Speaker 1: Welcome to zero. I am Akshatrati. This week one goal,
Speaker 1: two technologies, three times the renewables. It's day five of
Speaker 1: cop and it's been busy around here. Over the weekend,
Speaker 1: we heard leaders from more than one hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: countries wanting to secure a more ambitious deal on tackling
Speaker 1: climate change. My country is experiencing devastating impacts of climate change.
Speaker 2: This crisis must never be seen as a distant threat.
Speaker 2: Let's make this called the first one where the benefits
Speaker 2: of our concrete commitments exceed our excuses and the carbon
Speaker 2: footprints of the planes we arrived on.
Speaker 1: There have already been some significant successes, include the announcement
Speaker 1: of half a billion dollars is set up the Loss
Speaker 1: and Damage Fund, and of course there have been many
Speaker 1: many side deals which you can read about on Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot com for free during these two weeks of coal.
Speaker 1: But a lot still remains to be agreed on, including
Speaker 1: the goal to triple renewables globally by twenty thirty. If
Speaker 1: it's achieved, electricity will be the first economic sector to
Speaker 1: get on track for net zero by twenty fifty. Currently,
Speaker 1: the world has about three point six terraworts of renewables
Speaker 1: installed that took us more than two decades to build.
Speaker 1: Tripling it would mean getting to eleven terrrawarts in just
Speaker 1: seven years. That is a lot of solar panels and
Speaker 1: wind turbines to deploy. And there are other challenges like
Speaker 1: building out battery storage and grids all around the world.
Speaker 1: So how exactly are we going to do it? To
Speaker 1: find out, I spoke with Jenny Chase, one of the
Speaker 1: lead authors of a new report by Bloomberg ne EF.
Speaker 1: It looks at everything that is needed to achieve the goal.
Speaker 1: Jenny is being a lead solar analyst and the author
Speaker 1: of Solar Power Finance Without the Jargon, a second edition
Speaker 1: of which will be published early next year. Jenny, welcome
Speaker 1: back to the show.
Speaker 3: Nice to be here at SHAD.
Speaker 1: We're going to talk about tripling renewable energy by twenty thirty.
Speaker 1: Let's start with the basics before we triple renewables. Where
Speaker 1: are we right now? What is our starting point?
Speaker 3: As of the end of twenty twenty two, we have
Speaker 3: about three point six terrawatts of renewable energy and this
Speaker 3: is wind, solar, big and small, hydro geothermal by a mass,
Speaker 3: and marine and tidle. Now the bit of that that
Speaker 3: anyone expects to drastically increase is a solar and wind section.
Speaker 3: And it's honestly great that we can even talk about
Speaker 3: tripling renewables or talk about eleven terrawatts of renewables, which
Speaker 3: is the other number that's being battered around, because ten
Speaker 3: years ago eleven terrawatts of renewables would have been an
Speaker 3: insane target. Nobody would have believed we can get there.
Speaker 3: And the reason why we can actually talk about this
Speaker 3: maybe being achievable is that wind and solar have got
Speaker 3: really cheap over the last decade. Solar will probably be
Speaker 3: pretty close or even exceed tripling. The challenge is wind.
Speaker 3: Our win team, who are sitting in different regions trying
Speaker 3: to come up with a sensible forecast for twenty thirty
Speaker 3: based on pipeline, based on policy, based on what's going
Speaker 3: on in their regions, are saying that no, wind is
Speaker 3: not going to triple by twenty thirty. It isn't the
Speaker 3: end for renewables if governments don't sign off on this,
Speaker 3: but it would really help to have some acceleration, particularly
Speaker 3: on the wind side, and so.
Speaker 1: The difference between where we will be with business as usual,
Speaker 1: which is nine terrorworts, and where tripling would take us
Speaker 1: eleven terror warts is two terrorwards, which is a big difference.
