[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] good

afternoon. thank you all for joining us this afternoon. it is my honor to welcome you to the event one year later. it has the world moved on. since the announcement. i like to start out by saying my own personal reflection actually kicks off on the night. i was at the climate conference at the that time and if anything i witnessed was a renewed commitment to delivering there. it really stood out. what was memorable and what i remember is the steady uptake of countries that continue to ratify the agreement it was

really signaling a big determination. and that's what i remember from that moment. and now 18 months later that same decisiveness is very much evident trip can announce what he will but the reality on the ground in the u.s. and around the world is that effort to tackle climate -- climate continues. and as someone who has been involved in that regime for now you can guess several decades i can go witness to the fact that there has been steady progress forward. it has been relentless. so we are really deeply honored today have something distinguished leaders from government and finance in international relations to join us to reflect on where we are on how the american people had responded and how the

world has responded. before i turn over the floor to our very distinguished senior fellow. he will introduce this distinguished speaker. i like to share with you three brief thoughts. whether trump wants to ignore it or not climate change is real and it's happening now and the impacts are being felt around the world. 2017 was the second hardest -- hottest year on record worldwide. and in australia they broke 200 60 records on heat and rainfall. puerto rico is still recovering. and then there is always the place where it is most vulnerable. i won't go into the statistics on the numbers for africa but let me tell you they are daunting and sobering.

we would've the trumpet administration is advocating its historic. he is witness to that historic leadership of the u.s. at their advocating that responsibility to lead on climate the u.s. states and cities in businesses are pushing forward with actions that will help to bend the needle on the mission in the u.s. they know that if they don't keep up they risk being left behind in the near -- in a new future. regardless of what action takes place at federal level. today as an indicator of this for example some before businesses had have those space targets. which aligned there with the businesses in the past targets. businesses are walking the talk. and last december as you all know. california governor jerry brown in the former new york

city mayor michael bloomberg launched america's pledge it was a new effort to mobilized nonfederal climate action. in the initiative was kicked off with the release of analysis that was there. they found that states, cities and businesses representing more than half of the u.s. economy and population have adopted the politics. think of this. if they were a country. the u.s. states and cities alone would be the third largest economy in the world. that matters. that speaks. together with our partner. they are helping to author the next america's pledge report. to achieve the 2025 climate goal.

what about the rest of the world. and as i said at the beginning the momentum continues to grow internationally. since last year over 20 countries committed to facing the coal power. they all came forward with a nonsense or plan to ban the sale of fossil fuel vehicles by 2024. committed to reach the net zero missions. they indicated that they might will follow suit. it would restore 6.6 million of those in 2018. and the last two countries that have not ratified the parents agreement so now the only outlier is the u.s. and parallel to all of this. the negotiations are continuing to continue to work and finalize.

the implementation guidelines of the paris agreement. i think all of this points very clearly to the progress that is being made in the u.s. around the world. if we are really honest we need a lot more vision. so that means that countries and companies and businesses all had to back up. there is no time to waste. what's really daunting about where we are right now. and exhilarating at the same time is that whether we act today or we don't is going to determine what the world will look like for centuries to come. what kind of economy and societies will be viable. we not only need to avoid locking in the mission trajectories. is locking out all of the good stuff. and the real possibilities of sustainable developments.

think about the incredible moment that we are at today. a lively and timely conversation. welcome everyone and welcome to those of you who are watching. let me just explain how we are going to go with the panel today. we will have the conversation about 35 or 40 minutes. with our panelists who represent a range of positions

and views and experiences. after that will open it up to you. and then we will close the session. on the last administration felt the onboard of climate change. as a chief negotiator. with china and the number of other countries. on clean energy investments. they served as the lead negotiator. and the developing states. he was also a director for that. it is now ambassador of barbados to the united states.

next to ambassador hart. with al smith. who is the managing director. they oversee the global sustainability initiative. including the finance goals. to the cities energy needs. by 2020. next to that. we have -- been grumbles. the climate change there with governor hogan. he is also chair of the greenhouse gas -- gas initiative. you can all remember that. the first mandatory market-based program. with the northeastern and mid-atlantic states. next to ben we have andrew navarro's.

with the states renewable energy. he helped to advance the paris agreement. the ultimate aim of strengthening actions. it's been a long member of the climate community in washington out elsewhere. in front of the earth. so todd, we will start with you. how would you assess the paris agreement that has withstood the test of the announcement a year ago this week. where are you seen a science of leadership where do you think we still need some more work. thank you very much andrew. thank you for putting this

event on. all my fellow panelists. i think it's a mixed bag. i think the most important piece of good news other countries stayed in. they just can a double cannot double down in their general determination not told the united states just used use the president's words. in president she from china showed up dallas in january and january of 2017. to that extent. that is very good news. we shouldn't look past that. i will confine my comments to the international side.

