so it means if we don't have a major change in the energy investment we might say goodbye to the world. internet context given a signal to the energy investment in energy efficiency i believe we have a historical chants which is the chance in next year. ..

responsible for 45 emissions. europe, 15%. altogether, 60% emissions. it is a political commitment at the highest level. this would show the responsible leadership level 228 european countries plus united states plus china. this is in terms of numbers. paquette, this, i believe, china

being a part of the game. this will inject a very strong political laments and to be part of this process. it can be more and more difficult for the countries who are other significant emitters who will not be a part of the coalition of finding a solution. it will be very difficult for them not to be part of the countries who want to find the solution. and these countries are the 28 european countries, europe and china. number three, i believe the key issue here is china. in europe and i believe in north america and asia, many people

who find a solution to climate change say and will say we can do a lot of things to reduce emissions. but if china doesn't move, we cannot find a solution. so why should we punish our economy if china, the largest emitter, doesn't move. and now china move aimed, making such a commitment for the first time is a bigger target. if you wish, we can discuss comment is for me, taking the arguments from the hand of the people. to sum up, i am optimistic, cautiously optimistic about these events.

and there may be less chance to get that signal to the investments so they can be in line to the target so we don't throw it in the trash. the clean energy investments for efficiency, for renewables, for nuclear and so one are about $400 billion. in our central scenario, which is everything around 2014, which of course they are always increasing to five, but to be able to see, to save the earth, save the planet, we need to increase the clean energy investment four times competitively. this will not happen if there is not a serious signal coming to

ambassadors that they will be punished or rewarded with the investments dependent on the technology they choose. and the value of a very new way for the clean energy investment plans. so, ladies and gentlemen, if i can finish up our words, i believe in terms of energy security, there is a growing risk. any number of parts of the world that are very important strategically for the energy sector. iraq, libya, russia, north

africa, these are very crucial countries, and as such, the current lower oil prices should not disguise the challenges we have in front of us and i believe energy security may be a crucial issue in the next years to come. what is happening in the middle east today raises concerns about investment foreword in the region as it is a lack of security, lack of predictability. and if the investments do not come in a timely manner, you may see the future production very, very peak and may present challenges for the oil markets. many countries believe nuclear

energy can play an important role in terms of the energy security, and reducing climate change, at the public concerns remain a major issue with financing and address the government's plan to be taken seriously. we are in the opinion that this success story and part may well change the global investment for clean energy technologies, the renewables, efficiency, nuclear powers. but to do that, we have to see an agreement coming as such the recent china-u.s. steel of them

in the european targets is a very bad step. finally, we at the iaea believed that the market instruments are the best of the united states challenges for sure. looking at the complexity of these two major problems we are facing. energy security. oil, gas, defense, all of these things, plus the climate change, so many things are involved. there is a need that these market policies are put in framework by fireside of government policies to steer us in the right direction. thank you and thank you very much for your attention.

[applause] >> thank you for that wonderful and comprehensive look -- probably a lot more than what you highlighted there. but certainly a lot of issues to talk about. we have about 20 minutes for conversation. i am going to open to the audience in a few moments. there were a couple of questions that i had. one is you were pretty passive mistake about sort of the prospects of increased investment in the middle east given through what you determine turmoil. but you are also pretty confident about investment in brazil, which an outside perspective to look at as well. how much of your view on most of those countries are predicated on a securities environment versus this investment commercial framework governments that we put on a table quiet because i could argue that for both of those reasons, those are really the crux of the issue.

>> thank you. for me, the main reason why we are questioning the growth in these countries is the lack of investment not because of economics, but because of the security issue here. the current as security and the unpredictability of the middle east may well mean that some key investments, especially in iraq, and we talk with the iraqi policy today, we see that the appetite for investment is almost close to zero. this is the reason why for brazil it is a different story. it is to be able to raise the

necessary funds and as we highlighted in our report, which i will do now, if the prices go to $18 below, the ac brazil may be one of the regions which will be the toughest challenges because of our ability to finance and to go and increase the debt, which will be a major issue for concern about the production growth coming forward. >> may be turning the page a little bit to the issue of subsidies and an issue i would give you ball and the iaea tremendous effort for framing a lot of the debate and quantifying how we talk about energy on that side of the equation, you mentioned there is

progress being made on the issue. can you characterize a little bit disordered nature of that progress? i think one of the ways you talked about it with sending a signal about using energy sufficiently or one kind of energy first. for a lot of countries where these subsidies exist, one of the real political challenges may be sort of an access issue. are we becoming smarter about how we implement sanctions in that research? >> i think the subsidies are being questioned by many governments, namely because of the pressure on the budget because government are feeling this big pressure on their budget and even for

oil-producing countries becoming a major problem. in asia, the main reason they have moved ahead is because the government budgets cannot afford anymore and there was a new government, a freshly elected government with strong confidence of the asian borders, very much in line with ice. and the middle east, many governments are taking steps. today in the middle east, they used 2 million barrels per day of oil to generate. from an economic point of view -- i just want to say something. this is something to run your

car, -- it is not economic at all. so the government are moving to cast especially. in the middle east, i see part of the subsidy is just for me unbelievable that on one hand, and rubber bands equaled the market share. on the other hand, they are putting substantial subsidies to use. this is unbelievable because you pushed the renewables in order to have a better chance to compete in terms of crisis. but you have no chance if you do not -- you said you work on it this year. one of the reasons people say something is for energy.

our numbers show that out of this money, only 8% of the subsidies go to global interest groups and 90% of the subsidies go to medium and higher income groups. so it's more medium and high income levels. so therefore, we have some suggestions in the context of the g20, how to realize the subsidy forms and we will be looking also at this year at the turkish g20 two the subsidy program. >> one final question for me and then we will open it up for the audience. it is not asking for the climate change question. one of the things for those of us who have read your report for

the years upon years and look at climate messaging new product, one year it was to raise them on the next year they would avoid. he basically said last chance. is that how you really care or rice pudding or long-term forecasting. what needs to have been in paris to feel confident that we are on that path? >> you have to understand others. the tomorrow's years of oil, gas, coal, co2 are determined by today's investments. it is a long time. the decision and the impact. so the 2014th omissions are

determined to break these investments. so if we are not able to get our acts together and present new energy investments, unless there is a major economic downturn, we will say goodbye to case. this is what we are seeing. to be very -- to be very frank, we are able to get the price agreements, which is one signal to other countries, investments and others in the climate change that is a major issue brittany make your business plans. it doesn't go to the agreement to the ceiling in some type of the location of responsibilities. then we better find out what are the ways to get used to the different planets.

