All Episodes

[Episode #5] – Winning the Carbon War


One man's sweeping ride through three decades of campaigning for action on climate and deploying solar from a veteran of the "carbon wars," plus his pithy observations on what our leaders in government and in the energy industry really think. And in the news segment: New studies are finding that renewables are getting cheaper than any other grid power; the continuing death of "baseload power" and the rise of flexible grids; more coal and nuclear power plants are being closed; and why deregulation and consumer choice isn’t necessarily the fastest path toward grid power transition.

Guest: Jeremy Leggett, Founder of Solarcentury and SolarAid, Chair of Carbon Tracker, and author of five books on energy transition.

On Twitter: @JeremyLeggett

Recording date: August 28, 2015

Air date: October 21, 2015

Geek rating: 2

Chris Nelder: Welcome Jeremy to the Energy Transition Show.

Jeremy Leggett: Thanks Chris.

Chris Nelder: You've had a front row seat in the global campaign for energy transition longer than most, I mean since the 1970s and you offer a remarkably personal account of recent developments in your new book. You've obviously been committed to the energy transition effort for a very long time. But when did you begin to get the sense that this war as you call it could be won?

Jeremy Leggett: I think it ebbed and flowed. I had a couple of phases of optimism after Rio in 1992, I thought that things would move much faster than they ended up moving. Then again I had another phase of very qualified optimism of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997 because the energy incumbency did not expect the people who were trying hard on climate change to secure a protocol that would be capable of sending a signal. And of course we did. It was far from perfect but that was essentially the signal I think that materially contributed to the rise of renewables this century with agreement of the Kyoto Protocol but then of course Copenhagen was a huge set back in 2009. So you know I went through a few years of being pretty depressed about things. But over the last few years things have definitely turned around and I think we're in a phase that we've never seen before, we're in with a chance. I call my latest book, The Winning the Carbon War, meaning I think we have begun a process that might end up with us winning. I certainly don't mean to infer that we are guaranteed to win. And I think really as I look back on it with the benefit of hindsight, I didn't see this right at that time, but I think around the spring of 2013, April-May 2013 if you look at the diaries, and of course I keep a diary and a log on my web site. That's when a really regular drip of crikey stories started hitting the press. Now of course we read things on an almost daily basis that we wouldn't have believed possible a few years ago and I think the energy transition is definitely under way. There are big questions as to how fast it can proceed. Will it proceed fast enough to save us from some of the most awful possibilities of an enhanced greenhouse effect? But you know it's very clear not least in the reactions of some of the big energy incumbency companies. I'm thinking of E.ON, and GDF Suez who have done 180 degree turns in their business models and embraced some notion of clean energy future powered by renewables storage and smart grid and so we're living in very exciting times, redolent with opportunity but also depressingly seeing the more die hard quarters of the energy incumbency showing every every sign of digging in and going down with the ship and trying to take us with them.

Chris Nelder: Yeah I mean there's no question, it's a time of amazing ferment in the industry. So you've participated in many an energy and climate conference meetings in Parliament the United Nations, other high level dialogues all over the world and you have a better idea than most people of the political and economic dimensions of the climate challenge around the world. Do you think the upcoming COP 21 conference will be a success and how would we measure that?

Jeremy Leggett: Yeah, I think it's very difficult to be quantitative about this. I think it will on the very strong balance of probabilities, as I read things a moment be describable as a success. Now, what will that look like? Will it look like a piece of paper... that guarantees us staying below 2 degrees Celsius, or staying on track for something even less than that, 1.5 Degrees Celsius if that's what we end up having to do. No, we won't have that out of Paris but it will be about a direction of travel. It will be about sending a signal that is positive that reinforces what's already underway and amplifies it, accelerates it, that is what I think we're going to see, there will still be many open questions. But what I don't expect to see is what we saw in Copenhagen which was a lot of optimistic people going into the summit and then an absolute pig's ear of a result which really thrilled the coal industry at the time who thought they had a gold plated guaranteed future to dig up every lump of coal on the planet and burn it. I don't think we're going to see anything like that in Paris, he said with fingers crossed.

