[MUSIC] In a carbon-constrained and climate-changed future, there's little space one could argue for fossil fuels to be there, and yet the world still primarily relies on fossil fuels, using coal and gas and oil. And the number of developing countries are increasing their use of fossil fuels. What is the role of fossil fuels going forward? How would we take them out of the system effectively? >> The role of them going forward, I would hope, is that they've already peaked or will peak soon. And there's no space for a fossil fuel in energy generation, I don't think beyond 2050. We're looking to have to get to a net zero emissions place by that time. There's no need for fossil fuel energy generation any more except in the process of transition that we're going through. I think it's widely flagged now that the energy transition we are going through is as massive as the Industrial Revolution, but it's going to happen as quickly as the IT revolution. It's fossil fuels, coal, oil and even gas, facing a limited, maybe 20, 30-year period. I think the reason they're still being implemented, these stations, in places in the developing world, in places like Africa. Is because often the coal fossil fuel lobby is powerful in those places, and it's a really easy way to put in a very quickly funded Immediate solution. So you can quickly deliver 50 or 100 megawatts of power because the plant's already made, the system supply's already there. You can plug it in. It's all easily understood. And there are people that turn up with the money there. But I don't think if you look at the longer term, that that situation is going to continue. >> I would suggest that the composition of, again, lets reference 2050 again, the share of fossil fuels in the global energy mix will invariably be lower than it is today. However, I could foresee a situation in which oil and gas still maintains about a 50% share such as they do today. The mix, it will be interesting to see how it evolves. Perhaps less oil and more gas, one would say from a climate change perspective, that would be a very positive step. But the idea of a zero carbon global economy feels still very much like science fiction, despite what some of the science of climate change would tell us. My personal opinion is that we need to focus rather more on syncs and some of the opportunities we have to offset these key contributors to our global economy. >> If you look at the science, if you look at the numbers, we have to stop consuming fossil fuels as soon as possible. Maybe they can be, there's still use for them for specialty chemicals and things that we need, but they should not be burned. And I think that a lot of people have come to that conclusion, there's al leave it in the ground movement, there's a divestment movement, encouraging financial institutions to divest from owning assets in fossil fuels. >> Fossil fuels have been fundamental to economic growth throughout human economic, well, throughout the last couple of hundred years. What we have is a system where large parts of our international economy are based on the values that are ascribed to fossil fuels that are currently in the ground. If you look at some of our largest capitalized companies around the world. They are valued on fossil fuels that may well not be able to be taken out of the ground if we're going to stay within the carbon budgets that have been set. That is going to have huge implications economically. It's going to have huge implications in terms of how we then power our cars, our factories, our homes, our offices. There are different technology, we have to find a way of transitioning. There is absolutely no question that for example, internal combustion engines are going to be around for a while. We're simply not going to turn around one day and say, right, the 3 million cars that are sold last year, we're not going to sell anything next year. We're looking at different ways of using the internal combustion engine, combining it with different forms of fuel, increasing efficiencies. Almost every industry we have is going to have to go through that transition, in one way or another. Policy makers are in a very difficult position. It's very clear that fossil fuels need to stay in the ground. What is not clear is how we do that without having a negative impact on economic function. Without having a negative impact on the relationship between countries. Those who are consumers of fossil fuels, those who are exploiters of fossil fuels and exporters, all of these different things have to be balanced. And that's something I think is going to be a very interesting thing to watch, over the five years before the treaty comes into force. >> Like for like substitution, which is a narrative that has been, I think it's very well-established in sustainable development discourse. Actually doesn't really sit quite well with energy economics and indeed the history of the energy system, which would point to the use of certain fuels for specific applications. And the yield of which has actually fueled our economic growth over the course of the last century and a half. And I would look to the opportunities for more like for like substitution, as opposed to considering a broader system, where the is no role for fossil fuels. So, looking down the road to mid-century, which is a very important milestone in many, many policy discussions. The idea that we would be somewhere, 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Some of the targets which we see to this point, I think, can be driven and pursued, and even met, while retaining a certain very, very strong role for fossil fuels. And I wouldn't say that because I wish a particular future for fossil fuels by any means. But there are some things which are much, much harder to push out of the systems than others. So if you look at the power sector, there are certain opportunities to displace the most carbon intense fuel that we have relied upon to this point. So addressing our coal consumption is the clearest, fastest, and easiest way for us to immediately dent our emissions profile. And indeed working within the power sector, we've seen very strong business models emerge that give, I think, credence to the suggestion that a great deal more could be done. The flip side is looking at questions around mobility. And although there's a certain kind of populist rise around electric vehicles and the opportunity that certain type hybridization could play within our light duty vehicle fleet in particular, which I think is a key issue. We're not even really moving the needle, as yet. A certain amount of new vehicle sales have been now taken up by some great brands offering some fantastic products. But, one look around most car parks would indicate that things are moving rather slowly. And that points to, I think, some persistent issues, which policy makers will need to intervene in different ways in the energy markets to change. [MUSIC]
