1 00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:02,080 Speaker 1: Hey everyone, it's a busy week in the world of 2 00:00:02,080 --> 00:00:04,720 Speaker 1: politics and climate. In the US. It's crunch time for 3 00:00:04,760 --> 00:00:06,800 Speaker 1: the Infrastructure Bill and we should know by the weekend 4 00:00:06,880 --> 00:00:08,520 Speaker 1: what of it will make it through and become law. 5 00:00:09,000 --> 00:00:12,360 Speaker 1: And on Sunday of October, the COP twenty six climate 6 00:00:12,400 --> 00:00:15,880 Speaker 1: negotiations in Glasgow officially kick off, where representative from nations 7 00:00:15,880 --> 00:00:17,720 Speaker 1: across the world will gather to take stock of where 8 00:00:17,720 --> 00:00:20,960 Speaker 1: we're at with regard to the Paris Agreement and attempt 9 00:00:21,000 --> 00:00:24,000 Speaker 1: to map a path forward. Now the tide that binds well, 10 00:00:24,440 --> 00:00:27,320 Speaker 1: there's a lot of clean energy and climate related legislation 11 00:00:27,360 --> 00:00:30,360 Speaker 1: in the US Infrastructure Bill. Whether and what passes this 12 00:00:30,400 --> 00:00:32,320 Speaker 1: week and will impact a position from which the U 13 00:00:32,320 --> 00:00:35,120 Speaker 1: s can approach the global climate negotiations as a leader 14 00:00:35,360 --> 00:00:38,800 Speaker 1: or well not. From BENEF We've got Ethan Zindler, head 15 00:00:38,800 --> 00:00:41,839 Speaker 1: of America's and Vicky Comming, head of Global Policy, on 16 00:00:41,880 --> 00:00:43,920 Speaker 1: the show to tell us about what's going on, what 17 00:00:44,040 --> 00:00:46,040 Speaker 1: to watch for, and their predictions of what they think 18 00:00:46,040 --> 00:00:48,440 Speaker 1: will happen. This episode is based on our ongoing coverage 19 00:00:48,440 --> 00:00:50,920 Speaker 1: of US and global policy being if. Users can find 20 00:00:50,920 --> 00:00:53,920 Speaker 1: this content on BENEF dot com, BENEF Mobile and of 21 00:00:53,960 --> 00:00:56,360 Speaker 1: course on the terminal and for everyone listening, will also 22 00:00:56,400 --> 00:00:58,280 Speaker 1: be doing a public blog these next two weeks that 23 00:00:58,320 --> 00:01:01,880 Speaker 1: will follow along with the eatings and provide commentary. You 24 00:01:01,880 --> 00:01:04,480 Speaker 1: can find that at bloomberg dot com Forward Slash Professional, 25 00:01:04,560 --> 00:01:08,560 Speaker 1: Forward Slash Blog. As always be desprovide investment or strategy 26 00:01:08,600 --> 00:01:10,880 Speaker 1: device and you guessed it. The full disclaimer at the 27 00:01:10,959 --> 00:01:13,280 Speaker 1: end of the show him Mark Taylor here with Dana Perkins, 28 00:01:13,400 --> 00:01:24,160 Speaker 1: and you're listening to switch on the BENF podcast. Ethan, Vicky, welcome, 29 00:01:25,160 --> 00:01:27,280 Speaker 1: Thank you. Okay, so we're gonna kind of do this 30 00:01:27,319 --> 00:01:30,600 Speaker 1: in two parts today talk about the US infrastructure bills, 31 00:01:31,000 --> 00:01:34,039 Speaker 1: what's going on there, and then tie that into what's 32 00:01:34,080 --> 00:01:36,920 Speaker 1: going on in COP twenty six. But let's start off 33 00:01:36,959 --> 00:01:40,039 Speaker 1: really basic, as we always do, and just talk about 34 00:01:40,040 --> 00:01:43,199 Speaker 1: the infrastructure bills. So, Ethan, you and I were talking 35 00:01:43,240 --> 00:01:46,360 Speaker 1: before and I said, generally, you know the Infratructure bill, 36 00:01:46,360 --> 00:01:48,200 Speaker 1: and you said, actually, it's a bit more complex than 37 00:01:48,240 --> 00:01:50,640 Speaker 1: just that. I think out in the in the wide world, 38 00:01:50,720 --> 00:01:52,360 Speaker 1: we call it that, but I think there's a bit 39 00:01:52,360 --> 00:01:54,240 Speaker 1: more to it. Can you explain kind of the differences 40 00:01:54,280 --> 00:01:56,680 Speaker 1: you're mentioning a bit ago. Yeah, So there are two 41 00:01:56,920 --> 00:02:00,560 Speaker 1: major pieces of legislation before Congress right now, neither of 42 00:02:00,560 --> 00:02:05,280 Speaker 1: which have gotten final passage. One is the Infrastructure bill 43 00:02:05,880 --> 00:02:08,639 Speaker 1: that passed the Senate that has not passed the House. 44 00:02:09,240 --> 00:02:12,840 Speaker 1: The other is a so called reconciliation bill, and that 45 00:02:12,880 --> 00:02:16,720 Speaker 1: one has not passed either chamber so far. And basically, 46 00:02:17,120 --> 00:02:19,760 Speaker 1: if you put the two together, you're talking about several 47 00:02:19,840 --> 00:02:23,760 Speaker 1: trillion dollars potentially worth of support for US infrastructure in 48 00:02:23,760 --> 00:02:27,200 Speaker 1: the most literal sense, roads and bridges and clean energy, 49 00:02:27,520 --> 00:02:30,279 Speaker 1: but also a lot of social programs that are potentially 50 00:02:30,400 --> 00:02:36,120 Speaker 1: in both bills, which one has the things that benf 51 00:02:36,440 --> 00:02:40,160 Speaker 1: would write most about. Actually both both have a lot. 52 00:02:40,400 --> 00:02:44,160 Speaker 1: The infrastructure bill that passed the Senate has some real 53 00:02:44,200 --> 00:02:49,440 Speaker 1: support for electric vehicles and charging, but the Reconciliation bill, 54 00:02:49,720 --> 00:02:53,760 Speaker 1: the larger and arguably good deal more controversial. One has 55 00:02:54,040 --> 00:02:58,079 Speaker 1: long term extensions for tax credits for wind and solar included. 56 00:02:58,200 --> 00:03:01,360 Speaker 1: It has tax credits for electric via goals included. It 57 00:03:01,520 --> 00:03:05,800 Speaker 1: also has a potential something akin to a national clean 58 00:03:05,880 --> 00:03:09,240 Speaker 1: Energy standard included in it. But all of that was 59 00:03:09,280 --> 00:03:11,840 Speaker 1: what was in the original legislation a couple of months 60 00:03:11,840 --> 00:03:15,200 Speaker 1: ago written by the House. It is being whittled down 61 00:03:15,360 --> 00:03:18,480 Speaker 1: as we speak, and a slimmer version of that bill 62 00:03:18,600 --> 00:03:22,520 Speaker 1: is ultimately what we'll get past if it gets past. Oh, okay, 63 00:03:22,639 --> 00:03:25,960 Speaker 1: slimmer version, if it gets past, before we get into 64 00:03:26,000 --> 00:03:29,079 Speaker 1: the mechanics of, you know, whether or not it will 65 00:03:29,080 --> 00:03:31,359 Speaker 1: pass all that stuff. Can you just describe to us 66 00:03:31,360 --> 00:03:33,800 Speaker 1: just maybe a couple of the programs that you're excited 67 00:03:33,840 --> 00:03:36,200 Speaker 1: about or interested in in either of the one of these. 68 00:03:36,640 --> 00:03:39,640 Speaker 1: The legislation contains a lot of things, but most importantly, 69 00:03:40,120 --> 00:03:42,600 Speaker 1: I would argue for the wind and solar sector, it 70 00:03:42,640 --> 00:03:47,080 Speaker 1: contains long term tenuere extensions of tax credits, and those 71 00:03:47,120 --> 00:03:51,720 Speaker 1: tax credits have historically really been the most important subsidy 72 00:03:51,800 --> 00:03:55,440 Speaker 1: in the United States to support growth of clean energy. 73 00:03:55,560 --> 00:03:58,280 Speaker 1: So that's probably number one on the list. Number two 74 00:03:58,280 --> 00:04:01,760 Speaker 1: on the list is a National Clean Energy Program that 75 00:04:02,040 --> 00:04:06,720 Speaker 1: is aimed at essentially being a national renewable energy standard. 76 00:04:07,040 --> 00:04:09,280 Speaker 1: That part of the bill almost certainly looks like it's 77 00:04:09,360 --> 00:04:11,520 Speaker 1: not going to make the final cut at this point. 