he constantly reminded chinese technology must solve the problems in climate change but to do so effectively we need a rigorous system to protect intellectual property america is well equipped and provide the cutting edge technology for solving the climate energy challenge but we need to develop the solutions but tomorrow and then deploy them world wide passage be assisting the developing world and it is a serious issue but it ought not to be at the expense of innovators and it ought not to be in a way that depresses and suppresses innovation and if we are going to be providing assistance to make new technologies available to the developing world it ought to be based in a way that the community as a whole finances it rather than just the innovation community to do otherwise really suppresses  prevent from coming into existence that we might be able to share and or sell to the developing world so i just want to make the point and i hope you will talk about this today that the worst   have my personal opinion about that and also to see in the context of the upcoming negotiations and what my hopes and worries are i'm going to address the three of them today my experience in the last few years  ts today and energy production today it's significant and it's growing so they are actually being very aggressive on coming up with new ways of meeting that demand both on the on the energy generation side but more importantly they've also started very aggressively putting a cap on how to use the energy the demand that i think is a powerful thing and i will spend some time on that today because we have new technologies that are coming onstream  generation i believe that us tremendous amount of technologies here in this country already existing to mitigate the demand we're not doing much about them and i'd like to spend some time on that this is a big p than anything that we have seen before so whether it's the road to electricity or landing on the moon are we talking about the internet any of these things all of these things are better than to i think what we have in terms of climate change we look at this from a job graphic perspective in property but i believe we have to change our paradigm and to look at this as a global activity let me give you an example of three days and behind in the middle east over the last few days very very very very simple there is an urgent need to do act for us to acknowledge the global community and we have to start breaking down the barriers to just i think the idea that we have built the opportunities in the middle east and asia and china especially in  that the markets are created locally we just heard china is urging by china buy local make local buy local we have to be there but dr acknowledge isso i'm not saying give away the technology i think goes the way of doing that there is a way of establishing leadership i have made a proposal would love to answer more questions about that in terms of creating an exchange but i'd be innovators get rewarded and not not just a consumer dictating taking for granted thank you mr chairman thank you firm i've been involved in sounding thirty companies over twenty three years including companies that are the standard of care and breast imaging the leader in caves are six mathematics the leading genetics company and sapphire energy the leader in algae biofuel please for a moment imagine a world with oil made here in the us what just c o two and sound on desert land powering conventional cars and jet imagine a world where solar energy costs six to eight cents a kilowatt hour with no subsidy that time is now those technologies exist today and that innovation is happening in our research universities in labs and in start up not in big companies big companies don't do that anymore and they don't take the risk this bottle of algae oil from sapphire energy has two hundred patents behind it and a hundred million dollars of private capital just to start it will compete with exxon in the middle east and china so far has a huge lead now because of u s innovation and patents and we're hiring hundreds of people in new mexico and california without those patents no money would come no plan no job with a strong world patent system and the right voluntary  cooperation we can use this green crude to make work companies oil x poor countries oil exports and we want to do that i believe the only way to get to energy independence unsolvable overwatering warming is through technology four to five inventions in the next one to ten years will change everything algae biofuels that scale solar come with us all of that competes on cost new batteries new lighting with ten x less electricity consumption it will happen only in the u s almost all the major breakthroughs in energy in energy are happening here not just fifty percent of the patents but almost all the major breakthroughs only because of strong ip protection only because of huge private venture capital investments that follow federal research now imagine a world where we allow big oil to run over the innovators because if we can patent laws and we can force meant when we accidentally harm our own clean industries by using compulsory licensing instead of incentives where we increase taxes on investors who create new companies jobs and our policy goals like we did in carbon that could be our trajectory the light at the end of the tunnel is this committee and others who are saying wait a minute policy goals actually matter we need to support and reward the innovators we need funding support for scale up and we need support in other committees of congress so that we do not inadvertently and accidentally hurt energy innovation we need the right policies in incentives for global cooperation so we can deploy our solutions rapidly to to the world while still protecting jobs that we may even need something like a world green bank to help fund the deployment of green technologies in developing countries our greatest global competitive advantage in the next decade is energy innovation regardless of your position on global warming we will lead the world in and innovation and we will become more secure as a result venture capital investment in energy is solely dependent on our patent system and international production of an intellectual property without that investment we all lose without a healthy venture capital and by or by environment our policies will fail with policies  encourage that investment we are more secure more prosperous and we will have a greener and cleaner environment for the benefit of the global community thank you thank you sir our next witness is  production only nine percent in two thousand the problem here isn't that we don't have the right national policy of course were valid concerns about existing must be addressed we're not going to build a clean energy economy rhetoric but limited analytical basis ip rights are becoming a real flashpoint in the un climate negotiations were ip is one part of the broader issue over the years developing countries have been promised and have had high hopes for tech transfer but they've mostly been disappointed as others have noted