How Much Clean Electricity Do We Really Need? | Solomon Goldstein-Rose | TED Countdown
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 05. 2024
- To fight climate change, we need to clean up the global electricity system by replacing fossil fuel power plants with clean generation -- right? Climate author Solomon Goldstein-Rose thinks we need to do much more than that. Replacement isn't enough, he explains in this compelling talk: we need to rapidly develop a new global system capable of producing 12 times the amount of clean electricity we generate today. He shares four reasons why we need that expansion -- first, to electrify everything in all parts of the world (not just the wealthy ones) -- as well as some intriguing ideas for how we can get there.
Countdown is TED's global initiative to accelerate solutions to the climate crisis. The goal: to build a better future by cutting greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030, in the race to a zero-carbon world. Get involved at countdown.ted.com/sign-up
Learn more about #TEDCountdown:
Twitter: / tedcountdown
Instagram: / tedcountdown
Facebook: / ted
Website: countdown.ted.com
Watch the full 2021 TED Countdown Global livestream here: • [Replay] Watch the 202...
Visit TED.com to get our entire library of TED Talks, transcripts, translations, personalized talk recommendations and more.
The TED Talks channel features the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and more. You're welcome to link to or embed these videos, forward them to others and share these ideas with people you know.
Become a TED Member: ted.com/membership
Follow TED on Twitter: / tedtalks
Like TED on Facebook: / ted
Subscribe to our channel: / ted
TED's videos may be used for non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons License, Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (or the CC BY - NC - ND 4.0 International) and in accordance with our TED Talks Usage Policy (www.ted.com/about/our-organiz.... For more information on using TED for commercial purposes (e.g. employee learning, in a film or online course), please submit a Media Request at media-requests.ted.com - Věda a technologie
Watch UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina J. Mohammed's full talk from the 2021 TED Countdown Summit here: czcams.com/video/uX-0gEOdAuU/video.html
I had never thought about this concept. I really think the way we spend energy as society is a really interesting topic
One of the best TED talks I have heard. Even more impressive considering it was delivered by a McDonald employee
🤣
Considering it rained for Christmas for the first time in my entire life and it’s 60 degrees outside in Indiana, I would say ALL OF IT.
This would also be the single greatest job and economic growth stimulant in history.
There's no such things as green growth. This will be more mining, more high heat industrial processes, more pollution, and more e-waste. We're really in for it if we try this
@@gekkobear1650 All of the other types of pollution as important as they are, matter little if climate change creates so much droughts that our food supply chain crumbles in to bits.
The only important aspect of climate change impact is food production. If that falls we all fall. Local pollution from mining doesn't even compare.
@@gekkobear1650 yes, there will be no technological solutions and we all need to go live in trees
@@julianshepherd2038 we never stopped living in trees. We just started killing the trees and making them rectangles before we live in them 🍄🌎🌳🦧
Hi, What an amazing, beautiful, wise man you are. Spreading this kind of message! I didn't know and I bet most people don't. Please keep posting this! Please!!! I want to know more. Where can I go to read more? And I want to send people to watch and hear your message! Please tell me who you are, and how I find you! THANK YOU for caring about your fellow man and woman! What a Hero!!!!!
"The loneliest people are the kindest.
The saddest people smile the brightest.
The most damaged people are the wisest.
All because they do not wish to see anyone suffer the way they do."
thank you ✨
Another great ted talk that shows that even though we are making great strides in cleaning energy in our world that we need to do much more so that we save our world. Burning fossil fuels and other normally used techniques are destroying at an alarming rate. The emissions we are creating by doing this are destroying our ecosystem and the ozone layer. The search for a more cleaner way to produce energy must be found and implemented to help ensure our survival within the coming decades.
We need fusion and small state nuclear energy at scale
You missed the bit at 7:20. We need abundant and cheap electricity now and the next 5 years, not in 30 years.
Fusion would be a good follow-up after 2050. The demand for more energy won't just stop after all.
@@cyberneticbutterfly8506 well by 2050, fusion will be expected by 2080.
Excellent ❤
Thank you for enlightening me!
Well Said Solomon.
King Solomon's wisdom is legendary.
Here is a important piece of the puzzle for Consideration. Better storage technologies for energy generated during periods of low usage, so that they can be supplied to users during periods of high demand.
Making the dream of creating a slightly better world is certainly achievable in the current century century, as long as the world comes together as one.
you got it buddy ill do my best!
I love this guy
hire this man
If you want electricity expansion quickly, it will not be cheap.
TED | Good luck to you all:
American Leaders!
TED | Welcome: to- A New History 2022- and A New Live 🌍🌏🌎!
TED | Thank you.
And May God's peace 🌍🌏🌎 be upon you all:
Staff and Crew of the TED!
TED | - I thank you.
🌍🌏🌎
...