>> okay, we are going to take some questions. we've only got a few minutes. please wait for the microphone and identify yourself and please make your question in the form of a question. >> brian berry, washington bureau politics. one question about the price differential issue, is there a possibility that if europe increases the shale gas production that competitiveness issue would resolve? >> hi, do you have any china specific recommendations or comments on sort of a nuclear energy plan as you specify the government announced last week to triple the nuclear power generator capacity by 2020 and a more worthy plan.

thank you. [inaudible] >> fatih, thanks so much for your comments. in the short term, speaking of opec, you are unique that you have worked with opec in the iaea. how much do you think shale will end up complicating if at all opec's decision over the next year to two years? >> i will call johns hopkins questions on nuclear power. some industry people would contend that prosper to smr nuclear reactors as a cause of stimulus in the industry because they would be cheaper. yet, none of these have been my sins so far. i'm curious, how did you treat

that issue in your analysis? >> in europe, we hve today a significant amount of shale gas deposits in poland, germany, france, u.k., the ukraine. but we cannot expect that in the next 10 years it will be a major contribution to europe. having said that, if we start to work very hard and if we get rid of that dogmatic barriers we have in front of us, not to make use of shale gas, it may well help us at least in the european production and as such could eat an important factor in improving

the competitiveness of europe. this is not enough to cause the gap between europe and the united states, but it can definitely happen in terms of narrowing the gap and also put forward the security of europe. now, nuclear energy in china is definitely one of the most important push that china has an energy history with our numbers, china is making a lot of efforts on efficiency and renewables. but the nuclear numbers are very, very impressive. it is part of the growth in the global nuclear capacity only from china. this reminds me that at this stage, china in the 1980s and 1990s wrote half a billion

people. there was a big collective action and the olive government decision. the same level will be very important for reducing the share of coal in the chinese power mix. it will be very good for reducing the u.s. emissions and will bring china into the nuclear power and in that capacity, china would take the united states as number one in power. so as such the chinese merchants is a major power producer, the landscape of other countries will not change policies. to your question, yes, what do we expect from the next opec

committee meeting, the question is i will not be able to comment, but i can tell you the following. shell oil from the united states , these are extremely important developments in the hydrocarbon sector, evolution in nature and thus provides a lot of energy securities for many that are very, very important. however, i would highlight that we will issue you a forecast that even with these two success stories, we will still need middle east oil in the future. we should therefore view current investment issues, current security issues in the middle east from bad april. we should have the big numbers we are seeing today.

also tomorrow and this is important to putting forward in that perspective. they are important especially given the growing quartile of emerging countries who cannot finance the nuclear power plants, but transferability from one country. as we highlight in the report may well play an important role in emerging countries, but they are of limited natural resources. speed back let's take a couple more questions. one back bay or -- one back there. >> been a gardener, strategy international. just reacting to what you said, how do you see the whole issue

with the recent grade target -- [inaudible] >> just because your microphone wasn't on. ..

this is true, but if you put them, if you put it in a context how much at issues you approve, conventional oil, the difference is really, really very limited. i will tell you the numbers. in our report we expect that the oil is about 3 million barrels a day. if we assume this 3 million barrels a day will come from average --

[inaudible] the difference of additions, is equal to the but even one day of emissions of china for entire year. very small additional. there's an increase there, but very, very small. and if you want to see oral to play a role come then we have to find a way to combine china's daily co2 emissions growth, through other technologies. i didn't say that it will not be downward pressure but what i said was we should expect it to

be -- everywhere. it will be a least a downward pressure, but we shouldn't also forget that the cost of capital of building facilities are going up and, therefore, perhaps we will not see -- but we will see a downward pressure but it will be very much far from behavior in the united states today. but u.s. gas is different. we have to provide some flexibility in the markets, asia, also bring downward pressure on the prices. methane is another guess, but see you to, talking about the sector, so you do is one of the most potent gas to get methane,

since about more than two-thirds of the missions of co2 comes from united sector. for methane -- have to reduce them, easier to fix than through some technical and regulatory measures. >> okay. i think we've come to the end of our time but i just wanted to thank chris for putting your. i know you have to go to new york -- i want to thank fatih. we know there is no risk that you retiring anytime soon. we will hope to see you again here sometime in the very near future. i want to thank you and your team for the excellent work you bring to the broader energy

discussion. please join me in thanking fatih. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> defense secretary chuck hagel has resigned after nearly two years on the job, according to administration officials. they say secretary hagel will stay on the job until his

replacement is confirmed by the senate. it will be president obama's for the defense secretary appointed to the president will make the announcement at 11:10 a.m. eastern. live coverage on c-span. senator roy blunt who serves on the armed service committee he says this is a announced the shows when you don't have a strategy it's hard to come up with the team to help the ultimate this strategy. against the president announcing coming up at 11:10 a.m. eastern on c-span. also c-span will be live with the white house briefing with josh earnest. that will be at 1 p.m. eastern. live coverage will continue at noon eastern as we take you to the center for american progress to hear from todd stern, state department special envoy for climate change. he will talk about future global climate change policy to reduce

carbon emission. live coverage starts at noon ease turn here on c-span2. also the carnegie endowment for international peace will host a discussion on jihadists move was an increase in violence across afghanistan, syria and iraq. that would be like at 3:30 p.m. eastern. >> tonight on "the communicators," tim wong on a tech junkie that predicts outcome to congressional legislation using data mining and artificial intelligence. >> our analytics get more granular than just sing whether not something passes. we can break down on a legislative basis how likely they will vote for a certain bill. from a tactical perspective there's a lot of opportunities for attorneys, lobbies, whatever to be able to go in and say let you look at this bill. based on a cosponsor of the 50 people most likely to vote for, here's on the people less likely to vote for.

you could look at developing a strategy in terms of trying to get at the information you need. what i will say is that our analysts don't provide all the answers but it's not a crystal ball where you can ask any question but that being said there is a lot of power been able to find some of the analytics we provide with raw energy intelligence or human intelligence on the ground and be able to combine those things should be able to get you answers that you would like to get you. >> tonight at eight eastern on "the communicators" on c-span2. >> the senate select committee on intelligence consider last week the nomination of nicholas rasmussen to be director of the national counterterrorism center. he serves as deputy director of the center.ominee he testified on ongoing counterterrorism operations. this is about one hour.

