for the future, the next 30 years. so craig, you talked about the cost and the scale and scope of the infrastructure that intel has in each generation of fab. there's a concern right now that perhaps we don't have enough of the next generation in america, so tell us a little bit about how critical this manufacturing technology enterprise is to the nation's competitiveness. >> well, it's critical. i mean, ultimately i think if the u.s. wants to have a healthy economy and growing economy and growing jobs, you need manufacturing here in the u.s. i mean, the facebooks and the googles are great, but you don't employ that many people in those companies and you don't -- google is making a few things.

but the companies actually manufacturing and making things and creating jobs are critical. so i think the whole concept of advanced manufacturing -- but i do want to turn the tables on you a little bit. i'd much rather see our national labs spend their monies on what i believe is the national labs mandate which is big science. there's no place other than the livermores, berkeleys and argons photo light sources and such things, that's a national resource that everybody can come and use, and quite frankly i'd like to see it grow dramatically. today if you want to -- i happened to be on the berkeley advisory board. if you want to upgrade their photon light source, which is critical for pharmaceutical development, chemical reaction,

there's all sorts of things. it's a ten-year-plus process to say i want to do this, i want to get the approval of d.o.e., i want to get my $800 million, $100 million a year to do this. hell, i come from a background where i want to build a $5 million manufacturing plant from green field to output in two years and i can't stand to see a $500 million project span ten years, it's not competitive. it's not the lab's fault. they're hamstrung by the bureaucracy that exists here in washington, d.c. so i'd love to see labs grow. i'd love to see them grow in what i think is their great capability, which is big science, big computing, big science, stuff that georgia tech

can't afford, stanford can't afford, because you just can't put those facilities in individual universities. and these guys are a national resource from that standpoint. >> i think you just gave us a great topic for a senate competitiveness caucus session next year to look at that challenge of how to reduce the time to get these large scale big facilities going and implemented in the country. >> i think one of the examples -- >> you guys just jump in. >> -- relates to bill's work and others in this room, was a high performance computing initiative that was done in conjunction with d.o.e. and the council, and it was a hugely successful endeavor. it created an infrastructure which, in fact, universities can use relatively easy and access the tremendous capability. they really can't afford to operate the cooling systems and all the things that are necessary. it came back to me when i was at the smithsonian. the smithsonian has 500 ph.d. scientist, people forget about that. craig knows because he's active at the smithsonian.

they do a lot of work in genomics. you only worry about one genome, scientists worry about the millions on earth. tackling that -- fortunately we signed an mou with oak ridge and the smithsonian has direct access to the computing capability and the talent at oak ridge to help the smithsonian get into and use the facilities that it needs to do this. you think well that's just pure science. it's not, because 70% of the diseases are coming from nature, zika and all these diseases, and so understanding the genomes of all of these other species is critical to the health of the human species. so there was an example where i think it was very insightful for the council and d.o.e. and the national labs to set up this system that works. i do think there is a missing component in all of this, and that is coming back to the local

idea. i grew up in a little town called douglas, georgia, and the very southern part of the state of georgia. they fortunately have a great public school system because they're committed to it. they win science competitions in the state of georgia, and i go back and speak to the students and we try to get as many as we can to come to georgia tech, but there's a gap. there's a gap between all the things that we can do here as these big organizations and i think universities have lapsed their responsibility to reach out, to help youngsters in these small communities get the education that they need. great opportunity with the digital capability and the maker systems and digital printing, for all this to happen back there in those schools. i think we're missing a link there, an exciting part, to reach a part of the population we're not reaching. >> bill? >> so maybe it will disappoint you but you're not going to get an argument from me about

anything you gentlemen have brought up. in fact, i would say one of the issues that stands in the way of better utilizing the laboratories and making them more of an engine for innovation and for growth, frankly, is, has to do with the regulatory environment that we all live in but the laboratories as an element of the federal system has to deal with, and i would be interested in the possibility of that kind of a dialogue going on. i did want to just pick up on something, you talked about this idea of reaching out more and bringing in schools and education, because i think education was a major theme earlier this morning. it was one that really struck a chord. it's something that i think actually the laboratories could do more of and play more of a role in with the council, with the other components of the council. we started over the last two

years hosting under presidential initiative my brother's keepers events at the laboratory, where the first year we brought in 70 students, middle school students, and i think over 150 middle school students just last year from the surrounding school districts, from san joaquin valley reaching all the way to oakland, and san francisco, and watching these students, many of whom -- well, almost of whom had never experienced a kind of big science that we could show them, watching them react to that and i have to say the inspiration that just spending a single day at the laboratory watching that sort of thing and becoming aware of it gave me a tremendous feeling of hope and the idea that many of these junior high school students who maybe never would have thought about going, becoming

quantitatively adept, and going into fields, s.t.e.m. fields, just doing that i thought could woo have tremendous impact. think how much more impact we could do coordinating this amongst the parts of the council and i think it would work tremendous things for the laboratories and for the missions here. >> deborah, from a retiree who raises cattle and bison in montana to come to the stage and talk about innovation is kind of interesting, but i would really like you guys to take one thing to heart, and that was what michael crowe said this morning that you've got to bring everybody in the system along, and until the average education system in the u.s. is world class, you got a hell of a job in front of you, and we dance

around that, you know, pisa results showing mediocre results are in the headline for one day and disappear. nobody picks that up. nobody takes responsibility for it but it is the achilles heel of this country. we're not going to increase the number of workers with post secondary schooling until we fix the primary and secondary school system of the u.s., k-12. that's physically broken today on average. they're bright examples but it's broken. until you get that one fixed, the job of the council is going to be increasingly difficult. >> thank you, craig. you know, our last few minutes here and of course, we heard this morning from jim clifton at gallup, the drag on productivity from our education system apart from the social issues and economic issues, that is clearly one where we need a whole new type of innovation and really also i think new relationships

between industry, academia, and also labor, very importantly, but a few other issues. john young last night in our video, i had the wonderful honor and pleasure to go out and interview him in august out in silicon valley. one of the things he said, we were sort of laughing. but i said, you know, we created the council on competitiveness. we thought it was just going to be around for a couple years, you know, and now it's 30 years and it's obviously sustainable, and contributing and what's going to be the next 30 years? is it this nexus of innovation, sustainability beyond moore's law? you're moving into 4d printing, genomics, there are lots of things we can do but at the end of the day you three leaders who contributed so much, craig, you've talked about the criticality of our k through 12 education. wayne, and then i want to ask bill and we'll wrap this up.

>> oh -- >> now remember, you're king for a day here, so you can -- posit into the future. >> i found the discussion about the gdp to be fascinating. it's also in line with an argument, a recent book that argues that the age of innovation was really and i think it was basically the same period that was talked about this morning from 1850 to 1950 in the u.s. over the last 70 years or so, the u.s. gdp is basically, productivity growth has basically been stagnant and that's really because the kinds of revolutionary changes like electroification, the automobile, things that have incredible impact on people's lives. despite the digitize asian revolution, what is going to

have the impact. we talked about 3 d printing beyond moore's law, all of the innovations clearly important to have an impact, what is the next electroification, global electroification. solving world hunger, moving off the earth, colonizing the moon. using the informatics and large scale computing to preserve the biodiversity that we're losing every day. i think these are the kinds of big ideas, really big problems that we should be thinking of over the next 30 years. this is a real futures looking agenda. it seems to me that it's important what the council does in looking at what's evolving today. it would be interesting to take a 30-year view of what the really huge impactful things

could be, doubling the life expectancy of everybody on earth. >> thank you, bill. wayne? >> i think a big challenge certainly for higher education in this discussion is access, and we all appreciate those of us of the white haired set here. when we went to school, tuition was very low. i could go to georgia tech to get my education and be a co-op student and pay my way through school. that's not true anymore. there is this great fear of leaving people behind. georgia tech will get good students because so many are applying but those cadre of students in another corps fundamentally just as good as the students up here but can't financially afford their education today. that accentuates, exacerbates the problem of people getting left behind and frustrated in our society. i teach part time again. i'm stunned by how bright the

