显然已经突破了那些障碍，那么你是如何看待这件事的，又是如何专注于越过那些障碍的？嗯，我非常信奉，嗯，用某种，呃，科学或物理学框架来尝试分析问题，特别是如果，如果它们是新的，嗯。所以，如果某件事是新的，那么类比就不、不太管用，嗯，因为它是、它是、它是、它是新的。我的意思是，我们度过日常生活的方式大多是靠类比，或者对事物稍作变化地照搬，嗯，因为这是一种计算捷径，呃。但如果你想做某种、某种根本上全新的事，呃，或者尤其是它违反直觉，那么你就必须做第一性原理分析，嗯，而且你知道，要从那些看起来最根本的、某种简单的基本

真理出发，然后从那里向上推理，嗯。而且，呃，我的意思是，那、那需要更多得多的思考，而且你不可能、你不可能对所有事情都这么做，但是，嗯，但是如果你在试图弄清某种新事物，我认为这、这确实是唯一的途径。所以，嗯，我提到过我、我当时在巴黎，而且我知道你也在那里。嗯，当我听那些演讲时，呃，首先，这届COP确实有一种真正的乐观情绪，我认为以前并不存在，但仍然有一种压倒性的感觉，就是我们还有很多、很多工作要做。让我印象深刻的是，嗯，你在索邦大学对一群学生讲话时所作的一些评论。嗯，他们当时在谈可持续性，而你说，关于碳循环，这就像不为垃圾

收集付费。我们不应该说，就垃圾而言，要建立一个零垃圾社会；建立零垃圾社会非常困难，但重要的是人们要为垃圾收集付费。所以，我们需要摆脱一种未征税的负外部性，它实际上是一项规模巨大的隐性碳补、补贴，5.

每年3百万万亿，而我们需要摆脱这种情况并征收碳税。那么，你能不能稍微谈谈这一点，尤其是从价格的角度？是的，我的意思是，价格本质上只是信息，嗯。它们、它们是使劳动力、劳动力得以配置的主要信息，嗯，而且它们某种程度上告诉人们该、该做什么，以及应该偏向某件事还是另一件事，嗯。而、而当价格错误时，经济中就会发生错误的事情，嗯。所以，当你遇到某种公地悲剧，嗯，比如海洋和大气的CO2容量，嗯，而它、它没有被定价，或者其价格远远低于、低于应有水平，嗯，那么错误的行为就会发生。所以实际上，呃，我们、我们是在激励不良行为，嗯，而且

嗯，我的意思是，我刚才谈到类比并不完美，但是、但是，嗯，你知道，这有点像，如果、如果我们对、对水果和蔬菜征收高税，而对、对香烟和酒征收低税，那就、那就没有道理，嗯。这某种程度上就是我们，嗯，目前在能源方面的情况，嗯。而且、而且，嗯，而且有非常强大的力量试图维持这种状况，嗯。所以，嗯，现在它最终会，嗯，得到纠正，但是我们在巴黎气候谈判中确实看到了一些朝那个方向发展的良好动向。听起来方向上是正确的，而且，嗯，而且会有一些进展，虽然没有应有的那么多，但这、这令人鼓舞，嗯。而且，嗯，我认为值得注意的是，一般来说，当、当、当政府干预经济时

它、它、它、它通常会导致定价误差增加，嗯。但在这种情况下，呃，我认为它会、它会是，很难错过，像任何、任何某种C文本都会降低经济价格体系中误差的影响，嗯。我、我想转换一下方向。呃，虽然我们是一个研究共同体，但我们也是一个教育共同体，而且，呃，我们为今天的活动众包征集了问题，其中一个来自，呃，教育界。这个问题是通过Twitter由Regina Brinker，呃，@Brinker science发给我们的，如果你想关注她的话。她说：“我教授中学STEM。学生应该学习什么，才能为未来的劳动力做好准备并作出贡献？”嗯，我认为，嗯，我的意思是，软件工程是，嗯，可能是人们应该学习的最重要的单一

领域，嗯。而且，嗯，而且、而且我认为，我想我一直有点偏爱物理学，以及，呃，普通经济学和批判性思维。我认为这些是，我们确实应该多得多地教授批判性思维，嗯。这可能看起来是一件简单的事，但它、它只是，嗯，比如你只需要告诉人们，这就是你如何判断自己是否应该相信某件事。[笑声] 不，是的，你、你可以看出每个人有多么重新坐下。我想我是在对皈依者布道。是的，但是，是的，这，嗯，是的，你知道，就是教人们这些是常见的谬误类型，这是人们通常会怎样欺骗你，以及如何避免被欺骗。我认为那会非常棒。我们就在这里的秋季会议上这么做吧。呃，我们还试图，呃，强调

跨学科研究的重要性，以及科学如何为其他领域提供信息，比如，呃，政策等等。所以，我们从Twitter收到的另一个问题，呃，来自Lori xowski，她的账号是@extra neutrons，嗯，她问道：“所以，在那份人们应该了解的事物清单中，你没有提到地球科学。”我确实认为J非常重要，嗯，是的。未来的工程师需要从地球科学中了解什么？我们又怎样，呃，怎样施加影响并开展合作？嗯，我的意思是，总的来说，我认为一般而言，让人们了解地球科学会是件好事，而且，嗯，了解我们，嗯，作为一个文明的行动将如何影响未来，嗯，或者我们可能怎样影响它，我们可能如何对它产生负面影响，嗯，你知道，前提是

我们希望未来是美好的，呃，我们就希望引导自己的行动，以，嗯，你知道，就、就地球科学而言，导向、导向一个好的结果，嗯。所以、所以总体上，实际上人们对、对地球科学了解得如此之少，着实、着实有点令人惊讶。我的意思是，甚至像碳循环这种相当直观的东西，你知道，某种，嗯，我的意思是，我曾和一些相当、相当聪明而且很好的人交谈，他们，嗯，他们、他们不明白存在类似地表碳循环的东西，而且、而且接着，如果你确实从地下深处弄上东西，并把它添加到地表碳中，那、那、那会从根本上改变地球表面的化学般生存。嗯，他们会说：“哇，真的吗？”[音乐] 是的，而且，嗯，你知道，就像守恒

质量对人们而言并非完全显而易见。你知道，比如你不可能凭空创造出新的碳，嗯，你有，而且你也不能让它直接消失。是的，它不会消失，嗯，是的，没错。所以，呃，你知道，像那样的基本知识，会像是让人们继续保持在地。嗯，我，我们似乎一直跳来跳去，但我有一些，你知道，我、我们在征集问题时从你们所有人那里得到了很好的意见，而且我想确保我们努力，呃，触及许多不同的话题。所以，嗯，我想谈谈私营和公共部门在确保科学研究与创新进步方面的目标，以及你认为，嗯，私营部门与公共部门分别扮演什么角色？有没有它们重叠的地方？它们是完全分开的吗？是的，我认为公共部门