>> [inaudible conversations] >> [inaudible conversations] >> this hearing will come to order. will lelet me just say the soon-to-bo chairman of this committee, thi, is not my usually of operation.k i like to be on time. we ge got into a bit of a probla

in the caucus, i just wanted to say that to you.-- to the committee will come to order. we meet today in open session to consider the president's nomination, mr. nick rasmussen, to be the truck of the nationalt counterterrorism center, or as we call it nctc. mr. rasmussen is well-known and respected by the committee. he has appeared numerous times in closed session as the deputy director of nctc. and since matt olsen's mon' resignation as the acting is myp director, it is my intention painting today's session to move this nomination quickly to the senate and seek his confirmatioe before our adjournment in december. r mr. rasmussen has been theas serector director of the nctcio since 2012. from 12 as the senior

director for counterterrorism at the national security council. in terroristrsed threats to the united states and the growth of terrorist groups around the country. mr. rasmussen's service goes back to 1991, with a series of positions at the department of state, nsc, and nctc. mr. rasmussen, i enjoyed reading in the background materials for this hearing that public services part of your family. and i am pleased to welcome your family here who had been in public service as well. i speak for the vice chairman of the committee who regrets he cannot be with us today, and for myself, when i say that we need a full-time senate-confirmed director of the national counterterrorism center as soon as possible. not go into the threats to our nation, but they will go in to the record, and it is clear i think to all of us who deal in this situation with the

andmic state of iraq levan, we continue our efforts aq affiliates and other terrorist groups across the world. it is a real problem, and it is escalating. these groups now have safe havens in syria, libya, across other parts of north africa, and in many places online. the threat from isil and aqap pose a direct threat to the united states homeland, and from external attack and from directed and inspired lone wolf attacks from within the united states. needs to be at the front of our efforts to identify these attacks as it has done many times in the past. at the same time, the director

is the national intelligence manager for counterterrorism and the official in charge of government wide strategic operational planning to defeat terrorism. rasmussen, you have a big job before you. i have gone to the answers to the questions you have submitted. . see no problem whatsoever but it is a great pleasure to welcome you and your family here today. and i would like to ask unanimous consent to put into the record a letter of support for nick's nomination from admiralctc directors, ven, andmccra former national deputy security advisor juan serate. let me stop and welcome the

nominee and ask the senator for his opening statement. >> thank you, madam chairman, want tok, let me say i thank you for your many years of government service, the state department, white house, and at nctc, and i thank you for the time you spend for me the other day and your insight into the areas of interest we had an opportunity to talk about. i would like to welcome your wife, your parents. and all three of you are proud of the progress of his career, and i thank you for sharing him with the country, because it is invaluable. over the last 10 years you have focused primarily on analyzing the terrorist threat to our country and devising policies to address those threats. nctc will need your experience in the years to come. 13 years after 9/11 we continue to face al qaeda in afghanistan,

affiliates in somalia, yemen, syria, and now in the indian subcontinent. nigeria, in somalia, in syria and iraq, and the list goes on. these groups raise money by way of criminal acts, and in some cases state sponsorship. extremists with technical degrees special skills, and expertise building ied's. to includehters americans are exploiting local and regional conditions to train before returning home. here at home we faced the threat from violent extremists, who often utilize the information in connections -- and connections from online and plan smaller scale simple lots that are harder to detect. ,hese terrorists are capable well organized, well financed, and make asp are two attack u.s. persons abroad and at home.

the threat is more distributed and complex than ever before. we no longer have the luxury of focusing attention on one group or one region. to lead theg asked primary agency for integrating at analyzing all intelligence related to the terrorist threat, and you have your work cut out for you. this committee will try to provide you with resources you need to address three and keep our nation safe. the truth is we are going to have to make some local choices in years to come. nctc is a capable organization with excellent people. i fully expect you to lead and effect of agency under our watchful eye, but i can assure you that moving forward we are going to challenge you to improve the center and the search for efficiencies. tough going to ask th questions and ask you to be better, and i look forward to

you giving direct and candid answers. i think that chair and pledge on behalf of vice chairman chambliss and the side of the aisle that you cannot move too fast on this nomination for us. >> thank you very much. would you stand, please, mr. rasmussen? would you repeat after me, i, rasmussen, do solemnly swear that i will give this committee the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me god? [indiscernible] >> you agree to appear before the committee here, do you agree to send officials from the nctc when invited, do you agree to provide documents or any other materials requested by the committee in order for it to carry out its oversight and legislative response ability --

response ability -- responsibility, do you agree with [indiscernible] of members of this committee intelligence activities and covert actions rather than only the chairman and vice chairman? >> [indiscernible] >> consistent with past investments with national intelligence, will you promised you briefed the committee within 24 or 48 hours of any terrorist attack or attempted terrorist attack if requested by the committee? >> yes. >> thank you very much. please bc did, and we are interested in your opening statement. >> thank you, and chairman, members of the committee, thank you for considering my nomination to be the next director. i want to express my appreciate the efforts of the

staff. there's a tremendous amount of work that goes into their review to support any confirmation hearing, and i'm grateful. i would like to recognize and introduced i parents and my wife. their love and support means everything to me, and i am glad they are here with me today. as you remarked, i briefed this committee several times as recently as last week in my capacity as the deputy director. tos is my first opportunity appear in open session, and i truly welcome the opportunity. i'm honored by the president's trust in my ability to continue to serve international enterprise. the service came natural to me growing up in the washington area, as i had to look no further than my own family for examples. my father and my mother moved to northern virginia from wisconsin in 1952 so my father could pursue a career in public policy. he was a career federal employee beginning at agriculture or feel

capitol hill for a junior staff member on the house side and retiring 40 years later as the most senior curator official at the department of education. my mother was for a time at a big school teacher in fairfax county while playing an active role in our local church and serving for over 10 years on the board of the northern virginia community college. i one sibling who is an active officer will with two tours of duty in afghanistan and another works with local government in their facts and volunteers and he's community. his committees. anything i learned about public commitment i learn from my family. the long way to geoeye have to go as to serve as my father, but i'm currently on your 23. i started my career while a student at wesley and -- wesleyan and university, working on the korea desk. after finishing graduate school, i joined state as an intern just

as the country was liberating kuwait during operation desert storm. during my tenure at stake, i was given many opportunities, whether working on efforts to dissuade north korea for -- from pursuing nuclear ambitions. incareer took a sudden turn 2001 when i accepted a position on the national security council staff. my first day on the job was monday, september 17, 2001, six days after the attack. ince that day 13 years ago been focused for every day of marker on the nation's counterterrorism efforts. those include positions at the white house under bush and obama and at nctc.