the less positive part of it is that it is really damaging for the united states to be on the way out. you probably know if you're in this room that were not actually out yet. under the agreement we can't literally be withdrawn until this november 4 of 2020 which is the day after the 2020 election. we can submit a formal notice of withdrawal. is 2020 before. in principle left the door open to coming back and as he said. we have this announcement has been made has made it clear the intention to withdraw. the sense of things from the senior level of the trump administration is to be not

interested in climate change and not intending to stay in paris. that is a very damaging impact. i've seen in a couple of ways. they had spent about three days there. the whole slew of people from every part of the spectrum. undermining and difficult right now. in the negotiations themselves. in the second as there are a

whole number in poland in november. this is sometimes referred to in the press as a rule book but it is a bunch of different guidelines and measures meant to implement provisions of paris and it's really important. there are guidelines for transparency. there is accounting in compliance. in all sorts of things. you have to get dealt with. i think in the absence of the united states you have a phenomenon of a fair number of countries that try to pull back a little bit from the things that were agreed to. i think generally there is a

sense among many countries that countries in many cases extended themselves past the point that they are entirely comfortable. they saw i it was a big moment. that the united states is walking on and on with china. they understood that there were elements of this think that they could actually join the agreement never a foregone conclusion. having done that. that is a very difficult dynamic and i think in my observation and in many times the comments they make. from across the spectrum made it to me. finding a way forward on some of these points. with respect to the other thing i would say.

the targets in paris are not binding. there is a binding transparency but not the targets themselves. have he done that way in order to get broad agreement. but it is a feature of paris. if you think how are we going to get that kind of ambition that we need to get overtime. there has to be a growing development of norms and expectations within countries of the world. not just within the negotiating community but in the countries. two ramp up more and more and faster and faster. the country which for so many years has been viewed in all sorts of areas while beyond climate change. suddenly saying nevermind.

what is the impact on that. obviously not good. i think they are ready to go forward. but don't underestimate the negative side of the u.s. position. i want to bring in ambassador hart and david to launch from this platform. where do you think the coalition and that really that really got us the admission of paris i was working for todd during paris and we all came together in the high initiatives. we got a much further agreement than most of us thought. very difficult. they all had to agree on the same one. sixty out of a hundred.

this one evening everyone to agree to move forward. where do you think we are in terms of holding that ambition together and where do you think we are in terms of the coalition that's really going to move forward in this time limit. thank you a lot andrew. and first let me think my other colleagues here. we sat across from each other many long days to what occurred.

where despite enormous differences around legal form the intricacies of the agreement. a very ambitious agreement. no one got everything they wanted. we wanted those targets that todd spoke about to be very ambitious. not only is there individual countries. in future generations. if we can craft in ambitious global agreement that responded to the defined global challenge of our time. and despite the decision by the u.s. administrion currently to withdraw or to announce this withdrawal withdraw from the paris

agreement. the coalition that delivered the agreement remains strong. it was only a coalition of countries it was a coalition of civil society who we are seeing an amazing amount of mobilization around the goals. certainly in my own region. for us it is not some scientific debate or discussion for reality. and in 2017 we saw some of the most devastating in disrupting hurricanes that we've ever seen in our entire history. therefore when we have these discussions it carries loss of

life implications in my own region governments had decided to be even more ambitious than they were in paris. we heard a general election in our country. the first female prime minister in our history. and she has already announced that by 2030 barbados will move to more in transition to be 100% carbon neutral. anyone who knows or knows that she will keep that. throughout the time and other regions. you are seen countries recognized there are opportunities for taking

action on climate change. my response to your question is that the coalition remains strong. we want the u.s. to be back at the table and engaged in a constructive manner however their neck and await until the u.s. resumes its position of leadership. they are already taking actions to implement or exceed their paris commitments. however it is imperative to have the u.s. at the table. were it not for the leadership of the united states of todd that i disagree with him sometimes.

we need the u.s. at that top of the table. how are we in terms of holding together the ambition. are you seen new signs of leadership in response and what has happened the last year. what is the accelerated moments. i think another realignment with the global politics. and what happened during the trump administration in that trump era. they alluded to this i think. when the election happened.

that one felt. throughout the halls there. it was quite remarkable. the sense that come trees the determination to carry on was there. i think that came through as well. in the wake a year ago of the announcement. .. .. i think that has carried on and that then brings us forward. that really can carry forward

and i don't want to suggest that it's naïve. the legality of this administration is something that many are keenly aware of and yet there is this determination to carry on. some of the things coming down the pike are those moments that will test of that. both negotiations and outside that level clock should-- action summit. in large part it's meant to highlight that absence that businesses will take, but i think it will be a surprising number of countries. that then will carry us forward and i think we will see that it will then carry us forward to

prop 24 in poland, there we are really on the cusp of two major decisions. one has to do with the set of rules or guidelines for the paris agreement and this should be seen as the mobilizing ingredients, the catalytic ingredients, so not scriptures per se but how do we put in place the building blocks that are going to allow the paris agreement to come into full life and have traction and countries are very determined to get foundational elements of that set of guidelines and rulebooks in place. there is a lot of work left to be done. there will have to be a stepped-up pace to get there, but that is the goal that's been

established. the second piece has to do with ambition and here we are really in the midst of the first five-year cycle under paris. paris established a series of five-year cycles to increase ambition and strengthen action. this is less definitively spelled out in the agreement, but nonetheless many countries and we saw this at the end of negotiations several weeks ago have made clear that they see this as an important milestone and so driving towards that objective and more importantly having a clear sense of direction for increasing actions is another of those milestones and next year the un secretary-general has announced the un is holding a major climate summit in new york.