适用于这种情况：当你有某种，嗯，对全体人口，呃，或者对，你知道，整个国家，甚至整个、整个世界都有少量好处的东西，嗯，但要去向每个人收取比如10美元会非常困难，嗯，以便更多地了解，嗯，你知道，地球、太阳系、宇宙的本质，嗯。所以你，它、它有点像，去尝试以某种方式，你知道，收取服务费用并没有效率。如果、如果你有一个，比如，一个，你知道，30亿美元的项目，却要去向美国的每个人收取10美元，那就像是、最好由公共部门来做这件事，嗯。而且，嗯，然后你知道，就会有一些很棒的东西，比如、比如哈勃，嗯，而且我认为人们会说，那、那是相当、相当不错的东西，嗯，或者

火星任务，嗯。所以我认为，嗯，你知道，当、当你有这些能给、给很多人带来少量好处的东西时，由公共部门，去、去，你知道，由政府来做是有道理的，嗯。而当你可以，嗯，更具体地闭合经济循环时，嗯，呃，那、那就是适合私营部门的地方，嗯。所以，例如在SpaceX，我们执行许多通信和广播卫星发射，嗯，而、而这可以某种程度上闭合经济循环，因为，呃，然后人们可以，呃，收听X和广播，或者接收DirecTV之类的，嗯，而且、而且那样就有点说得通了，嗯。但随后我们也会为NASA执行任务，重新、重新补给空间站，嗯，这样我们就能以某种方式更多地了解太空。那作为一种、作为一种公共部门

事务是有道理的，嗯。所以我认为这就是基本的、基本的区别。那么，在那个公共部门中，嗯，不仅地球科学，许多科学领域都在其他国家进行投资的时候，呃，在存在巨大机遇的时候，资金投入显得非常平稳，呃。你认为私营部门能怎样帮助我们，呃，扭转这种状况，并把重点放在，你知道，公共部门对研究的投资会给社会带来什么益处，呃？嗯，我当然支持增加，嗯，对、对科学总体的投资，呃，来自，你知道，公共和私营部门双方，嗯。而且，嗯，我超级支持科学，所以我，嗯，而且，看到像，嗯，大型对撞机这样的东西很有意思，你知道，那、那在欧洲确实是一项伟大的努力，嗯。而且，呃，你知道，我们有点

取消了美国这里的超c导滑翔机，嗯。我认为那是、那是我们在那里做的一件有点、有点令人难过的事，嗯。你知道，我、我确实认为我们应该、我们应该增加科学经费，绝对应该，嗯，实际上要在全世界增加。很好，呃，国家科学基金会主任就坐在这里的前排。我相信她，呃，是的，很激烈。是的，绝对是。那么，你提到了火星，而且，嗯，呃，在你接受Stepen Coar采访时，你说火星是一颗需要修缮的行星。是的。但你也一直支持殖民，呃，火星，呃。你认为我们前往火星会面临哪些挑战？我知道你对此非常感兴趣。你怎样、怎样看待这件事？当然，嗯，首先我认为我应该说

你知道，为什么我认为这很重要，嗯。而、而那是，呃，如果我把它背后的某种哲学基础拆解开来，就我而言，我得出那个结论的原因是，嗯，你知道，我认为，嗯，我们还不，那里、关于宇宙的本质，还有太多需要理解和学习的东西，嗯。而那种理解会、会大致与人类文明的范围和规模成比例地增长，嗯。而且，嗯，如果我们是一个多星球物种，而不是一个单一行星物种，人类文明可能的寿命、其可能寿命的概率就会大得多，嗯。如果我们是一个单一行星物种，那么最终会发生某种灭绝事件，要么，嗯，你知道，要么来自人类，要么来自某种自然，呃，所以，嗯。所以我认为，而现在这是

地球历史上第一次，那扇窗口已经打开，使我们有可能把生命扩展到其他行星。我的意思是，已经过了15亿年，所以这是很长的时间，而且、而且那扇窗口可能会开放很长时间，希望确实如此，呃，但它也可能只开放很短的时间。所以，我认为明智的做法是在我们还能做到的时候，让生命成为多行星的，嗯。而且、而且，嗯，而且、而且这最终，呃，将会带来，嗯，大量、大量的新科学，嗯，并确保，呃，我们拥有理解宇宙本质的最高概率，嗯。所以那、那实际上就是我认为它很重要的原因，嗯。而且、而且我也认为这会是一场伟大的冒险，嗯。而且，你知道，需要有一些事情让，嗯

人们在清晨期待。比如，它、它令人兴奋、鼓舞人心，嗯。而且，嗯，你知道，我们、我们需要这些东西。是的，我年纪足够大，还记得，呃，登月，以及，呃，那天起床，还有关于那件事，还有那种变化。是的，正是这个意思。所以，嗯，但是、但是做这件事会超级困难，嗯，而且需要很长时间。而且，嗯，我、我怀疑自己可能活不到看到它实现自给自足的那一天，嗯。但是，嗯，如果我们必须以那个目标为目标，那么，你知道，就需要一些重要的技术步骤，嗯，才能、才能抵达那里，嗯。其中一个例子是，呃，可重复使用火箭，嗯。如果我们有可重复使用火箭，我们就能把，嗯，进入太空的、的成本可能降低2个数量级，嗯。而为Falcon n操心这一点，嗯，它是

一枚大约600万美元的火箭，而B推进剂的成本只有，嗯，大约200,000美元。所以，你知道，这很像，呃，重新加注，嗯，我想是747之类的东西，嗯。所以，如果我们能让rity奏效，这、这确实会产生巨大的差异，嗯。然后我们也需要规模，嗯，需要真正的大型火箭，嗯。而且、而且你需要在火星上进行，呃，本地推进生产，嗯。所以，如果我们能做到那些事情，那么我认为我们可以在R上建立一个自给自足的文明。那么，我了解到你将在下周发射你，呃，最新的火箭，而且，呃，这是自6月Falcon 9以来的首次发射。而且，呃，我已经在海里损失了一些相当昂贵的科学年份，我知道那是什么感受。也许不知道，也许我不知道它如何