over these years i have seen what i believe are vast improvements in our capabilities and policies. that said, challenges remain and there's much work to be done. this is what makes the work of so men and women atnctc central. that is what i would like the opportunity to lead them to serve a longtime them as their director. working with our allies and partners has made great strides in dismantling the al qaeda organization that attacked us. the terrorism threat we face continues to evolve. as the president said, for the foreseeable future, the most direct threat to america at home and abroad remains terrorism. committee understands an andility in the lev the middle east has accelerated the movement. the once global focus under osama bin laden is now being driven by regional conflict.

across these unstable regions we are confronting a little to do threats. from long-standing well-known terrorist groups, but also from newer and loosely connected networks of violent extremists who operate without regard to national borders or establish organizational norms. better than any audience i ever engage with understands that diverse and threat picture we face from al qaeda. that threat teacher includes other sunni terrorist groups, to isil, including shia groups, including homegrown violent extremists who live amongst us in the united states. we face a broader array of threats from a greater number of groups and actress than at any point since 9/11. come locating that our losses of collection as a result of an

unauthorized disclosure, the spread of extremist messaging by social media in different ways, and the need we feasted balance technology based analytic tools with people focused human eyes on antensive analysis if i'm confirmed, i look forward to working with and helping the community overcome these challenges. 10 years ago when senator susan collins and joe lieberman first put pen to paper in what would become the intelligence reform act of 2004, most in the country believed a second large-scale catastrophic attack in a home and was possible, even probable. today the threat we face is different from then, and i would argue we are equipped to respond to it then that we were in 2004. earlier this year, we were on it to host authors of that landmark legislation in our auditory. senator collins, you told the

workforce there is no doubt that information sharing is far superior to what it was prior to the passing of the law in 2004, and there is doubt the talented nctc has been making a difference. i can assure you the members of our workforce were beaming with pride and they heard your words. 10 years later, i believe we can declare your vision that the congress' vision has in fact taken hold. that vision called for an integrated workforce fully empowered with access to the right information and armed with the best training and tools. i believe that vision is growing stronger every day. we all know this is no time for complacency, self-satisfaction, either at ncntc or anywhere else. we understand that civilian challenges remain. the adversaries we face are persistent and so we must learn

and improve and get better every day. we must exceed their ability to attack us with our will to make certain they do not succeed. in the position i have as deputy director, i'm reminded of 9/11 and the threat we face every single day. if confirmed by the senate i would bring the focus and urgency born of that terrible day 13 years ago to everything i do as director. i would aim to ensure the best and brightest continue to fill our ranks, and i would aim to ensure they are equipped with tools and training they need to meet the threat. in my 23 years in government service, i worn a number of hats working in a number of different government organizations. no label means as much to me personally over that time as the of theember counterterrorism community. every day i'm privileged to work with truly outstanding friends and partners all across that nsa,nity come at fbi, cia, the defense department, homeland

security, justice, state, treasury, state and local partners, international partners, white house, and here on capitol hill, with you and your staff. the job for which i've been nominated demands for much, but i am thankful for the loving support of my family, my wife, parents, and i would like to take this opportunity to thank her and them publicly today. they've always been there to support me as i pursued my career. familyen part of the since its inception in 2004, even when serving president bush and president obama for several years on the nsc staff. i feel connected to their remarkable workforce at nctc, and its critical place within the intelligence community. there's no place in government i would rather serve. --man find stand, senators, chairman feinstein, senators, thank you for your support them and for considering my nomination to be its neck direct -- its next director.

thank you. >> >> that was actually. thank you very much. mr. rasmussen, in a written statement for the record you wrote and i quote, attacks either link or inspired by isil in belgium and canada, recent arrest in europe and australia, demonstrate that the threat beyond the middle east is real, although thus far limited in sophistication. however, left unchecked overtime we can expect isil capabilities to mature as a threat to the united states homeland ultimately to increase. could you expand on nctc's view of the threat from isil to the extent you can hear in an unclassified setting please? >> i would be happy to, madam chair. i tend to think of the threat i suppose is currently as being somewhat in concentric circles.

because their capabilities greatest anorak in syria right now i think our personal their potential is great at risk, particularly in iraq where our embassy security is of course as you know a serious concern. in the front-line states about iraq and syria, jordan, turkey, syria, lebanon, saudi arabia, they are also, we were that i sal has the capability and ability to potentially carry out attacks to identify and mobilize personnel and to engage in attacks issues personal and interest. be on that the next ring of next occurring i would look at his western europe where very limited you cited in your question indicates that isil looks at it as a potential theater of operations would make it out attacks against western interests. lastly the homeland, where we certainly believe isil has aspirations over time to develop the capability we need to carry out a homeland attack.

at this point we assess we are far more at risk presently of attack from an individual homegrown violent extremist who may be inspired by but not necessary corrected by isil here in the homeland. in the point about if left unchecked we worry the longer isil is left unchecked and is allowed to pursue and develop a safe haven, the more that capability is allowed to grow to carry out attacks in each of those theaters i mentioned. >> thank you. i saw in your responses to are preparing questions that you wrote that you we hiring more than 40 officers this year. it's my understanding that in addition to these 40, nctc still has many vacant positions it needs to fill. so the question is with respect to contractocontracto rs, which we have some concerns about, how do you plan to fill the vacant spots at nctc? >> first of all thank you, madam chairman.

the support nctc receives from this committee under efforts to making the best possible workforce could not be better and we're very grateful for that. the numbers you cite of 40 individuals who are looking to hire this year reflects what we call odni country, people who are hire hired and working offif director of national intelligence. as you know and as most of the committee knows well, nctc has appointed workforce which includes permanent cadre templates but also detailed personnel from other intelligence community. and not just intelligence community that other government organizations as well. that is the real lifeblood of nctc, the expertise, talent we get from other departments and agencies. >> will the 40 be a mixed? if so speed is 40 will be new country trek higher. in parallel we are pursuing a similar effort to try to get our detailee numbers up for the reason i just said. we need to doubt the cubs of

other intelligence community partners. all of those partners are willing and very strong supporters of nctc as an enterprise. the challenge comes year in and year out as you try to keep the numbers up. they have their own staffing needs any period of budget uncertainty. they struggle to meet their own internal efforts to staff themselves. it's a constant dialogue with them. as i would say is a positive dialogue with them to make sure we can get talented officers from places like fbi, cia and other partners in the intelligence community. >> thank you. senator burr. >> thank you, madam chairman. neck, the committee as you know is charged with providing vigilant oversight. a couple of questions that really go in line with what the chairman had your eyes and raise your hand and swear to. would you agree that the committee to conduct effective oversight, that we should have