students are, how excited they are. they want to be motivated. they want us to provide them with the kind of education that gets them excited. in the technological fields it's the help i think these students broaden their view. i love the concept bill gates has thrown at big history. i love history and i think as you get into history you learn an awful lot about becoming something bigger than yourself and i think that really helps. new approaches to education, georgia tech, to its credit, started the first degree program, masters in computer engineering on line. the whole degree program. not a course, but a whole degree program and it's enormously successful. 4,000 or 5,000 students are taking this course. half the cost of what they would have to pay if they came to georgia tech. i think we really have to look at these models and find the best practices and make sure we marry them in a way that inspires and reaches way down to the second graders and third graders so they get inspired and

want to learn. it's there. but we really have mismatched ourselves in terms of being able to do that. >> well i want to thank you all for coming, and helping us celebrate our 30th anniversary, but very importantly, sharing your story and these three gentlemen have had and bill continues in his current leadership role to have tremendous impact on our country and i'll just close by saying that in the beginning of the council, there used to be a saying that what's good for america is good for all americans, and i think going forward we need to reverse this and really think of what's good for all americans is good for america. and so with that, i want to thank you all for being with us. >> thank you. [ applause ] >> ladies and gentlemen please welcome the assistant secretary for energy efficiency and

renewal energy, dr. david friedman. [ applause ] >> hi, everybody. well thank you very much for that introduction, and first off, thank you very much to the council on competitiveness, and especially to deborah wentz smith in particular. under your leadership, the council has been an incredible collaborator, including through our american energy and manufacturing competitiveness partnership. the regional dialogues that we held across the country were truly a really rich way to directly engage with stakeholders. including, i think, many of the folks here in this room. this was a great way to talk about how we can tackle our challenges and unlock our country's leadership in innovation, science, and technology, because that is exactly what it takes to ensure

competitiveness. leadership in science and technology, leadership in innovation, especially when it comes to manufacturing. now nations around the world have their own ways of working towards competitiveness in manufacturing. of course, given the great nation that we are, we have our own way, which includes using public/private partnerships to drive innovation and expand manufacturing and jobs right here at home. so on behalf of the department of energy, i'm really excited that i have the opportunity today to announce the selection of the lead for our latest manufacturing institute. in fact, the tenth institute in the manufacturing usa initiative, but i'm not going to tell you quite yet. i'm going to leave you in suspense for just a little while

longer, because i want to talk to you about the natural outcome of innovation. and that, that's revolution. innovation is at the heart of everything we do in my office at d.o.e. in fact, when it comes to making america more competitive with nations like china, germany and japan on clean energy, we at the office of energy efficiencies and renewable energy, we are the solutions people. our mission is as simple as it is ambitious, to create and sustain american leadership in the transition to a global clean energy economy. and really, this is a transition that's already under way as we save money and create jobs while changing how we generate and use energy across the country. i mean, just think technologies like solar and wind power, l.e.d.s and electric vehicles are rapidly spreading across the country as costs drop by 40% to 90% thanks to

innovation. and around the world, global investments in world, global investments in clean energy have quadrupled between 2005 and 2015, and i would argue that within the next decade, those investments are going to reach the trillions when it comes to the opportunity before us. so to paraphrase the beatles, you say you want a revolution? well you know, we are changing the world. it's incredible the pace of change. but as these technologies continue to be deployed, we face a fundamental question -- who's going to make them? if you look around the country, we have two options. we can cede the mantle of manufacturing and innovation leadership to germany, japan, china and others around the world, or we can step up and

lead. now, i guess looking around the room you all probably have the exact same answer that president obama has had. step up and lead. and that's exactly what he's done. i think that choice is pretty clear. after all, manufacturing, it plays such a critical role when you look across our economy. you all know this sector supports over 12 million u.s. jobs across the country and contributes to more than $2 trillion when it comes to our gdp. these are well paying jobs with an average manufacturing worker earning over $80,000 a year, and these jobs, they're creating incredible domino effects. the economic policy institute found that for every single person directly employed in manufacturing, another 1.5 jobs is created elsewhere across our economy. that's exactly why we've been working hard for these many,

many years to create a lot more of them, because, as i've gone around the country and talked to leader after leader in industry and government and around communities, i've seen a growing awareness that if we're going to play to win on the global stage, many, many more clean energy technologies need to be made in the usa. and the entire manufacturing process needs to be here. whether it's clean energy or not, all of our manufacturing facilities need to get a lot more efficient so they can become a lot more competitive. now other countries are also making significant investments in the world of clean energy manufacturing innovation. germany, japan, singapore, the uk, these are just a few examples of the folks who are working hard to challenge us and to challenge our leadership every single day.

we need to do the same. in fact, we need to do more and we need to do it better, and that's why president obama launched the manufacturing usa initiative. this effort, it's been a great partnership. it's brought together industry, academia, other federal agencies including commerce and defense in order to create a growing network of advanced manufacturing institutes, each one bringing in different technology focus, different ideas, different innovations to enhance our competitiveness and revolutionize manufacturing. now with the department of energy, we've played a key role by standing up institutes in emerging fields like power electronics and advanced composites. the goal at the department of energy here is to help manufacturers of all sizes, large and small, to save money,

to save energy by adopting new technologies and by providing workers with the skills they need for the manufacturing jobs, not just of today, but of tomorrow. if you look back over the four years since this effort has begun, the administration has already committed over $700 million in investments and we've already gotten so much for that investment. in fact, we've already leveraged more than double that, more than $1.4 billion in private and other nongovernment investment from our partners. because that's what we can do. we can leverage our work into much greater progress around the country. and as a nation, we have grown from just one institute with 65 members to an entire network that now includes ten institutes and over 1,300 participants.

so on that note, i'm going to end the suspense. so today, i'm incredibly pleased to make the announcement of our nation's tenth manufacturing usa institute. it's called r.a.p.i.d. which stands for the rapid advancement of the process intensification deployment. and i'm happy to announce that the new institute will be led by the american institute of chemical engineers. they will be serving as key drivers behind the institute's cutting edge work in modular, chemical, process intensification. common household word everyone's familiar with it. i believe karen fletcher is here in the house. karen, are you out there somewhere? there she is. all right. so karen now has an incredibly impressive career. she's now moving from industry

to tackle this great new challenge to serve as ceo of the institute and leading this coordinated effort. karen, i'd love several members of your team, i'd love for you to stand an everyone the institute and leading this coordinated effort. karen, i'd love for you and i know several members of your team may be here as well, i'd love for you to stand and i'd love for everyone to give them a loud applause for their great work. [ applause ] that's a lot of folks and that's just the beginning of all the folks who are going to make great things happen because there's over 130 partners across industries that are part of the r.a.p.i.d. manufacturing usa institute so thank you all and congratulations. it was a great proposal and i look forward to the amazing work that you're going to do. when we look at this new

manufacturing usa institute, it's going to leverage up to $70 million in federal funding, with another $70 million in commitments from partners already in hand, and in just five years, in five years the institute will be standing on its own, driven by industry and other stakeholders to be completely self-sustaining. it's going to focus on new technologies that add up to big savings on the manufacturing floor, from improving energy efficiency and cutting operating costs to reducing waste and cutting the amount of equipment that's needed. i mean, in the chemical industry alone, these technologies have the potential to save more than $9 billion in costs every single year, and on top of that, there can be huge benefits for a variety of other industries, too, including oil and gas and the pulp and paper industry. so what's our end goal with all of this? it's to see the growth of more customized factories, more and more local manufacturing across every corner of our country and to make greater use of u.s. feed

stocks, all while training workers in advanced fields and the next generation of manufacturing. now this institute is just the latest example of how the department of energy continues to invest in the manufacturing technologies of tomorrow, like high performance computing and the next generation machines, as well as 3-d printing, just to name a few. now we've also seen exciting steps forward with major new u.s. manufacturing plants in the works supported by the department of energy, including tesla, who's been doing great work in batteries and suniva and solar city and solar modules. 1366 technologies in solar wafers and sora, with high-efficiency l.e.d.s. i love the fact there's no debate anymore over a compact fluorescent or incandescents.