衡量，但是，嗯，呃，你知道，如果这次成功，它、它显然将具有历史意义，而且，呃，嗯，你怎样看待，呃，那个关于，呃，你知道，呃，向前失败的问题？嗯，我想，呃，我想我会向前成功，但是，嗯，是的，这、这、这实际上在情感上相当痛苦，嗯。而且，呃，是的，上一次失败的战斗实际上发生在我生日那天，这一点毫无疑问，是的。所以，是的，我的意思是，火箭很难。呃，我的意思是，如果、如果重力只轻一点，就会容易得多。实际上，如果地球上的重力再强一、一点，用化学火箭基本上就不可能做到。重力对这类事情的影响有多大，实在令人惊讶。比如G发生这么小的变化，就会让人觉得，哇，嗯。你看看，比如Saturn 5，它的大小就像，基本上

一栋办公楼，呃，要从地球起飞，而、而从月球起飞却只需要Eagle着陆器的上半部分。所以这，哇，这就像是疯狂的差异。总之，所以为了、为了让火箭在地球上能够运作，你必须真正把一切都推到极限，嗯。所以你必须拥有真正先进的材料，嗯，真正优化设计，嗯，一切都必须，你不能在、在火箭里留出巨大的余量，否则它根本无法抵达开放处，嗯。而且，嗯，而且在地面上以你在生命中会经历的确切情形来测试一切真的很难，因为根本就没有、没有能做到这一点的测试设施，嗯。没错。所以你确实、你让它接近，但并不完全一样，嗯。不过对于、对于这次即将到来的

飞行，嗯，火箭有多项改进，嗯。我们首次进行的事情之一，嗯，我想也是任何人首次这么做，就是，呃，深、深度低温推进剂。所以我们正在对推进剂进行过冷处理，尤其、尤其是液氧，因为它是23液氧，嗯，接近其冰点，嗯，这会相当、相当显著地提高密度，嗯。而且，嗯，然后推力会更高。我们将改进，呃，级间分离系统；我们加长了火箭的上面级，嗯，以便为其添加更多推进剂；电子设备方面还有其他多项改进。所以我认为，与上一枚相比，这是一枚，嗯，得到显著改进的火箭，嗯。然后，我应该说明，可重复使用性的重要之处，就

助推级而言，嗯，关键的某种优点指标是转移，嗯，转移能量，嗯。所以，如果你把势能和动能，嗯，考虑在内，并问有多少能量由助推级转移给了alha级，嗯，以及、以及、以及那个质量是多少，那么基本上，是的，基本上把势能输运联系起来，那、那就是关键，那、那就是优点指标，嗯。所以，falcine的boo级能够把8,000公里/小时的转移速度传递给opp级。所以这真的、那相当快，嗯。一枚突击步枪的子弹以2,000公里/小时的速度飞行，所以它比突击步枪的子弹快4倍，嗯。那是大约100公里的转移速度，嗯，而且，呃，针对大约

120吨的质量。所以它是在把120吨加速到比、比子弹快4倍。我很喜欢你刚才把人们完全无法，呃，形成概念的东西，与他们能够理解而且会让他们印象非常深刻的东西作比较的方式。我的意思是，那是惊人的沟通，太棒了，嗯。我想最后再问你一个问题，然后我们会把时间开放给、给观众。当你谈到火星时，你说：“我认为我永远无法抵达那里。”嗯，还有，是的。嗯，你能不能稍微谈谈，你知道，我们很多人都会参与一些不知道自己是否能看到成果的项目。你能不能稍微谈谈你如何看待这件事，以及、以及，呃，如何权衡，你知道，是我亲自做成它，还是它会在以后实现？嗯，你知道，去

回到那种UNL mindl式的、某种做第一件事的哲学理由，你知道，最初去做，嗯，那个，你知道，基本上我还是个孩子时就在思考这件事，而且，嗯，试图寻找生命中的某种意义，比如生命的意义是什么。而且，嗯，我十几岁时实际上对此相当难过，嗯。而且，嗯，然后，嗯，我读了《HED指南thexy》，它基本上说，像，真正的，那个，你知道，基本上宇宙就是答案，而你需要弄清那些问题。所以我认为，嗯，你知道，就是如果我能帮助以某种方式弄清那些问题，呃，那么我会认为那非常绝对。也许我们可以，是一条B鱼。对，没错。好的，呃，现在轮到你们了，而且，呃，我要去，嗯，我们将交替

在现场观众的问题和来自那个U的问题之间交替。不，Joan，我们不，我们不会。好的，只采用现场观众的问题。好的，嗯，那么轮到你们了，给尤万的问题，嗯。请到位于，呃，过道里的麦克风前。这个麦克风前已经有人了，请讲。非常感谢你今天出席。呃，2周前，《洛杉矶时报》在头版显著位置刊登了一篇报道，其中描述了许多自称来自本地区的风险资本家，他们迷上了一种新的、尚未明确说明的发电技术。报道没有，呃，报道中承诺的，我想，是不同于在3 M岛、柴尔和福岛展示的那些技术。呃，我想问的是，你的批判性思维技能

会如何运用，当有人找上你，提出让，呃，让你投资或参与，呃，新的、未定义的核能技术时？你知道他们在谈什么吗？第二，呃，在我们努力把地球恢复到更接近在“你必须继续”开始之初可能存在的状态时，你认为核能的未来如何？当然，嗯，实际上我、我确实，嗯，我、我的意思是，我认为核能没有任何问题，无论是视觉还是聚变。我认为，如果设计得当，呃，视觉动力系统实际上没问题，尤其是当它位于不受自然灾害影响的地区时，嗯。所以，你知道，例如法国拥有大量菲昂动力，嗯，而且那可以、我认为这对，嗯，嗯，很有S。但是、但是对加州来说就更值得怀疑

嗯，日本也是，嗯。那么、那么，嗯，那么、那么聚变，嗯，我、我绝对认为聚变是一个可以解决的问题，嗯。我之所以某种程度上没有在，嗯，直接聚变方面做任何事，是因为我、我目前认为，而且我对此可能是错的，那个、那个来自天空中名为太阳的巨大聚变爆炸的间接聚变，嗯，你知道，再加上便携式泰克斯，可能会在经济上使最多的事情可行，嗯。而在北部，在北半球的高、高纬度地区，往往有大量水电，所以，嗯，那、那、那确实有助于解决，嗯，你知道，天黑时如何发电的问题，或者、或者在隆冬之类的问题。所以，嗯，我不想阻止人们追求聚变，但就个人看法而言，我认为

经济因素将会青睐多个帕布尔·特斯的间接聚变，嗯，至少会以压倒性的程度如此，尤其是在结合，呃，电池以及，嗯，东西向和L南方向铺设的高压线路时，嗯。我的意思是，你完全可以解决地球上的、地球上的所有电力需求，嗯，只需要占用地表面积中相当小的，呃，百分比，嗯。我的意思是，对美国来说，你基本上可以占用犹他州、内华达州的一小个角落，然后用太阳能为整个美国供电，嗯。所以我、我认为那、那大体上会是它得到解决的方式。下一个。那么，这是对那个问题的一点追问。呃，太阳能基本上每2年翻一番，嗯，而且我们都知道指数增长是一种强大的东西。所以我们距离一切只差大约7次翻番