access to the intelligence product produced by the intelligence community and in some cases be provided with the wrong reporting that contributes to that analysis? >> yes, adequate at some specific cases it would make sense to have access to that reporting. >> will you commit to providing the committee complete and timely access to all nctc products, reporting and staff if necessary to assist in our oversight responsibility? >> yes. >> i won't get into staffing because i think you cover that with senator feinstein. earlier this week the institute of economics in peace released its global terrorism index. the report indicates that deaths from terrorism are at an all time high significantly, specifically the number of deaths attributed to terrorism is five times higher than it was in 2000, and we have witnessed a 61% increase in the last year alone. would you agree that the threat from terrorism is at an all time

high? >> i think as measured in the array, variety, dispersion of terrorist threats across many different regions, the answer is certainly yes. >> what is nctc as executive agency for our nation strategy against terrorism going to do about it? >> the role that nctc place in carrying out strategic operational planning in support of the government is one that has us tied very closely to the national security council staff and the policy development process for pursuing strategies against counterterrorism. we work with the national security council staff to develop whole of government plans to address our counterterrorism concerns in each of the theaters around the world, not just one single theater as you would do well expect, senator. the effort to develop strategies against isil is at a particularly energetic pace right now.

but our strategic operational planning capability is also brought to bear on the whole array of t. challenges we face in africa, in asia come in south asia, every region you can think of think of. can city our job at nctc to make sure we are not leaving any holes in that fabric of strategy as we look across the challenges we face. while at the same time, try our ties in where effort needs to be most energetically directed. that would argue a lot of effort to be directed in syria and iraq. >> are you confident nctc can discover and are enabled to find plots in homeland? toi would say our ability detect and potentially disrupt a a complexving objective with a number of terrorist actors and a fair

amount of communication, i would assess our odds at being good at being able to detect and disrupt that kind of plotting. the more the plotting looks like what you and chairman feinstein talked about in terms of being an individual lone wolf actor, perhaps with no direct connection or even in direct connection to a terrorist group, a radicalized individual, that decreases pretty dramatically our ability to use .t. tools.l c it is hard to guaranty or give you high confidence that we would be able to detect that kind of attack. >> do think the administration or congress should do more publicly to let the american people know that the threat from terrorism in fact that it is growing, not the climbing? you.would agree with

that is one of the reasons why this hearing being in open session is such a good thing. the 9/11 commissioners during the past year, as they reviewed where we are this many years later, one of their calls was on the policy community to speak more often, or public a, about the threat environment we face. i would look to contribute to that in my own way from nctc. so much of what we do is it necessarily in close succession and with you and your staff, but there are opportunities where we particularlyectly, to the homeland aspects of the threat, which i referred to a minute ago and the the presence of violent extremists and its rate they pose -- and that threat they pose. >> in response to the committee questions, big data was one of the nctc biggest challenges. the united states government is struggling with that challenge. tc, it is a life or death matter. i'm concerned this issue does not receive the proper attention and resources at nctc.

can you assure us you will make this a top priority and that this effort will get the intention it needs -- get the attention it needs? >> you are right, and i commit to you to embrace this as one of my top priorities. on his way out the door, during his last couple of months of lsen directed a new office of data strategy and innovation to do a better job than we thought we were doing of organizing our short, medium, and long-term term vision in terms of how to make best possible use analytically of the data we have access to. some of that will also involve developing new technological tools, taking advantage of create efforts by dni to a new architecture for terrorism, intelligence information for the entire tell intelligence community.

we hope to leverage the work at across the i.c. keephope you will the committee updated on the progress. , m chairmou firsll, >> first of all, congratulations on your appointment, which i think is an excellent one. i appreciate very much that the president chose to put a career expert in this vital position, and i thank you very much for your generous comments about the role that former senator joe lieberman and i played in creating the nctc. i do hope that you will at this committee know if you encounter difficulties in getting detailees who are well qualified

and experienced to come work at nctc. the i know it's hard for of the components of the intelligence community and the fbi to let go of some of the most talented analysts, but for nctc to be fully effective in these very dangerous times it is essential that we achieve that goal of joining us -- jointness by having those detailees. so please do not hesitate to come to the chairman, ranking member, any of us if you do anticipate problems in that area. >> i will. thank you. >> one of the findings of the 9/11 commission was that border security and immigration were not seen as national security concerns prior to the attacks on our nation on 9/11 '01. the 9/11 commission specifically

found that 15 of the 19 hijackers could have been intercepted through more diligent enforcement of our immigration law. as the acting director of the nctc, were you or any of your staff asked to scrap the president's proposal for immigration changes that he will announcing tonight? >> to my knowledge, nctc or any personal at nctc were not involved in an effort. i'm not aware if there was elsewhere in the intelligence community such an effort not at nctc. >> when president obama created a 2009 guantánamo review task force to evaluate which detainee could be transferred or release from guantánamo, as i recall,

the head of nctc was the executive director of that task force, is that correct? >> yes. prior service, matt olsen held that position as chair of the task force. >> and matt olsen has told me that when the decision was made to exchange would have become known as the taliban five for the release of sergeant bergda bergdahl, that nctc was not consulted in that decision. to your knowledge was anyone at nctc consultative? >> my understanding is that in the context of in the process of moving to the transfer of those detainees, there was a request for an intelligence assessment from the odni, the intelligence community. such an assessment was prepared. it was prepared by another element of the odni, not at nctc. >> and that was despite the fact

that the nctc was acting as the executive director for the commission? or for the task force. >> matt had that role in a previous, at a previous time. in the current processes that the administration is following we are considering process -- nctc is asked to produce threat assessments of what impact on security% return of a detainee may have. that didn't happen in the case of the issue you are referring to. >> i just want to be clear on this. so the normal process is for nctc to be involved in putting together a package that is used by decision-makers on how to classify the detainees, is that part correct? >> that is correct. >> let any case of the taliban five, the nctc was not asked to

put together a new analysis that went beyond the previous analysis which, according to press reports, found that these detainees were too dangerous to be released, is that correct? >> again, we did not have direct involvement in the production of the intelligence assessment. >> thank you. again, i want to thank you for your willingness to serve in what is a 24/7 very demanding job, and i think we're very fortunate to have someone with your background and expertise. >> thank you, senator. >> thank you. >> it looks like this is going to be a tough vote. senator rubio. >> thank you, and i want to congratulate -- >> i didn't -- for tv, i was suggesting. >> thank you for your service to her country and congratulations on your appointment, and look forward to moving forward