.
This was a good talk. But we always want to cure the symptoms of a problem and not the source, which in this case is overpopulation.
You want to massively kill people?
@@JanKowalski-vj9py Nope. Just encourage to have less kids.
Problems with subtitles !!
yes we can !
subtitles had wrong Toggle timestamps
Countries need to tap into waste water management systems and other such sustainable technologies along with clean and renewable energy. Estimates say if we are able to recycle all the waste water that is currently left untreated then we will have enough clean drinkable water for the entire society. Wastage of food also needs to be given equal priority and we need to generate awareness in people regarding wasted food.
How much fusion power do we need by 2050 for it to be enough to make a difference?
ideal
phụ đề lỗi r ạ
The day when all human put public interest as the priority over the personal interest(which is individualism), we might achieve the great success throughout the entire human history. Teamwork around globe is essential for making our life better.✊🏼💪🏼🔥
Great talk, informative and scary at he same time - since we have to rely on politics to make it happen :sadpanda
Green energy is the future need and not choice.
This shows whatever plans out there for fusion power needs to get it's schedule waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay faster.
We'd need at least 2nd or 3rd generation viable fusion plants by 2050 for it to be a good contributor to this.
Maybe as a follow up source of further growth of energy consumption after 2050.
Delusional
👍👍
The political power of the oil, gas and extractive industries -- and the powerplants and utilities that deliver them is immense. Most of them make money through status quo processes. This virtually guarantees that change will come in excruciatingly slow centimeters at a time.
so according to him, discussing what is a green energy source is counterproductive.
There wasn't here even a theoretical estimation how many power generating equipment would be needed for 120PWh. Do we need 10.000 nuclear power stations - we didn't get even the smallest clue about how big energy generation system need to be expressed in numbers.
The cover of his 2020 book shows atomic, solar PV, and wind power-plants.
@@JanKowalski-vj9pyIf that's over the course of a year, then it's 14 TW of power. That could be supplied by a single uranium-fired power plant with 14,000 1 GW reactor units.
I might be missing something, but all the carbon capture techniques I've read about only function in very small scale, like using copper nano-spikes to catch individual CO2 molecules. Is there legitimate hope for large scale carbon capture by 2050???
How much water resources do we spend from rivers to operate clean power production?
GO ITER!
👍👍👍
Hi, I think there is a problem with the subtitles while it is shown 5 seconds before the voice
Do you realize how funny it is that it takes a young bold man in yellow T-shirt to say what should be obvious to everyone.
We need to consume less energy in total. Like in winter you dont have to heat to 22 degrees when 18 will do
Very good points, however, this better world does not yet comprise the increasing demands of food and goods, if all people globally rise to a much better standard of living, which they deserve and come closer to with reliable and sustainable energy
The transition will be much easier if instead of putting energy at the service of exchange value maximisation (money) we put it into providing essential services in an affordable and safe way. We already generate enough renewable (not clean) energy to cover essential needs worldwide according to Steinberger et al, the problem is that we do not question for what energy is used: vacations, fast fashion, industrial farming, private jets, and many other wasteful activities are energy intensive and provide far to nothing that we need to thrive: nutritious food, safe and renewable energy at affordable prices, clothing, transport, housing, health and educational services... they all require less than 20% of today's American energy consumption. We need to change how we organise economic activity into a more use value and democratically oriented list of needs and not wishes if we are really committed to make it. By the way nuclear, as well as carbon capture is nothing but a very unsafe and wasteful way to use our scarce resources.
Does everyone else need to know this electric stuffs?
Bitcoin is an energy innovation play
make him president in every country now
Petawatts are downright tiny compared to other large named numbers, yada yada yada.
Good presentation, but the requirement of electricity he claims is absurd. First of all, so much electricity is wasted due to lack of demand in certain times of the day and rush fir electricity during peak hours. Utility level battery storage will stabilize the issue. Also, EVs will greatly help electricity utilization due to charging them during off peak hours. Also with V2G and VPP coming out shortly , need for peaks plants, diesel generators will be eliminated. By replacing gas AC and heaters and also electric resistive heaters with heat pumps, demand for electricity will drop considerably. Also, to refine a gallon of gasoline we need 4kwh of electricity, which is enough to 50% of the electricity needed for EVs.