while plans for that are still being late i think it becomes a certain moment especially headed towards 2020. the last thing i will say quickly is that one of the things we are witnessing is a real change in some of the dynamics around how action is being taken and what the alliances are that are taking action. we see that in part outside of government with cities and states and businesses that have banded together, not only in the us, but across countries to a remarkable degree and rows of see it with governments. india, for example, has generated the creation of international solar alliance which has over 60 countries as members. it's an intergovernmental organization in a formal sense when it's mostly in tropical countries, going to drive forward renewable energy options

we see in africa that africa renewable energy initiative which now has 300 gigawatts of renewables in africa and all of that together shows to which we are witnessing a change globally in the types of leadership that we have. it's a distributed leadership model, not one-- although, clearly we need the us in the game at the end of the day. it's not one that depends just on major parties. many more actors in the mix. >> excellent. great segue as we turn to secretary grumbles, angela smith now. pictures of this and people confusing the term. this is conference of the parties and thank god there is not confer that. the annual meetings, we are all

just terribly impressed. you were all there with a show of leadership from your industries, from your state. within a week we had jerry brown going to china a week after president trump makes this announcement. goes to china and talks climate change so there's been tremendous response. we are still in the us climate alliance. on and on different organizations is the businesses and states together in cities. work-- say a little bit about insights into the process of building those alliances, creating them, creating momentum around them and letting the american people know they exist in a way they probably never did before and then how do you see that leadership unfolding over the next couple of years?

let's go down the line. we will start with you and someone. >> i want to join everyone in thinking wri for pulling us together for what is a celebration of the action that is taking place over the past year and it's an honor to be here with the state and national and international leaders. citigroup has been quite active in this state both in terms of our supports of the paris agreement leading up to opt 21 in paris as well as our financing of climate solutions and andrea, you wanted us to talk bit about how we have joined together with other institutions. you know, i first want to say that city is most global banks

in the world, people in the ground, so we clearly see this issue partly out of our efforts with value proposition and enable growth in process, partly because of our role as a global citizen and partly because of the business opportunity, climate solution states. when paula was doing her opening remarks she said one of the things about having sound climate policy is you want to make sure you block out-- you are blocking out the good stuff and i think the good stuff is really you see is a huge motivator for so many. for city we have a environmental plan we came up with an 2015 and we have supported our clients

$57 billion worth of climate environmental solution in four years since the goal was announced and jean zero, i think what we have been very pleased to see and we are one voice, but then thousands of voices that through either their statement for their business action have said we are still in the paris agreement. we really see this as a sort of this inevitable motion, progress from our clients that are pulling all of us in the right direction in terms of climate solution. specifically focusing on how we have been able to join together. i think we have been quite pleased to partner with those competitors and our clients and other companies to make a couple -- a few different statements leading up to paris. we joined together with the other major us banks to state our support for a global climate

agreement. after it began-- after there was talk about whether or not united states would stay in the paris agreement are ceo joined with many other ceos in an open letter published in the "wall street journal" to say the paris agreement is important to our business and after trump announced that he intended for the us to withdraw from the united-- from the paris agreement we issued a statement saying that we were disappointed , but through our statement and her actions they are still in, so i think that for a company we really want to focus on what is possible today, what is possible tomorrow, brinng solutions to our clients and i think whate have seen as there's been an incredible mobilizer for companies.

we understand the importance of this issue. we understand the importance of the paris agreement and understand the imports of policy certainty. our hope through-- we are still in another coalition is that we can help to sort of creates the continued moment-- momentum to fill the gaps with states, cities any other countries to sort of bridge the gap and get us to a place where we are again looking at a successful implementation of the paris agreement. >> quickly, governor larry hogan, republican governor of maryland directed me to go and be part of the call 23 to be learned-- to learn and share and to underscore that there is nothing more practical than the preservation of health and beauty and the key to preserving our health, our environment, our

economy in maryland, all of you are not just in the nation's capital right now. you are in the heart of the chesapeake bay watershed in the preservation of our beauty, and the natural resources means we need to find bipartisan solutions, so the opportunity to learn from sony other countries and be with states that were united in the effort to reduce greenhouse gases and increase resiliency, learn and work with the business community made us very excited in maryland and looking forward to taking the next steps to follow through with policies and actions in maryland. think globally, act locally and invest locally in maryland, all of you.

>> best not unusual, so i think then obviously set up a really great conversation about the things the states are doing. i think a lot of people would recognize that most of the climate action was taking place in the united states and is happening at the state level. the work we are doing through a variety of collaborations whether it be the us climate alliance, the commonwealth is moving forward with regulatory progra where we would for the first time a southeastn state will place a limit on carbon pollution in power plants and link to the regional greenhouse gas initiative, so we are excited about these actions and a lot of these activities were occurring before president trump's announcement, but i think the importance of the work the states are doing has only been amplified since the

announcement from president trump a year ago. of the coalition, us climate relations-- clients we are still in, you know, a lot of this work would have occurred naturally, but it gave us a galvanizing points and there is so much excitement at the state level in terms of investing in our clean energy economy, growing new businesses around resiliency for states like virginia and maryland water resistant-- resilience is important and something we think about every single day so there are opportunities as a state to step forward and to take a more leadership role in the absence of the federal government doing so. that's not to say we wouldn't like to see more federal action. i think consistent regulatory programs nationwide are the preference. our businesses in the commonwealth and i'm sure all across the state, all across the nation would appreciate that

consistency of a strong regulatory program rather than state to state approaches. states are close to the ground and we have to live in reality and prevent the problems associated with the climate change we deal with on daily basis and we have to take action we have to be beholden to our constituents. a significant factor is addressing the impacts and reduce carbon pollution through our new regulatory program, looking at advanced transportation, bringing in new businesses, extending the clean energy economy and addressing our community. >> let's go down another layer here. here at the world resources institute's we are very much in favor of a good solid conservative idea.