Chris Nelder: Right. Fair enough. All the oil majors used to invest in renewable energy. When I was in the solar business 10 years ago BP made some of the nicest solar panels on the market. Shell was one of the biggest solar panel manufacturers in the world. Chevron and Total have both invested in renewable energy solutions all around the world and even ExxonMobil used to invest in biofuels. But all of them have pulled back from renewables in recent years. Why do you think that happened? I mean why have they not embraced the energy sources of the future especially since they were doing it already. And especially now that they're becoming truly competitive with fossil fuels and fossil fuels face these unprecedented existential threats, what happened?

Jeremy Leggett: Well, I mean the first thing to say is to be fair to them, some of these companies haven't pulled back as badly as others. I mean Total are well invested in solar and they don't talk an adequate game but they talk a much better game than ExxonMobil, BP and Shell. And the real foot drag is now of which BP and Shell are the most disappointing because as you say, you know they used to talk and play a pretty good game. I didn't think we would have had a Kyoto Protocol if we hadn't had BP not just actively involved in the embryonic solar industry but saying all the right things about energy transition back in 1997. So they've gone backwards. ExxonMobil to be fair to them has stayed in the same depressing place it's always been. And I think what we're looking at here, this is the way I describe it in my book, is it's a problem of human culture. You know the neuroscientists tell us a lot about how these things happen. You have a belief system, it's a belief system that is hugely insulated by corporate information shields it holds that grownups do not and cannot get their energy really materially any other way than oil and gas. They have all ganged up now and thrown coal under the bus, which is very important. And you know that's a big step forward but they're still saying we can burn all our oil, all our gas and it'll be fine, or we have no choice any way. And this is depressing. I know a lot of these people because I used to be one of them in my first career as an, I was an Earth scientist pretty much a creature of the oil and gas industry I know quite a few of the senior suppliers and their culture allows them to get their heads around an argument that says that this really isn't their problem it's the problem of governments and if governments would just but get their acts together we would of course compete on a level playing field and we would go for green energy. And they say that in front of their peers they persuade themselves that that's their individual and collective belief system. Of course they ignore the fact that their public relations department some madly plotting and enacting shady things that we only know that the surface manifestations of. As I get told by people in the PR industry for example, blind guilt stricken people within the energy incumbency itself who trust me not to dog their names in it. So we are fighting a problem of human culture and the good thing I think about all this is that human cultures change. They collapse and I was talking to a very senior oil industry executive the other day, a lady who shall be nameless from a company that shall be nameless but she said words to the effect I'm paraphrasing but fairly and accurately she said look you know, imagine what it feels like when I'm sitting here talking to my kids at the table, a couple of years ago I could say that we were getting fuels out of the ground, oil and gas that were fueling economic growth and civilization and everything good that we stand for. All that's evaporated within just a couple of years, we now have college kids all over the world pressuring their campus governors to get investments out of fossil fuels, we have doctors divesting, making us no better than the tobacco industry. The British Medical Association. We have the Pope for heavens sake saying to the world's billion Catholics words to the effect that get on plan with the low carbon future or start worrying about your souls people. And don't you think that makes me feel? And so my answer of course was: not very good.

Chris Nelder: Tough place to be in.

Jeremy Leggett: Yeah. And that people say the divestment movement is very powerful it's not affecting much money compared to the amount of money and equities, now I think it's about politics, it's about I think an existential threat to malign human culture that can be deconstructed in very short order and we'll have people like this lady saying to her boss, you know what you solarize every piece of our infrastructure, and get serious about this future or I'm out of here. I'm going to spill secrets in so doing. You know I think that's what's coming Chris in my optimistic moments.

Chris Nelder: Wow, what a fascinating little view of what must go on in the minds of those folks. And I think it's a really interesting point that this is in fact a cultural question that goes on within the oil and gas industry and probably the coal industry is wrong. So the Carbon Tracker reports again a lot of traction very quickly with their warnings about fossil fuel assets being stranded by climate policy. That was a risk that surely deserved more attention than it had previously gotten especially within public pension funds. But now it seems that macroeconomic forces this year have crushed the prices of all commodities globally and they may be making fossil fuel reserves uneconomic to produce rather than climate policy making them sort of formally unburnable. And last year I speculated that at some point in the future we'll probably likely see oil prices spike up back to levels that killed demand as they did in 2008 which is actually a risk that I think is increasing now because oil prices have been low enough to slash an estimated $200 billion globally from investments in future oil and gas production. So what are your thoughts about the various forces that might render fossil fuel reserves unburnable, unproducible or unaffordable in the years ahead?