Speaker 3: It's a big difference. And the other problem is that
Speaker 3: that two terror watts that fall shore is mostly win
Speaker 3: and wind is better than solar on a capacity basis
Speaker 3: because wind structurally has capacity factors of somewhere between thirty
Speaker 3: and fifty five percent, whereas even in the very sunniest deserts,
Speaker 3: solar has a capacity factor of maybe thirty percent.
Speaker 1: Which is just basically a way of saying that at
Speaker 1: any given time, because in a day, the sun only
Speaker 1: shines for so much time and the wind only blows
Speaker 1: for so much time, the one hundred percent capacity is
Speaker 1: never reached. You only get a fraction of one hundred
Speaker 1: percent in actual generated electricity.
Speaker 3: Yes, fundamentally, per installed megawatt of gigawatt, wind generates two
Speaker 3: or three times as much as solar.
Speaker 1: Obviously, the entire point of all this is to try
Speaker 1: and reduce emissions. So in the scenarios we do have
Speaker 1: around tripling renewable energy, what kind of emissions reductions do
Speaker 1: we get if we achieve that goal.
Speaker 3: So the tripling renewables would have put us quite close
Speaker 3: to Benf's net zero scenario, which ended up with ten
Speaker 3: point five to ten what's by twenty thirty, and we
Speaker 3: estimate that the emissions reduction is about nine point three
Speaker 3: billion tons of carbon emissions in twenty thirty.
Speaker 1: Wow, that is stunning. I mean, given where we are
Speaker 1: right now, which is thirty eight forty billion tons of
Speaker 1: CO two on an annual basis, that's like a twenty
Speaker 1: five percent reduction.
Speaker 3: It's a start. I mean, this is by twenty thirty.
Speaker 3: That is both scarily close and a long time away
Speaker 3: to be talking about twenty five percent reduction. I wish
Speaker 3: we were looking at doing it quickly, but you simply
Speaker 3: cannot turn the juggernaut much faster than that.
Speaker 1: And so it puts us on the net zero track,
Speaker 1: which is of course, we must recognize the net zero
Speaker 1: track has all other sectors of emissions that also need
Speaker 1: to decline. We always knew, given how well solar and
Speaker 1: wind prices we're doing, that electricity sector is likely to
Speaker 1: reduce emissions the fastest, but on everything else we are
Speaker 1: quite far away. But let's go back to tripling renewable
Speaker 1: energy and just break it all down. You talked about
Speaker 1: how solar will play a big part in getting us
Speaker 1: there because solar has become cheaper, faster, and is easier
Speaker 1: to deploy, And you said we are on track and
Speaker 1: maybe even exceed tripling of solar. Now, why is that
Speaker 1: the case? Why is it that solar just makes for
Speaker 1: the easiest form of renewable deployment there is in the world.
Speaker 3: Our solar is incredible.
Speaker 1: Act chat.
Speaker 3: The thing is that photovoltaics is the first bulk electricity
Speaker 3: source we've ever had that doesn't involve turning a turbine.
Speaker 3: Do you know how special that is? We finally broke
Speaker 3: the tyranny of turning stuff around to drive a motor
Speaker 3: to generate electricity, and it's super cheap and just over
Speaker 3: the over the past few weeks, solar modules have dropped
Speaker 3: to a price we didn't expect to see for a
Speaker 3: few years. Yet they are scary cheap, which is really
Speaker 3: frightening if you're a module manufacturer trying to sell These
Speaker 3: things exceeds our expectations and how much gets built nearly
Speaker 3: every year, and it exceeds our expectations about how cheap
Speaker 3: it can get, not relidly, so otherwise we could change
Speaker 3: our expectations for better and that would make our forecasting
Speaker 3: much easier. But solar just keeps hitting it out of
Speaker 3: the park and it's not done yet.
Speaker 1: So why can't we just rely on solar, Why try
Speaker 1: and trouble ourselves to try and meet goals on wind
Speaker 1: and hydro.