由太阳能供能。你认为那个、那个翻番速度会、会保持吗？我的意思是，我、我认为它可能会放缓，嗯，但是、但是每年仍会保持很高的百分比增长率，嗯。一旦太阳能在电网中达到某个百分比，你确实需要添加电池来实现负荷平衡，嗯，并且，呃，以某种方式缓存电力。但是，嗯，但是太阳能与、与电池相结合，确实，你有点像，我说过，你完全可以只用那、那两样东西解决所有这些电力问题。很好，那位Victor。是的，我认为值得注意的是，人们可能已经知道这一点，但你得到，嗯，每平方公里太阳能，嗯，能量、太阳能功率是1 Gatt。我是Victor，是F工作室的大F，嗯，尤其致力于对抗碳污染，而且实际上

继续追问这个电池问题，呃，我们开始逐渐理解碳污染有多么强大，但是，呃，与电池相关的技术和F takes有自己的生产c。我想知道你是否可以谈谈你的看法，包括其后果，以及也许一种辐射回收，如果那会是，是的。嗯，目前Tesla的所有电池包都会被回收，嗯。所以，回收中心位于北美、欧洲和、和亚洲，嗯。而且这有点合乎道理，因为你完全可以把电池包看成真正高品质的矿石，嗯。开采电池包比开采岩石好得多，嗯。所以，呃，从经济角度回收它们有点合乎道理，嗯。是的，嗯，而且那显然会相当大幅地降低、降低生产成本，嗯。对于G工厂

，也就是、就是我们正在内华达州建设的那座工厂，呃，它会内置回收能力，这样他们，我们就，呃，完全地以某种方式，你知道，闭合那个循环，嗯。而且从长期来看，它将完全由可持续能源供能，也就是太阳能、风能和地热能。是的。那边的麦克风。你好，我是来自亚利桑那州立大学的Jim Croll。呃，我当时，嗯，在听另一位倡导人类前往火星的Chris McKay博士讲话，他谈到，嗯，当我们确实前往火星时，呃，如果我们发现生命，无论是目前存在的还是已经灭绝的，我们都应该，呃，考虑撤走人类，让那种生命能够繁衍，嗯。我想知道你对此有何看法。嗯，我，它确实看起来火星上没有任何、任何生命。我的意思是，至少如果它们在地表，嗯，我们没有看到任何那样的迹象，嗯。我认为，如果我们确实发现

它的某种迹象，那么我们当然需要了解，嗯，你知道，它是什么，并且努力，我努力去 Ure，确保我们不会让它灭绝。我的意思是，那很重要，但我认为，嗯，我认为现实是，火星表面没有任何生命，嗯，在地下深处也许有微生物生命，呃，那里算是受到屏蔽，嗯，免受辐射和，嗯，严寒的影响，嗯，而且，呃，是的，所以那是，那是，那是一种可能性。但在，在那种情况下，我认为我们在表面做的任何事情，确实不会对地下 tring 生命产生很大影响。嗯，是的，谢谢。这里，再来。你好，嗯，几天前 COP 21 刚刚作出决定，世界现在看来正走在能源系统脱碳的轨道上，可再生能源，当然还有储能，将

变得越来越重要，而且，嗯，相关发展很可能会加速。我对 Tesla 在电池方面所做的事情非常感兴趣，这将有助于平抑，嗯，可再生能源发电的间歇性，并且非常希望听听你谈谈，你认为 Tesla 在可再生能源电池储能方面将走向何方，以及总体上的整个可再生能源储能问题。是的，嗯，当然，这项，嗯，B 技术对可持续能源极其重要。嗯，我们正在内华达州建造的那座，那座，那座大型工厂，我们所做的实际上是试图把，呃，规模经济发挥到 liit。嗯，所以它就像是我们所能设想的最大工厂，嗯，目的是，目的是让规模经济最大化。嗯，然后显然还有底层技术

本身，嗯，它会有，我会说，底层技术会有中等程度的改进，嗯，不算巨大，但也不，不算小，而是差不多中等程度。嗯，但随着时间推移，我预计那些，那些技术改进会变得越来越好。嗯，从 Tesla 的角度来看，我们总是有兴趣尝试弄清楚如何，如何把它做得更好。嗯，我，我确实认为电池是目前最热门的技术问题之一，嗯，因为制造一种有用的 batter 存在太多限制。嗯，这，这确实是，我的意思是，太多极其聪明的人都为了改进电池折断了他们的镐，呃，所以，所以结果通常是，能源密度，嗯，以及经济性平均每年提高大约 5% 到 8%。嗯，尽管我认为我们将能够改进

经济性要素，幅度大得多，只需通过规模经济就能做到。嗯，但任何对，对制造电池感兴趣的人，我当然都会鼓励他们去，呃，研究更好的电池。这，这是一个极其困难的问题，也是一个必须解决的关键问题。嗯，你认为低碳能源转型的主要步骤是什么？沿着这个思路，有哪些技术，嗯，外面有哪些技术发展让你觉得非常有意思，但你还没有在做？那些不是电池或电动汽车、但你认为是适合人们进入的很酷领域的东西。好吧，我认为总体上交通运输的电气化很重要，嗯，所以包括飞机和船舶，嗯，那，那非常重要。嗯，还有，嗯，还有供暖和制冷，把它们电气化。嗯，是的，我的意

我认为，嗯，我的意思是，核子方面的东西可能会，可能会相当有意思，嗯，但就是得看看它与，呃，太阳能相比竞争力如何。嗯，不过，是的，任何东西，任何形式的能源生产或消费，如果你把它推演到未来，嗯，它能持续非常长的时间，而世界依然是好的，我认为我们就应该去做。这里这位。早上好，我是普渡大学的 Pisha Hoover。嗯，我的问题涉及全球背景下的，呃，科学获取和能源。嗯，我想知道，你如何看待你的，你的任何或所有公司与事业，嗯，试图解决科学获取或能源获取方面的，这种不平等，嗯，或者，或者你希望做哪些类型的事情，嗯，在这一背景下尝试真正扩大

那些资源，嗯，并让所有人都能获取。当然。好吧，嗯，我是说，正如之前提到的，嗯，Tesla刚刚开放了所有专利，嗯，而 Solar City 实际上还更进一步，呃，也就是他们正把这项技术提供给，嗯，呃，发展中国家，而且他们提出让来自那些国家的人到工厂里来，亲眼看看它是怎么做出来的。所以我认为，你知道，在这方面努力提供帮助，嗯，而且，呃，但是、但是我，我确实认为，你知道，互联网极大地拉平了信息获取方面的差距。嗯，你知道，这件事谈论得也许没有它本应得到的那么多，但只要你有一台100美元的联网设备，你就可以学习任何东西，你完全可以学习任何东西，这……

