project that pitted private versus public, i think there's no reason that the space is too large. there is a lot of cooperation and collaboration. we partner with the european effort as much as we do with the american effort. unlike, those previous science projects, it feels more collaborative than competitive. >> it is true, when you nail your goals, you are able to collaborate. when it is an open field __ the synthesis is the challenge. even with willingness to cooperate, synthesizing a final map for the brain, and eventually many brains, that is going to be the challenge.

technology now is a prime time to tackle this issue. >> speaking of narrowing your goals __ what you're doing in san diego __ you talk about how your cultivating community engagement. >> we make it personal. our participants are meeting us. one thing i discovered __ i came out of the lab __ not the closet, the lab. i was a basic scientists, but by meeting patients who would come to me with a diagnosis, i started really even challenging the idea of a patient. when we met her, she had already been diagnosed.

i was intrigued by the fact __ why does the medical field calll someone a patient the minute they are diagnosed. june was motivated to participate because she wanted to help someone in the future. i donate her brain, we could find out what really happened. that will help other people. in terms of ideas __ i wonder what the idea of a patient keeps us away. i met parkinson's patients they soon after their diagnosis. the question is, why me? one week ago i was riding my bike, and now i am a patient. it is more of a humanistic view of the brain.

i think it is important when people become more aware about the brain, that they become more responsible and self_aware of diet and nutrition. hand_in_hand with technology. >> you talked a little bit about people having regular mris in relationship with understanding how their own brain looks. >> it is like a self fee __ selfie of your brain. over time, they will tell you how your brain is doing. i used an mri scan from two

years ago, if i printed it now, it may be less flattering. [laughter] woody allen said __ this should be our favorite organ. it is who we are, and we know what happens with dementia. >> the thing about dementia __ an extremely terrifying, and also costly, diseases. do we have enough? is is looking promising? maybe 10 years __ how will that play out? >> i think the numbers are constantly changing. there was an nih panel that

recommended that the project be funded up to $500 million annually up to 2025. to be clear, the brain initiative, what has had a lot of momentum, is not incorporated into future funding, yet. to make the case __ you look at the societal cost of just alzheimer's alone. let alone, all the other things that are encompassing brain disease. whenever i say obesity, or eating disorder __ keyboard like, how is that related to the brain. how is in it related __ isn't it relates the brain? there's only things that impact

daily lives. one in four people in this country will have a diagnosable mental disorder. that means, every single person is affected by somebody __ somebody in your family, a coworker to affect your live. if you think about that, the burden is huge. we can do something about it. technology is here to make a difference. we just have to pay attention to it, and put some effort towards it. >> after all __ diabetes, heart disease, these are problems that science and medicine has __ i would not say resolved, but we have a handle on it. the only diseases that we really do not know what to do with our from psychiatric

treatment. we cannot transplant the brain. it is really where we need to focus now. the brain initiative and what allen institute is doing, it is to bring the brain up to speed to the rest of medicine. we are at a loss. looking at dementia, we still do not have a grasp on it. >> good luck. thank you very much. [applause] >> next, interviews with energy secretary, and secretary moniz. the event was part of the washington ideas forum.

[applause] >> welcome, mr. secretary. let me start with the question you probably get a lot, and i think secretary kerry gets a lot. what is the harm in doing keystone? >> as secretary kerry has said, hhe is hoping to decide the question soon. >> something want to get into a little bit __ tax reform, corporate tax reform. this is probably something you do not deal with a whole lot. there are a lot of incentives in the energy market, the energy world that are affected by this question of whether our corporate tax rates would come down. you promoted so many energy credits, what is the cost?

is there a cost to not using tax credit? >> let me broaden it a little bit to general iincentives that we have two accelerate to a low carbon future. the president has made it clear that we are moving towards a future. the department energy has rather enormous loan guarantee authorities. we have $40 billion left in play. we intend to continue the great success with our portfolio over the last year's over the energy spectrum.

on the tax side, a senator is hoping to advance tax reform. in the energy side, if we could broaden out, we could attract more capital into a clean energy future. >> would you oppose getting rid of tax incentives that exist? >> we support extension of tax credits. we especially support having predictable incentives. as you know, with wind, with production tax credit, ooscillations over time directly impact the ability of

firms, and customers, to make investments. we need to extend those renewable tax credits. we need to do it in a way that there is particularly on all sides. >> you have an energy review coming out in january. what have you learned about the nation's energy infrastructure over the course of putting that together? >> it is a little bit of inside baseball. what we are doing __ it is very different in execution to the defense review in the sense that energy is really a whole of government exercise. we are working across the administration.

secondly, the first year's focus is specifically on energy infrastructure. we see the enormous challenges to our energy infrastructure over the last years. mainly, set of regional challenges. for example, in new england the lack of natural gas infrastructure has been a huge problem. that is what we are looking at. what we're finding is a bit of a preview __ the level of investment in the infrastructure that we need going forward is not out of line with what is happening already. it is the issue of how to be directed in a way, hhow do we guide it in a way that supports the kind of clean energy future that we are looking for.

how do we introduced the right information technology into the electric grid, for example. those are the kinds of policy recommendations that we will be coming out with. in some sense, what we're seeing already, it is not an issue of the level of investment because i have come up dramatically already in the last years. especially in response to the new energy situation. >> it is just a correction? >> yes, guiding it to have transitional policy to have clean energy infrastructure. for example, how to be guided to be resilient against what we expect to be increasing bouts of extreme weather, against cyberattacks, against physical attacks. there are a whole set of risks. we need to invest in the 21st century infrastructure in a way that both supports clean energy, and provides resilience.