Speaker 3: Well, I've been an expert on solar for eighteen years
Speaker 3: act shat and the answer to that is that solar
Speaker 3: doesn't generate at night, and it doesn't generate much in
Speaker 3: the winter. Is a highly technical answer, and I know
Speaker 3: this sounds silly, but as solar starts to be twenty
Speaker 3: percent of your electricity makes thirty percent, that does actually
Speaker 3: become a problem because the other sources that you want
Speaker 3: to add to the grid potentially needed to make money
Speaker 3: in daytime hours. So wind, for example, generates electricity in
Speaker 3: the winter and at night, but also during the daytime.
Speaker 3: Not getting any money for electricity in the daytime and
Speaker 3: in the summer, that does hit the economics of wind farms,
Speaker 3: and one of the things that governments would have to
Speaker 3: do is make sure the wind gets built anyway.
Speaker 1: So, okay, we can't rely on solar to meet our
Speaker 1: renewables goals alone. That means we need wind power, and
Speaker 1: that is where we are not on track. So what
Speaker 1: is it that we can do to try and get
Speaker 1: wind power deployment back on track?
Speaker 3: So first of all, to build wind we need to
Speaker 3: build more grid because wind farms are not distributed. They
Speaker 3: tend to be in specific locations that have to be
Speaker 3: quite big, so they need big grid connections to areas
Speaker 3: of land where you're allowed to build wind turbines. And
Speaker 3: easing permitting wields is also important, which is not to
Speaker 3: say that we should just build wind everywhere, but governments
Speaker 3: can allocate places and types of land which are suitable
Speaker 3: for wind farm development and potentially build grid to those.
Speaker 3: Those are the two really big things. And for offshore
Speaker 3: wind actually there's the additional possibility of holding auctions where
Speaker 3: the governments do site surveys on the seabed because it's
Speaker 3: pretty expensive to look into a maritime environment and assess
Speaker 3: the resource, and often you have developers doing the same
Speaker 3: report for the same bit of land, which is silly.
Speaker 3: Governments should take that over and do it once and say, hey,
Speaker 3: anyone want to build an offshore wind farm.
Speaker 1: Here. The renewable stories for all the difficulties that some
Speaker 1: parts are facing and some governments are facing is a
Speaker 1: good one, and given the level of deployment that we
Speaker 1: are going to see over this decade, it's also going
Speaker 1: to be one that will require a ton of money
Speaker 1: going into the sector. What do the numbers say when
Speaker 1: we look at tripling renewables? How much money are we
Speaker 1: talking here?
Speaker 3: So it's a lot of money, but perhaps not a
Speaker 3: totally unreasonable amount. BNF calculates that last year about five
Speaker 3: hundred and sixty four billion dollars was invested in renewables.
Speaker 3: To be on track for net zero, about one point
Speaker 3: two trillion dollars need to be invested in wind and
Speaker 3: solar every year between twenty twenty three and twenty thirty.
Speaker 3: On average, it actually ramps up a bit, it's less
Speaker 3: than the first half of the decade. In addition to that,
Speaker 3: investment in grids needs to ramp up as well, to
Speaker 3: about seven hundred and seventy seven billion in twenty thirty.
Speaker 3: So that's the grid to take electricity away from all
Speaker 3: of these sources. And also a very significant amount has
Speaker 3: to be invested in batteries. So the amount of batteries
Speaker 3: worldwide has to increase by sixteen times by twenty thirty.
Speaker 1: And of course we're talking about all this money as
Speaker 1: if it's just a cost, but we've deployed so much
Speaker 1: renewables not because it's just a cost, but it's actually beneficial, right,
Speaker 1: somebody is paying for that electricity, and building renewables is
Speaker 1: also pulling money away from fossil.
Speaker 3: Fuels absolutely, I mean, you buy renewables so you never
Speaker 3: have to buy oil again.
Speaker 1: To meet the tripling renewable energy goal, we need to
Speaker 1: deploy seven hundred and twenty gigawatts of battery storage worldwide
Speaker 1: by twenty thirty. That's like sixteen times deployed by twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two, so it's way more than the tripling that
Speaker 1: we need to do on renewable energy capacity.