quickly. let me ask a number questions that are of interest to me and everyone on the committee. the first has to do with the planned reduction in use commitment to afghanistan and the growing concern that would have implications in our ability to conduct effective counterterrorism operations in the region. if there's been one success in all of this, the ability to erode core al-qaeda's presence. if we lose territory in afghanistan back to the taliban we could be once again in a position where many of those elements reconstitutes strengthen and uncovered space somewhere in afghanistan as the government is no longer capable to exercise a presence in the region. that could be accelerated to what are your thoughts on the current plans to draw down forces in afghanistan and the impact it would have on our counterterrorism efforts to? >> as an intelligence community we also are concerned about what potential effect the drawdown of u.s. forces may have on the ability of al-qaeda to

regenerate capability, particularly and northeastern parts of afghanistan. the effort to train and equip a competent afghan national security force is an important part of the effort to make sure that there is a capability disrupt potential activity inside afghanistan. we, of course, will maintain as robust as possible and intelligence collection framework to bauhaus to continue to monitor, track, and if necessary disrupt al-qaeda resurgence in that part of afghanistan, or certainly in pakistan. it will be a more challenging and more difficult environment than what we face today. >> i second question has to do with iran. there's been talk about a deal with regards to the nuclear ambitions and the realization sanctions against them. what has not been discussed is iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism, and certainly in economic growth and

prosperity to come about as result of a relaxation of sanctions i believe would have an impact on the ability to fund and expand their already robust sponsorship of terrorism around the world. i was hoping you could share thoughts about what they might be able to grow into in the future if, in fact, the sanctions are relaxed and they have more access to global capital, more money basically, to sponsor these operations. >> the willingness and ability of iran to support various shia terrorist groups has always been very high on the list of concerns of the counterterrorism community and the intelligence community. one of the pathways to addressing the challenge has been to try to get iran out of the business of thinking that carrying out those kinds of attacks advances their national interest, and ultimately they

would see that as a self-defeating and not advancing their interests. speaking personally in my own personal analysis can anything that puts us in a position where we are more effectively dealing with iran in a normal way would reduce the incentive for them to use that proxy network of shia terrorist groups that they do in fact have at their disposal. there's no doubt you are right, the capability of the terrorism apparatus sponsored by iran and is something that should into the united states, not just in the region of the middle east but all around the world, even potentially here at home. i would place a priority in trying to not necessarily seek to defeat that terrorism apparatus on the battlefield as we have in our efforts against al-qaeda but trying to take them out of the business in some other fashion. that's how i would think about

it. there's no question as we watch and worry about how sunni shiite tensions in the middle east play out, our interest in the region are put at risk i shia sponsored terrorist groups, but the focus on iranian intentions will continue and be a very high priority. >> your statement about putting them out of business, it comes to mind any sort of relaxation could be linked to their sponsorship of terrorism as a leverage point to get them to abandon those sorts of things. >> i can't speak to the policy context in which we would relax sanctions. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator rubio. senator king. >> thank you, madam chair. mr. rasmussen, i have been to your office but i've been to the cia. i've been to the bidding on and have traveled recently, and the one major conclusion i have taken from those visits is the

incredible quality of people that we have working for us. they are patriotic, idealistic, smart and capable. you are exhibit a today and i just want to thank you. i'm honored to serve this country along with you enter college. i hope you'll take that we're back. >> thank you, senator. i did appreciate that. >> we have talked about this before. here's my concern. i know in the day-to-day work, you are focusing on threats and attacks immediately with fires around the world, and that's your basic mission. we have to be thinking more strategically and long-term it seems to me. we cannot simply kill these people and call that the solution to worldwide terrorism problem. worldwide terrorism problem. i remember from the 50's we had the containment strategy of george mccann and that really worked. it took along time, but it

worked. 's strategy. kennan i will urge you to work with think tanks, brookings, whatever, to work on this in addition to the military response. do you have any thoughts on that? is atrophic suggestion, senator. the expertise of how to carry out effective counterterrorism policy does not reside only with the government, as you alluded to. research organizations, think tanks not just in washington but all around the world, they have a role to play in helping us get this right. the strategy we try to help with nctc, and my answer to chairman wholeein, are typically of government strategies not just relying on intelligence or military but also trying to take

the abilities and resources would have across the government to try and produce the conditions that would, over time, eat away at support for terrorism and some of these locations overseas. at the same time, we all go into it understanding well those efforts will ultimately take years, if not decades, to play out and to reap the benefits of those types of strategies. in the meantime, you are left to handle a very difficult threat environment. >> i just want to make sure we are not simply putting out the fires. we also have to think long-term, it seems to me, or we are in for a 100-year war. >> exactly right, sir. >> this morning at an open meeting, nsa director rogers said there should be no doubt in our mind that our nation states and groups with the capability forestall our ability

whether it is generating power or moving water and fuel. how concerned are you about terrorist groups using their own capacity or what i call hackers for hire to attack our infrastructure? the cyber attackrious is threat? >> as i understand it, the threat is more acute from state thans at present individual terrorist or establish terrorists. isil has shown capability with the internet. >> it is something they have developed and can exercise. knowing that, we are looking for ways to be ahead of them both in our ability to defend our infrastructure but also in our ability to detect key individuals were engaged in a kind of activity to disrupt their activity. you alludedowden, to this, but isn't it true we've

lost a lot of capability in some of theseing groups because they have gone dark in part based upon their awareness that was given to them by the snowden revelations? that is compromised our ability to protect ourselves. you, notd agree with just the snowden disclosures but other disclosures of classified information and our collection capabilities have caused our adversaries to adapt, look for new ways to do business, look ,or new platforms, and go dark or just find new ways in an attempt to keep us in chase mode as they move from potential platform to potential platform. this is an ongoing challenge for the intelligence community. i know our colleagues at the nsa are particularly focused on this but you're absolutely right, sir. it is dangerous because

intelligence is the first line of defense with terrorism. these are not people we can line up the army or the navy and shoot. we need to know where they are coming and when. intelligence -- that is why it is so absolutely critical. >> i would agree with you, sir. >> thank you, senator. >> i was going to say senator warner. martin, excuse me. thank you foren, being here today and for all of your public service. as you can see, you have an enormous amount of respect from this body. i wanted to ask you, given your experience with the national counterterrorism center going back to its inception, it's clear there are few in the federal government with your and itse of the nctc mission. in your responses to