>> your aides told me that you are and all of the above energy guide. i want to ask about that. i think there is a promotion of natural gas __ republicans attacked democrats saying there is a war on cool. is that true? >> tthere is no war on coal. there is a fundamental commitment on moving towards a low carbon future. what we mean by all the above is we walk the talk. we make major investments in developing the technology and lowering the cost for using all fuels in that low carbon world. so, what does that mean for coal? we have $2.6 billion to advance the kinds of integrated coal

projects that involve capturing carbon dioxide. most of them involve using that carbon dioxide in recovery. we have a solicitation right now for loan program __ $8 billion for supporting fossil fuel technologies that reduce emissions. we are working really hard to get those technologies developed, deployed, demonstrated. >> do you worry at all __ >> may i add __ in the carbon context, we have to keep in mind that this requires a global solution. we all know __ we use shy of 1,000,000,000 tons of coal per year.

the chinese are at or near 4,000,000,000 tons. we need to have these technology solutions that are going to be applied globally. >> the u. s. ban on crude oil exports __ where you stand with regard to that? >> there are a number of arguments on that. we've made it very clear __ wwithin the administration, involves multiple agencies. first of all __ there has been no policy change. we export products, oil products. and, we are examining the whole issue around the increase in oil production in the united states. how to refineries matchup, etc.

that will influence the response on exports. again, i want to emphasize the context. we still import 7 1/2 million barrels a day of crude oil. we are __ we have become a substantial exporter of oil products. we are exporting a lot of products, and importing crude oil. those facts also emphasize something else __ we remain linked to the global oil market, and global oil prices. >> it sounds to me that you're not excited about that been. >> what you say, __ let's just

say, we are evaluating all the factors. perhaps the arguments are little over ventilated at the moment. >> it sounds a like a keystone argument. the loan program __ bring us up_to_date on what that loan guarantee program has done. >> the loan guarantee program has already deployed $30 billion roughly across energy spectrum, including nuclear. the portfolio has been a major success. let me give you one example in

solar. in 2009, the united states had zero utility portable projects. in 2009, debt financing was not easily available. the loan program stepped in and provided that support for five projects, successfully. today, there are 17 projects completely with private financing. that is a model of what we want to do. get this kick started, and then let the private sector takeover. solyndra is the default. the portfolio has had a 2% default rate. i do not know of other portfolio defaults that have

had similar rates. it is a 2% default rate. i said earlier, we have $40 billion left. assuming we have a great pipeline, we intend to deploy that. >> i have one last question __ is there anything __ a target of opportunity in dealing with chairman on the senate energy committee? >> first of all, when it comes to click on an action plan __ our main guide for what we are doing __ we are exercising all of those programs through existing executive authority.

we will continue to do that. it is well_known that we have a good relationship with senator landrieu, michalski, it is well_known that we have worked well across the aisle, and in both chambers. that will continue. we will continue as well to pursue our programs. >> thank you very much. [applause] >> next up is thomas fanning. next spring, a coal_fired power plant will be erected in mississippi. fanning has called the money __ $5.5 billion __ a bitter pill to swallow.

with these high cost, come hhigh returns. tom fanning is here to talk about the painful and costly road that he has traveled to build the first ever u. s. power plant designed to include carbon capture technology. >> thank you so much. >> tom, thank you for joining us. i guess the big question i have is __ ddo you like ernest moniz? >> he is great. >> i heard you gave a talk in aspen a few years ago.

you talked about carbon. you talked about ways to constrain carbon, and how to deploy that. you just opened this mississippi plant. beyond that, you are taking things to china. you are one of the big power guys. you also deploying your energy to the lowest socioeconomic sector of the united states. i'm wondering, how do you get smart energy choices when the economic front there. >> it is so foundational. when i think about the challenges in the economy __

46% of the families that we are privileged to serve make less than $40,000 per year. their energy budget is relatively inflexible. when you talk to all the challenges that we face __ our ability to provide clean, revival energy for their benefit is enormous. >> so the strategy for those people is typically coal. >> but, when you say, what is the strategy. we have to balance those things. we are a bit smaller, but similar in the size to australia __ a big company. we have to figure out all the ways for this to work. we are the only company in america doing proprietary, but robust research and development.

we develop our own technology to essentially consume low_grade coal with a carbon footprint less than natural gas. and, we take the co2, tto produce more domestic oil. >> how do you turn everything into a kemper pproject? >> wwell, you do not. what we have to do is build the whole portfolio. i have this on youtube, if you want to see this whole thing. the idea is __ we need nuclear. 21st century coal. natural gas. the technology that we are talking about an kemper county, mississippi __ we signed to agreements in china.