与过去相比很不可思议。嗯，你不需要，你不需要进入图书馆，嗯，只要……你真的可以免费学习任何你想学的东西。那、那是我们现在所处的未来中相当美好的一部分。最后面。嗨，呃，我是来自 T national 的 ke Park。到目前为止，Tesla在为这个国家的电动汽车建设基础设施方面做得很出色，但我认为电动汽车本身并不能解决绿、温室气体问题，因为我们仍在通过……和天然电厂、天然气发电厂产生温室气体，而它们的效率不如，呃，汽油车。那么，您最初设想未来的电力来源是什么？现在又是怎样设想的？是的，实际上，嗯，值得注意的是，即使电网完全……

由，呃，煤炭和天然气供电，嗯，电动汽车仍会产生更少的二氧化碳，嗯，即使你把额外……即使你一直计算到发电厂这一层面。嗯，原因是，当你不受质量和体积限制时，你可以让，嗯，能源提取效率比汽车高得多。嗯，所以，如果以……比如来自、来自 G 的天然气发电厂为例，它、它的效率超过60%。嗯，所以就按发电效率 s 60%来算，这真的很好。嗯，而通常情况下，汽油动力汽车在整个行驶循环中的效率会低于20%。嗯，而、嗯，那是因为，你知道，那台、那台大型天然气涡轮机，它、它可以非常重，也可以非常庞大，嗯，而且你……

可以利用这些、这些废热，然后驱动蒸汽轮机，嗯，并且，呃，你知道，提取更多能量。因此，你的效率从根本上说就是高得多。所以，即使把输电损耗和充电损耗考虑在内，呃，电动汽车仍然远远领先于汽油车。因此，你甚至可以对任何来源的燃料都这样做：煤炭，呃，任何东西；嗯，你、你总是会赢。嗯，即使一切都由、由二氧化碳来源供能。嗯，当然，并不是所有东西都由2种来源供能，呃，还有水力，嗯，mal，呃，太阳能、风能。嗯，正如之前一位提问者指出的那样，太阳能的增长非常迅猛。嗯，所以，你知道，电网中可持续能源所占的百分比……

正在随着时间推移而增加。嗯，当我们把电池加入其中时，呃，这会、这会进一步提高这一速度。所以我认为，我认为我们、我们正处在一条……我们正朝着积极的方向前进，问题只在于需要多长时间才能到达那里。事实上，就像我在 par tool 中真正强调的一点是，呃，我们必定会转向可持续能源经济。嗯，因为另一种可能将是、将是能够把所有碳基燃料从地下开采出来并燃烧掉，嗯，然后你要么转向可持续经济，要么整个经济崩溃，因为那时它就没有任何能源了。所以我们可以肯定，我们将转向可持续能源经济。问题只是什么时候，以及有多少，你知道，数十亿……

吨的、的二氧化碳，呃，是在大气中，而不是在地下。那、那其实是唯一的问题，也就是，嗯，我们会……什么、什么、什么 PPM 数值，你知道。是的，没错。所以，你知道，鉴于我们知道最终会到达，呃，也就是可持续能源经济，那么我们似乎应该、我们应该尽快终止这项实验。为什么不呢？很抱歉，但我们没有时间再回答更多问题了。嗯，我走进来时，我的一位朋友，呃，正在告诉我他来到这里有多么兴奋，而我把他说的话记了下来，嗯，因为我认为这是我们所有人的共同感受。他说，看到一个人献身于为最大的问题构想真正的解决方案，然后付诸行动，是如此难得。非常感谢。谢谢，时间……感谢大家参加。

今天的我们，请稍后再回来，呃，大约1小时后，呃，来听弗朗斯·科尔多瓦，也就是，嗯，那个、呃，国家科学基金会负责人讲话。

have clearly blown through those so how do you think about that and and how do you focus on getting by those obstacles well I'm a big believer in um in the sort of uh science or physics framework of trying to analyze problem particularly if if they're new um so if something's new then analogies don't don't work very well um because it's it's it's it's new I mean the way we get through daily life is most by analogy or by sort of copying things with minor variations um because it's a computational shortcut uh but if you want to do something that's that's fundamentally new uh or particularly it's counterintuitive then you have to do a first principles analysis um and you know take things from from the what appear to be as fundamental sort of simple fundamental

truths and then reason up from there um and uh I mean that that requires a lot more thinking and you can't you can't do that for everything but um but if you trying to figure out something new I think it's it's really the only way to go so um I mentioned that that I was in Paris and I know that you were there too and um as I listened to presentations uh first there was a real sense of optimism at this cop that I don't think was there before but there was still an overwhelming sense of a lot of of work that we have to do and I was struck by um some comments that you made when you were talking to a group of students at the surbone um and they were talking about sustainability and you said regarding the carbon cycle this is analogous to not paying for garbage

collection it's not as though we should say in the case of garbage have a garbage free Society it's very difficult to have a garbage free Society but it's it's just important that people pay for the garbage collection so we need to go from having an untaxed negative externality which is effectively a hidden carbon sub subsidy of enormous size 5.

3 million trillion a year and we need to move away from this and have a carbon tax so can you talk a little bit about that especially from the standpoint of being in price yeah I mean essentially price are just information um they they the primary information um to allow for labor labor allocation um and they sort of tell people what what to do and what thing should be favored or another thing um and and so when the prices are wrong then the wrong thing happens in the economy um so when you have a sort of a tragedy of Commons um like the CO2 capacity of the oceans in atmosphere um and it's it's un price or the price is is much lower than it than it should be um then the wrong Behavior happens so effectively uh we're we're incenting bad behavior um and

um I mean I just talked about how analogies are imperfect but but um you know it's kind of like if if we had uh high taxes on on fruits and vegetables and low taxes on on cigarettes and alcohol that would that wouldn't make sense um that that's sort of what we have um right now with respect to energy um and and um and we're very powerful forces trying to keep it that way um so um now it will eventually um correct but and we are seeing some good movement in that direction with the Paris climate talks it sounds like it's direct directionally correct and um and there will be some movement not as much as there should be but it's it's encouraging um and um I think that it's worth noting that like generally when when when the government interferes in the economy