one of the ways you practice problems is crisis solution. you are chernow of the greenhouse gas initiative. will this system in the united states, virginia is now poised to join. can you say more about the role of these regional trading systems? are they inherently limited? what is the future? do you see a way in which we could imagine reggie taking a step that california is taking? is linked to the providences of ontario and québec. what is the current status of that and-- >> we certainly enjoy along with maryland several other states who are participants and members , sharing ideas and thoughts about our experiences and it's a tremendous track record over the last almost

decade, these nine states have cut carbon emission in the power plant sector and generated in addition to that the focus on environmental progress, generating $2.9 billion in revenue divided among states for investing in clean energy and energy efficiency and ratepayer assistance and resiliency and the key to us was that 83 days after the president announced the withdrawal from the us from the paris climate agreement, nine states were extremely diverse geographically, politically from new england, maryland and delaware agreed to reach consensus to strengthen and extend the program beyond 2030 and the price question is

key for us all to ensure that there are mechanisms like payment reserves at different safety valves involved in the process, critically important so each of the states in the power sector that our constituency is within those states understand that this strategy for environmental is also consistent with the team of clean energy and affordable and reliable energy, so it's an auction system based on the market price , but we also mechanisms such as cost containment reserve as the price gets too high or i think our-- a really important breakthrough that wri and others in the environmental community

were involved in is that we announce we would be including admission containment as well to ensure that the limits on overall emissions with the regional effort would continue to decrease and and can-- continue the environmental process so our effort as we reach out to the commonwealth of virginia and new jersey, which is also very excited and focused on regional and reggie is that we find the right mix of autonomy and flexibility among the states and use price mechanisms to ensure that there won't be unaffordable or unreliable energy in the states, so it's i think one of the most powerful and uplifting messages in the country and around the world that when we become 11 states if that is the case and i hope it will be we will have somewhere between it the fourth

and fifth largest economy in the world when you take those 11 states into account. even though it's focused just on the power sector. right now that's still a very powerful and uplifting message to others that-- and a total bipartisan manner in the united states are moving forward and reducing emissions and benefiting their state economy. >> angela, can you walk us through what it's like to be on the side of trying to emerge into. and mean that's clearly-- for now, i mean, that really is the future. you have just finished recently your public comment on this. you were with us from the beginning of the last administration into this administration. there's been some tension there with the state legislature already, so how are you growing support for this? how does the process look from

the inside of being one of the states on the cusp? >> that's a great question. obviously the collaborative effort is key. i will say virginia started down the pathway a number of years ago. did not happen overnight and it started with our stakeholder engagement around the clean power plant in federal regulation covering carbon emission from the power sector. our stakeholder engagement in talking to industry groups, environmental groups, science -based groups, everyone across the board recognizes the power of a market and the power of establishing a program that was ready and that was the beauty of the claim power plant that there was flexibility for states to embark upon that type of regulatory program, so as we moved through the process of working through our own state regulatory approach to comply with the clean power plant-- the clean power plan was at the federal level by the supreme

court and we actually had a meeting of our stakeholders that we asked them do you want to continue and everyone unanimously said yes, we want to continue working through this because our utilities, our pricing carbon in the long range plan and carbon is known as a huge regulatory risk for our manufacturers and industry and so they wanted to continue to have these conversations. that's not to say they all of the results, but they were all at the table and part of the discussion and in a state like virginia that is a purple state where you have the majority republican legislature, but then two consecutive democratic governors was key to get the stakeholders in the room to have those conversations. we knew we needed to move forward via an executive action rather than through legislation because we didn't have the votes in our general assembly to have a more comp rents of approach to

let us fully take advantage of the benefits of reggie. for example, virginia is not directly auctioning allowances and we don't really get the revenue, so the significant investment that the states have made from the auction revenue that comes, virginia does not have the ability to do that so the revenue will go back to the utilities and we will essentially refunded back to customers. certainly, bringing those groups together, recognizing that we needed consistent action. we saw there was a uncertainty at the federal level. there was i think momentum, political momentum for us to move in this direction and with the election, so the draft rule when out right after the election at the state election where the governor was elected and governor-- governor northam committed to move forward with the regulatory program established with the previous governor. >> one more question and then we

will start to wrap it up. part of the way i think about the programs really is building a coherent and consistent overall economic system which will create a growth model that lives up to the realities of climate change and one of the other things that citigroup is involved in in task force or climate related financial disclosure so companies like bloomberg, you know, trying to come up with recommendations on how to move forward on a system of climate risk disclosures to inform investors and help create long term investment. can you tell us something about city support for that program, how you think it's going, do you

feel momentum emerging on that in the same way we do it some of these other programs? >> earlier, i talked about our financing of climate solution and this is really the other side of the coin. how do financial institutions, companies assess climate risk and risk to their business from climate change, so andrea was referring to something called the financial stability board task force on climate related financial disclosures. the recommendations were released by the task force in june, 2017, so a year ago. these recommendations as financial institutions as well as to provide guidance to other sectors too provide disclosure across the whole host of different climate related

issues. they asked companies to provide disclosure on the climate governance. they asked companies to provide disclosure on the climate changes strategy, targets and there is a particular piece of this that i think really stumped a lot of companies and it surrounds to consider doing scenario analysis how your committee would perform in different-- [inaudible] we have been reporting on climate related issues and metrics 2002 started reporting on greenhouse gas emissions associated. a long history of continually ramping up our disclosure in this area.