Jeremy Leggett: Yeah, this is an area where it's difficult for people like me not to engage in schadenfreude. I mean one doesn't have to talk to the incumbency any longer about climate change to really unsettle them about the clear and present danger that that you know the low and zero carbon future presents to their business models. And it's because of the reasons you say, these low oil prices, a lot of what they're out there doing is way below water, they will have to wait for much higher prices before they even even get their cost back much less make a profit. And these people all know this, the folk drilling up in the Arctic like Shell, the people contemplating drilling the subsalt in Brazil and in the shale as well in America. They are not profitable and they won't be profitable unless the prices go up and more and more investors are realizing this, more and more people are beginning to show signs of concern. Not yet panic but panic is conceivable at some point, given the low oil prices and then people say OK well lower oil prices are bad for renewables as well aren't they. To which my response is no nothing like as bad as they are for the incumbency. I'm not losing sleep over that. I don't know renewable energy executives who are losing sleep over it. And then the flip side obviously if you're not investing in exploration at some point down the track where there is such a narrow margin between supply and demand mismatch, its quite easy is very very unpopular to say this and not many people are, you and I are two who do. But you know it's really easy to see a quick reversion to a supply crunch if things like the banks pulling the plug on all the junk debt that's exposed in the shale for example in the United States. That becomes a clear and present danger. You know it can flip around very quickly and then what happens, you have exactly the same problem, the prices are too high compared to the alternatives in solar, wind, storage and the other parts of the clean energy family that are beginning to show signs of doing well. So it's possible to weave a narrative arc for people who for whatever reason except climate change, don't believe in climate change, and talk to them for hours about why all this is inevitable it's just a question of timing anyway just based on the economics of supply and demand and people like us have done this. In the book I describe a trip to Saudi Arabia where I had a really interesting time talking to folk who you know I've been forwarned did not want to be hearing about climate change. But you know at the end of the day you're talking to them about the same end result.

Chris Nelder: Yeah. So maybe in some fashion it doesn't really matter whether fossil fuel reserves are stranded via being unburnable or unproducible or unaffordable. Maybe those different drivers sort of change places at different times. Either way there doesn't seem to be any escape for the fossil fuel industry.

Jeremy Leggett: That's what I believe. I'm not comfortable avoiding the climate discussion. I think there are issues there that we have to think through. We have to figure out a way of collectively being more rational than we are. There's no excuse. When the neuroscientists tell us much about how our brains are operating individually and collectively. And so I'm not in the camp that says never talk about climate change because the Republicans don't want to hear about it, or the Saudis, whatever I think we have to because it's so much of a clear and present danger and ultimately once the energy transition is well under way and nobody is querying it any longer, there will be questions about whether you know we're going fast enough, hard enough where the two degrees as a ceiling to global warming is adequate. And you know whether we have to try and figure out ways of keeping that thermostat lower than 2 degrees, difficult as that looks like being from where we're standing at the moment.

Chris Nelder: Yeah. You know in recent years most of the big banks have forecast that renewables especially solar will be the cheapest form of new power generation in much of the world by 2020, if that's the case could the world achieve a needed reduction in carbon emissions through market forces alone without effective carbon policies?

Jeremy Leggett: Well, it's possible but not likely. I think the name of the game is mutual reinforcement. So for example the last session of climate negotiations I went to the Executive Secretary Christiana Figueras was warning negotiators things are moving so fast in the markets that you know you guys are in danger of getting egg on your faces and you've got to play catch up. And I think governments will collectively, of course there'll be exceptions but in the dynamic that we have now between the United States and China is very encouraging in this regard. So I don't think it will be an either or. But that said, as I told to people who are fresh to all these ideas and they need persuading on any one document you have to pull one thing down off the shelf.

Chris Nelder: Yeah, they need their FAQ.

Jeremy Leggett: Yeah, yeah. And I keep coming back to that UBS report from last year with a big team of analysts who looked at solar, storage and electric vehicles in great detail. You will know this one. And of course what they find is that right across the OECD by 2020, five years from now we will be able to have solar roofs, electric vehicles in the yard, big banks of batteries in the home, and with reasonable assumptions about how cost down trajectories continue, actual cost down in solar and projected for the most part in storage, that package that trio of technologies which would take you off-grid, zero emissions get you about to the extent that you need in your neighborhood and your region you better do that with a payback of six to eight years and crucially a rate of return, a simple rate of return every year of 7 percent. And they say this is going to change the face of the energy industry in ways that most people can't even imagine much less predict. So I'm in that camp, you know I'm more than cautiously optimistic that that this phenomenon can go much faster than most people including many supposed experts actually can comprehend.

