which we could Work Together to identify those new technologies, to align those research efforts, and to figure out how developed and developing countries could take advantage of that. Not just to address climate, but to address the multitude of environmental and economic challenges that face them and integrate climate into those efforts. It was a wonderful meeting. I think i should stop there since im at my time limit. I think we should just take questions. I am happy to talk in detail about this. 2016 will really be for epa a tremendous opportunity to move forward to continue with our commitments under the president s Climate Action plan to implement the clean power plant. Plan. An power we will have a heavy role supporting the state and working on issues to bring this kind of detail that you are suggesting to the table. This agreementat is cast in stone, and to provide we will meet the president s domestic commitment on issues like are heavyduty vehicle rule, methane rules, a series of work that will continue. We will not take our eyes off th e ball of sharing her expertise and supporting best International Effort. Which for the first time has a framing that could make it very successful. We intend to get it there. Thanks very much everybody. [applause] can i wear this on my head . Thank you. I think there has been universal acclaim for this many countries agreeing on anything. The headline numbers have been pretty positive. The criticism has been that the details are yet to be hammered out. How do you get to this goal of limiting temperature change to to degrees celsius or less . Two degrees celsius or less . Walk us through stepbystep, how the this now happen . How does this now happen . Admin. Mccarthy for folks that may have these concerns, i dont know if they are criticisms. They are limitations of what you can get done in an International Agreement. This one is much more specific in terms of how it must be carried out. It talks about coming back every five years to look at goals. Every goal needs to be more aggressive than the one before. It outlines new capacity effort new capacity building, to make sure that developing countries can do the kind of work that provides that accountability and transparency. John not just energy capacity, it the intellectual admin. Mccarthy thats exactly right, and technical capacity. This basically says that every country is going to have to meet standards that look at providing a transparent accountability system. Anyone who has Done International work knows that accountability is a big thing. Transparency is a big thing. Is often the key driver to getting countries to do what they are supposed to do. Most countries hate to be the one that didnt meet the goals that they articulated. That is a huge driver in the international world. What epa does, and what we are doing at the conference, is to outline what those steps might look like. And why they are not just a measure of accountability, but for develop and different link countries developed and developing countries to do that. Its the same thing that we have been working on with their quality standards. Their air quality standards. Its not compensated. Not complicated. It takes technical capacity, but the first thing you do is an inventory where the house gases are coming from. It is amazing how bad we are at estimating that before we look at it. Every country is the same. We have done this with china. We taught them how to do inventories. It never matches up where they think the emissions are coming from. We all have a bias on where the bad and good things are. That is why for a long time we have to keep telling people that cars matter, is not just utilities. People just think things. You do an inventory, look at what actions you take. This is what every state does when they implement an air quality standard. Look and a range of action, measure those analytically. Chart your path forward. Every year you look at reconciling that, or every 2 y ears. Thats exactly what this was all about. Reflectedthat process in the background dr. Mentation . Admin. Mccarthy it is in the agreement itself and in the background. It mentions every two years, every country is going to do a report that monitors their success. To do that report, you have to follow guidelines. Those guidelines say what a good inventory is, how you do this. The challenge for epa will work with other countries to expand the capacity of the developing countries to do this as well. We have spent a great deal of time in china doing this. We have detailed folks working with states through Different Countries to in that people there who can teach to embed people there you can teach this. Tojob was to explain countries that this is not punishment, this is opportunities. If you cant say where your Greenhouse Gases are coming from, you are not going to be a market for technologies. You are not going to be able to articulate where your Research Needs are for all of the research dollars. It is a foundation for them to put their hand up and get the assistance they need, as well as develop a plan that might be consistent with twhere their economy needs to head. I think that is essential. For countries like china and india and others, where we now have monitors that look at air quality and recognize