as well as on the risk aside. the one piece of this around climate scenario analysis is a different way of thinking for a lot of companies. we actually banded together with 15 other banks. we are the only us bank, so it's 15 other from across the world. under the guidance of the united nations environment program initiative. we banded together work we hired to consultants to help us build methodologies and models for looking at physical risks from climate change and what that would do to our businesses and our loan portfolio as well as transition risk. if we are so fortunate it's to be able to keep warming, what does that look like, what does

the global economy look like what is our business look like? we are still in process with developing that. on this work is being done with the support of the un and it will be a public good so we would feel like it will contribute to the overall dialogue. there's been a lot of focus on this, a lot of attention to have those financial institutions and other companies are going to like understand their risk and report on the risk. for a bank it might be a risk from loan portfolio impact to managers a different kind of impact. i think what this is really helping us with because it's involving our bankers, risk managers in different sectors starting with the energy sector and now look at the transportation sector is it makes a company more climate aware because you are pulling in so many different units. we talked about how climate risk affects your business from an

opportunity side and a risk aside and so this is something that i have been talking about a lot to really simplify what it is and is it whether we are in companies or states responsible on the international scale that becoming more climate aware and looking at how different warming scenarios affect us is a really important step. >> i have to disclose something about financial risk that has been honestly a key magic ingredient for the bipartisan success on climate action in the state of maryland. the climate change commission that our state has come a 26 member body, one of the most active members of the commission is the state elected treasurer and the commission also recommended that aggressive 40

by 30 greenhouse gas reduction plan for the state, 40% reduction based on 2006 benchmark by 2030, but the key is that the department of the environment needs to track our progress and document through the governor and general assembly whether we are leading to a net pitive impact on jobs and that economy as we go forward without 40 by 30 goal. .. to local government and businesses to deal with and to help prevent flooding and storm surge, and other adverse financial impacts to property

and people, the risk that climate change presents. it's all stemming from an awareness that financial impacts are an integral part of a broad collaborative and bipartisan approach to real action and increasing resiliency throughout the state. >> rate, thank you. i'm going to want to come back to angela on the question, too. we will get, work that in. let's first opened it up to questions from the audience. we will take one over here and here, and then there. >> thanks very much. tim mcdonald and a journalist

for npr and other publication. i wonder if you talk more about what the impact of the u.s. walking away from the agreement is on the parts of the agreement that deal with adaptation, loss and damage and that, not that the emissions mitigation part but more on that side. we talked a bit about how this coalition are doing their own actions with reducing emissions but i'm wondering if that's enough to fill the gap when it comes to things like that climate fund or other kinds of financial organizations and that kind of thing. [inaudible]

>> i'm a grad student from arizona state. a number of organizations, many entities supporting, would look at data standards, the financing standard, what do we see as the means for adopting of standards for data can be shared? where is that coming from? and do you see best of standards for what kind of infrastructure need to be taken up? >> this question, well, my name is amy schmidt, climate exchange maryland. the question is for the secretary. i'm concerned reggie does not

come , does not include the transportation sector -- [inaudible] what the probability would be that reggie could expand into the transportation sector or whether you believe that another program, putting a price on carbon throughout these or maybe increasing the rps help bridge that. >> tot, why don't we start wit you? >> thanks. a couple things to say. the first question, i think obviously the u.s. not playing in the world of providing income of financial support, that puts something of a damper on overall financing. hopefully other countries can

step up and do things like help fill the first replenishment round for climate fund. that's part of the kinds of funding because you adaptation. i don't know, david, if somebody is able to fill me in. i don't know if there are tough certain negotiation questions right now with respect to adaptation. it's more adaptation is more importantly getting the flow of funds. loss and damage is a perennial difficult question, a lot of progress was made first in 2013 of course and other stuff in paris. it's a delicate issue because there are places where countries like united states and whoever

is president and other developed countries can't quite go but on the other hand, it's so important. i've always thought this is an issue that needs to seize the potential of the larger u.n. family, x essential challenges that many countries faced that we have to and not take it outside in the sense of shuffling it off, but to broaden the family of institutions that are focused on it. just one comment on the standards issue, which mostly i don't have much to say about but with respect to investment standards i did have, i was in china all last week and had lots of interesting meetings. some on negotiations, other things. i had one with the guy who was the key person in china working

on green finance across the board, trying to build an entire u.s. system of green finance and lending. and i think that he is also focus on the issues of green investment, whether its standard% i'm not sure but there's a lot of interesting work that he is doing, and beyond that i don't know. >> on the adaptation question, i agree with todd that in the actual negotiations, it's not, there are very little difficulties around negotiations on adaptation. the question on the major concern especially from the developing countries is twofold. the political profile, that adaptation gets globally. and secondly, which is also

linked to the support of adaptation receipt. traditionally it's been around and 80-20 split. 80% of all finance is going to emission reductions, critically important. and only 20% is going to support adaptation. the green climate fund one of the major decisions that was taken by the green climate fund during the process operationalization of the green climate fund was to ensure that there was a balance 50-50 split between adaptation and mitigation finance. and this is motivated many of the international institutions to adopt a similar approach. the green climate fund has been trying really hard to do this, but i believe many of

i chose my colleagues and no friends international alliance. why can't we island states who face many of the same challenges from extreme weather events, hurricanes, storms, coastal inundation, flooding, et cetera, why don't we form a coalition to exchange best practice and collaborate on everything that is building. i put that out to you, to the sister city international and many of you, great states of maryland and virginia. we are willing to partner with you on adaptation and resilience building in the absen of any leadership from the federal government. >> great. secretary, let's go to the question on rggi. i want you to answer the question on transportation but let's go broader than that.