Chris Nelder: Well, I completely agree on that. I think first of all the history of the energy agency forecasts has shown that they've radically underestimated the speed for decades already. And it only seems to be accelerating now, I think we're still waiting for those forecasters to catch up. So speaking of that the UK's energy transition now seems to be stalling out after achieving considerable success.

Chris Nelder: I mean its renewable energy generation reached a record 22 percent in the first quarter of 2015 and solar farms have been growing rapidly. Yet the government now seems to be backpedaling on the transition, its signaled its intent to slash the FIT and ROC incentives it's pushing forward with tenders for shale gas exploration over the objections of residents in the prospective areas, and its green lighted the new Hinkley Point Nuclear Plant under a contract that will cost twice as much as wholesale power does today. Why is this happening in the UK and how will it affect consumer electricity costs?

Jeremy Leggett: Again, I come back to the cultural issue its a relatively small number of men of a certain age and a certain political predisposition who are driving this, and they are tragically and catastrophically wrong and they are going to realize that on their watch in this five years one wonders what advice they are getting about the shale narrative in America, whether they know that the drillers in America collectedly have clocked up nearly a trillion dollars of debt, most of it junk and that is how you get the cheap gas in America that they lust after in Britain. And if they want to import that route to bankruptcy into Britain then good luck to them and they are not going to succeed. And that's just the economics. When you look at the geography of a productive shale play in the United States, and imagine that in their hinterland in their conservative voting hinterland, in the beautiful British countryside on this cramped and tiny island. Honestly I just think it's breathtaking. My prediction is they won't bring in a single productive play in their efforts. The opposition of the British people, Conservative, Liberal and Labor will be so great that they won't be able to get away with it. Never mind about the economics. But if the train comes off the tracks in the States in the short term as people like me suspect it will, then the Emperor's going to be left with no clothes and as for nuclear, as I say my book just once you can only say this once. There are many days when it seems to me that life is stranger than art, that you couldn't invent stuff in the world of fiction and do so credibly on the scale that we see it happening in a weekly, monthly, basis in the energy markets and for those people listening who have not heard the drama of the carbon in the pressure vessel of the French nuclear reactor that the Brits intend to install and in Hinkley Point, that is well worth follwing. That is a drama that is an existential threat to the entire French nuclear industry. French government knows this because they cutting nuclear down madly and bringing in renewables.

Chris Nelder: You're referring here to the Flamanville reactor.

Jeremy Leggett: Exactly the neck of the pressure vessel in the Flamanville reactor that's got way too much carbon in it and has now got to be ripped out and replaced if they can find the money to do it, on a project that's years over schedule, and billions of euros over budget already without this existential disaster that they've uncovered recently.

Chris Nelder: Just the very idea that they were able to put through this contract for Hinkley Point at twice the price of wholesale power just absolutely, I just thought as you would say gobsmacking.

Jeremy Leggett: Yes. Yeah absolutely. And a cultural problem, too many men of a certain age, not just in the energy industry in companies like EDF but also in the ministrys, you know in Whitehall who simply cannot get their heads around the fact that there are better ways to produce energy in society than those great big nuclear reactors that they have loved all their lives and that they view essentially as national status symbols that are capable of providing nations like Britain and France with nuclear weapons so that we can pretend to be on the same footing as the United States and Russia.

Chris Nelder: Well that is a great segue to, I guess I probably don't even need to ask the next question, which was can Nuclear be a part of meeting our climate challenge? I think you're probably going to say no.

Jeremy Leggett: Absolutely not. And the more money that gets poured down that hull, and the more time that gets wasted, and the more delusional propaganda that gets pushed out, that apeople without time find it easy to believe, the harder it's going to be to bring in the real solutions, the modular solutions, the fast flash to bang you know install time solutions that we know can get us to 100 percent renewable powered economies and the rest of it.

Chris Nelder: That's very much my view as well. I mean renewables are just simply a lot faster to build. It takes a lot less capital upfront to do it. There's just a lot less risk and ultimately it's cheaper so, yeah, I think we're on the same page there.