Speaker 3: It's a lot of batteries, that's for sure, But on
Speaker 3: the other hand, the battery market was quite small at
Speaker 3: the end of twenty twenty two. Batteries is in a
Speaker 3: much earlier stage of deployment, so our battery team actually
Speaker 3: already says that energy storage capacity will increase fourteen point
Speaker 3: five times by twenty thirty, So getting to sixteen point
Speaker 3: one times, that's really just surrounding.
Speaker 1: Eer batteries aren't in the target for tripling renewables because
Speaker 1: obviously it's just about tripling the sources of supply for
Speaker 1: clean energy. But why does battery investment have to rise
Speaker 1: that much.
Speaker 3: Well, if we don't build batteries, we're not going to
Speaker 3: be able to use all this solar and wind that
Speaker 3: we're building, particularly all this solar. The renewables build out
Speaker 3: relies on making the way that we use and store
Speaker 3: and sometimes even catail electricity better and more flexible because
Speaker 3: solar and wind do generate only when the resource is there.
Speaker 3: That's a big difference between yesterday's power system and the
Speaker 3: future power system that actually we can make sustainable and
Speaker 3: we have to move our demand to when there is
Speaker 3: electricity available. Batteries are one way of doing it. It's
Speaker 3: not the only way, but we definitely need to build batteries.
Speaker 1: Well. Wind has problems, as we've seen, the industry is
Speaker 1: kind of struggling right now, but solar is cheap and
Speaker 1: clearly getting deployed much much faster. Could we just use
Speaker 1: batteries to maximize solar and not really worry that much
Speaker 1: about wind.
Speaker 3: In parts of the world that will work. So if
Speaker 3: you're near the equator, you do pretty regularly get sunshine
Speaker 3: every day, but even there there are weeks where there's
Speaker 3: very little sun and I think that will drain even
Speaker 3: the biggest battery. And the other thing is if if
Speaker 3: you're just looking at tripling capacity, wind does just generate
Speaker 3: more power, more electricity than solar. So it would be
Speaker 3: really good to have a diverse portfolio of clean energy
Speaker 3: sources almost wherever you are.
Speaker 1: Energy security is another issue that has come to the forefront,
Speaker 1: especially in the last few years with wars, with volatile
Speaker 1: fossil fuel prices, with reliability of supply, and a lot
Speaker 1: of conversation going into COP twenty eight is going to
Speaker 1: be about well, we need to triple renewable energy, but
Speaker 1: also make sure that we are energy secure. So what
Speaker 1: does it mean just from a renewable perspective to try
Speaker 1: and make supply more secure.
Speaker 3: I think fundamentally renewables build is always going to make
Speaker 3: supply more secure, because if you've got solar wind on
Speaker 3: your land, that doesn't go away if you have problems
Speaker 3: with other stuff coming in. However, there's also a lot
Speaker 3: of talk about supply chains, so manufacturing your own solar panels,
Speaker 3: manufacturing own wind turbines, and there is a lot of
Speaker 3: investment going into this. The US Inflation of Adaption Act
Speaker 3: makes it very attractive to manufacture solar modules in the States.
Speaker 3: India's doing something somewhat similar, bit a bit less generous,
Speaker 3: and it's possible that Europe will put some money into
Speaker 3: factories as well. And in fact we estimate that the
Speaker 3: global supply chain for wind, solar and batteries is probably
Speaker 3: invested enough, at least within near term, there are enough
Speaker 3: factories out there to supply the tripling renewables future with like.
Speaker 1: Minor tweaks, they're not that many things on which we
Speaker 1: can say, well, we are on track for net zero.
Speaker 1: It's interesting that manufacturing capacity wise, it seems like we
Speaker 1: are quite there. It's more really deploying all that capacity
Speaker 1: that's sitting.