let's talk about what would it take to expand rggi to other sectors as well? hurling it is clearly on the power sectors. >> what would be the prospects of expanding the program to other sectors? if you're going to hit your big target that's got to be there whether rggi or some other mechanism to get there. >> i want to say one of the organizations that maryland and virginia are proud to be members of is the u.s. climate alliance which is absolutely 17 states bipartisan bicoastal, tracking progress on our states living up to the terms of the paris climate agreement if we are still in it. and are we exceeding that? on the rggi question, specifically with the transportation sector, i would say a couple things. one is our state is proud to be part of a very active

organization called the transportation and climate initiative. there are a dozen states that are part of that effort. looking, recognizing that in many states including maryland, increasingly the transportation sector needs to be the focus of attention and collaboration. it's not obviously adore knows this, it's not just the energy sector or the building and housing sector or the agricultural sector. on transportation, honestly one of our top priorities right now is having regional meetings among those dozen states that a part of the transportation and climate initiative and hearing about how do you and the transportation sector reduce greenhouse gas emissions and how can you do it in a coordinated way regionally, thinking regionally? but honestly one of our priorities, and i say this as a state that has a republican governor, is to push back real

hard on epa proposed rollbacks, clean carbon rules under the clean air act. that that is a very important strategy on transportation sector progress for greenhouse gas emissions. and it's also a lot of local meetings, citizens, stakeholders, businesses are going to be part of these discussions about do you put in place some type of a cap on carbon emissions and the transportation sector, how would it work? it clearly needs time and discussion among all the different stakeholder groups. and in terms of rggi, our focus, our success has been to be focused on one sector and make sure we get it right, in these auctions in the way the rggi program is carried out the cap and if this program and a power sector is run well and

successful. we are, each of our states are look at other strategies to put a price on carbon to come up with collaborative mechanisms. it's the power of collaboration, is, as everyone knows knows, is enormous, and would you look beyond your own border to deal with transboundary pollution or a moving sector of public, that's a good start. and we are focused on that, but i know it's going to take some time to consider either an individual state or in a regional approach broadening the rggi model to other sectors. but it is worth discussion and it is worth scientific scrutiny and analysis as well. >> great. on that second question, angela,

anything to say on the reliability to these commitments that we're getting into non-federal level counting them, accounting for them, making sure that we can actually measure progress from these different actors as we are really working in almost exclusively nonfederal arena for the time being? and making sure that the rest of the world can actually rely on these commitments as a real come something real, that the united states is contributing right now. >> so ben mention where both members of years climate of light and that something were doing in a much more coordinated fashion but as i mentioned earlier the bulk of the regulatory work happens at the state level anyway and so our vibratory programs, for example, moving for two linking to rggi is a regulatory program that is established under virginia's administered procedure act. it is targeting commitments and enforcement and it is enforceable under our state law,

virginia air pollution control law. so there are requirements and targets building to our own regulatory programs when it comes to transportation sector, mobile source emissions, states also have the ability to regulate emissions and to do it again under the more tangible administered procedure act. when you're talking about things like emissions reduction associated with reducing the loss of forest of habitat, that's a bit more difficult so we are working with a coalition of nonprofit partners on developing some mechanisms to understand the value of our natural lands. the same thing with her agricultural sector. obviously there's a carbon footprint associate with that, and to understand what that means is incredibly important. but for our baseline regular programs, our energy sector programs, transportation sector programs, those that are governed under state law or under federal law, those other

traditional regulatory backing with the monitoring and compliance and enforcement protocols that are very similar to what you see at the federal level. >> yeah, , i'll just add quickly to that question. first of all, around whether you can trust companies commitments. i am a big believer in disclosure, and i think in general you can trust that companies are probably making more conservative commitments than you actually going to be able to make. i mean, we have certainly made, been able to reach our previous $50 billion climate finance initiative through years early. we're on track to their current goal early. but we do disclose a lot of information about how we are tracking and accounting and reporting that. and we also disclose a lot of

information about the impacts of this financing fix a as part of our $100 billion commitment, we also committed to report on the environmental and social benefits of that financing because we thought it was helpful to begin to put numbers to some of that as well. for example, i mentioned $57 $57 billion that we financed so far in that initiative. those financings, our clients have under that initiative with our support, help to avoid 4.5 million metric tons of co2 emissions and supported over 100,000 jobs. i want to just sort of put a a plug into for the world resources institute, which is really been the leader in developing a standard called the greenest gas protocol for measuring different kinds of co2

emissions. i lastly just want to address the question around international financing standards. this has been an area that the finance sector has been able to work pretty collaboratively in. we first started in 2003 with the development of the equator principles for project finance which really set out the gold standard for how banks should assess environmental and social risk associated with the project related lending. and more recently you've seen the principles big-city mac helped create of those which are framework for disclosure around green bonds. what is the use of proceeds for the green bonds yet issued, what are the impacts of that green bond. i think that standards and sort of coalescing at the appropriate time around common ways to measure and report is really important. if you have a goal you want to know when you have hit it. but i think that also broad industry framework, that

support, that sort of give you comfort about the greenness or the sustainable, the sustainable benefits of a transaction while also allowing for innovation and exploration are equally important. >> so let's take a couple more questions. with some quick answers. there were people over here who had their hands up earlier. >> i'm from the asian development bank. i'm very interested in climate financing aspect of this. we provided 4.5 billion last year for climate financing in asia-pacific region that that's very small compared to what private sector can do. i'm very encouraged to hear from both citi bank and also the state that the private sector is finally profitable or a good business deal to stay the course. given that the green climate