it's it's it's it's that usually results in a in a a pricing error increase um but in this case uh I think it would it would be it's hard to miss like any any sort of C text would reduce the effect of error in the system of prices in the economy um i' like to shift directions uh while we are a research Community we're also an education community and uh we have crowdsourced and questions for today's event and one of them comes uh from the education community so this came to us uh on Twitter from Regina Brinker uh at Brinker science if you want to follow her and she says I teach Middle School stem what should students be learning to be prepared for and contribute to the Future Workforce um well I think um I mean software engineering is um probably the single

biggest area that that people should learn um and um and and I think I think I'm always sort of a fan of physics and uh General economics and critical thinking I think those are we really should teach critical thinking a lot more um me seem like a simple thing but it's it's just um like you need to just tell people like this is how you know whether you should believe something or [Laughter] not yeah you you can tell how much everybody resat I think I'm preaching to the convered here yeah but yeah it's um yeah you know just teaching people these are the general types of fallacies and this is how people will generally trick you and how to avoid being trick and I think it be really great let's do it uh at the fall meeting here uh we also try to uh stress

the importance of transdisciplinary research and how science informs other areas like uh policy and so forth so another question we received from Twitter uh came from Lori xowski she's at extra neutrons um who asked so you didn't mention geoscience in that list of things that people should know about I do think J is very important um yeah what do the engineers of the future need to know from geosciences and how can uh how do we influence that and work together um well I mean I think in general I think that it would be good in general for people to know about geosciences and um to know how um our actions um as a civilization will affect the future um or and how we can possibly affect it how we might be negatively affecting it um you know on the assumption

that we want the future to be good uh we want to direct our actions to um you know with respect to to geosciences to to a good outcome um so so I generally it's it's it's sort of quite surprising how little actually people know about about geosciences I mean even like pretty straightforward stuff like the carbon cycle you know sort of um I mean I've had conversations with with quite quite smart and well people who um who who don't understand that there's like a surface carbon cycle and and then but if you did Stu up from deep underground and add it to the surface carbon that that that fundamentally changes the chemical like liing of the of the surface of the Earth um and they're like wow really [Music] yeah and um you know like there's just conservation

of mass is not totally obvious to people you know like you can't just create new carbon from nothing um you have and you can't just disappear yeah it doesn't disappear um yeah exactly so uh you know just like basic stuff like that be like wa to keep people on ter um I we s bouncing around but I have some you know I we got great input from all of you uh when we ask for questions and I want to make sure we try to uh touch on a lot of different topics so um I want to talk about the gools of the private and public sector in ensuring the advancement of scientific research and Innovation and where do you see um the roles of the private sector versus the public sector are there places where they overlap are they totally separate yeah I think the public sector

is when when you have something that's um kind of a small amount of good for the whole population U or for you know the whole country or even the whole the whole world um but it would be really difficult to go and collect like $10 from everyone um to understand um you know more about the nature of the Earth or the solar system the Universe um so you it's it's sort of it's not efficient to go to try and sort of you know collect service if if you got say A you know a$3 billion project to go and get $10 from everyone in the United States it's like it's it's better to do that by the public sector um and um and then you know you have great things like like the Hubble um and I think what people would say like that's that's quite a quite a good thing um or the

Mars missions um so I think um you know where where you have these things which are a small amount of good for for a lot of people it makes sense for public sector to to you know for government to do that um where you can um more concretely close the economic Loop um uh that that's where the private sector makes sense um so for example at SpaceX we do a lot of launches of communications and broadcast satellites um and and that that can sort of close the economic Loop because uh then people can uh listen to X and radio or get Direct TV or something like that um and and that kind of makes sense um but then we'll also do missions for NASA to re resupply the space station um so we can sort of learn more about space that makes sense as a as a public sector

thing um so I think that's the basic basic difference so in that public sector um not only geoscience but a lot of Sciences seen very flat funding at a time when uh other nations are investing uh at a time when there's a tremendous opportunity uh how do you think that the private sector can help us uh turn that around and focus on you know what the benefits will be for Society for uh public sector investment in research um well I'm certainly a proponent of increasing um investment in in science in general uh from you know both the public and private sector um and um I'm a super pro science so I um and it is um interesting to see like um the lar collider you know that was that was really a great effort there there in Europe um and uh you know we sort of

canel the superc conducting to glider here in the US um I thought that was that was sort of a sort of a sad thing that we did there um you know I I really think we should we should increase funding for science absolutely um you across the world really great uh we have the director of the National Science Foundation in the front row here I'm sure she's uh yeah in violent yeah definitely so you mentioned Mars and um uh in your interview with stepen coar you said that Mars is a fixer uper Planet yeah but you've also been a proponent of colonizing U Mars uh what are some of the challenges that you think we would face in traveling to Mars I know you're very interested in this how do how do you think about that sure um well I think first of all I should say

you know why do I think this is important um and and that's uh if I sort of unpack the sort of philosophical basis for that as far as I'm concerned it's the reason I came to that conclusion was that um you know I think that um we don't there there's so much more to understand and learn about the nature of the universe um and that understanding will will grow kind of proportion to the scope and scale of of human civilization um and um the probability of the probable lifespan of human civilization is is much greater if we are a multipl species as opposed to a single plan species um if we're a single plan species then eventually there will be some Extinction event either um you know either from humans or or some natural uh so um so I think and now it's the

first time in the history of Earth that the the window is opened where it's possible for us to extend life to another planets I mean it's been one and a half billion years so it's a long time and and that that window may be open for a long time and hopefully it is uh but it may also be open for a short time and so I think the the wise move is to make life multiplanetary while we can um and and um and and this ultimately uh is what will lead to um a huge amount of of new science um and in sure that uh that we have the highest probability of of understanding the nature of the universe um so that that's actually the the reason that I think it's important um and and I also think it would be a great adventure um and you know there need to be things that um

people look forward to very in the morning like it's it's exciting inspiring um and um you know we we need those things yeah I'm old enough to remember the uh landing on the moon and uh getting up that day and about that and just the change yeah exactly point so um but but it it will be super hard to do this um and it will take a long time and um I I suspect I probably would't live to see it become self-sustaining um but um if we had to aim for that objective then you know they important technological steps that are needed um to to get there um one of them for example being uh reusable Rockets um if we reusable Rockets we can reduce the the cost of of um of access to space by probably two magnitude um and worting that for the the Falcon n um which is

a about a $6 million rocket to B the the cost of the propellent is only um about $200,000 so you know it's much like U refilling um think it's 747 something like that um so it's it's really a massive difference if we can make rity work um and then we also need scale um need to have really big Rockets um and um and you need to do uh local propelling production on Mars um so if we can do those things then I think we can establish a self sustaining civilization on R so I understand that you're going to be launching your uh newest rocket next week and uh this is the first launch since the Falcon 9 uh back in June and uh I've lost some scientific year that was pretty expensive in the ocean and I know what that feels like Maybe not maybe I don't know how it