Speaker 3: Definitely, the bottlenecks are all deployment, honestly, and it's not
Speaker 3: usually even economic barriers. It's usually things like grid and
Speaker 3: land and supply and getting long term security in place.
Speaker 3: It's things that potentially governments can debottom.
Speaker 1: That after the break we get into the og of
Speaker 1: renewable energy hydropower. Now we've spent a lot of time
Speaker 1: talking about a wind and solar for very good reason.
Speaker 1: But until recently, the source of renewable energy that made
Speaker 1: for the greatest supply of renewable power was hydro. Does
Speaker 1: hydro feature in any way in this goal to reach
Speaker 1: tripling of renewable energy?
Speaker 3: So I think the structure of the target probably doesn't
Speaker 3: benefit hydro, particularly because hydro has a high capacity vector.
Speaker 3: It's clearly advantageous for countries that can build hydro to
Speaker 3: add more hydro. My suspicion is though, that it will
Speaker 3: not be a big part of the increase. Building new
Speaker 3: hydro isn't trivial because you need a suitable place for it,
Speaker 3: and most developed countries have already pretty much developed the
Speaker 3: suitable resources that they have. A hydro is also quite
Speaker 3: susceptible to drought. The regions that are heavily dependent on
Speaker 3: hydro do sometimes have problems in drought. It's actually a
Speaker 3: good compliment of solar because of course solar generates more
Speaker 3: in those times of year, so it can help you
Speaker 3: use the hydro to just balance the solar. But yes,
Speaker 3: it's quite difficult for us to imagine that there will
Speaker 3: be a huge hydro build out.
Speaker 1: Are there other renewablelds that are meaningful in trying to
Speaker 1: meet this tripling renewables capacity.
Speaker 3: There aren't any that are quite as easy to scale
Speaker 3: a solar wind than hydro. I mean, if you have
Speaker 3: geothermal resources, then build geothermal power plants. That's really great,
Speaker 3: And it's very unlikely that this statement will actually do
Speaker 3: anything on nuclear. But nuclear is also an electricity source.
Speaker 3: There are parts of the world that can probably usefully
Speaker 3: build that. Otherwise there isn't really anything else that scales
Speaker 3: in the same way.
Speaker 1: There is, in fact, some discussion among a group of
Speaker 1: countries sort of the Coalition of the Willing, that are
Speaker 1: going to try and put out a goal for tripling
Speaker 1: nuclear capacity by twenty fifty. So that may be the
Speaker 1: best outcome that nuclear has had had a cop meeting
Speaker 1: in forever. I think let's go back to tripling renewable energy,
Speaker 1: even though the goal is tripling renewables globally. Do all
Speaker 1: countries need to approach the target in the same way?
Speaker 3: No, certainly not. Brazil, for example, already gets eighty five
Speaker 3: percent of its electricity from renewables, mostly hydro, and so
Speaker 3: it really makes no sense for Brazil to try and
Speaker 3: triple it's when it was capacity it should focus on
Speaker 3: the capnizing other parts of its economy instead. And then
Speaker 3: there are parts like the Middle East and Africa, Sub
Speaker 3: Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia and India is a really big
Speaker 3: one where increasing renewables by more than a tripling is
Speaker 3: not only required to get the role on track from
Speaker 3: net zero, but it's probably also quite beneficial potentially for
Speaker 3: bringing electricity to people who haven't had enough in the past,
Speaker 3: and to leap frog over the need to build centralized
Speaker 3: fossil fuel power plants. The market that is both expected
Speaker 3: to triple renewables by twenty thirty and where that would
Speaker 3: be really enough to be on a net zero pathway
Speaker 3: is China. China is building huge amounts of solar and
Speaker 3: wind and also batteries, and China is probably going to
Speaker 3: be on a net zero pathway. The US and Europe
Speaker 3: are not expected to triple renewables by twenty thirty. Europe
Speaker 3: is actually more ambitious than tripling renewables, which is great. Obviously,
Speaker 3: being ahead is fantastic. The US should speed up. I
Speaker 3: also suspect that, particularly for Sub Saharan Africa, tripling renewables
Speaker 3: is not a burden, but an opportunity, and richer countries
Speaker 3: can certainly help with providing climate finance and making it
Speaker 3: easier for these to deploy renewables. That should also help
Speaker 3: them on the development path. It should not be considered
Speaker 3: a thing that will help them back at this point.