change was supposed to be raising $100 billion per year by 2020 to help with the climate side, and so far has raised a bit more than 10 billion. do you think by the transparency, improving transparency, providing the information for climate risk in terms of private investments, would this have enough potential to fill the gap that is left by some of the recent developments? >> great. >> thanks for doing this. it's great that no other countries follow the u.s. out of the agreement but as i think we know, you all know that there's a a great was a work in progress and the promise was would ratchet up ambition over time, starting in 2022 close the gap between the commitments and under two-degree temperature limitation goes. i wonder if you could say, two questions, what is the effect of

u.s. withdrawal announced withdrawal on the political will of other countries to stick with that ratcheting up of ambition, maybe starting with the tell annoyed dialogue can be going into secretary-general summit next september. for the subnational representatives what i hoping for out of the global climate action summit to send a powerful message to national leaders that come on income of the waterside weekend d carbonized for final profit? >> we have about three minutes so let's get some good, quick answers. >> first i i want to just givea clarifying answer to the first question about climate financing. it's a very often made misconception. the $100 billion was never a pledge to raise that money for the green climate fund per se. it's all climate funding, both

publicly delivered and mobilized by public action from the private sector, and it includes the world bank and all of the regional development banks and all countries bilateral. so green climate fund is a key anchor but he was never intended to be 100 billion. is 10 billion a good amount? probably not. it's probably too low but it is a start. it's not that it is 90 billion short. i just want to be clear about that. with respect to ambition, i think that there is an element of mobilization created by countries not wanting to give the united states their way. the one the one hand that's a good thing. there was service people and talked about, there's been a tremendous mobilization internally. the subnational level here. still when you get to the point of talking about ratcheting up what you're going to do looking at the united states not acting, i think some countries will say

then we will do more, and something to say we will do less. it will be country by country. >> any -- i agree with todd's comment on the green climate fund although from it felting country perspective we hope the green climate fund would generate 100 billion. buthere are a number of elephants elements in the agreement were inserted to serve to help countries to incentivize countries to enhance ambition. national contributions were submitted in the lead up to powers. we all knew it would not be consistent with below 2° let alone the target. everyone knew that. however, the stated goal of holding the global temperature increase to below two degrees,

it was recognized that it will be a work in progress but there were some key elements that countries now need to put in place to incentivize themselves and other partners to increase ambition. one is, and this is something that a key element of the united states was a transparency system, that countries no what each other is doing. that helps to incentivize countries to be even more ambitious. a shorter commitments like five years so you don't lock in ambition over a ten year period but over short periods here and before making a new commitment come you get an assessment, a review of this date of the sites, the state of the economic to help inform a decision to increase or to submit a new number. so those were some of the key

elements that were inserted into the pis agreement and, quite frankly, some of them are under threat in the ongoing negotiations. quite frankly because the u.s. is no longer displaying that level of leadership. so on the ambition question i believe countries can do, we're going to do more as barbados has announced that we are .0000% back of emissions. however, however, we are going to do more. in many countries, and i think as david said that leadership needs to come from around the globe. the need to come from small islands. any to come from the african countries, countries in latin america like colombia in costaa are doing amazing things. so that type of leadership needs to come from all over the world. >> okay. very quickly, how can we fill the climate finance gap while

generating profit? i just want to share with you what we see in the finance sector in terms of how quickly this space is changing at a think what should give us all hope. there are so many financial products that you now see being bent to a sustainable or climate or green outcome. compared to have our energy bankers that are quite engaged and project finance of renewable energy projects. you have our commodities team that is doing power hedges for renewable energy projects to provide price certainty. you have our ability to securitize lots of small energy efficiency and solar loans into one aggregated security that we then consult to investors. then of course you have green bonds, sustainability bonds, still new products and chair of the brand-new green phones energy. so while i think they gap is significant, i do think that we

are all leaning in on this problem and that there is real progress up ahead. >> the question was about the global climate summit, san francisco later in the year and the three goals for us. maryland will definitely be there, and what of them is to continue to share lessons learned and the models around rggi to others around the country and around the world who are interested. the second would be to share ideas about our climate leadership academy for local governments and businesses and individuals on increasing resiliency due to risk of climate impact. and the third is to put a real emphasis, a growing emphasis on healthy soil and regenerative agriculture in maryland, and i'm sure this is the case in virginia as well, agriculture is the heart and soul of our heritage and economy, and the solutions from the land are there. so we're really interested in sharing that with others and

what merited agriculture is doing to increase resiliency and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. >> so i'll be brief because i think we're probably over time. for us i think, to your question, telling the business case for decarbonization and one of the most significant drivers for renewable energy investment in virginia has been facebook, amazon and microsoft. those three companies are responsible for over a gigawatt of investment in solar energy alone. so we are seeing tremendous progress from the corporate side and those investments are driving policy changes at the state level. we are seeing changes with our state legislature, and we just this year the governor signed legislation that paves the way for 5000 mw of solar solar and wind in virginia, which is a ten fold increase over what was on the books before and something that probably would not have happened had we not had that investment from those large corporate giants who were saying this is what we want when customers are demanding it, then you will see policy moving and i

think that's one of the biggest drivers that were seen in states like virginia. >> quickly, david. >> first for a quick, on the finest piece to i think it's helpful to think in terms of orders of magnitude, 10 billion plus for the green climate fund. we need 100 billion that has to be mobilized by public finance and we're actually over two-thirds of the way to the target according to our assessments and then we need the trillion, really trillions, in finance from multiple sources that are shifted to climate and in many cases that's a matter of shifting from brown, if you will, too green and making sure that we undertake that at the skill that is needed. just on the ambition question of where to add one quick comment. i think it's absolute already clear that they many smaller countries are ready to move like