78 00:04:11,800 --> 00:04:14,880 Speaker 1: The bill also has support for carbon capture and storage 79 00:04:14,920 --> 00:04:18,480 Speaker 1: technology in the form of tax credits, for electric vehicles 80 00:04:18,480 --> 00:04:20,360 Speaker 1: in the form of tax credits. It's got a lot 81 00:04:20,400 --> 00:04:23,559 Speaker 1: of different goodies for a lot of different subsectors within 82 00:04:23,680 --> 00:04:27,240 Speaker 1: the clean energy world. You mentioned that it's now slimmer, 83 00:04:27,760 --> 00:04:30,720 Speaker 1: and I think my question before you get into any 84 00:04:30,720 --> 00:04:34,400 Speaker 1: more specifics on that, is slimmer a bad thing? Because 85 00:04:34,600 --> 00:04:36,920 Speaker 1: when I hear slimmer, I hear the opposite of throwing 86 00:04:36,960 --> 00:04:40,160 Speaker 1: in irrelevant things, you know, which sometimes do get thrown 87 00:04:40,200 --> 00:04:42,400 Speaker 1: into bills, which maybe are just kind of making their 88 00:04:42,440 --> 00:04:44,480 Speaker 1: way along as a part of the bartering process in 89 00:04:44,560 --> 00:04:47,479 Speaker 1: order to get something past. But something that slimmer in 90 00:04:47,600 --> 00:04:50,880 Speaker 1: theory could be a starting point, maybe not the final endgame, 91 00:04:50,920 --> 00:04:53,360 Speaker 1: but a starting point for a bigger conversation. Is that 92 00:04:53,440 --> 00:04:56,880 Speaker 1: the case or is a slimmer version something that really 93 00:04:57,200 --> 00:04:59,600 Speaker 1: kills any hope for anything that is wider and maybe, 94 00:04:59,640 --> 00:05:03,600 Speaker 1: as we've discussed COP twenty six more internationally relevant. When 95 00:05:03,640 --> 00:05:07,000 Speaker 1: I say slimmer, primarily what I'm talking about is reducing 96 00:05:07,120 --> 00:05:10,240 Speaker 1: some of the social program benefits that were in the 97 00:05:10,279 --> 00:05:13,120 Speaker 1: original bill. But also, most importantly, as far as the 98 00:05:13,160 --> 00:05:17,720 Speaker 1: clean energy sector is concerned, grapping this potential national clean 99 00:05:17,800 --> 00:05:22,200 Speaker 1: Energy standard program. There's been plenty of debate, I would say, 100 00:05:22,200 --> 00:05:25,320 Speaker 1: within the US clean energy policy community about whether that's 101 00:05:25,320 --> 00:05:27,920 Speaker 1: a big deal. My personal view is it's not as 102 00:05:27,920 --> 00:05:29,760 Speaker 1: big a deal as people are making it out to 103 00:05:29,800 --> 00:05:32,960 Speaker 1: be given that the tax credits have always historically done 104 00:05:33,000 --> 00:05:37,080 Speaker 1: what have boosted build of renewables, So you know, that's 105 00:05:37,120 --> 00:05:40,440 Speaker 1: probably what the slimming means as far as clean energy 106 00:05:40,520 --> 00:05:43,000 Speaker 1: is concerned. So it sounds like the slimming is kind 107 00:05:43,000 --> 00:05:45,520 Speaker 1: of keeping the carrot getting rid of the stick. But 108 00:05:45,560 --> 00:05:48,480 Speaker 1: they also sound like really familiar kind of old tunes. 109 00:05:48,800 --> 00:05:51,320 Speaker 1: We've heard of the tax credit before for the wind 110 00:05:51,360 --> 00:05:54,680 Speaker 1: and solar. We've heard of the carbon capture and stories 111 00:05:54,720 --> 00:05:56,920 Speaker 1: tax credit as well. What is that forty Q right? 112 00:05:57,320 --> 00:05:59,839 Speaker 1: We've heard of tax and centers for buying electric vehicles. 113 00:06:00,040 --> 00:06:03,680 Speaker 1: Guess my interest is is there anything for say, EV 114 00:06:03,920 --> 00:06:06,560 Speaker 1: charging electric vehicle charging? I saw an announcement this morning 115 00:06:06,560 --> 00:06:08,600 Speaker 1: from what was it Hurts that said they're going to 116 00:06:08,680 --> 00:06:11,479 Speaker 1: buy a hundred thousand testla's Like it sounds to me 117 00:06:11,520 --> 00:06:14,520 Speaker 1: like an e V charging infrastructure could help things like 118 00:06:14,560 --> 00:06:17,200 Speaker 1: that and others. Is there any new programs in there? Yes, 119 00:06:17,240 --> 00:06:21,039 Speaker 1: there is, Actually there's a tax credit potentially for electric 120 00:06:21,120 --> 00:06:24,680 Speaker 1: vehicle charging infrastructure. I actually believe that's in the Infrastructure bill, 121 00:06:24,800 --> 00:06:28,040 Speaker 1: the one that passed the Senate already. There is a 122 00:06:28,080 --> 00:06:31,400 Speaker 1: so called manufacturers tax credit. It would give you basically 123 00:06:31,440 --> 00:06:36,400 Speaker 1: a thirty capex discount on building a new manufacturing facility. 124 00:06:36,440 --> 00:06:40,200 Speaker 1: And this is explicitly and specifically aimed at trying to 125 00:06:40,320 --> 00:06:44,240 Speaker 1: grow the US supply chain for strategic things like batteries 126 00:06:44,240 --> 00:06:48,000 Speaker 1: and battery materials and other things like that. Sounds timely, Yeah, 127 00:06:48,040 --> 00:06:49,960 Speaker 1: up and down the up and down the value chain 128 00:06:50,120 --> 00:06:53,800 Speaker 1: down to consumers, but also up to manufacturing and production. 129 00:06:53,880 --> 00:06:57,320 Speaker 1: There's a lot of important stuff in the bill. One 130 00:06:57,360 --> 00:06:58,960 Speaker 1: other note I would just say about, you know, as 131 00:06:59,000 --> 00:07:00,840 Speaker 1: you're here, I'm hearing you and me saying tax credit 132 00:07:00,880 --> 00:07:04,760 Speaker 1: tax ra tax credit. Tax credits have become essentially by default, 133 00:07:04,760 --> 00:07:07,920 Speaker 1: the system by which we support all kinds of things 134 00:07:08,000 --> 00:07:10,960 Speaker 1: in the US, all kinds of social programs, everything, and 135 00:07:11,000 --> 00:07:13,560 Speaker 1: tax credits, I mean to be clear, as a policy 136 00:07:13,600 --> 00:07:18,440 Speaker 1: mechanism are terrible. They are inexact, They can be complicated 137 00:07:18,640 --> 00:07:21,520 Speaker 1: to take advantage of. You don't really know how much 138 00:07:21,520 --> 00:07:23,080 Speaker 1: you're going to get out of them unless you put 139 00:07:23,160 --> 00:07:24,920 Speaker 1: some kind of cap on them. And the only one 140 00:07:24,960 --> 00:07:27,840 Speaker 1: that's ever been capped has been around electric vehicles, at 141 00:07:27,880 --> 00:07:31,200 Speaker 1: least within the clean energy sector. So they're very inexact, 142 00:07:31,520 --> 00:07:34,280 Speaker 1: and it's very hard to know when they're not exactly needed, 143 00:07:34,560 --> 00:07:37,040 Speaker 1: and this is why policy people really like things like 144 00:07:37,080 --> 00:07:40,160 Speaker 1: clean energy standards, and they really like carbon prices and 145 00:07:40,280 --> 00:07:43,880 Speaker 1: carbon markets. The reality of it is, tax credits politically 146 00:07:44,000 --> 00:07:46,160 Speaker 1: have worked in the US in the past. They look 147 00:07:46,200 --> 00:07:48,800 Speaker 1: like politically they might work again this time, and so 148 00:07:48,840 --> 00:07:50,920 Speaker 1: that's probably what we're gonna end up with. It's gonna 149 00:07:50,960 --> 00:07:53,680 Speaker 1: say tax credits sound very American, Well, yeah, I was 150 00:07:53,720 --> 00:07:56,000 Speaker 1: gonna say that. I think it's one of the few 151 00:07:56,000 --> 00:07:58,720 Speaker 1: places in the world where tax credits have played a 152 00:07:58,720 --> 00:08:01,680 Speaker 1: big role in the clean energy deployment, and the rest 153 00:08:01,680 --> 00:08:03,600 Speaker 1: of the world it's been historically more of a story 154 00:08:03,640 --> 00:08:07,720 Speaker 1: of feeding tariffs and auctions, at least for renewables. Lastly, 155 00:08:07,760 --> 00:08:10,240 Speaker 1: i'll say tax credits is they actually they suck as 156 00:08:10,280 --> 00:08:14,880 Speaker 1: a policy mechan maybe one. They are only used in 157 00:08:14,920 --> 00:08:18,120 Speaker 1: the US. They're really they're just dumb. But they are 158 00:08:18,200 --> 00:08:21,040 Speaker 1: are dumb thing, and they are what we're used to 159 00:08:21,160 --> 00:08:23,720 Speaker 1: over here. They have the potential, let's be clear, to 160 00:08:23,840 --> 00:08:28,440 Speaker 1: potentially over subsidize things because they're not calibrated in