the problems they face. For them, this is their opportunity to look at not just Greenhouse Gas productions, but efforts to reduce those that can also have cobenefits. John growth benefits. That with the argument you were making, right . People are leaving beijing because you cannot breathe the air. At the end of the day, is it naming and shaming . This is a lot of countries with very disparate objectives. It is hard to get agreements in even a smaller group. At the end of the day, is the naming and shaming process that will happen every 25 years in those meetings, is that the stick that the agreement has . Admin. Mccarthy no, the agreement isnt enforceable. The goals are flexible. Transparency mechanisms are agreed to. Those would move forward. I dont think it is a naming and shaming. As you build capacities for countries to look at this, they will see the opportunities that the u. S. Is beginning to see. This is all about shifting to a clean economy. That is not punishment, thats simply being smart about the future. John the Global Economy was already slowing in the last couple years. That must have factored into some of the discussions. How does that factor in . If the Indian Economy drifts lower its already happening in china is the temptation to fire up that coal plant, get those factories humming, have jobs so its not sports . Its not pitchforks in the streets . Admin. Mccarthy that is the natural instinct everywhere until you figure out where you want your economy to head. We are certainly going to look at how we spend money to this effort internationally and make sure that the gut instinct to do that isnt all you look at. There are countries clearly trying to move themselves out of are pretty. Out of poverty. The challenge for us is to make other opportunities available to them. To bring options to them that allow them to choose something more sustainable. John when you sat across the table from india, how did you answer that question . 1. 1 billion people in poverty. Half the population is still rural. They have a long way to go. How did you answer that question . Admin. Mccarthy the way to think about this, at this meeting, the other thing that was very different that led to the lack of naysayers was the fact that india recognizes that its on the front line of disasters. It is going to be significantly hardhit in a changing climate. As, not all as cut and dry do we want jobs or not . Is what you do to protect her population at the same time it is what you do to protect your population at the same time. The support for Climate Adaptation was really high. There was a lot of discussion given the change already happening. It isnt as easy for these companies these countries to put limited resources into things that will contribute to the future disasters. Its not that simple anymore. They are recognizing that they have to put people to work, but they are also recognizing now that there are opportunities that dont rely on the same old technologies. John the agreement talked about a big investment in technical capability. Previoushere have been promises of investment by developed countries. That has never really materialized. Why would it materialize no w, but previously it did not . Admin. Mccarthy we already made some additional commitment. President announced we were doubling our adaptation funds. We had a number of countries that have gotten together to invest in a new program that is everybodys research dollars. The different thing now is private sectors stepping up. This is not just a government challenge, its impact on business already being felt. International businesses were there in force. I met with many ceos. They are meeting with other countries and talking about this challenge. John what were they discussing . Opportunities to build wind farms . Admin. Mccarthy opportunities to not make it worse by looking at mitigation strategies. But also adaptation strategies. Water is becoming a problem everywhere. Not just water quality, but quantity. Loving is becoming difficult. Impact on agriculture. Flooding is becoming difficult. The understanding of climate was not just how to reduce Greenhouse Gases in a vacuum, just because businesses demanded it. Recognizing that you are going to live in an constraint world. It was a different conversation entirely. That was because it wasnt all governmentled. John what else does the u. S. Need to do to maintain that leadership role and to expand its own objectives . The president has talked about 28 by carbon by 26 , 2025 compared to 2005. What else should the u. S. The company itself to u. S. Be committing itself to . Admin. Mccarthy epa does Greenhouse Gas inventory and reporting on how well we have done. There is uncertainty around this. We have to get these numbers right for ourselves and our countries. We have to keep looking at the fines run this. We will also be implementing that the u. S. Sues has put in as a basis for goalsetting exercises. Over the next year we will look at opportunities. Is very clear we will not get everywhere we need to go. The country has put a plan that is going to get them there. For epa, its looking at how we push the envelope on heavyduty vehicles. Its getting montreal protocol amendments and doing work on hydrofluoric carbons. Moving those out