barbados is. in addition to it with middle size countries and even large ones that are also beginning to demonstrate their readiness. just two quick examples. one is chile is already looking at its current national contribution, it's climate under paris with a view to finding t way that it can increase its action. and then mexico has recently passed a law that put in place a five-year cycle of examination and strengthening action for itself. i think this is a spreading movement in essence. >> great. thank you. thank you, everyone. i want to bring up the executive vice president and managing director here at the world resources institute for a few final reflections. >> what an event. [laughing] just want, first a huge round of

applause for the panelists. [applause] incredibly stimulating, motivating set of remarks. i have the unenviable task of 402 thymic to sum up this event in three minutes. so i'm going to give that a shot. seven very brief takeaways. that i felt we are today. first urgency. i think we all recognize and we can appreciate the urgency. so many people spoke about the damage of climate impacts, we're seeing the impact already today. what we know moving forward, the infrastructure stock and we will double in the next 15 years. the gdp is going to double in 20 years. urban population will double in 40 years. the window of getting this right, getting kind of info climate trajectory right is now. i think we're moving as his earlier in the right direction. we are making the right

direction but is not decisive enough. this point but urgency is absolutely central. second point, resolve. we heard following trump's announcement both todd and selwyn spoke about the coalition around paris agreement remained strong. with several people talk about that we are still in movement. the real test will be how do we sustain and enhance that resolve? selwyn spoke about what the immediate tesla be the recapitalization of the green climate fund, what other step up? the third point i felt there was really about an economic, that the economics of the transition of becoming increasingly clear and compelling. why is sitting back putting 100 billion into climate? what is three major technology companies investing in gigawatt in solar in the country? how is maryland assessing progress on climate? the interesting thing about the economics is it is amazing how quickly this has shifted over the past five or seven years.

seven years ago it was a choice. the dominant discourse was i did get something on climate or you thought about jobs and growth. three to four years ago we begin to recognize that was a false choice. you could potentially have both. increasingly the discourse is that they are mutually reinforcing. you can have growth without taking climate action. you can take certain climate action with the thinking of growth. that intellectual journey and discipline hugely hugely important. the fourth point kind of ambition. shining points of light come with some examples here today, proof points about what's happening but the real test is going to be what lies ahead. barbados, 100% for renewable energy target but the real question will be as we go to 2020, david and others spoke about the ratchet mechanism. will people step up, and that's not just on mitigation as

important as that is. it's also on adaptation, on finance come on support. fifth., policy matters, right? how we design policy matters. we talked about rggi. we talked about gc fd. we talked about the importance of getting to design the policies right. we talk about big test coming up and the cost around the rulebook for the paris agreement. getting that right sends the right signal to those political. 6., politics matters as well. we saw really interesting examples of bipartisanship around state climate action. most people may recall, think about the major national environmental legislation of the united states come clean, , clen water act, overwhelmingly, , cln water act was a think 86 to zero in the city. some of the equations of the move to the truth terms and elections, will bipartisanship start to emerge a more serious way at the national level?

the seventh and last point, undeniable , undeniable imports of use national government leadership. also important, we can't forget about the importance of both domestically and international. and with that, important to take a long-term view around this, gets back to something i would like to just say, paula has done a phenomenal job as global climate drug treatment of you may know she is soon going to be leaving, quite unfortunately but quite for truly she is going to stay within the community. she is going to rare to be the managing director of climate and water, , an opportunity for the focus quite a bit more on columbia pictures to remain here in d.c. so she'll be pt of all this community but it did want in this form to recognize her, her leadership in her crib. from oc who may not know she was a lead architect and sustainable

goals and a champion toward thinking about strategies, integrated strategies bringing climate and developed to give the pics i just recognize her and after all to join in the warm round of applause to paula. [applause] to the speakers, to enter into all of you for giving us two hours of your time. we not precious that is pure we hope you enjoyed and we hope you come back next year. thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> i had on c-span2 the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction talks about use efforts to stabilize the country. then a hearing on capitol hill looks at the industry that moves energy from power plants to substations. it's booktv in primetime with a focus on memoirs. we would hear from anthony ray hansen discusses wrongful imprisonment in the sun does shine. human rights campaign press secretary sarah mcbride talks about tomorrow would be different, and former special assistant to president george w. bush on his book madison park. you can find booktv all this week in primetime on c-span2. >> joins us live sunday at noon eastern for our year-long special in-depth fiction edition. featuring best-selling fiction writers, contempo novelist will be our guest. >> i would have to say that if

we talk about creativity, of course i know many writers and so on the people who have a lot to say are completely undaunted or for that matter storytelling. the whole idea that there is a storytelling, that there is a triangle, that you might learn to do this if you go want to be a fiction writer. it's necessary but not sufficient. it's not going to make you a great writer. but then you sit down and you discover that actually they could all do it. i think there's nothing about learning to do those things that has creativity. watch our special series "in depth" fiction edition with author gish jen sunday from noon to 3 p.m. eastern on booktv on

c-span2. >> next john sopko the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction talks about your strategy for stabilization and rebuilding thatountry because itarks are followed by a panel discussion focusing on idtifying lessonsnd recommendation for rebuilding afghanistan. hosted by the brookings institution in washington, this is about to one half hours. >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. welcome to the brookings institution. my name is john calvin and i'm the president of brookings. it's my distinct pleasure today to be joined by my friend john sopko, special