any 161 00:08:28,480 --> 00:08:31,840 Speaker 1: kind of way. But they work and they are a 162 00:08:31,840 --> 00:08:35,640 Speaker 1: lot simpler, frankly than a national clean energy program, which 163 00:08:35,679 --> 00:08:38,160 Speaker 1: is what's being proposed you know, to come along with this, 164 00:08:38,280 --> 00:08:39,880 Speaker 1: and if you had to pick one or the other, 165 00:08:40,000 --> 00:08:42,440 Speaker 1: I think most people in the industry would say, we 166 00:08:42,480 --> 00:08:45,600 Speaker 1: will take a long term extension of the tax credits 167 00:08:45,760 --> 00:08:49,760 Speaker 1: over a new bureaucracy that mandates certain amounts of clean 168 00:08:49,840 --> 00:08:52,520 Speaker 1: energy consumption. Yeah, I mean, Vicky, what's your opinion on 169 00:08:52,559 --> 00:08:54,480 Speaker 1: the flip side of that. So Ethan is not a 170 00:08:54,480 --> 00:08:56,760 Speaker 1: big fan of tax credits, is it working that much 171 00:08:56,800 --> 00:08:58,800 Speaker 1: better in the rest of the world, Well, ensure, I 172 00:08:58,840 --> 00:09:04,840 Speaker 1: would say yes, Okay, I would certainly say that renewables 173 00:09:04,920 --> 00:09:09,920 Speaker 1: auctions have proved particularly successful at deploying large volumes of 174 00:09:10,080 --> 00:09:13,760 Speaker 1: would say wind and solar at costs that kind of 175 00:09:14,200 --> 00:09:18,800 Speaker 1: more accurately reflect the underlying technology costs. So we've seen 176 00:09:19,080 --> 00:09:22,160 Speaker 1: auction tariffs have tended to go down with but they 177 00:09:22,160 --> 00:09:25,520 Speaker 1: don't always. For example, if there's like an delay on 178 00:09:25,600 --> 00:09:29,880 Speaker 1: permitting or some kind of really heavy a local content requirements, 179 00:09:29,920 --> 00:09:34,360 Speaker 1: then they might not necessarily go down, but certainly they 180 00:09:34,400 --> 00:09:38,240 Speaker 1: do help the government also kind of keeper a tighter 181 00:09:38,280 --> 00:09:41,720 Speaker 1: rein on their outlay in terms of expenditure as well, 182 00:09:42,040 --> 00:09:45,160 Speaker 1: certainly compared with beaming tariffs. I was just going to 183 00:09:45,280 --> 00:09:48,040 Speaker 1: say that the text credits are an ugly beast, but 184 00:09:48,120 --> 00:09:52,000 Speaker 1: they are our beast, and they're the beasts that everybody knows, 185 00:09:52,240 --> 00:09:56,640 Speaker 1: and that's why ultimately they seem to be politically possible. 186 00:09:56,640 --> 00:09:58,920 Speaker 1: And the last thing, without getting too much into the politics, 187 00:09:59,040 --> 00:10:02,280 Speaker 1: is that the reason why I think, and we'll see 188 00:10:02,320 --> 00:10:04,400 Speaker 1: how this plays out, but I think that they'll get 189 00:10:04,400 --> 00:10:08,160 Speaker 1: through is because the most important person in all these discussion, 190 00:10:08,240 --> 00:10:11,920 Speaker 1: Senator Joe Mansion, who represents the state of West Virginia, 191 00:10:12,160 --> 00:10:16,600 Speaker 1: seems to be open to policies that support renewable energy 192 00:10:16,760 --> 00:10:21,280 Speaker 1: that's tax credits, but opposed to policies that presumably would 193 00:10:21,720 --> 00:10:27,120 Speaker 1: you know, explicitly limit the role that coal and fossil 194 00:10:27,160 --> 00:10:30,600 Speaker 1: fuels play, never mind the sort of inconsistent thinking around 195 00:10:30,600 --> 00:10:34,720 Speaker 1: that logic. But policies that appear to be, you know, 196 00:10:34,840 --> 00:10:39,120 Speaker 1: specifically hurting fossils he doesn't like. But policies that go 197 00:10:39,240 --> 00:10:43,400 Speaker 1: to support renewable specifically he's been open to. And I 198 00:10:43,440 --> 00:10:45,520 Speaker 1: think that's why this will probably make it through. Can 199 00:10:45,559 --> 00:10:48,480 Speaker 1: you explain to everybody listening, who is not a U 200 00:10:48,600 --> 00:10:51,560 Speaker 1: S policy buff, why Joe Mansion is significant and what 201 00:10:51,640 --> 00:10:55,319 Speaker 1: he represents in this discussion. So people have jokingly referred 202 00:10:55,360 --> 00:10:58,880 Speaker 1: to him as Prime Minister Mansion or co President Mansion. 203 00:10:59,240 --> 00:11:03,760 Speaker 1: The issue is that the Democrats have fifty elected members 204 00:11:03,760 --> 00:11:06,719 Speaker 1: of the United States Senate and the only reason effectively 205 00:11:06,760 --> 00:11:09,839 Speaker 1: they have a so called majority is because they can 206 00:11:09,920 --> 00:11:13,280 Speaker 1: cast the fifty first vote with the sitting Vice President 207 00:11:13,360 --> 00:11:18,520 Speaker 1: Kamala Harris. That means that every single Democrat must vote 208 00:11:18,520 --> 00:11:21,320 Speaker 1: for any piece of legislation to get through the Senate. 209 00:11:22,000 --> 00:11:25,840 Speaker 1: And Joe Manchin is pretty much the most conservative member 210 00:11:26,040 --> 00:11:29,320 Speaker 1: of the Democratic Caucus, along with one other Senator, Kirsten 211 00:11:29,400 --> 00:11:32,600 Speaker 1: Cinema from Arizona, but he's probably a slightly more hope 212 00:11:32,679 --> 00:11:35,280 Speaker 1: high profile. But the bottom line is you actually need 213 00:11:35,320 --> 00:11:37,400 Speaker 1: to get all fifty senators on board. It's just that 214 00:11:37,480 --> 00:11:40,920 Speaker 1: he's been the most challenging because a big chunk of 215 00:11:40,960 --> 00:11:44,880 Speaker 1: the rest of the caucus is considerably to the left 216 00:11:44,960 --> 00:11:47,840 Speaker 1: of him. Can I ask this might be a dumb question, 217 00:11:47,920 --> 00:11:53,760 Speaker 1: but apart from not wanting any democratic legislation through, what 218 00:11:53,840 --> 00:11:58,920 Speaker 1: do Republicans oppose in these bills? Is there anything policy 219 00:11:59,040 --> 00:12:01,280 Speaker 1: oriented that they actual the opposed or is it strictly 220 00:12:01,320 --> 00:12:03,920 Speaker 1: political Because you have Joe Manson, you have Cinema, but 221 00:12:03,960 --> 00:12:05,640 Speaker 1: you have fifty other people that could vote for this. 222 00:12:06,440 --> 00:12:08,360 Speaker 1: It's a great question. I mean, the first thing to 223 00:12:08,440 --> 00:12:13,000 Speaker 1: note is in fairness to Republicans, the infrastructure bill, which 224 00:12:13,040 --> 00:12:17,000 Speaker 1: is the first bill passed I think with six votes 225 00:12:17,040 --> 00:12:19,440 Speaker 1: through the Senate, like a lot of Republicans got on 226 00:12:19,440 --> 00:12:24,000 Speaker 1: board to support that, it had bipartisan support. That bill 227 00:12:24,160 --> 00:12:27,800 Speaker 1: is pretty narrowly focused on Rhodes bridges. It has some 228 00:12:27,920 --> 00:12:30,920 Speaker 1: e V support, but it's kind of a pretty conventional 229 00:12:31,280 --> 00:12:34,800 Speaker 1: infrastructure bill. Republicans make the argument that the other bill 230 00:12:35,320 --> 00:12:39,160 Speaker 1: goes way beyond the bounds of what the definition of 231 00:12:39,200 --> 00:12:43,280 Speaker 1: infrastructure should be to focus on social policy. They also 232 00:12:43,480 --> 00:12:47,160 Speaker 1: seem to have found religion on the question of caring 233 00:12:47,160 --> 00:12:52,040 Speaker 1: about the deficit and debt. And again, uh yeah, I 234 00:12:52,080 --> 00:12:55,920 Speaker 1: say that ironically or sarcastically, because it does seem like 235 00:12:55,960 --> 00:12:58,880 Speaker 1: whichever party controls the reins is usually typically willing to 236 00:12:58,920 --> 00:13:01,559 Speaker 1: spend a lot of money and and deficits have run 237 00:13:01,679 --> 00:13:04,960 Speaker 1: up a big time under Republican presidents and Republican congresses 238 00:13:05,000 --> 00:13:07,920 Speaker 1: in the past. So I think, you know, now suddenly 239 00:13:07,960 --> 00:13:11,359 Speaker 1: they're finding a certain amount trying to find