l.e.d.s are cheaper over their life, better quality of life, incredible and we're making them here in the usa. now on top of all that, if you look across our government, if you look across our nation, the u.s. manufacturing sector as a whole has added over 800,000 new jobs since february of 2010. now of course that doesn't change the reality that manufacturing has faced challenges and will continue to do so. the number of our successes aren't comforting to those who are still hurting, to those folks who have been left behind. yes, we've created many more jobs for example in the energy sector than we've lost in recent years, but they aren't the same jobs. they aren't in the same place for employing the same people. so we know that the clean energy

revolution, while real and while revving up, still hasn't been felt in every region, at least not yet. and that's why we at the department of energy must continue to accelerate our efforts to invest in innovation, innovation that will continue to enhance america's manufacturing competitiveness, innovation that will bring more good jobs and innovation that will strengthen our economy as the clean energy revolution expands around the u.s. and around the world. and that's why every single one of us in the room need to help, because this challenge of ensuring the revolution, excuse me, this challenge of ensuring that that revolution is spread across our great nation is way too big for any one person or any one sector to solve alone. so one last quote from the beatles.

we all need to come together right now. i know that if we work together across industries, across sectors, we can create more prosperity and many, many more jobs and a much stronger economy, but to do that, we need to face the reality of the market, where the trends in clean energy are crystal clear, the choice is not whether or not there's going to be a clean energy revolution. it's happening. the choice is whether or not we as a nation are going to continue to lead it. i encourage all of you to take the opportunity you have as leaders to keep focused on progress, because i have no doubt in my mind that we can boost u.s. competitiveness across the board in our manufacturing sector and beyond and we can ensure that the united states leads in the global manufacturing marketplace if, if we continue to innovate and fight to win the clean

energy race. thank you. [ applause ] >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the president and ceo of excelon corporation and director of argon national laboratory for moderating conversation with washington correspondent mr. steve levine on the future competitiveness of american advanced energy infrastructure. >> good morning. in a time of great change in the world in the united states, in the world, it's said that the transformation that is going on in electricification in electricity in transportation and in our electric grid is bigger and more profound than

any, and today we're going to try to take that apart. i want to open up right away. when chris, i want to start with you, when we're talking about a transformation of the grid that the grid of the 21st century, which is the mantra that we hear is going to be much different from now, what are we talking about? what is the problem, and what kind of a solution are we looking for? >> sure, let me tell you where we've come from in a very short period. technology is morphing and changing and faster in our industry. up to a couple years ago you didn't know if your power was on

unless you called us, monitoring on a distribution system was very limited. it was based off of previous engineering calculations on line size, load, what the demand would be at peaks and so it was not a very intelligent system. in the last ten years we put over 7.5 million smart meters on. now we're starting to see how the system operates, the demands of the system, what our customers are looking for. there's a lot more intelligence that we can put on fault detection, fault isolation, but

the customers now are becoming much more engaged in what they want to, how they want to control their energy consumption, and how they want to manage the cost. so as the technology becomes available, the customer gets more control, how do we integrate that in maintaining the premise that it has to be reliable, it has to be clean, but it has to be affordable. so as we look towards the future, significant amount of distributed generation, how do you control the grid with that. there's a potential desire that one neighbor will want to sell his solar power to the other neighbor, and how do you manage that? so energy storage systems, energy management systems,

intelligent operating systems and trading businesses are going to be a big part of our business as we go forward. >> and we need more electricity, right, 7% more electricity forecast by 2040. >> that's the estimate. >> peter, do you want to unpack that, too? >> yes, so firstly it's very interesting to see this transformation from the outside. i thought i might warm people up actually by putting up a slide if we could have the slide coming up. if you go back a century, we had a discussion earlier about gee, is the disappearance of productivity growth due to the fact that all of the big things are already invented and all being done? so actually beginning with this, what you're looking at is telecommunications and the electric grid in 1915. one is clearly new york and the other is in california, and it's snowing in new york and they have horses and california it looks like they just had a vehicle accident, but you may not be able to tell which of that was electric power and which of that was telephony. if you look forward, click again

on the slide, you see where that's gone. so those two things in 1915 were in many ways very similar. what you're doing is pushing electrons out in one direction, and one case producing power and the other case sending information, but by the time we got to 2015, at least for telecommunications, everything has changed. there aren't any wires. the information is going around through photons rather than electrons a lot of the time, and there's been an amazing change of that. whereas what actually happened on the electric grid, it's got bigger and there have been many changes within that but fundamentally as chris just said, the mechanism of what we're trying to do has been until recently the same. so a bit of my own history, i used to work for the phone company when it was marbell, at&t, when i worked for bell labs in 1980 the model for telephony was the same as it was in 1915.

it was universal service at the lowest possible price. and the assumption was that you had to regulated mo mop know which had to deliver just that and it was delivered by cost, by price, whereas everything changed after that. so one of the effects of that is that my phone bill is about an order of magnitude higher than it would have been under the old model and the reason i'm happy to do that is i get more stuff, and the question is, is that going the same way with energy? and i think it is, and chris has already pointed out that you begin by having more smarts on the grid, you know what's going on, we're no longer in this central push out where you're regulated by price. there's real value, and if you ask how much are people prepared to pay for energy? maybe six cents a kilowatt hour but the best price, if you go to a rock concert it's been going for a few days, everybody's phone run down and a business model people charge for ten bucks. you're not paying six cents a kilowatt hour to do that. there's a different model which may emerge with that. >> so chris, just playing

directly off of that, you've established what the problem is in the system, and how in some ways it sounds primitive when peter describes it. you have as a bridge to getting there, you formed a relationship with mit, northwestern, and with argon, deciding that you didn't have internally whatever means of intellectually bridging that gap. can you describe that, what are you lacking and what is this relationship all about? >> sure, as a publicly traded company that provides energy delivery services and energy, there's not a lot of capability or balance sheet space for r&d, so it is the jewel of our competitiveness going forward is the work that's being done at the national labs and the work that's being done at the universities and how we can support the labs and the universities is a much more efficient model than us being a

utility company or a competitive generating company trying to come up with our own bell labs type design. the work that we're trying to do, the partnership that we're trying to do is we know the practical on how the system operates. we have some imsight into what customers want and what customers at this point are willing to pay, so we have a practical knowledge where the theoretical, the deep theoretical knowledge is within the labs and the universities, and how we can help commercialize that in a very affordable way, but a more expeditious way is what we're looking for with partnerships with the labs and the universities. >> but peter, the labs are research facilities.

chris seems to be describing a think tank operation, right? how formulating what the future looks like. >> that's what we're trying to do. so we have to see how this works. so it's certainly not a model whereby chris says i have this problem, i need a widget. would you please design it for me and go back? we do work like that, many of the labs do, universities do. we're really trying to get into a piece of white space and say what actually are the problems? how can you think them through in a different way? of course we could do that from a theoretical perspective but it wouldn't be useful if we didn't have a partner to be able to do that because we don't understand the constraints, how stuff works and indeed we are a research

lab, so you know, it's not appropriate of course for us to be doing certain classes of things, but it really is i think appropriate for us as part of a national endeavor to bring out competitiveness in the system to be working with very forward-thinking companies line excelon that want to think through this. it's more of a think tank than it is let's design some better widgets. >> all right, so let's have a mini think tank here now. of course you only just started and so what the future looks like is vague, to say the least, but you must have already had some brainstorming. can both of you give some

possible scenarios of what the world looks like in 2040? >> well that's a risky proposition. the one thing we know is to stay on path is we have to stay educated. we have to stay informed. in relationships like we have with the labs and universities, help inform us, as we're trying to define what is the utility of the future. it's another overused phrase, but as i said earlier, the customer desire, the technology advancements, the capability of our grid, getting smarter, the data that we're going to get off of the grid, how to figure out the best way to use that, we do have a big picture vision that there's going to be much more distributed generation on the system, so you'll have more solar panels on individual houses, and how we operate the

system and what the customers want to do with that is something that we have to be forward-thinking about. we have to ensure that it's an equitable process that we go through. we don't see distributed generation serving the industrial load, and so if we overcompensate an individual at a house with a solar panel at the cost of the grid to the industrial customer, or the commercial customer or the metropolitan area, it would be difficult. so we have to keep a balance on what we think the future can look like, what the technology evolution is, and how we're able to keep that affordable energy component going so we can continue to drive competitiveness. >> it's never a good idea to try to predict the future but a few odd things that may be out there. there are relatively conservative projections of