the part of the international negotiations will sharply divergent perspectives on many developing countries argue that restricts their access to climate friendly technology and special many of the tools necessary to reduce carbon emissions and adapt to a warmer planet are not leading edge unique solutions there existing technology unprotected by patents even in the developed world consider three main ways of emissions reduction the first patent protection many companies in different countries compete to offer renewal energy equipment in wind for instance or at least twenty different firms in many countries competing to sell wind turbines when a technology depends crucially on a single pat using less fertilizer it's also important remember that getting a patent on light copyright requires a time consuming and often costly application process in each individual country thus unless an inventor has obtained a patent in a particular country he won't have any patent rights to enforce their for these reasons it's not clear whether there are enough problems for climate friendly technologies to support significant modifications or exceptions to the rules it's also important to keep in mind the developing  countries proposals in the un negotiations that countries are in the midst of what has finally ripened into an actual negotiation with parties ramping up their rhetoric and staking out strong positions in anticipation of future compromise point three my last point the urgency of the climate problem demands however that climate friendly technologies be widely available and that breakthrough innovations be quickly and widely disseminated accordingly we must continue to monitor the situation and respond if i p r rules are found to be blocking effective transfer that happened before that specialize in our rules the world world intellectual property organization and the trips agreement appear better positioned than the un climate talks to address that issue you know take a shot i do think you have to have an alternative other than just saying now one of the things i was looking at as a model is something like the asian development bank some green bank here that that would incentivize us primarily u s breakthrough technologies to go to developing countries and possibly loan guarantees or some other way that kind of proprietary and protected but there's to deploy versus disincentive personally i think that it's going to be very hard because of the numbers of the amounts of dollars that are going to be invested and that's in these technologies to deploy billions and billions if there's not some kind of intellectual property right there and then people want to do the investment in the developing countries so having not played the opposite the fact that the developing countries are thinking of well some incentive structure  e so at least with this oil you know this is we're going to we're going to start in taxes and oklahoma new mexico and in and other places but but it does it isn't necessarily a loss for us if china makes this oil under the right construct right if china is making domestic oil that means there probably interfering in the last things outside of china and africa and other other places so it might not be a bad thing i personally it with china it has a different case than some of the other developing countries so i think it really needs to be dealt with that a high level probably in some kind of a nasty east construct or or some specific government to government  relationships where that where i p r is is really addressed at extremely high level i mean at least from when we're making our business it is about china right now we're waiting and we're waiting for government  help and we're waiting probably to try to get china to invest some of their own foreign foreign reserves and things like that so that they feel invested and that we feel protected that's that's a transportation fuel so really if you're if you're comparing a transportation fuel to something you need to compare it to a battery that stores electric you can't compare solar photovoltaic so it has to feel basically you have to say a gallon of gas compared to a battery  at the end of the day that able to invest in manufacturing in china if they're able to create the market in china and we're finding low cost options for energy technology coming from china and we're beginning to have conversations with people to actually however their markets are growing at a much rapid pace they are not waiting for people like us to come and getting it as mr sensenbrenner mentioned before they're taking it one way or the other and will continue doing that but it is through their own schools and universities or whether it's a partnership so that's why i brought of the sense of urgency here for us to move forward if we don't take the action and create some kind of a mechanism on the commercial side to take advantage of our technologies and then i believe we will be left behind which is one reason why we're jumping ahead and having this conversation i'll be very confident of protecting our ip in china but is that the reason not to do anything i don't believe so i'm not quite sure what the exact answer is but we have to get out there and start putting our technology out there so it leads the world most of the core technologies in demand side that has any lighting or not is here today to lower energy consumption if we as as as american people look for alternatives so that it's thailand or indonesia where there is more of a perceived protection of life you're not quite sure if that's true or not but it is less of a flow or what we do as genuine products here in the u  joint effort we're doing with china there are some things in europe there's there's a lot of interesting ways we can think about ideas like that on a on a global basis focused on application i think my point earlier was that most of the big breakthroughs are still to happen in the u s so we have to do two things we have to protect the big breakthroughs and then we have to develop the applications and i think when you talk about these kind of joint research institutes and potential kind of neutral ground those are better for the applications than they are for the breakthrough because no matter what you do in foreign countries you won't be able to replicate the trillion or two trillion dollar investment the u s has in our research amber structure that is pretty much d controlling their use of energy is going to be a lot faster than just adopting energy generation technologies as an example in the middle east using solar photovoltaic technology is not going to be same thing happens with outdoor lighting where the brightness of the pictures i did use at least by forty to fifty percent because of the film of dust that gets gigs and so we're taking that on as a challenge to resolve those issues so that's on the on the on the on the energy side the control side and the lady lighting interior i believe there are tremendous opportunities as an example in built environments today the technologies that exist here in the u s and elsewhere we can do use the energy usage by at least