some fiscal discipline, 240 00:13:11,640 --> 00:13:14,320 Speaker 1: and that's the argument that's being made to oppose this 241 00:13:14,360 --> 00:13:17,280 Speaker 1: bill as well. Can you discuss the longevity of these bills, 242 00:13:17,320 --> 00:13:19,480 Speaker 1: because I think as we get into this conversation around 243 00:13:19,520 --> 00:13:24,200 Speaker 1: copy and we're looking ahead, not just to that magical 244 00:13:24,280 --> 00:13:26,880 Speaker 1: year that we're all kind of very much looking forward 245 00:13:26,960 --> 00:13:30,320 Speaker 1: to when we're making policy decisions. A lot of discussion 246 00:13:30,400 --> 00:13:32,320 Speaker 1: around the US over the last few years has been 247 00:13:32,360 --> 00:13:35,320 Speaker 1: around executive orders and how easy they are to rip out. 248 00:13:35,760 --> 00:13:37,640 Speaker 1: So now we're at a place where there are things 249 00:13:37,720 --> 00:13:40,120 Speaker 1: going through the Senate, going through the House. How long 250 00:13:40,160 --> 00:13:43,720 Speaker 1: will these bills in theory be applicable. That's a really 251 00:13:43,720 --> 00:13:47,720 Speaker 1: good question. So there's the term of the bills, you know, 252 00:13:47,720 --> 00:13:49,880 Speaker 1: in terms of the length of the legislation that have 253 00:13:50,000 --> 00:13:53,480 Speaker 1: different programs. Many of the key programs are looking at 254 00:13:53,480 --> 00:13:55,880 Speaker 1: a tenure horizon in terms of how long they would 255 00:13:55,880 --> 00:13:58,840 Speaker 1: be on the books. So that's what the legislation says. 256 00:13:59,559 --> 00:14:02,319 Speaker 1: But as you rightly point out, there's the politics here. 257 00:14:02,600 --> 00:14:05,920 Speaker 1: So the reality of it is that if the Democrats 258 00:14:05,960 --> 00:14:12,080 Speaker 1: lose one or both chambers of Congress in two bye, 259 00:14:12,240 --> 00:14:16,560 Speaker 1: a Republican Congress could try to undo this through other 260 00:14:16,679 --> 00:14:19,440 Speaker 1: legislative action. The good news, I guess for those who 261 00:14:19,480 --> 00:14:22,200 Speaker 1: support this bill is that Biden will still be president 262 00:14:22,400 --> 00:14:26,520 Speaker 1: through the end of four into the very start, So 263 00:14:26,640 --> 00:14:29,320 Speaker 1: basically you would not be able to undo anything that 264 00:14:29,440 --> 00:14:34,640 Speaker 1: this Congress passes any earlier then, and even in that circumstance, 265 00:14:34,680 --> 00:14:37,080 Speaker 1: you would have to have basically a Republican president and 266 00:14:37,160 --> 00:14:41,320 Speaker 1: probably Republican control of the House and the Senate. But 267 00:14:41,400 --> 00:14:44,280 Speaker 1: all this speaks to why Democrats are so anxious to 268 00:14:44,520 --> 00:14:47,600 Speaker 1: get getting something done now, because this really may be 269 00:14:47,720 --> 00:14:50,360 Speaker 1: the last chance to try and pass something like this. 270 00:14:50,800 --> 00:14:53,240 Speaker 1: The elections next year do not look good for Democrats 271 00:14:53,280 --> 00:14:55,400 Speaker 1: at the moment, You've got a full moon now, basically 272 00:14:55,400 --> 00:14:59,280 Speaker 1: a Democratic president, two chambers of Congress controlled by Democrats, 273 00:14:59,280 --> 00:15:01,040 Speaker 1: and they feel like this is the moment that they've 274 00:15:01,040 --> 00:15:02,800 Speaker 1: got to move And I would agree with that because 275 00:15:02,840 --> 00:15:05,000 Speaker 1: I think you don't know what's going to happen in 276 00:15:05,000 --> 00:15:07,760 Speaker 1: the future, and especially as we think about climate there 277 00:15:07,760 --> 00:15:10,000 Speaker 1: really is no time to waste when it comes to 278 00:15:10,040 --> 00:15:12,640 Speaker 1: dealing with these issues. Okay, so let's let's talk about 279 00:15:12,720 --> 00:15:15,120 Speaker 1: what we think is going to happen. Here. There's a 280 00:15:15,160 --> 00:15:18,400 Speaker 1: deadline on all this, right, it's it's coming up. Yeah, 281 00:15:18,560 --> 00:15:20,920 Speaker 1: the end of the month October thirty one has been 282 00:15:20,920 --> 00:15:23,400 Speaker 1: said as the informal deadline by the Speaker of the 283 00:15:23,440 --> 00:15:26,320 Speaker 1: House Nancy Pelosi when she says that she will bring 284 00:15:26,440 --> 00:15:28,520 Speaker 1: both bills up for a vote on the floor of 285 00:15:28,560 --> 00:15:32,440 Speaker 1: the House. That also, not coincidentally, happens to be really 286 00:15:32,520 --> 00:15:35,760 Speaker 1: the eve of when the cop climate talks kick off 287 00:15:35,960 --> 00:15:38,280 Speaker 1: in Glasgow. I maybe off by a day, I think 288 00:15:38,320 --> 00:15:42,800 Speaker 1: you can correct me, but that's basically exactly that moment. Yeah, 289 00:15:43,120 --> 00:15:46,480 Speaker 1: the official opening ceremony, Yes, the thirty first of October. 290 00:15:46,680 --> 00:15:48,920 Speaker 1: I mean, with the time difference, it might even be 291 00:15:49,160 --> 00:15:53,480 Speaker 1: pretty like you're within minutes. So it's not coincidental. And 292 00:15:53,680 --> 00:15:56,320 Speaker 1: you know, the administration, I think that by an administration 293 00:15:56,400 --> 00:15:59,440 Speaker 1: is keenly aware of that. Privately last week, Biden said 294 00:15:59,440 --> 00:16:02,240 Speaker 1: to a bunch of members of Congress basically said, look, 295 00:16:02,280 --> 00:16:04,920 Speaker 1: if you don't pass this bill, I'm showing up to Glasgow, 296 00:16:05,040 --> 00:16:07,320 Speaker 1: you know, pretty empty handed. That's what he said privately. 297 00:16:07,720 --> 00:16:09,680 Speaker 1: Then publicly the White House was like, no, no, no, no, 298 00:16:09,800 --> 00:16:11,880 Speaker 1: We've actually all got all this other great stuff that 299 00:16:11,920 --> 00:16:14,680 Speaker 1: we've done. We've written these regulations or whatever. But like 300 00:16:14,920 --> 00:16:17,480 Speaker 1: that is uh. As I've said to Vicky in the past, 301 00:16:17,520 --> 00:16:19,800 Speaker 1: that's like put lipstick on a pig. They've done some 302 00:16:19,840 --> 00:16:22,840 Speaker 1: great stuff. There's no question about that. And writing regulations. 303 00:16:23,120 --> 00:16:25,480 Speaker 1: But you cannot show up a cop and honestly say 304 00:16:25,520 --> 00:16:28,160 Speaker 1: that the US has on its books any kind of 305 00:16:28,160 --> 00:16:31,800 Speaker 1: long term commitment to really address these issues unless Congress 306 00:16:31,840 --> 00:16:35,160 Speaker 1: passes something. So the pressure is really there. Now. Will 307 00:16:35,240 --> 00:16:37,440 Speaker 1: they do something by the end of this week? I 308 00:16:37,440 --> 00:16:40,840 Speaker 1: think so, But gosh, it's really really hard to predict. 309 00:16:40,880 --> 00:16:44,000 Speaker 1: Over the weekend. Nancy Pelosi said basically, oh yeah, well, 310 00:16:44,000 --> 00:16:45,840 Speaker 1: we've almost got a deal, and then this morning it 311 00:16:45,880 --> 00:16:48,840 Speaker 1: doesn't look so great to me. The person that I 312 00:16:48,840 --> 00:16:52,240 Speaker 1: think is that is most perplexing and worrisome to everybody 313 00:16:52,480 --> 00:16:56,400 Speaker 1: is Senator Christian Cinema from Arizona, who, while Mansion has 314 00:16:56,440 --> 00:16:57,920 Speaker 1: been out there and I think we kind of know 315 00:16:58,040 --> 00:17:01,000 Speaker 1: what it is he wants and doesn't like, she's totally 316 00:17:01,080 --> 00:17:03,840 Speaker 1: enigma to most people at this point. She seems to 317 00:17:03,880 --> 00:17:06,680 Speaker 1: like clean energy tax credits, that's what the reporting has been, 318 00:17:07,240 --> 00:17:09,560 Speaker 1: but she also really seems to like to be a gadfly, 319 00:17:09,680 --> 00:17:11,680 Speaker 1: and I have this fear that she's going to blow 320 00:17:11,720 --> 00:17:13,440 Speaker 1: the whole thing up at the end of the day. 321 00:17:13,480 --> 00:17:16,160 Speaker 1: But all things being even, I think they will get 322 00:17:16,200 --> 00:17:18,240 Speaker 1: something done by the end of this weekend. One last factor, 323 00:17:18,280 --> 00:17:21,520 Speaker 1: which people don't talk about is Halloween is on October 324 00:17:21,600 --> 00:17:24,439 Speaker 1: thirty one, and I'm telling you that is like a 325 00:17:24,480 --> 00:17:27,040 Speaker 1: sacred holiday here in the United States. That's when every 326 00:17:27,160 --> 00:17:30,280 Speaker 1: kid goes out and goes trick or treating. Washington Bureau 327 00:17:30,320 --> 00:17:33,760 Speaker 1: of Bloomberg by like three thirty PM is usually pretty quiet. 