unclassified questions from the committee, you've talked a little bit about that unique role. analysis as of nctc outlined in the service to reform and prevention act of two thousand four. as well as the mission objections -- objectives assigned, i went to dig a little deeper if i can into the unique nature of the analysis that nctc aes relative to that done by number of other intelligence community agencies. isyou know, even though nctc primarily the government organization tasked to analyze terrorist organizations, there are several other agencies track and they analyze terrorist as well. can you articulate for us how the analysis is conducted by nctc truly unique compared to that done by the other agencies? >> one >> one element that puts nctc in

a unique position to carry out the best possible analysis of terrorism information is our access to the full body of the terrorism information. that was the unique insight of the irtpa, the effort to bridge the domestic foreign intelligence divide. so i'm analyst sitting in nctc will have access to whatever is available to you as the government in terms of intelligence reporting from overseas collection efforts as well as from domestic law enforcement investigations here at home. that is not true of every other element of intelligence community. so that puts nctc in i would to a uniquely advantage to position. that plays out, that advantage plays a more profound when you are talking about homeland threats where the bridge between domestic and foreign intelligence matters so much. i would not quibble at the top of, capability or inside that analyst for most of my

intelligence community partners could bring to the analytical effort on some of our key challenges overseas. during the period of, just one example, during the period of our extended military involved in afghanistan and iraq, the defense department, the defense intelligence agency and their analysts were doing terrific work mostly for my time on the ground. i would never do anything to just otherwise. to answer you question i think it's access to information that makes that a critical differen difference. >> would you characterize the most unique thing as being able to see a bigger picture from multiple sources, and particularly we were talking about a combination of foreign and domestic? >> yes, i would. >> in your response to questions two to committee to discuss the growing importance of monitoring social media and exploding big data and tracking terrorist threats and conducting analysis. in your comment you mentioned

technology could help quote implement privacy and civil liberties protections beyond the current safeguards that are already in place. could you elaborate a little bit on what you mean by that? also sort of describe for us the shortfalls as you see them in the privacy and civil liberties safeguards that are currently in place. >> i wouldn't so much described as the shortfalls as much as, i guess what i was referring to with that answer, the more we can do you automate and make happen technologically segregation of information, deletion of information, all of the things we committed as part of our adherence to the attorney general guidelines, the more we can take the human element of that where a human makes a mistake and inadvertently sees something, retains something, holds onto something they did not have operation to do. the more we can automate that process of technology and tumor cells the ability to audit ourselves more effectively, and,

therefore, train more effectively, that's what i'm trying to get. get. >> it's more about technology and implementation effectiveness than any sort of change and authorization? >> exactly. on those rare occasions when we have had something go awry in terms of handling of information, we have found it is almost universally been a matter of human error rather than any intent to mishandle, misuse or not protect information. >> thank you again. >> i believe this completes the questions. i would like members to know that it's my intention to vote on this nomination as soon as possible when the senate returns. it may be off the floor after thanksgiving. any member should submit questions for the record by next monday. so we can have the answers by

the time the vote is taken, please. we will do our level best to move this just as quickly as we can, mr. rasmussen. >> i'm very grateful for that and will commit to getting every answer back to you as quickly and expeditiously as possible. >> that's fine. can't do better than that. so thank you very much for being here, and the hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations] ..

[inaudible conversations]

or analytics give more granular than just break down on the legislative basis how likely they are to vote for a certain bill. from a tactical perspective there's a lot of opportunities for attorneys, lobbyists, whatever.

based on the cosponsors here are the people most likely to vote for it and you can start a net developing a strategy to get back the information that you need. so what i will say is that our analytics don't provide all the answers sought a crystal ball we can ask any question but that being said there is a lot of power to be able to combine the analytics that we provide the industry intelligence or human intelligence on the ground. the center for american progress wired for a discussion on the state department special envoy for climate change. todd stern will be the speaker. this will focus on future global plan to change policy after the

u.s. recent deal with china expected to be moderated by the director of energy climate policy. this should get underway in just a moment. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

live this afternoon at the center for american progress to hear from todd stern the state department envoy for climate change. >> i'm pleased to welcome you here today for [inaudible] very delighted to introduce the special guest today todd stern the special envoy for climate change. he is uniquely qualified to speak about the prospects of

building the climate progress and we are excited that the progress he's made. he worked on climate policy at the center prior to his new role at the beginning of the obama administration so we are very honored to welcome him back. he's been a special envoy for climate change for six years and a lot has happened in that time. domestically the administration pushed ahead with an ambitious agenda that will take economic security and methods for years to come. we all recognize climate change is a global challenge. no country can solve it alone or that is by galvanizing international access is so fundamentally critical. fortunately and for this administration and thanks to the work of people the united states

has become a leader in the international arena and has built a relationship with china that culminated in the joint announcement in the greenhouse gas reduction goals. we've launched global partnerships that are short-lived but we have ramped up our assistance in the developing countries looking to achieve sustainable economic growth and better withstand the impacts of climate change including last week the $3 billion for the new global climate fund. all of this is tremendously important and has galvanized the final stretch of the climate talks to race to conclude an agreement that aims to set the world on a sustainable path of long-term economic growth. we express climate change as this recently happened has helped to demonstrate arguments

that china will never act or the world will never act have just become excuses so we are excited to have this timely conversation and i will welcome todd and peter up to the stage. >> i worked for you in the administration. in the last few weeks they've given you a lock to talk about here. i would love to start with what happened to china in the reference to the kind of talking

points climate action by the united states is futile. the joint announcement has caused people to look at whether that is a viable point going forward. i would love to hear how that came about. >> thank you very much for hosting me here. i was a part at the beginning and go back way before that. it was a big week for us no question. if you kind of look back to the arc of what we were doing it was

already quite positive and on the path reestablished in the working group and we got a number of initiatives the president negotiated an agreement so there is good momentum going forward. we got together in my office wanting to think about how we could take this relationship forward in a significant way and after talking about a number of possibilities, we hit on the idea of giving a try to announcement of targets that would go the way up to the presidential level assuming that

looked at each other's proposals and felt comfortable with it. so i accompanied him to china in february and we started talking to the counterpart about this idea and we talked about this notion into that kind of started the conversation but there was a lot of work that needed to be done over the course of the year or two. to share a lot of information we talked about collaborating to targets with the announcement if we could get there.