of the system, or reducing those so that the impact is not as large. We will keep looking at nothing. Looking at methane. Oil and gas, and opportunities to explore this year,. We will look for opportunities available and keep talking about this. We will keep working with the private sector and colleges and universities. John this goaround was quite an international one. That seems to be a new role for the administrator. Is that likely to continue . From the standpoint of the epa, is that likely now to be part of the brief for you and future administrators . And also, what did you find to be the case at this conference, the opportunity for u. S. Business internationally talking with those same individuals about mitigation . Compared to a competitor like the chinese, you were subsidizing millions into these zones. Done amccarthy epa has lot of International Work for a long time. Epa is more sophisticated than most other environmental agencies in any other country. It, we haveto admit always on this level of International Discussion. There has just been more visibility. We have provided International Leadership for a long time. We have done it when resources are available to us. Everybody has limitations. We work within those. One of the great things about the work on Climate Adaptation just beginning with this new agreement is that it will bring resources to the table to expand this. Not just by epa, but by other countries with similar expertise. We have been doing this for a long time, john. There is nothing new there and we will continue with it. It is an opportunity to recognize that Environmental Issues do not respect boundaries. They create international ones. One of the good things about it is that we are integrating some of our environmental goals into g20 and g7. Are beginning to not segregate we are beginning to not segregate discussion about the economy from environmental ones, because they are overlapping. You are able to frame your larger investments in a way that will produce the kind of healthy investment. I mean that in my terms, Public Healthy, in a way that will make the most sense. The second half of your question was what . John about opportunities for u. S. Businesses. I can imagine they were circling around this conference. How does that stack up against a china that is also getting into this . We saw solar panels without american business. Panels wipe out american business. Admin. Mccarthy the u. S. Is trying to provide leadership on environmental technology. That is been one of the goals of the president moving forward. To show that we are not just going to provide International Leadership, but we want the economic benefits. Our Investment Community is responding to that call. I think they are also part of the discussion. It was not just about investment, but protecting investment. That is where the claimant adaptation climtate adaptation work came here. The ceos and International Companies were pushing for an International Agreement on this, recognizing without that, it does not matter how well anyone country does. Itthese discussions were happeng not in a vacuum, but in a very integrated way. I have never seen businesses come together so much over an issue that has mistakenly been seen as an environmental issue for a long time. John the clean power plan. We are waiting on a federal decision whether to block it until the states have the opportunity to muster complaints against it. Youve been very confident that this is going to go through. But what if it doesnt, what is plan b . Admin. Mccarthy first of all, plan a is a good one. I dont want anyone to think that it isnt. Will get it is in the next couple weeks or so. Support from utilities and lack of challenge speaks to whether we did this right. There is no damage that any of us can identify. We are hopeful on it. John, the biggest thing is to make sure we continue the conversation with states. There are two key points. The stay is immediate. That is always a rush to judgment. We are all confident that we meet the legal test. The second question is working with those states. That is where i have been focusing. Are out on this issue working very hard. I have been too many meetings. I am seeing nothing but positive Energy Around this. The states are beginning to Work Together, not just individuals. Im confident we are going to have the plans in. John but if it doesnt happen, plan b . Admin. Mccarthy this is our shot looking at this under the clean air act. We would have to again, and always Welcome Congress taking action. We dont see that coming up, so we will look at other opportunities. John i was going to say the politics of this can get sticky. Lets get to you in the front. Tell us your name . I am a naval postgraduate. Thank you so much for coming to expand the story. My question is for you john, which is how you tell the story. This holistic interdependent story to the general uneducated public so that they recognize the time pressure and the importance. I would suggest also, its incredibly important to do with visually. To do it visually. There are so many pieacce parts. Story yesterday about all of the pollutions going into rio and concerns about the summer olympics. These are great pictures. They tell more than 1000 words. I would suggest both of you