328 00:17:33,840 --> 00:17:35,920 Speaker 1: All the parents have run home to like get the 329 00:17:36,000 --> 00:17:39,440 Speaker 1: kids set up. No parent in Congress is gonna want 330 00:17:39,440 --> 00:17:42,639 Speaker 1: to be fiddling with this on October thirty one. I 331 00:17:42,680 --> 00:17:45,000 Speaker 1: think that that is the sort of that's the sleeper 332 00:17:45,200 --> 00:17:48,760 Speaker 1: pressure here to get this done. That it's also Sunday 333 00:17:48,800 --> 00:17:56,359 Speaker 1: ethan y, so even more you know incentive. So full moon, Halloween, Yeah, 334 00:17:57,240 --> 00:18:00,360 Speaker 1: coming call, coming together, cop, It's all coming together. Wait, 335 00:18:00,400 --> 00:18:04,480 Speaker 1: so hang on. The infrastructure bill has already passed the 336 00:18:04,560 --> 00:18:07,879 Speaker 1: Senate and the House, right, and it has not passed 337 00:18:07,880 --> 00:18:12,439 Speaker 1: the House. Okay, so so we're likely to get at 338 00:18:12,520 --> 00:18:14,720 Speaker 1: least one of two. Is that right? No? I mean, 339 00:18:14,760 --> 00:18:18,399 Speaker 1: that's the issue here is that basically the votes are 340 00:18:18,440 --> 00:18:21,040 Speaker 1: there to pass the infrastructure bill basically more or less 341 00:18:21,080 --> 00:18:23,720 Speaker 1: on its own. But liberals in the House are saying, hey, 342 00:18:23,720 --> 00:18:26,480 Speaker 1: wait a second, We're not voting for this bill unless 343 00:18:26,480 --> 00:18:29,800 Speaker 1: we get to also vote on this reconciliation bill and 344 00:18:29,840 --> 00:18:32,560 Speaker 1: we also get to actually pass it. They're saying we're 345 00:18:32,560 --> 00:18:34,960 Speaker 1: not We're not in on your infrastructure bill unless you're 346 00:18:35,040 --> 00:18:38,440 Speaker 1: in on this reconciliation bill. And they make the argument 347 00:18:38,560 --> 00:18:41,000 Speaker 1: that if you don't do both at once, that you'll 348 00:18:41,080 --> 00:18:43,200 Speaker 1: never come back on the issues that are raised in 349 00:18:43,240 --> 00:18:45,359 Speaker 1: the reconciliation bill. And I think they raise a fair 350 00:18:45,359 --> 00:18:48,720 Speaker 1: point because I think Joe Manchin doesn't necessarily really want 351 00:18:48,760 --> 00:18:51,119 Speaker 1: to come back on any of that stuff. He's pushing 352 00:18:51,119 --> 00:18:53,479 Speaker 1: to just pass the infrastructure bill on its own and 353 00:18:53,560 --> 00:18:56,760 Speaker 1: be done with it. But Liberals are saying, we're not 354 00:18:56,840 --> 00:18:59,480 Speaker 1: coming along unless you give us something in return, which 355 00:18:59,520 --> 00:19:02,680 Speaker 1: is the reckon Cliation Bill. Ethan a quick walk down 356 00:19:02,720 --> 00:19:05,040 Speaker 1: memory lane before we segue over to cop. One of 357 00:19:05,119 --> 00:19:07,879 Speaker 1: my earliest memories in any f when when we were 358 00:19:07,880 --> 00:19:10,760 Speaker 1: a startup, before we were part of Bloomberg, was sitting 359 00:19:10,800 --> 00:19:14,399 Speaker 1: in our office where Ethan nat Buller and I shared 360 00:19:14,560 --> 00:19:16,960 Speaker 1: shared in office and we shared a YouTube video in 361 00:19:17,000 --> 00:19:21,399 Speaker 1: two thousand nine of Joe Manson shooting the Cap and 362 00:19:21,440 --> 00:19:25,520 Speaker 1: Trade bill with a gun signifying his u his stance 363 00:19:25,560 --> 00:19:28,479 Speaker 1: on the whole issue. Remember that I do remember he 364 00:19:28,560 --> 00:19:31,520 Speaker 1: ran for re election by making an advertisement in which 365 00:19:31,520 --> 00:19:34,560 Speaker 1: he took the waxman marquee Bill, pinned it to a 366 00:19:34,600 --> 00:19:38,240 Speaker 1: tree and shot it with a rifle. Yeah, and it worked. 367 00:19:38,280 --> 00:19:42,040 Speaker 1: He got re elected. Mansion knows his constituency. I mean, 368 00:19:42,119 --> 00:19:45,160 Speaker 1: it's a conservative part of the country, and the history 369 00:19:45,200 --> 00:19:48,000 Speaker 1: and heritage of West Virginia is coal mining, and it's 370 00:19:48,000 --> 00:19:50,359 Speaker 1: one of the poorer states in the country. And coal 371 00:19:50,359 --> 00:19:53,480 Speaker 1: mining has been hit badly in the US. But you know, 372 00:19:53,600 --> 00:19:56,439 Speaker 1: I still don't think that necessarily justifies his position. But 373 00:19:56,520 --> 00:20:00,359 Speaker 1: let's remember these members of Congress represent individual parts of 374 00:20:00,400 --> 00:20:02,879 Speaker 1: the United States, and this is why he is who 375 00:20:02,920 --> 00:20:06,320 Speaker 1: he is in terms of his position sometimes. Okay, So 376 00:20:07,200 --> 00:20:09,600 Speaker 1: this weekend, it all, it all kind of comes down 377 00:20:09,600 --> 00:20:11,480 Speaker 1: to it. We're gonna take a quick break and when 378 00:20:11,480 --> 00:20:14,280 Speaker 1: we come back, we're going to talk about the impacts 379 00:20:14,480 --> 00:20:17,000 Speaker 1: of the US giving the A or NAY and what 380 00:20:17,040 --> 00:20:35,520 Speaker 1: it means for the climate talks in Glasgow. Stay with us, Okay, 381 00:20:35,600 --> 00:20:37,879 Speaker 1: welcome back. We're going to change gears just a little 382 00:20:37,880 --> 00:20:41,159 Speaker 1: bit and talk about the global stage upcoming starting on 383 00:20:41,240 --> 00:20:45,800 Speaker 1: oct one and running to what November is the COP 384 00:20:45,840 --> 00:20:50,440 Speaker 1: twenty six negotiations in Glasgow, Scotland. So for the uninitiated. 385 00:20:50,440 --> 00:20:53,119 Speaker 1: I'm sure you've heard about it on the news, but Vicky, 386 00:20:53,160 --> 00:20:54,920 Speaker 1: can you start us off and just tell us what 387 00:20:55,119 --> 00:20:59,040 Speaker 1: this is? What are these negotiations? COPPS sounds for Conference 388 00:20:59,080 --> 00:21:03,879 Speaker 1: of the Party to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. 389 00:21:04,560 --> 00:21:07,760 Speaker 1: So all of the governments that signed up to the 390 00:21:08,400 --> 00:21:11,960 Speaker 1: U n F Triple C will come to Glasgow to 391 00:21:12,160 --> 00:21:17,040 Speaker 1: discuss how best to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt 392 00:21:17,080 --> 00:21:21,359 Speaker 1: to climate change. And it's usually an annual phone but 393 00:21:21,760 --> 00:21:24,399 Speaker 1: this is actually we had a gap because of COVID 394 00:21:24,480 --> 00:21:27,120 Speaker 1: nineteen last year, so it's actually been two years since 395 00:21:27,160 --> 00:21:30,680 Speaker 1: the last one and this year it's hosted by the UK. 396 00:21:31,480 --> 00:21:33,000 Speaker 1: And there seems to be a lot of pressure on 397 00:21:33,080 --> 00:21:35,879 Speaker 1: this one. Is it that because of the two year 398 00:21:35,960 --> 00:21:39,320 Speaker 1: hiatus or is there something special about this one? Certainly 399 00:21:39,359 --> 00:21:42,760 Speaker 1: kind of it's been heightened the expectations, I think because 400 00:21:42,840 --> 00:21:45,720 Speaker 1: we've had this two year break. But it's also important 401 00:21:46,040 --> 00:21:50,360 Speaker 1: because it's the first occasion where the first official occasion 402 00:21:50,480 --> 00:21:55,400 Speaker 1: when countries can discuss their climate plans out to twenty thirties, 403 00:21:55,520 --> 00:21:59,280 Speaker 1: so those are called nationally determined contributions or n d 404 00:21:59,400 --> 00:22:03,720 Speaker 1: c s, and it marks the start of this process 405 00:22:03,760 --> 00:22:06,840 Speaker 1: whereby first of all, governments say what they're willing to 406 00:22:06,880 --> 00:22:10,120 Speaker 1: do and how they plan to adapt climate change. Then 407 00:22:10,320 --> 00:22:12,920 Speaker 1: in three years time we have what's called the global 408 00:22:12,960 --> 00:22:15,960 Speaker 1: stock take. So it's essentially an assessment where you take 409 00:22:16,000 --> 00:22:19,000 Speaker 1: all of those plans together and see what impact would 410 00:22:19,040 --> 00:22:23,560 Speaker 1: be in terms of mitigating climate change. Within the view 411 00:22:23,720 --> 00:22:26,000 Speaker 1: is that the next step is the governments don't go 412 00:22:26,080 --> 00:22:30,240 Speaker 1: away and revise their plans and in theory increase the 413 00:22:30,240 --> 00:22:32,360 Speaker 1: ambition of their targets and pledge. I mean, I think 414 00:22:32,359 --> 00:22:35,400 Speaker 1: it's safe to say that among these cup meetings which 415 00:22:35,640 --> 00:22:38,800 Speaker 1: now we're on the one, certain ones really stand out. 416 00:22:38,880 --> 00:22:41,000 Speaker 1: So this is a continuation of Paris, And if you 417 00:22:41,040 --> 00:22:43,600 Speaker 1: rewind the clock really far, Kyoto is another one that 418 00:22:43,640 --> 00:22:46,600 Speaker 1: really stands out as a meeting where there was a 419 00:22:46,840 --> 00:22:50,600 Speaker 1: reasonable amount of crystallization, let's say, of thought. There are 420 00:22:50,600 --> 00:22:52,879 Speaker 1: others that Alsko us to know for other reasons, is 421 00:22:53,240 --> 00:22:56,360 Speaker 1: not doing that. So Copenhagen, I think, is the one 422 00:22:56,359 --> 00:22:57,960 Speaker 1: that many of us think of already say well, that 423 00:22:58,040 --> 00:23:00,720 Speaker 1: meeting maybe didn't quite do what we set out to do. 424 00:23:00,840 --> 00:23:02,919 Speaker 1: Now making one of the things you've done is a 425 00:23:03,000 --> 00:23:06,000 Speaker 1: preparation for this meeting is to have a think as 426 00:23:06,000 --> 00:23:08,160 Speaker 1: to whether or not you think this will be one 427 00:23:08,200 --> 00:23:10,560 Speaker 1: of those meetings where we continue to say Glasgow for 428 00:23:10,640 --> 00:23:13,439 Speaker 1: years to come in a positive light or maybe sortly 429 00:23:13,560 --> 00:23:18,000 Speaker 1: lackluster light. So there are some probabilities that you associated 430 00:23:18,240 --> 00:23:20,880 Speaker 1: with this outcome. Now, should we lead with the headline, 431 00:23:20,920 --> 00:23:23,399 Speaker 1: Should we lead with what you think the overall probability is, 432 00:23:23,480 --> 00:23:26,640 Speaker 1: or do you want to break down the different areas 433 00:23:26,680 --> 00:23:30,120 Speaker 1: that perhaps you looked at when trying to decide if 434 00:23:30,119 --> 00:23:33,280 Speaker 1: this is going to be a success or relative failure. Well, 435 00:23:33,320 --> 00:23:35,960 Speaker 1: maybe we'll take the pyramid principle and start with so 436 00:23:36,080 --> 00:23:40,080 Speaker 1: the flagship like our overall expectation, and then we'll explain 437 00:23:40,200 --> 00:23:43,000 Speaker 1: what we actually I mean by that is that there's 438 00:23:43,000 --> 00:23:48,440 Speaker 1: a saycent chance that will be a success. And by 439 00:23:48,520 --> 00:23:52,000 Speaker 1: success in this case, because there's lots of different definitions, 440 00:23:52,160 --> 00:23:56,680 Speaker 1: that means that it makes meaningful progress towards actually achieving 441 00:23:56,880 --> 00:24:00,119 Speaker 1: the goals of the Paris Agreement. So I'm sure you're 442 00:24:00,119 --> 00:24:03,639 Speaker 1: called the Paris Agreement agreed to limit global warming to 443 00:24:03,720 --> 00:24:06,800 Speaker 1: two degrees and to try to make that limit to 444 00:24:06,880 --> 00:24:10,360 Speaker 1: one point five degrees. And the way that we've came 445 00:24:10,400 --> 00:24:14,200 Speaker 1: to this fourth empersent is that we broke it down 446 00:24:14,280 --> 00:24:18,720 Speaker 1: into Okay, so where do we actually expect countries to 447 00:24:18,840 --> 00:24:23,639 Speaker 1: make progress? What are the sort of fifty metrics? For example, 448 00:24:24,440 --> 00:24:28,360 Speaker 1: do we expect all of these NDC targets, of these 449 00:24:28,400 --> 00:24:33,359 Speaker 1: twenty thirty emission targets to collectively put the planet on 450 00:24:33,400 --> 00:24:36,520 Speaker 1: the path to the one point five degrees? Do we 451 00:24:36,720 --> 00:24:39,760 Speaker 1: expect parties to make some kind of pledge about coal power? 452 00:24:40,280 --> 00:24:45,320 Speaker 1: Do we expect developed countries to meet the target pledge 453 00:24:45,320 --> 00:24:49,440 Speaker 1: a hundred billion dollars per year in climate finance? And 454 00:24:49,560 --> 00:24:52,120 Speaker 1: we looked at what we thought the probabilities for each 455 00:24:52,119 --> 00:24:55,399 Speaker 1: of those fifty metrics and then totted them all up, 456 00:24:55,640 --> 00:24:58,359 Speaker 1: and that's how we came to our overall estimate. I 457 00:24:58,480 --> 00:25:00,800 Speaker 1: got a definitional question for you. And as we get 458 00:25:00,840 --> 00:25:03,720 Speaker 1: into the discussion around what they're actually going to discuss 459 00:25:03,720 --> 00:25:07,679 Speaker 1: at the event, there's a lot of conversation around carbon emissions, 460 00:25:08,080 --> 00:25:11,480 Speaker 1: and then also discussions around methane, which I think hasn't 461 00:25:11,520 --> 00:25:14,040 Speaker 1: gotten quite the same amount of play. But let's start 462 00:25:14,040 --> 00:25:17,200 Speaker 1: on the carbon emissions side of things. Can you explain 463 00:25:17,240 --> 00:25:20,520 Speaker 1: what net zero means? Because it's important to differentiate that 464 00:25:20,680 --> 00:25:24,480 Speaker 1: net zero is different than absolute zero, and as countries 465 00:25:24,520 --> 00:25:28,600 Speaker 1: are creating commitments or at least talking about potentially maybe 466 00:25:28,600 --> 00:25:31,600 Speaker 1: Sunday making commitments towards net zero. Can you give us 467 00:25:31,600 --> 00:25:34,320 Speaker 1: a definition there? So, and maybe first of all, just 468 00:25:34,400 --> 00:25:38,520 Speaker 1: to explain where that net zero number comes from. So 469 00:25:38,600 --> 00:25:42,080 Speaker 1: that inter Governmental Panel on Climate Change produced a special 470 00:25:42,080 --> 00:25:46,560 Speaker 1: report in looked at where emissions need to be in 471 00:25:46,680 --> 00:25:50,600 Speaker 1: order to achieve these one point five or two degrees targets, 472 00:25:50,600 --> 00:25:53,240 Speaker 1: and they said that in order to get to ensure 473 00:25:53,320 --> 00:25:56,000 Speaker 1: that global warming doesn't exceed one point five degrees by 474 00:25:56,000 --> 00:25:59,800 Speaker 1: the end of the century, by the middle of the century, 475 00:26:00,520 --> 00:26:03,080 Speaker 1: then the world needs to be at net zero emissions. 