it's something that would have a very significant positive impact both with the climate relationship in the u.s. and china and of course the multilateral. hopefully that will all prove to be true. the targets that china put forward are both strong on our side by 2025 it is ambitious on the basis of authorities to come

up with a pie-in-the-sky kind of target based on the legislation we might not be able to get into to the based on authorities that we have. the 28% other end would put us on the straight line path reduction by 2050. it's the first time this is a big step if you look at all sorts of analytic bodies they tended to be a good deal higher.

it includes the commitment to the earlier than 2030 and that they would have a good chance to do that assuming that broad program that she is pursuing an assuming that goes well earlier than 2030. the other part of the target but they announced his ticket for bob fossil energy, 20% from the non- fossil sources which is actually a huge undertaking for them and it will require them to build a thousand gigawatts of nuclear energy by way of comparison.

you you're talking 800 to a thousand and that is also by way of comparison around what they do now. it's a very big deal we will see what transpires but a really big step and our sense is the way that this will arise it made res. it made in the climate community will be very -- spinnaker will give momentum to the negotiations and it will spur the countries to come forward with their own targets

and generally the way that i put it in one conversation is if you are loading stock it would have gone up after this announcement because you have the historic antagonists having come together at the presidential level to say we are going to work together here is what we are doing in the announcements being ambitious and the commitment by the presidents to work together and to try to clear up any obstacles that might come up so all in all it's very good. >> you mentioned the evolution of the relationship going back to 2009. do you have any views on how that has matured or would have

been the important moments in that relationship? >> at one level copenhagen was in that relationship in terms of spurring a greater desire to get the relationship on a cooperative footing. i don't think that it was a very important meeting and things got done and positive things that have been to since but having said that the interaction between the u.s. and china was pretty rough and both sides came out and i certainly think this is true with a desire to work in

a collaborative cooperative way as possible and i have developed a very good relationship with the vice chairman. we've taken each other to our hometowns and spend a lot of time together and we've lost track of how many times we've had together but i think we worked quite well together and that has been true in 2011, 2012 and as i said last year i think it stepped up in 2013 to another level of engagement with a lot of discussion and meetings that we have worked on so i think

that it has been gradually building towards what we have now and obviously this isn't the end of the story and we just have to keep moving forward. >> there is a lot of attention being paid to the willingness to fully confront. do you find that interest and goals is present now in a way that maybe it wasn't a few years ago because i think back and it wasn't front and center. as it's now just influencing it from above or around? >> i think more of the latter. it's a first order of flaherty at home.

the process of the u.s. embassy this was an initiative that occurred at the embassy when they started to publish the statistics it had a big transformative effect. they got the bit between their teeth on this one. it was a matter of high priority at the highest levels and i think that has an impact but it's not the case so much that when we had our climate discussions there's a bunch of

discussion about air pollution. as you said, it is around and it's influencing from our point of view the thing that is most important to make them known they deal with the problem in a way that is positive regarding climate change in a way where there are synergies because that isn't self-evident if you decide the way that you're going to deal with the problem is to take all of the planes and moved them last but not actually reduce coal that doesn't help you very much a so the critical thing is that they do it in a way that is

positive. >> one last thing i would like to ask before we move on. can you talk about the attention and interest in the target itself is that something that how much concern or interest do they show? how important was it that the united states was developing a pledge and is that a big concern for them? >> each side had the same understanding that there was going to have to be pledges that the other guy saw to stand up and make this announcement.

we would come in with some kind of a lowball that wasn't in the cards for us if we saw something inadequate that would concern them. they were just as concerned about the notion of the capacity to implement and they are always looking at what is going on on the hill and i think that our capacity to say both quite ambitious but also something we can execute based on the authorities that we have was important to them sick because of all of the progress with china did cause a lot of caused a lot of people to ask about india and is the third-largest

in important player. we have the dialogue and we have been to be doing that meeting when the news broke to bring people that have a lot to say and it was followed quickly by a love of words but there is a moment when people try to internalize what this tectonic shift would mean and i think a lot of people have started to become more interested in what the dynamics are and how it operates in a multilateral

forum. you've had some experience recently where climate was certainly on the agenda and now president obama is going to be out there in delhi. so i would like to get your thoughts on the state of the relationship and how you see it developing. >> india is an important country in connection with climate change as well as so many other things and i think that we did have a relatively new team as far as we are concerned. i've gotten to know a little bit about my counterpart and i like him quite well. i don't know yet it is too early to say where they will position

themselves with the negotiations i think on the one hand it's an honestly important country and on the other hand i think that they bristle a little bit of the notion if they go together. they are third but it is a distant third compared to china so the u.s. and china are the biggest china depending on what specific and what your exact numbers are but if you look at that figure which a good agency from the netherlands they do very good numbers and china is about 29% of global emissions and it's around 6% said it is a big difference. having said that, india is huge

and hopefully will be growing at a rapid pace and the carbon intensity is going to be important going forward and most important is to see that there is a path to growth and to eradicate poverty and energy access between three or 400 million who don't have electricity. there is a path to get to those fundamental development needs to be have a vet is as low carbon as possible and that is not based on the long-term and it's

going to be very challenging and our inclination is we want to work with them as closely as possible. we know how they will play the negotiation. i hope it is as constructive as possible. we've had a good relationship overall on the climate talks during the periods of time that we've agreed about things and then we have been on different sides they still manage to be quite collaborative "-end-quotes will and have useful discussions so i have every expectation that will continue but long way around, we don't know yet.

>> energy access is a major concern and i wonder if there is a potential for that to motivate a policy. >> i think by the way they have their own air pollution concerns which are kind of at a china level of intensity. it's not clear that it's as big a political issue as it is in china that it's a big important problem in a lot of the major cities. they and the prime minister have a lot of interest in solar, there is a tremendous potential both for grid connecting and

officeholder and indeed a tremendous potential for using that to reach a lot of the people because most of those people are rural. so if done right it can be addressed in a positive way but it is a huge challenge. >> you will be spending some time in january. i'm glad we talked about air quality in india before we move on the way i want to talk a little bit about some of the bond formal tracks where a lot of the diplomatic work has been done and has been in the

protocol and i know that both back in 2009 or 2010 when the coalition was launched with a push to see if we could address. that is the seed of opportunity and recognition that this is an area where it had not been sufficiently focused during the effort. it grew very rapidly but then when the president came for the first summit with president obama there was a major breakthrough in terms of finding a way of interacting and in many

ways we see the forerunner to what you achieved a couple of weeks ago. .. it was quite good progress made