start telling your story in that fashion. John good. We will keep that in mind. I am delighted to say about five years ago, the wall street journal finally did begin to publish pictures. [laughter] we are almost up there. To answer your good call. Next please . World bank, retired. We spent almost a lot of time in that place to justify investment. At future costs. It seems the cop21 agreement ducked the issue of getting the cost of carbon correct, and failed to identify modalities to get there like cap and trade or carbon tax. Could you please enlighten us about this discussion that took place . Admin. Mccarthy i wasnt involved in all of the discussions. Doesnt fixnt everything, but there clearly is an openness. Many countries are looking at whether they will do cap and trade or a carbon tax. It does not preclude that from happening. I think it is wise to let every country get their own path forward. Clearly there will needs to be support for that and some consistency on how one would calculate its success. Those are things we will be able to look at. Part of this agreement is making it clear that you set your goal, articulate your mitigation strategies, come back every 2 years to determine if you are achieving those, you go to workshop conferences where you extend information. You have the opportunity to challenge whether one another is going to achieve or hasnt. We are going to have a transparent system that will hopefully allow folks to see what countries are doing, sure those lessons learned, and articulate a strategy to see whether or not things are being done correctly. If all goes well, it should allow the flex ability to choose a different path forward, but learn from one another. Yes please, over here. I am with the state Department Office of religion and global affairs. We havepast year or so, been engaging with faith communities domestically and internationally. Wanted your impressions on the toe of aitfaith communities up paris and after. Admin. Mccarthy that fiat was the cutest thing, rolling into the back of the white house. Andave been working at epa building bridges with the Faith Community for a few years. Many in the Faith Community see this as an opportunity to make sure that human beings protecting the resources that god gave us. They see that as a moral obligation. I think the president has stood up and characterized it like that. I think the pope has clearly been a large voice on this issue, but not exclusively. People of all faiths are coming together on this issue. In two different ways. Not just the fact that we have a stewardship responsibility. Thatare also recognizing the biggest vulnerabilities are for low income and minority u. S. Andes in the internationally. They are simply not prepared to take on the challenge of a changing climate. They are generally not the ones at the table designing the strategies towards addressing it. Being seen it is much more as a moral obligation to address this. Their voices going to be extraordinarily helpful. People hear climate, they pigeonhole it into some kind of a treehugger issue or polar bear issue. This a much more personal issue. The Faith Community helps us do that. It helps us do it by putting faces on it. By reminding us that we have an obligation to protect people that cannot protect themselves. They are the ones most at risk here. The other issue is that they help us Design Strategies that engage people. There are things epa is doing to engage the Faith Community. Like our food recovery challenge, looking at food waste and how that reduces methane. But also allows you to organize things so that people that need food get it and people stop wasting food. There are wonderful ways in which you can build this in to the very things that faith communities are focused on. Water is a clear example. It is a large symbol in faith communities. We can start engaging people by listening to those that they most listen to. Get activities going so that this doesnt just become waiting for international solutions. But bringing different ways in which individuals can participate. Renewableember of the Energy Commerce committee, mother of a documentary filmmaker that focuses on Climate Change, putting a face on what you have been so articulate about today, as has obama administration. So thank you. My question goes back to regard to the bilateral relationships between u. S. And china. Im particularly concerned every time i open my google alert and see yet another thing on Renewable Energy in china, and they are building more incinerating plants. Knowing that, based on my own experience, there are entrepreneurs that have Gasification Technology which eliminates these kinds of pollutants that come into the atmosphere because of incineration. You mention methane. I think about what is being produced. If you wouldit nationa takese those entrepreneurs with patents and technology and get them. Eveloped into investments particularly in china. China is making these constant investments in old technology, which will only add to the problem. John you saw this happening at the conference . This solution . Admin. Mccarthy there have been more solutions put on the table. You are not wrong to be frustrated. It takes a long time for these technologies to work their way in. The one thing different now is that they see a market. One of the reasons why this president and epa went out for as long as we did was because we needed to send a longerterm market signal than 37 years. Thats the only way that investment is going to have the window that it needs to invest and understand that its going to have a return. There are two things that happened during the conference. One was mission innovation. 