forty percent without major infrastructure changes they have recognized that and they've asked us to help them but the implementation of this technology so that the specific examples so if you talk about controls what am i talking about specifically making built environment more intelligent that actually regulated the air conditioning is i'm down to sixty five degrees it really and they've actually been in environments where you feel cold inside when it's a hundred ten degrees outside that difference doesn't have to be that much to provide comfort to us as human beings to be inside so making it intelligent actually adds tremendous amount of savings that is something that we ought to be doing here in the u s and people outside the u s in the middle east and southeast have recognized that as well they're beginning to implement those technologies let me ask a question you talk about the incentive process right so if you have a developing area they get essentially partnered with a private company and then apply for funding from this entity whether it was a private entity or a public entity and something like the asian development bank would be would be a good example of something that you can get outside of the u s proposed green bank so if i wanted to make a million acre algae biofuels ability in a poor country in africa i would approach the country and we would jointly applied to an entity that would help partially funded intellectual property rights being preserve not actually transferring the technology to anybody but it kind of a joint effort that that would have some public funding and then with china i think it's a little bit different so it needs to go in at a probably a different level and i actually think maybe the solution would be to have the chinese put up some of their excess money into those into that kind of a structure so they feel invested so when they say they don't have any excess money person that's directing the social security fund and in china and the other person that happens to be in charge of the china investment corporation and they have a large amount of money and i think that one of our challenges to china and one of the ways to solve this problem is to get them invested right i mean if they're investing billions and billions of dollars in u s technology that it played in china and intellectual property rights are preserved and a government to government relation that actually might work because it it's less likely that they're willing to want to steal the technology if they've invested huge which as the examples pointed out the developing countries could draw from but i think putting the onus on the developed countries is only half of the equation the other half is is addressing the tariff and non tariff it doesn't make much sense to contribute to the bank and that really are really improving their own economic competitiveness technological skills so it's a special case that we really have to work on in particular if we're going to break down these barriers and get them to be a think it's part and parcel of the strategy we need to put forward terms of addressing the tech transfer issue of looking at these countries looking at where they rank on the special three a one watch list and asking ourselves how do we how  personally invested i think you define it based on poor countries versus versus wealthier countries so there are developing countries that have large foreign currency reserves one you know china being the obvious i think china is a china and india and and maybe one or two other asian countries are separated and then you have issues like africa and other places where basically there isn't money and so you need to probably have some kind of private sector public sector matching or similar public structure like a that asian development bank where there's maybe or maybe multiple different organizations are looking for the right technology just as we are want once the green technologies that actually can compete on cost this i think they will absolutely invest their money in it and and so as you see solar come down and as you see biofuels that are practical it's the same process that we have here i mean they're going to be marginally impactful until they can compete on cost and then i believe we will invest more and i believe china actually will want to invest some of their foreign parent's see in the solutions and that's probably actually a good thing for us in a lot of ways but we're still going to need to go high and maybe a not to be level for for ip protection  believe they are we are doing some research on the workshop wasn't on intimate and vice president or child was on energy solutions as a whole this is one aspect of it so we have started doing research about forty eight hours and my losses on that and i've been on a plane for twenty six out of those taking a different approach to ip instead of actually having this for the sake of ip internationally maybe in conjunction with what was talking about here in terms of having an ip clearinghouse as an exchange actually has been tried by the add this green bank it was actually called a funding but make this a part of the w t o effort where the clearing house actually takes responsibility you pay for but you get in if you have an idea you get in and you can actually take and take ip as well it let they actually take advantage of ideas around the world the interesting thing is it's not about the large companies alone i think the backbone of our economy and most of the economy is what i call the it's a means of small medium enterprises innovation comes out of there and providing  but the deployment cost on these energy solutions is very large so one biofuel that's just a demonstration plant in the u s cost more than the total manufacturing cost of all the h drugs that have been distributed in africa so it's a very different completely different equation i was only making reference to a hearing that we had yesterday with a whether it's biofilms or it's all about cost and and it looks like the i would say that the breakthrough is probably will be there almost exclusively going to be done in the u s and that is and will be made in the united states and compelled to do it so the question is what are the right incentives and how would you tell if somebody told me i had to license you know that i had to give away my technology to some world body versus versus some incentive structure which i think could be table for negotiation or for undermining and i think the congress complained a portable in that through through passing legislation as you already done through speaking to the administration asking him to come forward offering statements of your own making clear to our partners both in the developed world and the developing world who look to us for leadership that ip rights are the solution not the problem and we should focus on the real problems that myself and various others hear about line today they're going to be breakthroughs and they are going to be the solution to climate change and they are also going to be what allow us to lead the next ten or twenty years the economy in the world