energy use but let me offer a nonconservative one which is to note while we're getting more efficient at using energy, for i.t., it's now running at 6% of global energy consumption. now if more were to continue and this is one of the arguments explains that it won't continue running with current technology at 10 to the minus 14 joules per bit you project that both continuing to go on and by 040 the whole of the world's energy consumption will be for i.t. that probably won't happen, but it means that for example and i think this was referred to an earlier point, when we think about high performance computing and the direction that's going to go and the way computing will permeate everything there will be a model for computing which will change. one possibility is that there will be much more computing on the edge of things. so rather than the current model we have, where the data is kind of centralized, you take it

here, you put it in the cloud somewhere, as i'm pointing out the cloud is not, the cloud really is somewhere, it's in northern finland, melting the permafrost probably. we won't be able to have that model of just beaming stuff around the planet. we will have much more intelligent agents doing computing on the periphery. so what does that mean for us, and how does that connect with the kind of stuff that's happening in this space? it gets to something which is relatively prosaic. in chicago we're putting out 500 sensors called the array of things and these are things which sit out in the environment, they have cameras on them. they measure all kinds of things, gases and whether it's raining, and whether there's a dog crossing the street and things like that, but it has a lot of smarts at the very end of this, so that it computes with that and makes decisions and call up city hall and say there's a flood in the street, you need to pump out the drains.

that requires actually a lot of power. all of this is sitting on light poles and it's been put up by con-ed engineers. you begin to see how the need to put in power is not just going to be associated with people or with factories, it's actually going to be associated with autonomous stuff which is all over the place, and that's one piece of the scenario that we're going through, along with the other things that chris is thinking about, which is how do you integrate renewables onto the grid, how do you balance having wind and solar, and what other technologies do you need in order to get that to happen, including electrical storage, about which you know a bit. >> so just throwing in exactly where you've left off, let's talk a little bit about politics. so in january, we have a very different administration coming in, in the united states, with a very different idea about

energy, about the environment, and i'm wondering, until now, for the last eight years, the themes have been sustainability and green and renewable. your decisions are 30 and 40 years in the making. to what degree we're going to possibly have over the next four and possibly eight years, does that change what you're going to do? >> the last over decade has been a frustrating period for our industry. we have environmental policies that are set at a desire to have a reduction in greenhouse gases and have a low carbon future, but that's an environmental policy and it incents or targets specific technologies. it doesn't incent or design an outcome. the low carbon future is the

dream of the current policies. the energy policy over on the other side does not incorporate the desire or the outcome of the environmental policy, so the way the markets are designed, it's around reliability and it's around affordability. it's not around low carbon, so we've had an issue with predictability on making investments. if you were to go out and build a new nuclear plant today, it would cost you $16 billion. it would have a 60-year life. the dilution period during construction is seven years. it's a huge investment. it's not something even with our large balance sheet we could do, and there isn't an energy policy that says go do that. so what we're looking for with whatever administration comes

in, is a recognition if you're trying to get to a low carbon future, it can't just be on the back of renewables. you have to come up with some market design that says energy, transportation, agriculture, all of the industries together have a carbon footprint, and what is the most economical way to get to that low carbon future? if the new administration changes their mind or changes the policies and the positions at the federal level, and leave it to the state level, we'll work it with the states, but our customers in majority of the states that we operate in have a desire for a low carbon future. the confusion over federal policy and the confusion with the state policy has got to be what we work out. >> okay. just trying to bring some clarity to what you've said. the shale gas has been a big driver in the reduction of co2 and this has happened irrespective of anyone's policy and it's resulted in utilities taking coal fire plants off and putting gas fired plants on.

that's a piece of the landscape. are you speaking of nuclear then, of policies that encourage nuclear? nuclear? the other thing i wanted to ask on low carbon, are you saying irrespective of whether the new administration has a goal, objective of low carbon, that's going to go on anyway because the states favor it? >> couple bites there. the current economics of the current prices of electricity are set by the marginal producer, which is the natural gas plant. shale gas, the revolution that has come on to our industry has greatly reduced the prices of energy. it has made it more competitive.

in many plants that were, say, the eisenhower era inefficient or less efficient heat rates, thermal transfer and heat rates can't compete with these low natural gas prices. so there are some environmental rules that took coal plants off and just the economics that have taken coal plants off. so that's been good for carbon reduction, gas plant is 60% of the emissions of a coal plant. it has been good for economic growth in industry, so there's a positive portion of that in any plant that is in a competitive market, needs to compete against the marginal producer, and if you can't compete against that marginal producer, then you need to be shut down or you need to make the prudent business decision. there's a lot said in that. just having everything on one fuel source is probably not the smartest way to go.

so you have to design markets and evolve markets that have fuel diversity. this is not environmental policy yet. this is just sound resilient to make sure you have a reliable system. couple years ago the polar vortex came in, very cold. our gas plants, our natural gas plants couldn't get gas until 10:00 or 11:00 in the morning because the primary priority for natural gas is home heating. if you let the pressures go too low and you allow the pilot lights to go out in the city of new york, it could take a year to relight those things. there there's some dynamics around the way the current system works that yes, natural gas is good. yes, natural gas is competitive, but you need fuel diversification for reliability. so that's one thing.

on the other side, if you're looking at environmental, we don't know where this administration is going to come down. we've heard some commentary, and then we've heard some retraction or just stated that they'll be looking at it. the supreme court has mandated that the epa is to regulate carbon. now, how that manifests itself, we don't know, but there is a court mandate to do it. we can invest in our systems. we can work within the business models as long as we know there's predictability. like you said, our investments in our utilities are our investments in our power generation stack are 30 to 60-year investments, and in an understanding you'll be able to get a return on that investment is very critical. over the next five years, we'll invest $25 billion into our six utilities. that's a significant investment, half of it is dead on the books and half of it is shareholder

equity that you have to be able to pay the debt and you have to be able to give a return on the equity. with the level of uncertainty that we have, that's a hard investment. the one thing i'll tell you, if we're looking at a low carbon future, we have to balance the technologies and the capability of the technologies. we think the future, there is a very bright future for energy storage and energy management systems, and that's, that was the cornerstone of our new partnership with the national labs. that's got to be advanced, and we have to help commercialize that technology. but to do that, and to maintain a low carbon environment, you have got to have an all-of-the-above strategy. when california shut down two nuclear plants, with all the investment that's been made in renewables in california, the

carbon output went up 35%. germany has invested significant amounts of money into renewable energy and technology, and transportation capability. they determined they were going to shut their nuclear fleet down and now they're burning lignite. the reduction of carbon in the country of germany, started down, ticked back up and now it's flat. some of the highest energy costs in the european union based off of that design. we're saying give us an outcome. where do you want to go and let the market design how to get there in the most economic way or give us predictability. if that's not what the nation's policy is about, then we know how to make investments and how to support these investments going forward. >> let me jump in there. first thing i should point out from the perspective of the

labs, we work for the federal government and therefore the federal government suggests, sets the agenda, and we deliver on that, but you should understand that the balance between sustainability and manufacturing has actually tilted over the past few years. i would argue that what's actually happening in parts of the market now particularly around electrical storage with electric vehicles is that that's fast moving into a situation where people choose this because they want one, and because they want one of those, then the technology needs to be there. so it isn't just i think driven by regulation or by a view of the market. another point to come back in sort of a historical public/private partnership goes all the way back to the founding of argon. in 1946 argon was formed to produce nuclear power, to create

all of the first generation nuclear reactors, several of which are now operating, and there was a very clear set of a public agenda which involved the transfusion of these new technologies into private industry for the benefit of the country, and so when do you have that purposeful policy, which sticks for a while, then in fact we can, turns out we can work together very well. we didn't of course put in nuclear power there because we thought it was low carbon. wasn't the reason. >> too cheap to meter. >> too cheap to meter apparently. >> we have one minute left. i wanted to pose the other big thing that's going on, cyber attacks, cyber war, the german intelligence, british intelligence and u.s. all are describing cyber attacks as a threat to democracy, to our systems. to what degree is protection against these attacks one of the aspects of this research? >> so partnership between the industry, the national labs, the department of homeland security, and the d.o.e. is very collaborative right now.