8is was an innovation to get of the larger countries to double their research investment. That is a big deal. Hisas also bill gates and foundation, which has a worse acronym than the epa. Race for energy coalition. Maybe its another one, but i cant remember it. This was an effort to bring billions of private sector dollars to the table for the sole purpose of investing in early startups. This was the commitment to say we have agreed to take the added risk because the rewards, the needs are so great. I think we need to have that. There is an acknowledgment that technology is clear. What has frustrated me for dec ades is that there has been a sense that if we dont have every Technology Solution identified, to get less than two degrees, then it aint good enough. What has not been good enough is nothing. Dynamic inanged the terms of setting a longterm investment. In terms of china, i want to push back a little bit. You are right that they continue investment. E shiftingstments ar rather dramatically. Can get you followup information on that because i dont have it readily available. Bringingmitments on many window ringing renewable up to a certain level and reducing coal is already showing. They are changing their investment portfolio dramatically. The commitments they made in paris are consistent with that. Buting turns on a dime, nothing turns at all unless you are telling them the direction in which the rest of the world is going to head. That is what we got. John china wrote it into their fiveyear plan. One of them being pollution reducing industries. That should be of concern to american companies. That means trillions of dollars of subsidies. Yes, right here. Hi, i am a University Student at the college of william and mary. I have two questions, if thats okay. The first is more about the agency itself. Of the epacritiques is that environmentalists sometimes feel that there is a revolving door between Industry Leaders and epa leaders. Im wondering if you think that is true. The second is more about Current Events in the u. S. Theave seen in california, big story on the methane leak. I am wondering if you can comment on moving forward, if the you must government can improve how we are regulating if the u. S. Government can improve how we are regulating these plans so that these industries are keeping their equipment uptodate . I know this is one of the plants where some say there was a part of the leakge facility leakage facility that was outdated. If they had been up to speed, we may have missed some of these problems. John methane a lot worse than co2. Admin. Mccarthy yes, i know. All too painfully know. Let me hit the revolving door for industries issues. I dont want to be flippant in the way that i say this. Honestly, i am opening every door and window of this agency. I think everybody deserves to get an and have their voices heard. If we cant have them inside, people are going outside. I do not see industry as coming in in a way that is crowding the field or taking away our ability to see what the science or law says. For industryking to do is the same as anybody else every state, every stakeholder can tell me what is the best, most reasonable Sustainable Way to achieve what the science tells me. They have the best ideas, i am running with your ideas. I might even give them credit for it. [laughter] in the clean power lan, we did that. It benefited from those discussions. These are not behind closeddoor discussions. Everybody knows who i am meeting with. They are not coming in and thinking they are meeting with somebody that is just going to take a quick note and do what they say. They have a substantive discussion about why they are right and other people are doing the same thing. I will commit every time. It every time. I hope the agency continues to have an open door policy. The second on methane leaks. That is a really really good point. I tend to think that we have some outdated regulations. Epa tends to keep up more because our law requires that. Technologiesok at and make sure that regulations keep up with the different ways in which industries are changing. I think we do the best we can. Ranch, speak to porter because im not privy to the investigation. There is one is certainly going on. We have minimal oversight of those types of facilities. In fact, we dont have any. Onare working with the state the Public Health issues around that, making sure people are being relocated. Everybody knows about porter ranch . You should read about it. Its a significant nothing leak leakgnificant methane from a Storage Facility ancillary to a pipeline. It is leaking significant amounts of methane. They are trying to figure out how to depressurize it. But it has been going on since october. Its not a good situation. You are not wrong that we need to keep up with it. We need to make sure that there are complaints with current standards. John