476 00:26:03,800 --> 00:26:06,479 Speaker 1: And that means that for greenhouse gas emissions, so not 477 00:26:06,560 --> 00:26:11,240 Speaker 1: just carbon, not just media. And it means it takes 478 00:26:11,240 --> 00:26:14,800 Speaker 1: into account it doesn't mean that all countries that need 479 00:26:14,840 --> 00:26:18,399 Speaker 1: to have no emissions. It takes into account what we 480 00:26:18,480 --> 00:26:22,280 Speaker 1: call carbon sinks. So these are things like forests or 481 00:26:22,520 --> 00:26:26,280 Speaker 1: land that are able to absorb or sequester and then 482 00:26:26,400 --> 00:26:30,680 Speaker 1: store carbon or emissions. Does that explain Yes, I think 483 00:26:30,720 --> 00:26:34,080 Speaker 1: it does. So there's a emissions out versus emissions that 484 00:26:34,119 --> 00:26:36,280 Speaker 1: are able to be absorbed, at least on the carbon 485 00:26:36,320 --> 00:26:39,719 Speaker 1: side of things. And just to talk a little bit 486 00:26:39,760 --> 00:26:42,800 Speaker 1: about that, I p those IPCC scenarios. Of the five 487 00:26:42,800 --> 00:26:45,640 Speaker 1: scenarios they've come up with, only one of them actually 488 00:26:45,680 --> 00:26:48,200 Speaker 1: results with US meeting at one point five degree scenario. 489 00:26:48,320 --> 00:26:52,159 Speaker 1: All of the other four are above, So this is 490 00:26:52,240 --> 00:26:55,160 Speaker 1: definitely something that we need to be critically thinking about 491 00:26:55,240 --> 00:26:59,000 Speaker 1: regarding tipping points. Now, does this apply regarding this concept 492 00:26:59,040 --> 00:27:02,600 Speaker 1: of net zero to this applied a methane or is 493 00:27:02,640 --> 00:27:07,239 Speaker 1: there a different dialogue around methane emissions. Methane emissions are 494 00:27:07,280 --> 00:27:10,720 Speaker 1: the topic of that has really kind of suddenly emerged, 495 00:27:10,800 --> 00:27:14,400 Speaker 1: i'd say, in the last few months. Where previously everybody 496 00:27:14,440 --> 00:27:17,600 Speaker 1: was focusing on greenhouse gas emissions on carbon they then 497 00:27:17,680 --> 00:27:20,600 Speaker 1: have been looking at what they can do to tackle 498 00:27:20,640 --> 00:27:25,200 Speaker 1: methane emissions, and most recently there's the European Union and 499 00:27:25,480 --> 00:27:29,439 Speaker 1: the US and various other countries have made this what 500 00:27:29,480 --> 00:27:33,600 Speaker 1: they've called a Global Methane Pledge, which is to cut 501 00:27:33,640 --> 00:27:39,960 Speaker 1: global methane emissions by at least thirty from levels by 502 00:27:38,560 --> 00:27:43,000 Speaker 1: twenty and at the moment, by our analysis, about a 503 00:27:43,119 --> 00:27:47,280 Speaker 1: quarter of the world's methane emissions are covered by that pledge. 504 00:27:48,240 --> 00:27:51,280 Speaker 1: So if they really want to achieve that target, they 505 00:27:51,280 --> 00:27:56,000 Speaker 1: will need a big methane emitter like China and Russia 506 00:27:56,119 --> 00:27:58,560 Speaker 1: and India to really sign on. Well. I mean, I 507 00:27:58,560 --> 00:28:00,520 Speaker 1: think the main thing I'm nothing to point doubt or 508 00:28:00,600 --> 00:28:03,159 Speaker 1: methane as the case maybe, is that it stays in 509 00:28:03,200 --> 00:28:05,880 Speaker 1: the atmosphere for only ten years, whereas CEO two stays 510 00:28:05,880 --> 00:28:08,520 Speaker 1: in years. But it's eighty times more potent. So that's 511 00:28:08,560 --> 00:28:12,600 Speaker 1: why it's become a bigger conversation recent intern years. It's 512 00:28:12,640 --> 00:28:16,520 Speaker 1: also become a bigger conversation because the US has chosen 513 00:28:16,560 --> 00:28:18,760 Speaker 1: it as a topic and it's one where they can 514 00:28:18,800 --> 00:28:21,560 Speaker 1: make progress, so it makes them look better. I would 515 00:28:21,600 --> 00:28:24,920 Speaker 1: also argue it's one where progress can probably be achieved 516 00:28:24,960 --> 00:28:27,520 Speaker 1: more easily than on CEO two. I mean, you can 517 00:28:27,520 --> 00:28:31,080 Speaker 1: plug wells does financially make more sense for companies not 518 00:28:31,119 --> 00:28:35,080 Speaker 1: to be flaring and wasting extra gas up into the atmosphere. 519 00:28:35,160 --> 00:28:38,600 Speaker 1: This is a problem that is arguably much more solvable 520 00:28:38,640 --> 00:28:42,400 Speaker 1: than the CEO two problem. But it's also much smaller problem. True, 521 00:28:42,560 --> 00:28:44,000 Speaker 1: But as you know, this is all going to be 522 00:28:44,040 --> 00:28:47,920 Speaker 1: about making some headlines, right, So nothing or mething however 523 00:28:47,920 --> 00:28:49,320 Speaker 1: you want to say. It feels like it's one that 524 00:28:49,680 --> 00:28:52,360 Speaker 1: I suspect we'll we'll probably see some positive news out 525 00:28:52,400 --> 00:28:55,280 Speaker 1: of a fair amount of sort of victory lapping on 526 00:28:55,760 --> 00:28:58,280 Speaker 1: out of COP. But you know better than I do. 527 00:28:58,480 --> 00:29:02,400 Speaker 1: Speaking of headlines, though, let le's pivot slightly towards what 528 00:29:02,560 --> 00:29:05,640 Speaker 1: to watch for. So VI you mentioned Dame, you mentioned 529 00:29:05,640 --> 00:29:08,800 Speaker 1: the probabilities of success in each of the key areas. 530 00:29:09,200 --> 00:29:11,960 Speaker 1: But if I'm you know, listening on the radio, I 531 00:29:11,960 --> 00:29:15,840 Speaker 1: mean I even heard the cup mentioned on the BBC 532 00:29:16,000 --> 00:29:18,200 Speaker 1: this morning. If I'm listening on the radio and they 533 00:29:18,240 --> 00:29:20,960 Speaker 1: mentioned something coming out of Glasgow or not, what should 534 00:29:20,960 --> 00:29:24,320 Speaker 1: I be listening for. Is a pledge on methane good enough? 535 00:29:24,680 --> 00:29:26,440 Speaker 1: Or is there something else that I should listen for 536 00:29:26,720 --> 00:29:28,640 Speaker 1: to know if this thing has been a success. I 537 00:29:28,680 --> 00:29:31,040 Speaker 1: think in some respects it's the very fact that they're 538 00:29:31,040 --> 00:29:35,400 Speaker 1: having a COP is important to note. So one of 539 00:29:35,440 --> 00:29:38,800 Speaker 1: the main benefits of this process is that it brings 540 00:29:39,000 --> 00:29:43,520 Speaker 1: governments together, whether virtually or in person, where they can 541 00:29:43,600 --> 00:29:45,880 Speaker 1: kind of eye each other up to see what what 542 00:29:46,000 --> 00:29:49,080 Speaker 1: have you committed to and what have you actually achieved. 543 00:29:49,360 --> 00:29:52,720 Speaker 1: So the Paris Agreement it doesn't impose binding a mission 544 00:29:52,720 --> 00:29:56,960 Speaker 1: targets or any targets on the signatories. It's really this 545 00:29:57,080 --> 00:29:59,240 Speaker 1: kind of system of pay a pressure of who wants 546 00:29:59,280 --> 00:30:03,160 Speaker 1: to be the climate leader and who wants to keep 547 00:30:03,280 --> 00:30:07,480 Speaker 1: up with their peers, and that's that's really important. I 548 00:30:07,520 --> 00:30:11,920 Speaker 1: think we would be looking for concrete commitments in terms 549 00:30:11,960 --> 00:30:16,280 Speaker 1: of finance. So I mentioned earlier the hundred billion dollars 550 00:30:16,280 --> 00:30:19,760 Speaker 1: a year target. It's very very small fry in terms 551 00:30:19,800 --> 00:30:24,120 Speaker 1: of the actual amounts of finance, but it was committed 552 00:30:24,160 --> 00:30:27,640 Speaker 1: to by developed countries to provide this financing by twenty 553 00:30:28,160 --> 00:30:32,760 Speaker 1: for developing countries. So it's really important to the kind 554 00:30:32,760 --> 00:30:37,400 Speaker 1: of political process, the diplomatic process, and building trust between 555 00:30:37,440 --> 00:30:41,200 Speaker 1: the developed and developing countries, and to persuade developing countries 556 00:30:41,680 --> 00:30:45,240 Speaker 1: to take on much more ambitious and climate targets, which 557 00:30:45,280 --> 00:30:47,920 Speaker 1: is will be necessary if we want to achieve the 558 00:30:47,920 --> 00:30:50,200 Speaker 1: goals of the Paris Agreement. I would just add that 559 00:30:50,240 --> 00:30:52,320 Speaker 1: a hundred billion in the grand scheme of things. The 560 00:30:52,360 --> 00:30:53,800 Speaker 1: other way to look at it is it's a really 561 00:30:53,840 --> 00:30:58,080 Speaker 1: small price to pay to get developing countries to feel 562 00:30:58,440 --> 00:31:00,560 Speaker 1: that there is a fall through taking place. And