Jeremy Leggett: Indeed.

Chris Nelder: So, for years all of the major agencies from the IEA to the World Bank have projected that carbon capture and sequestration will be a big part of our response to climate change. And that those assumptions underlie their forecasts for fossil fuel consumption to remain at or near current levels for decades to come. Do you think this is a reasonable or likely expectation?

Jeremy Leggett: No. And of course to be fair, neither do many of them anymore. Yeah, I think the number of people who are prepared to stand up with a straight face and argue that carbon capture and storage is the future is declining. That's my experience. And you know just looking at the body language of the people who do, you can see that they're pushing a mantra that doesn't hold water. They've been pushing it for so long now, there should be hundreds if not thousands of these things deployed at industrial scale if this ever was going to be the universal panacea to keep burning fossil fuels that they you know have long said it would be. I think we have what eight functional projects in of any scale in the world right now?

Chris Nelder: Sounds about right. Yeah.

Jeremy Leggett: And the economics of those looks appalling even when you use the carbon dioxide, as they all do to enhance oil recovery because that gives them a good way of edging up the economics, but you know I think this is a dead horse that gets flogged by people who are lost in in their belief system, and you know accept climate change. And so have to have something to say like this. But increasingly their hearts know that it can't deliver, it's another one of these delusional detours that get put in front of us. And my theory here is mostly pushed by men, men of a certain age close to retirement coming back to this cultural thing who can't get their heads around the de-centralized alternative internet based vision that fire up so many young people you see employed in the green energy industries and companies like my own at Solar Century. And so those folk are going to find it, always find it very difficult to change their mind set and you have to be bouyed by the fact that so many of them are so close to retirement and the companies that, and institutions that tend to employ them in many cases so close to bankruptcy. Looking at the utilities for example, where there always used to be strong really strong arguments for carbon capture and sequestration. It's going to evaporate in the not too distant future.

Chris Nelder: Well I've been waiting for one of these major reports to come out and formally give up on the idea. But that's I think going to be very difficult for them to do because once you take that pillar out of their model, all of a sudden there's this giant gaping hole that now has to be filled and I don't think they really know how that can be done.

Jeremy Leggett: Yeah. That's right.

Chris Nelder: You and I have both championed the peak oil issue for a long time. We've both written books about it. But the notion that oil production will peak and then decline has probably never been more out of fashion in recent memory than it is now with all producers pumping as much as they can, and Brent trading around $45 a barrel. What are your thoughts at this point about the prospect of a global oil peak?

Jeremy Leggett: Well as we all know there is going to be a global oil peak, it's just a question of debate over the timing. And as we also know there are plenty of people who are prepared in the incumbency hand on heart to say that even that is at issue, that somehow, you know you've heard all the mantras as much as I have. We don't believe in peak oil at BP. The chief economist says.

Chris Nelder: Which sounds very much as you were saying of like a declaration of belief.

Jeremy Leggett: Yes, a belief in what, that oil production come what may can keep on rising for ever? We don't believe in peak oil? You know it's just. And so these people get away with murder you know metaphorically speaking. I was on a panel with Tony Hayward, I describe this in the book where he actually said gas supply is endless and oil supply is to all intents and purposes endless. So former chief executive of BP and I said to him this was after the debate because there were so many other things to focus on in the debate. I decided not to argue the toss on this one but afterwards I knew him as a graduate student. I said Tony you can't say that, you're a Ph.D. geoscientist.

Chris Nelder: You know better.

Jeremy Leggett: You know what are you thinking about. And he said, oh Jeremy you know I'm only speaking figuratively. No, actually I don't think so. I think for a moment there we saw into the black heart of the culture that we're dealing with where people like him feel able and comfortable in front of their peers. This asw the Financial Times Global Energy Summit, so a lot of people in suits desperate to believe everything he told them. And you know this is what we're dealing with. So there will be peak oil. And I think in a world where as you well know conventional crude peaked in 2005 has been wobbling around and on the way down not steeply yet. But on the way down, and you know what's been propping up production a good slug of it is shale oil and tar sands. And if you take away those from the production equation as Mark Lewis and others have pointed out, this thing can start going downwards very quickly and then if you get some of the other things that even the IEA have talked about, warned about, like the scope for the conventional crude depletion to accelerate over time, then you know you could very easily have a production driven peak in the not too distant future. That said, there's a huge pressure on demand as well not just with the Chinese economy but the speed with which oil has been displaced by storage storage technologies of different types and the scope for fast deployment of electric vehicles to attack demand. And so you know it's a complex equation. But whatever ultimately drives it there's going to be a peak. And my money is on sooner rather than later, and that I think is the fundamental difference between the unfashionable early peakists as I call it in one of my books and the majority of folk who think it's going to be OK because it always has been OK so far, thank you very much.