somebody way in the back . Yes. I am from climate wire. The moment of the president s signing of the paris accord, will that be the next way for the u. S. To show leadership . Will that be a big event in new york . Can you tell me about the strategy around it . Admin. Mccarthy i dont have anything i can share. Sorry. Here in theover back. Hi, i am with reuters. Can you talk about the status of the volkswagen diesel emissions issue . You will be meeting next week with vw ceo. Are you satisfied with their fixes to date . Do you know when vw might begin the process of recalling the vehicles . Admin. Mccarthy we have been having a lot of technical discussions back and forth with volkswagen. At this point we havent identified a satisfactory way forward. Those discussions will continue. We are anxious to find a way for that company to get into compliance. We are not there yet. Questions . Il member thank you john, and thank you gina for coming back here. I know this is at least your second time because i had the privilege of moderating the last time. It is an indication that we have entered a new era of environmental diplomacy. [laughter] sherri goodman, the consortium for ocean leadership. Thanks. Summit might characterize this some might characterize this as heralding a new era of investment diplomacy. It took its full flourish here in paris. Not only are we talking about unleashing the power of renewable and clean energy, but also markets for clean air and water technology, Autonomous System tracking. A range of other new markets potentially opening up. Do you see that the a model that being a model for climate diplomacy, but also international, environmental diplomacy . A new era where you have business as powerful as government in pointing the direction . Admin. Mccarthy i have been called one of the least diplomatic people in the world. I dont want to speak like a diplomatic. I would be really lousy at it. I cant speak to with more broadly. My sense was it was a powerful way to do business. I expect it will have an impact. Our abilityxpanded to work with business in a way productive. Epa has been working very hard at the new technologies, particularly monitoring technologies. From my perspective, the world of Environmental Protection has looked like a government issue in the hands of a few, when i think it needs to be a shared responsibility. We have been looking at ways of increasing citizen science, looking at new technologies and how you reconcile those in decisionmaking, providing markets for those. The world is changing. I dont think we can expect to be monitoring everything the way we have done it before. We needed to be more broadly recognized as something as a concern to all of us. Amazing inogies are terms of their ability to take hold and change the way we do business. We need to integrate those more into our businesses. John yes, way back there. Hi, i am with cms news. According to the Energy Information administration, although alternative and renewables are growing slightly, the fossil fuels will still account for 80 of u. S. Energy needs through 2040. Federal data also shows that u. S. Carbon emissions are at almost a 20 year low. How to those facts fit into the picture that epa is painting of the u. S. Energy landscape . Thank you. Admin. Mccarthy just as Climate Change is a longterm issue, clearly addressing that is. I dont think anyone disputes the direction in which the world is heading. How quickly it gets there is going to be up for debate. People,ave to remind and maybe this is an infatuation with new technology, is that no one could have predicted what the world would look like today 20 years ago. No one, zero. Agoyou told me 30 years there would not be a phone in my house, sitting on the wall . I would have thought you were nuts. Now nobody is investing in land lines. Dramatically. Ges the energy world is not going to be any different. People will look for continued opportunity for investment. Frankly, a lot of investments made before are so old that now there is an opportunity for significant investment. Be in the direction in which the energy world is heading. You will see an escalation of thats transition. John we have time for one more quick question. Adam taylor with the world bank. Thank you with your leadership into paris and beyond. Intalked about efficiencies renewable energies. The other piece of the Technology Question is the potential to take carbon out of the atmosphere. A cutting edge area, contentious in some circles. Im curious what you see as prospects for that. If you read to the Paris Agreement closely, for countries to ratchet up as manquickly as many of us i havent been directly involved in those discussions, but certainly i am aware that they are happening. John and others have spent considerable amount of time i cannot say to the discussions that went behind it because i was not engaged in it, but when you are dealing with an issue like climate you are not going to dismiss any avenue to address it. It is a big enough problem that it has to be addressed, but for me, i am going with what i have available and with incremental improvements and thats, in ways in which we can continue to invest. I do think there will be large controversy and any of those strategies. But, i certainly would not