Speaker 1: And when big economies do invest in renewables, we can
Speaker 1: see huge differences. So China obviously is the largest maker
Speaker 1: of all these renewable technologies, but also the largest deployer
Speaker 1: of renewables. Already, we had some reporting this year that
Speaker 1: given the level of deployment in China, its emissions are
Speaker 1: likely to peak this year, decline next year, and if
Speaker 1: it continues that kind of renewable deployment just remain in
Speaker 1: structural decrease after that. That's a goal as a country
Speaker 1: that China had set in the UN that they will
Speaker 1: peak their emissions before twenty thirty, and if these numbers
Speaker 1: are correct, it could peak it as soon as twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three. Now you raise the point that the US
Speaker 1: is not going to be tripling renewable energy according to
Speaker 1: the forecast have if the US went harder, that could
Speaker 1: make a big difference.
Speaker 3: That's true. The thing about the US is that since
Speaker 3: the Inflation of Reduction Act has been published and brought
Speaker 3: into law. It's like this car that has the accelerator
Speaker 3: pressed down really hard, but it's also got the handbrake on.
Speaker 3: The economics of renewables are fantastic, but it's a really
Speaker 3: difficult business environment. It's hard to get permits, it's hard
Speaker 3: to get grid, it's hard to build anything in America,
Speaker 3: it seems like from afar. So what the US government
Speaker 3: should focus on is removing bottlenecks. The economics are fantastic
Speaker 3: and it should go, but it does need to speed up.
Speaker 3: And our local analysts all look at the numbers and go, oh,
Speaker 3: I don't think it's going to take off like a rocket.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 1: We've talked about tripling renewable energy because that's going to
Speaker 1: be one of the things that will get signed off
Speaker 1: at COP twenty eight most likely. But there are a
Speaker 1: few other things that are being talked about, and let's
Speaker 1: just touch on them briefly. One is doubling energy efficiency.
Speaker 1: It's kind of a no brainer. You can deploy solutions
Speaker 1: that would use less energy but give you the same output,
Speaker 1: and yet it's one that seems to not really be
Speaker 1: the sexy solution people want to chase.
Speaker 3: Efficiency is never sexy, and you generally don't get much
Speaker 3: credit saving energy. I really hope that passes, though, because
Speaker 3: the best sort of electricity to generate the sort that
Speaker 3: you never even have to generate because you don't use it.
Speaker 3: But it's obvious that it's not a splashy, sexy target
Speaker 3: like tripling renewables capacity.
Speaker 1: We have seen some movement, given volatility in energy prices
Speaker 1: over the past few years, where industry and governments have
Speaker 1: focused on trying to increase efficiency, but you're right, it's
Speaker 1: just sort of the underused lever. Ultimately, would just those
Speaker 1: two things do enough to get us to net zero
Speaker 1: or do we also have to have some form of
Speaker 1: agreement to reduce fossil fuel.
Speaker 3: That's a very good question. I think that to get
Speaker 3: to actual net zero we have to not just decarbonize power,
Speaker 3: which is as we've discussed, the easy bit. We've also
Speaker 3: got to decarbonize shipping and transport and agriculture and aviation
Speaker 3: and industry, and all of those are harder. Yes, we
Speaker 3: can leave the bulk of that to be on twenty thirty,
Speaker 3: at which point we'll have loads of cheap and clean electricity.
Speaker 3: But we've got to start setting the pathway now to
Speaker 3: do so. So preparations for decarbonizing industry, transport, aviation, agriculture
Speaker 3: are really important to this point.