scales but um uh you know if this is successful it's it's clearly historic and uh um how do you think about uh that issue of uh you know uh failing forward um well I think uh I think I success forward but um yeah it's it's it's quite emotionally traumatic actually um and uh yeah the the last fight which failed actually did so on my birthday which of a doubt yeah so yeah I me it's it's Rockets are hard the uh I mean if if gravity was just a little lighter much easier actually If gravity was a little little stronger on Earth it would be basically impossible to do with chemical Rockets it's amazing how much uh gravity effects things like this small change in G and it's like wow um you look at say the Saturn 5 which was like the size of like an basically

an office building uh to take off from Earth and and yet to take off from the moon was just the top half of the eagle Lander so it's wow it's like a crazy difference so anyway the so for for in order to make things work on Earth for Rockets you have to really push everything to the maximum um so you have to have really Advanced Materials um really optimize the design um everything's got to you can't have huge amounts of margin in in the rocket otherwise it just won't get to open at all um and um and it's really hard to test everything in the ground in the exact circumstances that you're would experiencing life because there's just no there's no test facility that can do that um exactly so you do you make it close but not exact um but for for this upcoming

flight um there are number of improvements in the rocket um and one of the things we're doing for the first time um the first time I think anyone's done it is uh deep deeply cryogenic propellant so we're subcooling the propellant particularly particularly the liquid oxygen because it's 23 liquid oxygen um close to its freezing point um which increases the density quite quite significantly um and um and then the thrust is higher we're going to improve uh stage separation system we stretched the upper stage of the rocket um to add more propellent to that and there are a number of other improvements in electronics so it's I think a um significantly improved rocket from the last one um and then I should say what is important about reusability as far as the

Boost stage is concerned um what the key sort of figure of marit is is the transfer um transfer energy um so if you take the potential energy and the kinetic energy um and say how much has been transferred to the the alha stage by the Boost stage um and and and what's the mass that so basically yeah basically connecting to potential energy transport that that's the thing that that's the figure of marit um so the the boo stage of falcine is is capable of of transfer of a transfer velocity to the opp stage of 8,000 km an hour so it's really that's pretty fast um a bullet from an assault rifle it goes at 2,000 km hour so it's four times fast than a bull from an assault rifle um that's a transfer velocity of roughly 100 kilomet um and uh to to a mass of about

120 tons so it's accelerating 120 tons to four times FAS than than a bullet I loved the way that you just compared something that people wouldn't have any uh conception of to something that they would and that they would be really impressed by I mean was that amazing communication that was terrific um I wanted to ask you one last question and then we're going to throw things open for the the audience when you talked about Mars you said I don't think I'll ever get there well and yeah um you talk a little about you know a lot of us get involved in projects that we don't know if we'll see the realization and can you talk a little bit about how you think about that and and uh trading off you know I get to do it versus it'll come later well you know going

back to the sort of UNL mindl sort of philosophical rationale for doing the first you know doing in the first place um the you know basically I sort of was thinking about this when I when I was a kid and um trying to find some meaning in life like what's the meaning of life and um I quite sort of sad about it actually when I was a teenager um and um and then um I read the HED guide thexy which basically said like the real the you know basically universe is the answer and you need figure out the questions so I think um you know that that's if I can help kind of figure out the questions uh then that I consider that to be very absolutely maybe we can 's a b fish right exactly okay uh now it's time for you and uh I'm going to go um we're going to alternate

between questions from the audience and questions from the the U no Joan we're not we we won't okay just the audience okay um so it's your turn questions for youone um please come to the microphones that are in the uh in the aisles and there's somebody at this microphone go ahead thank you very much for appearing today uh two weeks ago the Los Angeles Times featured prominently on its front page a story in which it described many self-described Venture capitalists from this area who were enamored by a new and as yet unspecified technique of power generation it did not uh it was promised in the article I think was different than those demonstrated at three m Island chyl and Fukushima uh the uh I'd like to ask if you had uh what your critical thinking skills

would be when approached by people offering uh you to invest or become involved in uh new and undefined nuclear power techniques you know what they're talking about and two uh what you see as a future for nuclear power in our efforts to restore the Earth to the conditions that it might have existed more closely at the start of the you had to proceed sure um well I I actually am um I I I mean I think there's nothing wrong with nuclear power whether Vision or Fusion I think if a properly designed uh Vision power system is actually fine particularly if it's in an area that's not subject to natural disasters um so you know for example France has a lot of fion power um and that can that I think makes lot of s for um um but but for California it's more questionable

um or Japan um so then then um then then fusion um I I definitely think Fusion is a solvable problem um the the reason I sort of haven't done anything in um direct Fusion is that I I currently think and I may be wrong about this that that indirect fusion um from the big Fusion explosion in the sky called the sun is uh you know and having portable takes is is probably going to make the most things economically um and in the in the Norther in the high high latitudes in nor Northern Hemisphere you tend to have a lot of Hydro power so um that that that really helps solve the um you know how do you make power when it's dark problem or or in the middle of winter type thing so um I don't want to discarge people from pursuing Fusion but person thing I think the

economics are going to favor indirect Fusion of multiple pable Tes um at least to an overwhelming degree particularly when combined with uh batteries and um high voltage lines running East West and L South um I mean you can completely solve Earth's all the power need on Earth um with a with a fairly small uh percentage of the surface area um I mean for the United States you could take basically little a corner of Utah Nevada and power the entire United States um with solar power so I I think that's that's mostly how it will get solved the next so this is a bit of a followup on that uh solar power has been doubling um basically every 2 years and we all know that exponential growth is a powerful thing so we're only what seven doublings away from everything

being powered by solar power and do you think that that doubling rate will will keep Pace I mean I I think it'll probably slow down um but but it's still going to be a high percentage growth rate every year um once you reach a certain percentage of solar into the grid you really need to add batteries in order to load level um and uh kind of cash power but um but solar combined with with batter is really you kind of like I said you can completely solve all of this power with just those those two things great that Victor yeah it's it's worth noting I think probably people aware of this but you get um it's there's one Gatt per square km of solar um energy solar power I'm Victor massive F ofio work um particularly fighting the carbon pollution and actually

full up on this battery question uh we tend to start understanding how powerful the carbon pollution is but uh the battery related technology and F takes has its own production c i was Wonder you could maybe share your thoughts on what the consequences and maybe a radiation recyle if that would be yeah well um all of the battery packs for Tesla are currently recycled um so the recycling centers in North America and Europe and and Asia um and it kind of makes sense because you can just think of the battery packs as really high quality ore um it's way better to mine a battery pack than rocks um so uh so it kind of makes sense to to recycle them economically um yeah um and that obviously reduces the the cost of production quite a bit um for the G Factory