it's very structured. there's an electric sector security council that we meet on a regular basis. we have live monitoring on 75% of the consumers, electric consumers today. we have monitoring on the systems of intrusion, detection devices. it was with the partnership and the national labs we've been able to develop that technology. the labs developed it and we've been able to commercialize it coming up. there's a focus what we have to do going forward but it is really one of the best public/private partnerships that we have. >> peter? >> yes, i think i agree, and you know, that's a very important link.

it's doable. you know, i mean at the moment there's all kinds of stuff which is connected to the grid and the internet that doesn't have any security on it at all. we are here for the nation's security, that's our job and something we take seriously and there's a great partnership with the electric power distribution. >> we'll have to stop right there. thanks very much both of you. >> thank you. >> thank you, appreciate it. u.s. council competitiveness forum continues now, partnerships between colleges and businesses. >> thank you very much. it's a great privilege and honor to be here. we have, at our panel, some really esteemed panelists who are coming from the world

of research, collaborative sciences as well as venture capital and business. so it is a great pleasure to do this topic of artificial intelligence at a national level. i think this is the perfect time to conduct this as a national level and i want to thank the council, i want to thank debra and all the council leaders for giving usa chance to present artificial intelligence. what i would like to do is for the panelists sitting here, roy cynthia and daniella, i would like to mention several facts why this is a tipping point where artificial intelligence is today.

the tipping point is you see a lot of people are talking about artificial intelligence as the next internet revolution. it is absolutely the next internet revolution. it's very pervasive. not only that, we're now seeing, according to some of the economists and people from china, for example, they are saying this is the next electricity. this is the next energy. why this is all happening. the level of investments in artificial intelligence has been really very high. and we're now seeing a huge potential of all of the ai hardware and software reaching approximately $47 billion by 2020. that's a huge step up. we see enormous, enormous opportunities in the area of startups, especially in silicon valley, but in many ecosystems as the panelists can vouch around the world. so far there are over 1500 startups across the world that are leveraging artificial intelligence. that's not a small number.

you look at the information, for example, ibm watson back in 2011 was simply focused on basic machine learning, not deep learning. now they have 30 components focusing on deep learning today. google with only a few deep learning initiatives several years ago. but today they have more than 1,000 components in the space. we're seeing business models being changed, totally transforming the industry, totally transforming the world of academia and research. this is now entering a stage where i just came back from g-20 in germany. it is a high topic on digitalization task force focusing on artificial intelligence. because as you know, digitalization alone major impetus for growth around the world. additional 20% of growth in artificial intelligence will probably lead to 1% growth worldwide. that's why it's critically important, and that's why we're having this discussion. so with what i'm mentioning

regarding all this information, regarding the internet of things right now, they are basically saying it creates a value of over 1.9 trillion by the 2020, 2023. the numbers are enormous. we were just few years ago, again, from venture capital perspective playing with only 200, $300 million invested in artificial intelligence. but now today, we're going to close the year of probably close to a billion dollars invested in the space. we have with us the managing director of bloomberg data. you have ventures and other groups, intel capital heavily, heavily investing. in the next several years, we anticipate investments will be at $5 billion in artificial intelligence. so with everything going on, we're on the cusp of major revolution. the models are going to shift. let me be a maverick.

i think some companies won't exist because of what we're seeing. i will pose a question first to you, daniella, what do you see in terms of the perception and are we reaching the point right now where our economic models are going to shift and change and what do you think the future will bring to the united states? >> so it's a privilege and a great honor to be here. thank you for this great question about our research area. i would say this is an extraordinarily exciting time for ai. a lot of the tools we as a community are developing are maturing. this is due to great advancements on the hardware side.

we've heard about moore's law today but similar exponentials are happening in other aspects, in the quality of sensors, the quality of the motors that we have available to us, in how we communicate. practically everything about the digital space is subjected to moore's law, to an exponential. in addition to that, as community we have made tremendous progress in how we solve problems. and the third reason is the event of data. we now have the ability of collecting enormous amounts of data that help us learn how to do things right. when we cannot write from scratch algorithms that will solve those problems. good hardware, excellent algorithmic support, tremendous amounts of data are all coming together. there is a confluence that enables all these things to come together to deliver capabilities we never even imagined even five years ago. so five years ago, nobody was talking about self-driving cars. today it's inevitable that we will have self-driving cars. all major car manufacturers have announced self-driving car

efforts and we really expect this technology will come to bear and will bring us safety and will bring us more efficiency and lower impact on the environment. these are all tremendously exciting possibilities for the future. >> thank you very much. cynthia, just to follow up on that question, what are you seeing? you heard all the facts. we're hearing media tremendous potential, tremendous growth from the investment to revenue potential in artificial intelligence. what are you seeing in the area of robotics in artificial intelligence? specifically i know that you're also involved and founded a robotics company as well. give us an impression how you think it will change the business models and impact the

united states for tomorrow? >> sure. i would definitely say we're at an inflection point of ai. it's really not just about the technologies we talked about, advanced to the point where you commercialize the systems but when i first started working the field, it was a case where you had large corporations, advanced technologies speech recognition, machine vision. you take it, millions of dollars to develop these technologies and they would hold them close to the chest and productize their products based on these core technologies. what's been happening more recently on artificial intelligence, those tools and ability opened up to sdks.

third party developers can take ai techniques and put them into their own products and services. as ai starting to happen now you see many types of advices to exhibit artificial intelligence. that's recent. now we talk about google and microsoft services and watson and all the big companies are starting to do that. the way that impacts a company like mine, my company called gebo. back in the day today is december 9, 2016. it was with a partnership in the national labs we've been able to develop that technology, the labs developed it and we've been able to commercialize it coming out. there's a significant focus on what we can do and what we have to do going forward. it's one of the best public/private partnerships that we have. >> peter? >> i agree. that's a very important link.

it's doable. at the moment there are all kinds of stuff connected to the grid and the internet that doesn't have any security on it at all so that's really vulnerable. there's a real opportunity, i think, as you go to more distributed systems to build in a level of resilience which is very different from being completely fail safe but

major players from facebook, google, microsoft, ibm really buying out ideas, buying out start-ups. people who are leaders in this space. there have been over 150 acquisitions. 40 just alone this year by the corporate venture community especially of the companies that i mentioned. where do you see this going? >> we invested on behalf of bloomberg, exclusively in companies that influence the future of work. when we started our fund, we did not mention or think about artificial intelligence. this was 3 1/2 years ago. and six months into starting the fund one of my partners came to me and said we should start looking at this artificial intelligence thing. at first i dismissed her. three or four months later she

came back and found 2,000 or 3,000 start-ups. we prefer the term machine intelligence because it conjures up less of the scientific nightmare. as an investor my job is just to help them plug the invention into the power at the end of the day and then commercialize it. we play a role that's relatively late in the process, which is to say governments, large corporations, academic institutions start the chain of invention. and we're just delivering the last mile. for venture capitalists to be excited, it means it is almost ready. that said i still think it's early. the conversations we're having now about machine intelligence are similar to the ones about the internet in 1997. if you remember that moment when everybody started saying, well, what's your internet strategy? >> they hired people with titles like webmaster.

the tools are beginning to democr democraticize. the acquisition so far has been a blip relative to what will happen and we look at it at first, we said maybe this trend of machine intelligence as otherwise people might be able to do, maybe it's as big a trend as mobile. then we said, no, it seems bigger than that. maybe it's a big a trend as internet. actually, i think it might be as big a trend as all of software today. if you look at the productivity numbers it's actually unclear whether it's had that big of n effect on technology and i think that's because we've been waiting for the promise of the kinds of inventions we'll see now through artificial intelligence. >> just to follow up to the earlier statement i made when i was in berlin. the chinese were saying that they are creating funds, specifically related to artificial intelligence. one alone has put together, as

you know, a $200 million fund. this is happening right across china. investments are very, very important. for to us make sure our start-up community, and to make sure we are reinventing and reinventing our future, and to keep our leadership position, which i think we should in the united states, what do we do? >> i think venture capital is a rounding error. much more important is government investment. and large corporate investment in riskier, longer term research. we receive the end of the pipeline. it's funny. we've now done this study for three years, mapping all the artificial intelligence companies. the first year, we got a bunch of calls from academics who said oh, i've been working on this, thank you for finally see it. the second year, a bunch of calls from investors who said oh, last year i saw what you did and now i want to put some money into this thing. this year, for the first time, the wave of calls is from the fortune 500. so we now have big, multinational corporations. and not the ones who have the technology skills to actually