to 563 00:31:00,600 --> 00:31:04,040 Speaker 1: be clear, some number of their pledges are directly contingent 564 00:31:04,600 --> 00:31:08,280 Speaker 1: on getting support from wealthier countries. They literally say we're 565 00:31:08,280 --> 00:31:11,920 Speaker 1: not following through unless we get this help. So symbolically 566 00:31:11,960 --> 00:31:14,320 Speaker 1: it's really important. But literally it's really important, and it's 567 00:31:14,400 --> 00:31:16,280 Speaker 1: in the grand scheme of things. As Vicki points out, 568 00:31:16,320 --> 00:31:18,760 Speaker 1: it's really not that much money given the size of 569 00:31:18,760 --> 00:31:20,600 Speaker 1: the of the amount of money that needs to go 570 00:31:20,680 --> 00:31:23,520 Speaker 1: into the sector to solve the problems. Are their countries 571 00:31:23,560 --> 00:31:26,720 Speaker 1: not showing up that are part of these contingencies? It 572 00:31:26,760 --> 00:31:29,520 Speaker 1: depends if we if we mean they're physically showing up. 573 00:31:29,560 --> 00:31:34,160 Speaker 1: There's certainly been headlines recently about the China g and 574 00:31:34,560 --> 00:31:38,600 Speaker 1: Russia's putin are reportedly not coming. But I don't think 575 00:31:38,760 --> 00:31:40,760 Speaker 1: they should be taken those kind of an unsms. Should 576 00:31:40,760 --> 00:31:43,040 Speaker 1: we take where the pinch the saw. Really it's not 577 00:31:43,440 --> 00:31:47,640 Speaker 1: immediately linked between whether the political leader is present in Glasgow. 578 00:31:48,320 --> 00:31:51,320 Speaker 1: We've how much the country is willing to commit to. 579 00:31:51,840 --> 00:31:55,760 Speaker 1: So actually she hasn't left China since the start of 580 00:31:55,760 --> 00:31:59,720 Speaker 1: the COVID nineteen pandemic. They take a really conservative approach 581 00:31:59,800 --> 00:32:02,240 Speaker 1: to travel, and yet we've still seen since then that 582 00:32:02,480 --> 00:32:07,200 Speaker 1: absolutely China's committed to combon neutrality and is making progress 583 00:32:07,280 --> 00:32:10,920 Speaker 1: on some of the more concrete policies. Even though it's 584 00:32:10,960 --> 00:32:15,360 Speaker 1: true it's like headline emissions target is really not that ambitious. 585 00:32:15,480 --> 00:32:17,920 Speaker 1: I would just completely editorializes here and say that it 586 00:32:17,960 --> 00:32:21,680 Speaker 1: does seem like she likes to upstage Biden whenever he 587 00:32:21,720 --> 00:32:24,880 Speaker 1: gets the chance. And also I suspect they'll be a 588 00:32:24,920 --> 00:32:28,200 Speaker 1: quote quote surprise out of China. Who knows what will be. 589 00:32:28,240 --> 00:32:30,600 Speaker 1: Maybe it's that he shows up. Maybe they make some 590 00:32:30,640 --> 00:32:33,200 Speaker 1: announcement on domestic coal, which to my mind is one 591 00:32:33,200 --> 00:32:36,720 Speaker 1: of the biggest outstanding issues. China has a huge call fleet. 592 00:32:37,000 --> 00:32:40,040 Speaker 1: They made a pledge to stop financing overseas coal and 593 00:32:40,080 --> 00:32:42,680 Speaker 1: that was very well received, I think generally, but it 594 00:32:42,720 --> 00:32:45,120 Speaker 1: did not address the fact that they have this massive 595 00:32:45,200 --> 00:32:47,320 Speaker 1: call fleet and they, by the way, have another couple 596 00:32:47,400 --> 00:32:50,640 Speaker 1: hundred gigawats of coal fired power plants that they have 597 00:32:50,720 --> 00:32:54,360 Speaker 1: under development there over the next you know, five ten years. 598 00:32:54,400 --> 00:32:57,240 Speaker 1: So some announcement around that I think would make headlines 599 00:32:57,280 --> 00:32:59,960 Speaker 1: and justifiably so if and if they did it, Yeah, 600 00:33:00,120 --> 00:33:04,840 Speaker 1: that would be absolutely enormous because China accounts for a 601 00:33:04,960 --> 00:33:08,720 Speaker 1: huge chunk of actually what's planned for COPRA, and it 602 00:33:08,720 --> 00:33:11,880 Speaker 1: would also put pressure on India and in Indonesia and 603 00:33:11,920 --> 00:33:14,440 Speaker 1: other countries in the region to follow suit. It would 604 00:33:14,440 --> 00:33:17,840 Speaker 1: effectively spell the very end of any further coal project 605 00:33:17,840 --> 00:33:21,120 Speaker 1: development in the world. If they did that. We're almost 606 00:33:21,240 --> 00:33:25,360 Speaker 1: there outside of China and India basically because nobody's funding 607 00:33:25,400 --> 00:33:29,640 Speaker 1: coal other places, including China, but inside their borders is 608 00:33:29,680 --> 00:33:31,960 Speaker 1: a different story right now. So this all sounds to 609 00:33:32,000 --> 00:33:33,640 Speaker 1: me like we're going to need to do a post game. 610 00:33:33,840 --> 00:33:36,840 Speaker 1: How about we have you guys back to get into 611 00:33:37,200 --> 00:33:40,000 Speaker 1: what happened in the US and in COP in a 612 00:33:40,040 --> 00:33:41,880 Speaker 1: couple of weeks and we'll take into some of the 613 00:33:41,880 --> 00:33:44,560 Speaker 1: details as well. We didn't get to a lot of things, 614 00:33:44,640 --> 00:33:46,720 Speaker 1: whether there's going to be a global carbon price, what 615 00:33:46,760 --> 00:33:49,080 Speaker 1: the chances are there we can talk about what happened, 616 00:33:49,280 --> 00:33:51,520 Speaker 1: So free to come back in a couple of weeks. Yeah, 617 00:33:51,560 --> 00:33:53,640 Speaker 1: but hey, can I before we go, can I plug 618 00:33:53,720 --> 00:33:56,200 Speaker 1: some some other cool stuff? First of all, Vicki's note 619 00:33:56,320 --> 00:33:59,920 Speaker 1: is fantastic, which were just about it's Monday, this will 620 00:33:59,920 --> 00:34:02,400 Speaker 1: be app which will be out by the time this podcast, 621 00:34:02,480 --> 00:34:05,560 Speaker 1: so so definitely be enough clients check that out. And 622 00:34:05,600 --> 00:34:07,400 Speaker 1: then the second thing is that we're going to attempt 623 00:34:07,440 --> 00:34:11,920 Speaker 1: to blog through the entire cop and write something hopefully 624 00:34:11,920 --> 00:34:14,279 Speaker 1: every day but probably at least every other day, and 625 00:34:14,360 --> 00:34:16,239 Speaker 1: please keep an eye out for that because Vicky's got 626 00:34:16,280 --> 00:34:17,799 Speaker 1: a lot of great more stuff to say, and we'll 627 00:34:17,840 --> 00:34:21,040 Speaker 1: get input from our colleagues in the Asia Pacific region 628 00:34:21,400 --> 00:34:24,520 Speaker 1: where so much of the important potential commitments could come 629 00:34:24,560 --> 00:34:26,600 Speaker 1: from out of cop So where should people go to 630 00:34:26,600 --> 00:34:30,640 Speaker 1: find this blog? Blo dot com. Okay, Ethan Vicky, thanks 631 00:34:30,680 --> 00:34:41,279 Speaker 1: for coming. Thank you. Today's episode of Switched On was 632 00:34:41,360 --> 00:34:44,719 Speaker 1: edited by Rex Warner with Gray Stoak Media. Bloomberghinia is 633 00:34:44,760 --> 00:34:47,560 Speaker 1: a service provided by Bloomberg Finance LP and its affiliates. 634 00:34:47,560 --> 00:34:50,280 Speaker 1: This recording does not constitute, nor should it be construed, 635 00:34:50,320 --> 00:34:54,040 Speaker 1: as investment advice, investment recommendations, or a recommendation as to 636 00:34:54,239 --> 00:34:57,440 Speaker 1: an investment or other strategy. Bloomberguinia should not be considered 637 00:34:57,480 --> 00:35:00,480 Speaker 1: as information sufficient upon which to base an investment decision. 638 00:35:00,640 --> 00:35:04,040 Speaker 1: Neither Bloomberg Finance LP nor any of its affiliates makes 639 00:35:04,120 --> 00:35:07,360 Speaker 1: any representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness 640 00:35:07,400 --> 00:35:10,360 Speaker 1: of the information contained in this recording, and any liability 641 00:35:10,400 --> 00:35:12,640 Speaker 1: as a result of this recording is expressly disclised.