Chris Nelder: Well I'd forecast several years ago that I thought probably late 2014 2015 was going to be sort of the breaking point where we seriously ran up against the ultimate peak and we'll see how that pans out.

Jeremy Leggett: That's right. It's going to play out on our watch. And people are going to have to be eating their hats and I should be saying at this point I expect it to be the energy incumbency and I do. But given the seriousness of this issue and the way it's being institutionally miscalculated I actually hope it's going to be me and you who are going to be eating our hats.

Chris Nelder: Fair enough. I'd like to give you a chance to brag a little bit about the work the SolarAid does because I think it's just such a cool project. I mean you're deploying solar lanterns, I think mainly in Kenya, yeah?

Jeremy Leggett: Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi, Zambia, and Uganda.

Chris Nelder: So you're lighting up a part of the world that desperately needs it that's been relying for far too long on kerosene lanterns which is really a very expensive solution to lighting for them and also a health impacting solution for them. So how do the economics work for that and how is the campaign going?

Jeremy Leggett: Yeah. The news is mixed. I mean the good news is that we've sold 1.7 million solar lights in these five countries, most in two of them, mostly in three year period which makes us the biggest retailer of solar lighting in the whole of Africa. And all profits once eventually made to be recycled back into accelerating the solar lighting revolution even faster. So that's wonderful work. We're very happy about this. Solar Century gives 5 percent of its profits to this process every year and you know we leverage in funds from philanthropists and governments including USAid and here in the U.K. and it's a great microcosm because what we are doing is in essence at the bottom end of the oil value chain we're getting rid of one whole use of oil in lighting and we doing it easily because you know the average household saves $70 a year just in avoided kerosene costs, and what's doing that is the cost down in three things, the three components of the little solar lanterns, the solar cells, the batteries and the LEDs, the lighting, the energy efficiency technology. So you know it's a microcosm of what's coming right across the fossil fuel value chain and that's why I love it so much.

Chris Nelder: What's the simple payback on a lantern like that for your typical resident of Kenya or Tanzania?

Jeremy Leggett: It's measured in weeks. So the business so far we've had no financial innovation. We haven't done microcredit. We haven't done scratchcards or pay-as-you-go, or all the things that the payment services that can be done, could be done with existing technology and at scale. So it's really cool, and people save money immediately, and we know what they spend it on they spend it on schoolbooks, on medicines, on food. And of course on getting up the energy chain. So many of them buy entry level lights at $10, soon to be $5 with D-Light's wonderful new A1 model halving the price of a system. But that money can get deployed, does get deployed back into buying bigger lighting systems which charge mobile phones and allow people to have little businesses in charging a little bit by way of fees for people to pump up their mobile phone. And you know you can see development in microcosm here and displacement of fossil fuels entirely in microcosm. We do have problems at the moment with cash flow with the organization because you know we've been selling so fast and hard and literally catalyzing markets for the first time in Kenya and Tanzania. So now we have proper competition, and that's a different ballgame, we've got to figure out how to keep the cash propped up going forward. But I'm optimistic we'er going to be able to do that.

Chris Nelder: Wow, it's just I think a fascinating angle of energy transition that probably most people in the U.S. certainly don't even know anything about this thing that's happening in the third world. But what a terrific project, it must be really exciting for people who live there to have that extra cash in their pockets now and not have to deal with the stink and the health effects of kerosene.

Jeremy Leggett: Not to mention the greenhouse gas emissions, I mean one of these little kerosene lanterns it seems incredible to believe but over its lifetime one of these little monsters puts up a ton of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Chris Nelder: That's a real hit. Well Jeremy I'm so pleased that you could join us on the program here. I'm such a big fan of your work and really appreciate you taking the time to talk with us today.

Jeremy Leggett: I'm grateful for the opportunity so to do Chris.