invent, as ibm did, as google now does, as facebook now does. but every company is saying, wait a minute. i need to do something about this. so, if you are part of the leadership team, you ought to be asking what is our artificial intelligence strategy. now, note, just like the late '90s with the internet, the biggest danger is that many companies will blow billions of dollars on foolish ai investments before we figure out what to do. but we'll probably have to go through that phase. then i think we have 25 years ahead of us of incredible dividends for the economy and human beings. >> roy, thank you. i agree. i think we need a solid ecosystem. can't have venture capital sticking out. you need corporations and well funded research, especially at the government level to make sure that we main tape our ver competitive position. as you know, u.s. is very competitive in this space. next follow-up countries are in the nordic area, sweden and israel and other places. >> i don't know how competitive

is u.s. is. for what it's worth, this is an area where canada was focused on this issue for decades while the u.s. was basically asleep at the switch. china seems much more focused on this issue. one of the issues we have and where a group like this can be helpful as an industry right now, we lack strong hypothesis about where growth can come from. we have lots about economic growth, but actually think this is a warning call to the u.s., which is not the leader on this issue right now. >> thank you. >> i would like to jump in to add and say i was in china in august at a meeting where the governor of the province announced $500 million in robotics research for the province along. >> amazing. >> this is for the guandong province. let's consider our investment, national robotics initiative is amazing. it's wonderful. it's at $30 million a year for the whole community. the whole country. >> you know the amount the u.s.

government spends annually on ai research, funding basic ai research? the president released a report. ai should be important. and the number was -- a billion dollars. it is nothing. we need at least 10x. >> i agree. i think it should be a public/private partnership. we need government, families, all the institutions. >> sure. >> just coming back to you, regarding, you know, your home country, for example, romania and other places, you see -- when i have trouble in the region, just in slovenia alone, they have invested heavily in a lot of the artificial intelligence research and people. but it's not reaching the markets. how do we bring that talent that right now everybody is looking for talent of specific ai talent, indeed modeling statistics. how do we bring this talent into the united states to develop market ready solutions and products?

>> so, yeah, that's a great question. i would say we have a lot of talent at the top universities in the united states, but it's not easy for students who graduate to remain in our country and give back after their training because they do not get a visa. it's difficult for them to get a work visa. and so i think we need programs that enable our students to continue to stay here. at the moment, many of the students return to their home countries and they help build the local economies there. so, we have to do something about that. >> yeah. thank you. sin cynthia, we are at a point where industries are being created. we are seeing in the technology world what google, what facebook is doing. can you share with us your experience in robot, but also in the consumer space, which companies right now are the first movers and what business models forming as well as enterprises?

what are you seeing? what is research doing to align and connect with some of those first movers? >> yeah. so, before i answer that, i want to also just raise the opportunity of artificial intelligence in education. so many of these questions around talent and opportunity. again, we hear this theme of quite a lot this morning. artificial intelligence offers a new approach to bring potentially high quality education for everyone through we need to start tapping the problem at early childhood. way too much science is showing that critical neural foundtation that's formed in 0 to 5 years, that even if you start kindergarten mind it's very hard to catch up. artificial intelligence and these technologies offers an opportunity so you can learn at home and not just as school to augment what teachers do. i see this as an area of critical innovation we need to

take seriously as a country. now, in terms of the kind of leaders in the area robotics, i have to say, clearly, there are a lot of really profound movers in the space depending on the area of robotics. agricultural. medical, transportation, cars and so forth, but i have to say, the united states in terms of these first kind of bold companies still is producing a lot of the most innovative products and models. even in my own sector of personal robots coming swoot into the home, we did a crowd funding campaign to raise kind of venture capital and that stage. you had to put your idea out there. there have been so many copycats around the world to do what we're doing because the idea is out there. often the invasion is being started in the united states and i would like to see the ability for us to lead and own that rather than being taken over because there's so much more investment mapping in other parts of the world. >> yeah. cynthia, thank you. because we're a little bit short

on time and i have a lot of questions. this is a very interesting topic. i'm sure our audience as well. there's been a lot of talk regarding autonomous enterprises and what makes enterprise autonomous. some talk about self-service, neural networks. roy, maybe you could talk about some of the examples and what you're seeing in the autonomous enterprise space. >> i would like to find a company that runs itself. sounds like a good thing. we tend to invest in things that are very mature. i'll give you examples of things. they tend to be a large data set, immediate business value and an immediate way to deliver value to a customer. i'll give you a very tangible example. we invest in a company called textio. before you publish the job description, it analyzes data about past job descriptions to predict the quantity, quality and gender mix of applicants and lets you edit your job description before you put it

out there to maximize the potential results in the world. the reality is they're using relatively straightforward, well understood learning techniques. we invest in orbital insight that scans and estimates the size of market. so, for example, they can approximate how quickly is the chinese construction market growing by counting the shadows on buildings? a lot of these data driven. the question that this all raises is what happens to the experience of work and jobs together with new america bloomberg has been driving a project called the shift commission to study long-term scenarios for work in the united states. and i think the potential range of outcomes we might have. it's easy to picture the self-driving truck. uber just bought a company that does this, just made its first beer delivery. we did focus groups in ohio with truck drivers watching that delivery.

some fascinating results, but the self-lending officer, the there is a variant of this in any industry and the total number of jobs is not really the issue. a balloon doesn't pop because of pressure overall. it pops because of a pin. we have many, many different professions across the united states where there's some risk of profound change. so, whatever industry you're in, i think there is some ai application that is coming for you very quickly. >> just because we're running low on time, and i want to get into the area of the darker side of artificial intelligence. i believe that it will create lots of jobs in cybersecurity. we're stepping up on value creation in the united states. we're always looking to solve problems. we are looking to solve problems and stepping up in value creations we need to have people who are architects,

statisticians. but i understand that there will be 7% to close to 14% job loss by 2025 in a lot of areas. roy, you've done a lot of studies with truck drivers and taxi -- >> we looked at all the research. when we tend to debate these things we tend to have a point prediction about here is what i think will happen and, therefore, what we should do. the reality is human beings are terrible at prediction. so really the right way to think about it, and the reason we're doing scenario planning for the future of work is to try to prepare for a wide outcome of scenarios. >> i apologize because of the shortness of time. >> sure. >> and i just want to jump to daniella for some comments regarding the job loss or opportunities in the space. >> i see ai as a vector for tremendous positivity. i see ai improving the quality of jobs. in other words, consider any job. its repetitive and predictable

aspect can be done by a machine. that's not just for truck drivers and other jobs that are really obviously in the line of machines. so, i really see a huge opportunity to bring safety, to bring customization and to bring more efficiency and joy. because if you have a machine who does all the routine parts of the job that you might not be excited about, you have more time to focus on what you're interested in. >> thank you very much. and, cynthia, just as we're coming to the closure of this session, there has been a lot of talk privately and also through the media, discussing the ethics issue of artificial intelligence. they're trying to scare us, in fact, to say that the ai world catastrophic to mankind because they'll become smarter. the machines will become smarter than human beings. you heard that discussion. i had several friends from google and other companies that

took that further saying in 20, 30 years we're going to attach our brains and we will scan all this information almost like what we're doing with the phones. so they are predicting this scary future. but i'm not sure that this is the future, conscious machine and i want to get your feedback and your perspective on the ethics issue and where we're going with ai. >> yeah, i think the primary ethics issue is making sure that the ai we create truly benefits everyone. if you hook at the application, one of the big reasons i keep coming back to education, for me, that's one of those areas where ai could benefit on the planet. it's all speculation. within a specialized domain, we can create an ai that can perform better than a person.