Speaker 1: And since we talked earlier in the year about solar
Speaker 1: you have finished and a new edition of your book
Speaker 1: is coming out. What were the biggest updates?
Speaker 3: So my book is called Solar Power Finance without the Jargon,
Speaker 3: and the first edition was published in twenty nineteen, and
Speaker 3: it's meant to explain to people who may be studied
Speaker 3: stem more humanities what you need to know about finance
Speaker 3: to work in manewables. Back in twenty nineteen, I think
Speaker 3: I was relatively pessimistic about batteries. I sort of said,
Speaker 3: oh yeah, and there will also be batteries. But now
Speaker 3: it's actually pretty obvious that batteries are going to be
Speaker 3: a huge part of the solution. And over eighty percent
Speaker 3: of home solar systems in some European markets have batteries now,
Speaker 3: so they're really playing a part in moving that daytime
Speaker 3: power to the evening. Another thing is hydrogen. Now, hydrogen
Speaker 3: is not good for everything. It's not as good as
Speaker 3: heat pumps for home heating and it's not a silver bullet,
Speaker 3: but it's something that is potentially a way of storing
Speaker 3: power from somewhere to winter. And I think that it's
Speaker 3: probably going to be something that we use to de
Speaker 3: carbonize steel and also to run certain power plants when
Speaker 3: there is no sun and wind for a week and
Speaker 3: we don't really have many other ideas of what to
Speaker 3: do about that. So governments are investing very heavily in
Speaker 3: electoralizer facilities. So hydrogen is going to be a thing,
Speaker 3: and I hope it works, or I hope if it
Speaker 3: doesn't work, it's because we had a better way.
Speaker 1: Now, on a day to day basis, you are looking
Speaker 1: at the renewable energy sector. You're looking at the clients
Speaker 1: who are interested in deploying renewable energy. But how much
Speaker 1: attention do you pay to cop does that really translate
Speaker 1: into business conversation for me?
Speaker 3: Now, I think that the business of renewables is actually
Speaker 3: much too busy to look at these sort of high
Speaker 3: level conversations which tend to take at least five to
Speaker 3: ten years to result in something actionable. Of course, that's
Speaker 3: the kind of timeframe that ultimately, as a species we
Speaker 3: should be looking at, But as an individual and investor
Speaker 3: investors are my clients anyway that you're looking for the
Speaker 3: next market to hit, the sort of projects to invest in,
Speaker 3: what's going to happen with cannibalization. I'm very focused on
Speaker 3: trying to forecast price for solo right now, which is
Speaker 3: really difficult, and all of those are much shorter term.
Speaker 3: But the cop meetings are important to set a path.
Speaker 3: They give companies signals like if I build a coal plant,
Speaker 3: there's a very good chance there'll be a carbon tax
Speaker 3: on that could plans, So maybe I shouldn't do that
Speaker 3: because it will be a strand, the dosset and so
Speaker 3: they have a huge amounts of value.
Speaker 1: That was a lot of numbers, but I'm glad you
Speaker 1: could make sense of what is a big, big target.
Speaker 4: Thank you Jenny, Thank you Akschat. Have a good day everyone.
Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to Zero every day. At copp
Speaker 1: we publish the Bloomberg Green newsletter full of all the
Speaker 1: latest at the summit. Sign up for free at Bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot com. There's a link in the show notes. Also,
Speaker 1: you can now listen to Zero without the ads. Just
Speaker 1: log into Apple Podcasts using your Bloomberg subscription. If you
Speaker 1: like this, episode. Please take a moment to rate or
Speaker 1: review on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Share this episode with
Speaker 1: a friend or with someone who's broken the tyranny of
Speaker 1: turning stuff around. You can get in touch at zero
Speaker 1: port at Bloomberg dot Net. Zero's producer is Oscar Boyd
Speaker 1: and senior producer is Christine riskell Ar. The music is
Speaker 1: composed by Wonderly Special thanks to kirapindrum i'm Akshadrati back
Speaker 1: soon with more from kop