that that we're building in Nevada uh that will have recycling built in so they we uh completely sort of you know close that cycle um and it will be um in the long term fully sustainably powered so solar wind and geothermal yeah and microphone hi I'm Jim croll from Arizona State University uh I was um listening to Dr Chris McKay another advocate of humans to Mars and he was talking about um when we do go to Mars uh if we find life either currently there or extinct we should uh consider removing human presence so we can allow that life to thrive um I was wondering what thoughts on that were well I it really doesn't seem like there's any life on on Mars I mean if they're on the surface at least um we're not seeing any sign of that um I think if we do find

some sign of it then we sure we need to understand um you know what it is and and try I try to Ure that we we don't extinguish it I mean that's uh that's important but I think um I think the reality is that there isn't any life on the surface of Mars um there may be uh microbial life deep underground uh where it's sort of shielded um from radiation and um from the cold um and uh yeah so that that's that's a possibility but in in that case I think anything we do on the surfice is really not going to have a big impact on the sub tring life um yeah thank you here again hi um with a decision coming out of cop 21 just a few days ago with the world now appearing to be on track to decarbonize the Energy System renewable energy and of course storage is going

to become increasingly important and um likely the development will accelerate I'm really interested in what Tesla's doing on batteries that will help smooth the intermittent of um the renewable generation and would really like to hear your discussion of where you see Tesla going on battery storage for Renewables and generally the whole issue of storage for Renewables yeah well definitely this um B technology is super important to sustainable energy um what what we're doing with the the the big Factory and that we're buling in Nevada is is really trying to take uh economies of scale to the liit um so it's like the biggest Factory we could conceive of um in order to to maximize economies of scale um and then obviously there's the underlying technology

itself um which there there will be I would say moderate improvements in the underlying technology um not giant but not not small but kind of medium um but then over time I would expect those those technology improvements to get better and better um from Tesla standpoint we're always interested in trying to figure out how to how to make it better um I I do think that batteries are one of the hottest technology problems out there um because there's so many constraints on creating a useful batter um it's it's really I mean so many super smart people have broken their pick on improving batteries uh so so usually ends up being on average like about a 5 to 8% Improvement per year in energy density um and economics um although I think we'll be able to improve

the economic element a lot more just by the economies of scale um but I anyone who's interested in in doing batteries I'd certainly encourage them to uh to research better batteries it's it's a super hard problem and a critical one to solve um what do you think are the main steps in a low carbon energy transition and in that vein what technologies um out there What technological developments do you find very interesting that you're not already working on things that aren't batteries or electric vehicles but that you think are cool areas for people to go into well I think electrification of Transport in general is important um so aircraft and boats um that that's very important um and um and then Heating and Cooling electrification of that um yeah I me

I think um I mean the nucleus stuff could be could be quite interesting um but it would just have to sort of see how it competes against uh solar um but yeah and any anything which any form of energy generation or consumption which if you extrapolate into future um goes on for a very long time and still has the world being good I think we should just do that over here good morning Pisha Hoover from Purdue University um my question pertains to uh science access and energy within the global context um and I was wondering how you see any or all of your your companies and Ventures um trying to address the the inequity of science access or access to energy um or or what types of things that you're hoping to do um within that context to try and really expand

those resources um and make it accessible to everyone sure well um I mean as was mentioned earlier um Tesla just made all the patents open um and um uh Solar City is um actually uh going even a step further than that uh which is uh they're making the technology available um to um uh developing countries and and they're offering to have people come from those countries and actually sit in the factory and see how it's done so I think you know trying to be helpful in that respect um and uh but but I I do think that you know the internet is a great equalizer of access to information um the um you know this is this is maybe not talk about as much as it should be but you can learn anything if you have a $100 internet device you can just learn anything which

is amazing compared to the Past um you don't need you don't need to access to a library um in just you can learn whatever you want for free really that's that's a pretty great part of the future that we're in right now on the end hi uh ke Park from T national uh Tesla has done a great job creating an infrastructure for electric cars in the country so far but I don't think electric cars themselves solve green greenhouse gas problems because we're still generating greenhouse gases from and natural power plant natural gas power plants which are not as efficient as U gasoline cars so how did you originally Envision the future source of electricity and how do you envision it now yeah actually um it's it's worth noting that uh even if the grid was completely

powered by uh coal and natural gas um electric cars uh would still generate less CO2 um even when you extra when you take it all the way to the power plant level um the the reason for that is that uh when you're not constrained by mass and volume you can make the um the efficiency of energy extraction much better um in a power plant than you can in a car um so if you take say um like natural gas power plant from from G it's it's over 60% efficient um so take the s 60% efficient in generating electricity so it's really good um whereas typically a gasoline powered car over the drive cycle will be less than 20% efficient um and um and that's because you know the the big um natural gas turbine is it it can be really heavy it can be really bulky um and you

can take the the waste heat and then run a steam turbine um and uh you know get even more energy out so your efficiency is just fundamentally much better and so even when you take into account the transmission losses and the charging losses uh you're still way far ahead with electric cars than you are with gasline cars so even you can take this do this with any Source fuel coal uh anything um you're you're just always going to win um even if everything's um powered by by CO2 sources um then then of course everything isn't powered by two sources uh you have hydro ummal uh solar wind um and as was pointed out by one of the earlier question is the um growth of solar is very dramatic um so the you know the percentage of the grid that is sustainable energy

is increasing over time um and when we add batteries to the mix uh that will that will further increase the rate so I think I think we're we're on a we're headed in a positive direction it's just a question of how long it will take to get there in fact like one of the things I really emphasized in the par tool was that uh it it is a certainty that we will move to a sustainable energy economy um because the alternative would be would be able to mine all of the carbon based fuels from the ground burn them um and then you either move to a sustainable economy or the entire economy collapses because then it doesn't have any energy so we know for sure that we will move to a sustainable energy economy the question is just when and and how many you know billions

of tons of of CO2 are uh in the atmosphere versus in the ground that that's really the only question is is um what what what PPM number will we you know yeah exctly so you know so given that we know we will end up uh which is the sustainable energy economy it seems like we should we should terminate this experiment as soon as possible why not I'm sorry but we don't have time for any more questions um when I was walking in one of my friends uh was telling me how excited he was to be here and I wrote down what he said um because I think it's something we all share he said it's such a rare thing to see a person devote themselves to coming up with real solutions to the biggest problems and then doing it thank you so much thanks time thank all of you for joining

us today please come back later on uh in in about an hour uh to hear from France Cordova the um the uh head of the National Science Foundation