these ais that do one thing, that is all they really do. the new dialogue that's happening is the collaborative aspects. it's ai that works in conjunction and partnership with people so that the human ai team is more proficient, more productive, more successful than either the ai alone or the human loan and that's where a lot of the energy is going, so i don't see the doom and gloom. i see us p being augmented and being able to lead successful and fulfilling lives because of the partnership. we have to get it right ab that's when you get back to the basic verge and the application of that research. >> and government support for economic security for individuals. 100 technologists released this project. to call for exploration of the idea of a universal based income. because we think we need some

compliment to the uneven effect on employment. >> thank you and finally, one quick, brief answer from each of you. how does ai impact globalization? there's been a lot of discussion about outsourcing. we're at a stage where we're leaving automation and going to complete autonomy and how does it impact developing countries, how does it further grow our economy? what is your take? >> i like the idea of customization. i like to think about how we do manufacturing today where someone designs our products and they are manufactured overseas mostly. so now, imagine that we replace that process with a customized process, where we have customized templates for various products that people could customize and that then get produced in a local factory and this could impact the u.s. and

every other country on the planet. >> thank you. >> in terms of globalization, i think in terms of the empowerment, but also of the individual. so ai offers the opportunity for deepization and empowerment so services that we have to go to, industries and corporations for, going to be able to come at a personal level to the homes. whether it's finance planning, education, health care, i think we're going to see the empowerment in a new way and i think that would be a global way. roy! sorry to end on this, but not sure i have anything useful to add. i don't really consider myself an expert in the u.s. >> america first. >> i agree. what do you mean? >> where less than globalization. >> i would say that the first mover thing is wildly overrated. we need when these things work for them to benefit the united states. but i don't care who's first. >> great, i think this is an exciting time and i believe this

is our future. i think we as american entrepreneurs, american businesses, american research should be investing a lot more because this is a space chakd make a difference for the united states and the world and we've seen today prospectives coming from the top academics and research as well as prak tigs ners and financial capital and thank you very much for listening and being part of the future because i think the next time we meet, i think we may have intelligent agents that will guide us to this meeting, to lunch. we'll schedule things for us. it wouldn't be that very cool future for us and i truly hope that it happens very, very soon. thank you, everybody. >> next, leaders from industry and national labs will showcase exciting, potentially game changing innovations. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the director of pacific northwest national laboratory, dr. steve ashby.

>> good afternoon and congratulations on your 30th anniversary. very happy to be part of this. as we clear that so hopefully, we don't have a tripping hazard. i think it's appropriate i'm following the sessions we had earlier talking about the grid. talking about machine intelligence and really about bringing those together. what i'd like to talk about is energy. it illuminates our night sky. it warms our homes and powers our economy. and thank you. and the united states, we use a tremendous amount of energy. about quads of energy each year. the department of energy's national laboratory, we're working hard in partnership with ak -- to ensure we have the clean, affordable and reliable

energy that we'll need not only today, but into the future. another part is looking how we can make greater use and better use of the energy we already produce. that's important because when we look at that 97 quads, we waste about two-thirds of it in terms of waste heat and other inefficiencies. let's put that in perspective. what would this wasted energy do for us? >> it would power the rest of our hemisphere for the entire year. the entire immediate as africa. if we can find better ways to be efficient, we can say that energy, save money and reduce outlay frs plants. i want to taukt a what we're going doipg in collaboration

with many others to increase energy efficiency. see if we can get it here. there we go. and particularly, i'd like to focus on our electricity usage. we use electricity for variety of things, here, you're seeing a montage of things ranging from lighting, h vak, the it equipment we have in our homes and factories, a whole variety of things out of the 97 quads. we have made tremendous progress when they're running, the next challenge, is can we infuse them with some of the sbel jerngs some things we're doing here, so not only more efficient when they come, but they know when to run.

to know when to avoid peek, low times. what's that we're doing at the laboratory. voltron. an innovation we've come up with really combining some of the technologies we have today for controlling appliances and technologies. from building to campus to regional scale and infusing it with intelligence. so, what is this device? a combination of the real smarts. running on a lightweight computing platform, such as raspberry pie and made available through u open source, so our partners can download it through the website and use anytime a variety of different plaixs. one of the things we're able to do is partner with different people to explore the ways vol tron can be used.

we're also partnering with people to adopt this technology. what can it do for us? >> hopefully move the slide forward. what we have here is we can use that technology to within your building to control appliances or devices. here, we're just showing an hvac unit you might see in your supermarket. to control that, a series within the building, a buildingist itself, so you know have a smart building and cap or region. more than just that, you could have a talk to the grid. in a two way fashion through trans active control. which enables the energy, which makes the power of the spark grid a reality. so, this helps us do that.

what you can see is that in case of the refrigerated display case, in partnership with emmerson ran an experiment and show that if you use this, you could save a tremendous amount of energy, o think about the refrenlg rated display cases. they have a defrost cycle. presently, that just runs every so often. when it run, it's very efficient, but runs a lot when it doesn't need to. suppose you have environmental sensors that brought in the data stream to voltron and told you when you needed to defrost it. that's what it allows you to do. it can control that. 75% you could save enough power for 200,000 homes. another project we did with a

company, transformtive wave in western washington, is looked at retro fitting voltron into a line they have and using it for rooftop hvac. up to 50% savings on that device, not buying a bunch of new equipment, a retro fit of that into a product they're already offering. this is the of this technology where you're infusing in terms of it to bring together to make these things really smart. now, that's what you're doing to control a single device or a piece of equipment. also do that throughout your building and make the building smart or you can look at what you can do in terms of a campus. and that's what we're doing at pacific northwest national laboratory. here, we've installed voltron in

nine different buildings with a number of devices connected to it and we actually manage this and look at the whole campus now and we're going to control our energy usage, optimize it and actually make the laboratory itself a test bed for demonstrating the power of trans active control. here's an example of the control room we use here. we can monitor as part of our efforts for stainability operations. we look at this what we have going on here. that's what we're doing at the laboratory. in addition to that, woops. we also have partnerships going on with the university of washington. and washington state university. they're using voltron in different ways. university of washington is looking at using it for solar technologies. washington state, large scale stationary storage and they're

doing independent study, what we're now getting funding from, the washington state clean energy fund is to bring that together into a single regional demonstration of the power of trans active energy, where we can manage our loads in real time and watch the signals we're getting from the grid. we're doing that in the northwest. we've now been partnering with colleagues in ohio at the university of toledo where they're also looking at this with respect to the corporation of renewables and stationary storage and they're doing their own demonstration and our plans in the future is to link that at a larger scale. here in washington, d.c., we have plans to go up to 150 within the next year. so, here what you're seeing taking a simple idea a lot of smarts in terms of the -- and

working with with people to understand the different applications we could have for this technology. and making it available to our partners so they can integrate it into their existing product lines and new product lines. we've demonstrated the ability to save a huge amount of electricity. and save consumers and building owners a lot of money in the process. and so, we'd like to do here is invite you to join us looking for different ways in which we can exploit the voltron platform, how you can develop those applications for it or if you're a company, the product line, talk to us about how you can incorporate it into those product lips so we can have a bigger impact. and exploit that to save money and energy. so thank you very much.

please welcome senior vice president at vance technology and chief technology officer rockwell automation. >> good afternoon. let me also congratulate the counsel on 30 great years. i appreciate the opportunity to speak here this afternoon. in my ten minutes, i'm going to highlight some of the exciting manufacturing opportunities. we heard that manufacturing is atten inflection point for realizing unprecedented product i felt from a lot of the technology advances that are occurring around us so, if you look at all of the different technology advances, if i can only advance the slide, so when you look at the different technology advances that are impacting us, everything from u bik wiitous connectivity, machine learning analytics.

we heard a lot about some of these technology, just a few minutes ago. regarding artificial intelligence, machinery. well, the excitement in the manufacturing area is around industrial internet of things. you've seen projections that by 2020, there will be 50 billion devices connected to the internet. out of these, roughly half will be in the industrial space. fz companies like cisco and mckenzie have put out new numbers and that's around $15 trillion. just a smidgen less than our national debt. so off these $15 trillion of new value 27% is expected to be in manufacturing. that's the largest segment of the benefits industry from industrial internet of thing, so that's pretty exciting. if there really is roughly $4.5

trillion of value to be b created from industrial internet of things, how do we go about it? what are some of the impediments? i'm going to talk about not just the opportunities, but what are the areas where more innovation is needed? where more talent is need ed and better policies are needed to move forward. basically, what the connected enterprise means is bringing together data from your production site, manufacturing sites with your supply chain, from your customer demand inputs, so bringing them together and thep optimizing productions to get the most value.

we started with the enterprise roughly about six, seven years ago. we started out by rolling out any rp system, which a lot of companies are tone in the past decade, then it's not just the erp system, but we started transforming the process. we started working on people, processes and technology and optimize. seven or eight years ago, when we promised product to a customer, roughly 82% of the time, we delivered on time. that was not acceptable. they're going to have this bill of terribles. 98% of the time, we deliver on tile.

how? well, now, we have full visibility into customer demand. we know what the customers are buying. we produce roughly 300,000 products. so know whag the customers are buying, knowing where the demand is is, allows us to produce to demand. it allows us to stock in our distribution center, the products in the highest demand. it also gives the visibility to our sales force to sell products that are immediately available. we call them preferred products. no surprise that we discovered there are 30,000 products we sell 80% of the time. so having the visibility into what's being consumed using that to drive the production processes got us to the 97% number using this concept. they come back with four things. they want faster time to market. from new idea to prokt, time to market. they want to optimize that.

they want energy, roughly half is consumed by industrial operations. just in the u.s. alone is $6 billion in savings, so reducing cost is a major driver. the third area that most manufacturing companies will tell you that is a major today is uptime. they want to increase their asset up time. you walk into a food and bev type factory, most machines are only up 60 to 70% o time, so 30 to 40% of f the time, they're under maintenance, may be cleaning place. may be routine updates to the machines that are being made and that impacts productivity in a huge way. the final area that's real important is enterprise risk reduction. building and more safety and security. it's making their environment track and trace.

they want complete traceability. a lot of innovations coming out of rock well are helping our customers achieve these four major drivers. today, welcomed say that to some extent, manufacturing is modular. and in its own way, it's cure. of course o, security is never done. we know this is a continuous process. where we're doing in the near future is towards making manufacturing more predictive and optimized. a lot of machine learning, artificial analytics, cloud, mobility, all of these technologies will move manufacturing towards becoming more predictive and optimized.

where we want to go towards, the long-term vision is to make manufacturing self-healing and optimized. bewe see a change today. in the past, manufacture you ares were looking for low cost labor, tax holidays as we heard this morning again from intel. looking for location where is they could put manufacturing where they could benefit from these cost inventives. so as you build more connectivity, there's going to be a major security risk. they're looking for good risk for innovating good risk. they're looking for environment where there's a lot of innovation.

they're looking for talent. i don't need to repeat what we heard this morning about talent. there's clearly the change in the talent that's needed in plan plants today. a lot of the jobs where a person would shovel, that's not being done today. we need security experts. we need people who understand how the internet works, that also are living the plant environment, so clearly, there's a change in the skill set needed and we heard enough about education so i'm not going to belabor that point and finally, policies and procedures. we saw a speaker draw this expolice station card. if you look at that curve, it's the growth and regulations. we need friendly regulations, we need friendly policies.

in the future, that's what manufacturing companies are going to look for. i would love for the council to continue its leadership of manufacturing. we need help to get manufacturing to its next evolution and it won't happen without public, private partnership, so thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk this afternoon. [ applause ] >> ladies and gentlemen, please welcome mr. adam conn. founder and ceo of aconn semiconductor. [ applause ] >> thank you very much. before i begin, i'd like to thank you the counsel for having me. congratulate them on 30 years. it's a very important time now in text message and maintaining competitiveness, particularly within our field of advanced materials is crucial. i've been looking for ward to this talk for a number of of months. earlier this year, i spoke at the international forum of the americas in toronto talking

about riding wave of o disruptive technologies. it was disconcerting to hear from the u.s.'s position in terms of competitiveness was being questioned and so one month ahead of the consumer electronics show, i am so delighted to be able to engage with you and talk about the work. they're not only advancing the innovation technology, but advancing our competitiveness through clean technology, opening up the possibility, a number of of captivating markets. i would like to frame my talk with how it's more -- telecom and automotive market, now, the global semiconductor market is a huge market, $350 billion market worldwide.

but specific to the united states, it's actually the third largest contributing to gdp behind automotive. more importantly, it enables over a trillion dollar global market. within these, three key sub markets are very limited. power devices. things are overheating, power efficiencies are are about 90% inefficient. not good. wearable systems. we have these new technologies. augmented reality, virtual reality, very, very important, not only for fun, but military defense capability and sensing in addition to other industries, it's a $40 billion market with a compounded annual growth rate. additionally, the sensor market is key and these are quite limited by the present materials capability. we specialize in diamond based semiconductors.

diamond has been known to be a efficient material. perhaps the ultimate semiconductor material. diamond can conduct heat five times more efficiently than copper, the current status quo material, but above and beyond that, there's a highest power in addition to numerous other terrible attribute, which makes it very, very favorable for today's electronic, particularly as we're seeing in the new, different types of cell phones, won't mention names that are being either incinerating on power up or being ship damaged, so we know heat is still a major, major issue. and from diamond, we can see not only superior performance, increased energy efficiency, but thinner profile, the next big thing. for me, i think the next big thipg is is really going to be fully transparent electronics. because diamond is a transparent semiconductor material.

it can with are be married in with metals and you know have the ability to have fully transparent electronics. and so our earlier work in collaborating with national laboratories as well as other universities like the fabrication facility has been focusing on molecular engineering. actually going to the atomic level. and engineering them to alter the transparency or mechanical properties, so it's been a quite effective demonstration in terms of showing capability of diamond. when we compared to the state of the art silicon market. we see it's not only 1,000 times thinner, but we see that it's a million times higher. extremely efficient material. this is perhaps 507 years out. it takes about ten years to bring a ship to market. if we look at the optical and

thermal needs, the systems market. we can bring numerous solutions to much needed problems. within the aerospace market, more efficient. today, we're develop optical windows, more reliable systems which can better detect ballistic signatures, as well as high dishtsy so they can survive et cetera. we all have cell phones. all enjoy using automobiles which connect and won't leave us alone. with a semiconductor, we've been focusing on building a diamond

prairie. this has been a public private partnership. it came from center melinda bush and actually having us relocate at headquarter in illinois. so not only traditional semiconductor labor, but also engineering the new wave of folks to work on materials in competitive labor and manufacturing. the site is the world's first compatible eight inch diamond semiconductor line. no other line is specifically readily insert bable into today's marketplace to be able to address and process other materials and as a part of that signifying this, we actually are the recipients of an incentive

package as well as the local county and city. we're proud to announce this sum e, we brought back key elements of motorola's razor team. our chief operating officer chief technology officer as well as in addition to others down on the design level. after bringing on this talent, we had to do something exciting. right? so, we announced the third party test results of our diamond on glass technology, this brought the question of the world is can diamond actually provide what we need in consumer electronics.

more outlets picked up the story. so around how to 50 different outlets around the world reported on our third party testing results for diamond on glaz and the speculation was going wild. when are we going to see a diamond screen for cell phone? so i actually thought today for this audience, i would bring the world's first diamond glass screen and show you that not only is it here, it's been productized. and when we do something like this, we don't make this for one unit, we make it for 300 million units. so this technology is here today and actually, the next question after this, this is great, something for a diamond screen or wearable screen. it has much higher -- when your phone is to your face, it's much more cool and so, from 800 times thinner profiles compared to the

leading glass competitor, we see over six times harder material. if you checked the paper this is morning, we announced the world's first diamond glass lens. so, when we talk about the prospect of a diamond, is this material ready for market, we're not only seeing it being deployed in today's military technology system, we're see ng the broad, broad spectrum and it's very exciting because this was not only originate nd the labs for the united states, especially developed here, resernled to scale, but now

brought to pilot production, so i thought this was a very stellar way we could tate that innovative science started here. we'll be developed here and we have to bring it to mass scale. we are proud to be doing this in the midwest. please track our efforts under the diamond. thank you. >> our next panel will explore next generation opportunities at the intersection talent, technology, investment and infrastructure. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the cofounder new institute of thinking and research in motion, mr. mike --

dr. carol l. fult, chancellor at chapel. senior political reporter, cnn. >> hi, everybody, thanks for being here. it's great to be here. we want to start the four pillars of course talent, infrastructure, investment and technology. want to start talking about talent. first. and i'm going to start with you on this one because this is something you've written about. the idea of learn bability. -- learnability. the idea of upscaling. what do you mean by that? and what sort of responsibility do you think employers have in terms of that area?