Carbon capture, direct carbon capture technologies don’t really work. In US, 140,000 sq miles of land is used for growing corn. Out of which 30%, about 40,000 sq miles of land is used for growing corn for ethanol production for blending with gasoline for automobiles. It uses GMO corn, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and huge amount of water. It also re1uires huge amount of energy and resources to convert corn to ethanol producing enormous amounts of corn waste to decay. This is done year after year, polluting water the local area and in the downstream. This is use to blend 15% only to gasoline, it’s not for diesel. If we convert to all EVs, we can completely stop this wasteful process. In that 40,000 sq miles just 10,000 sq miles of land when used for solar panels is enough to power everything in US. Also, we need battery storage and transmission. The rest of 30,000 sq miles is used for a hemp cultivation, which requires no fertilizer, pesticide, herbicide and requires only minimal water. Hemp is really a good crop for carbon capture. Hemp can be used for making CBD, hempcrete for concrete for many needs except heavy construction, bio degradable hemp plastic, hemp insulation, paper other fiber requirements. Corn farmers will be a lot more money than growing corn, create numerous jobs while doing the carbon capture.
Trees and forests do better carbon capture than direct air carbon capture
That depends, how much weed are you trying to grow???
Airplanes could have highly efficient batteries one day. I wouldn’t rule it out
Still waiting for my nuclear flying cars 😭
Engineering electric I'm!!!
Is nuclear energy clean?
arguably cleaner than non renewable alternatives , nuclear fusion could be the cleanest, if we can get it working.
It HAS to be added that, the "first world" countries need to downsize, use less, be less wasteful and more efficient. This, is a cultural problem, especially in the US and the western Europe...
Eat the bugs and live in the pond?
Shame that chinese or indians won't follow.
@@MajkaSrajka downsizing doesn't have to be dystopian. Sustainable cities are a lie anyways. Ever hear of permaculture? Ever hear of human beings who take responsibility to meet their own food needs as individuals and communities? India certainly has more of this than the US does. The rest of the world is industrializing so they can be consumer markets for western industrial goods and services. Not because the people of those countries want that, but because their governments have been hijacked by Western corporations and their proxy states.
@@gekkobear1650 He's just a troll... Je li tako @MajkaSrajka ?
@@gekkobear1650 Never heard of permaculture, but here in the Eastern Europe we call it "Planting your own potatoes", and you couldn't @ someone more wrongly as we produce about 5t of tomatoes a year in a family farm '-.-
In general I do not believe that greed is only a factor for governments, ask any woman would she rather work a desk job or work on the farm (for half of the wage), and then cut that number at least in half due to bullshit "I would love to live on the farm, never planted anything" factor.
@@MajkaSrajka agriculture only sucks because ultimately the state has forced farmers into unfavorable commercial situations. The founding principle of a state is to steal food from a peasant base. If you're so familiar with how to grow food, I wonder why you assumed downsizing has to be eating bugs and such...
I am stunned to see people still talking about direct capture factories when seaweed-based oceanic aquaculture scales better and provides numerous other natural services, AND the tech already exists. Where is the TED talk about that?
The ideal of CO2 capture is to obtain pure solid carbon and release oxygen. Plants are the cheapest solution for CO2 capture but not so good for carbon storage.
@@JanKowalski-vj9py google the great biological pump: biomass that sinks to the bottom of the ocean doesn't reenter the atmosphere. That means it could be as simple as growing and then dumping kelp by the kilotonne into the deep sea. Also it absorbs CO2 10x faster than land forests. Now, unless you can build megafactories for less cost and materials than a small boat and some buoys, the ecological solution is superior in literally every way, except one: Offshore aquaculture enriches local fishermen, not billionaire oil barons like the ones building these factories.
🇺🇳6:59 👍👍👍
I´m worry about Mexico goberment, my country , only think in oil energy production because is afraid of international companies hystorical abuse
Anyone wonder why lithium mines are illegal in the United States? Something about pollution.. do your research
True
People will be kicking themselves in few weeks if they miss the opportunity to buy and invest in crypto as its retracing .....BE WISE.
I heard his strategies are really good.
His really an amazing man with amazing skills he changed my 0.3btc to 2.1btc
Woah what if we just used less energy?
No, because they are bringing in AI algorithms for everything, most of the increased future demand is probably going to be used for exascale computing. A single high density rack of machines is now up to around 300kW.
@@hootsmin yeah what if we didn't do that? Sounds horrible to me
@@gekkobear1650 Its needed to dominate and control you so they are doing it, whether you like it or not. The smart city is a goo lag, it will be obvious to everyone later, but it'll be too late by then. Everyone is getting obedience training for it now and most of them are sucking it right up.
@@hootsmin that's what I'm saying. All cities are prisons. Smart cities are just a triple max security upgrade
@@gekkobear1650 @GekkoBear The prison doesn't mold you with a soc !al cr3 dit system though eh? You just do your time. What they are capable of doing with the current tech would blow your mind - acoustic tracking, wifi ra da r, facial expression tracking, wireless respiration and heartbeat monitoring. These control free ks can count how many times you blink in a day, they need the supercomputers to do it though.
this is the longest anyone has taken to say "we're screwed"
We don't know what new technologies will be invented in the mean time over 3 decades so there is always a chance that if we work as hard as we can on the issue, solutions will pop up along the way.
Talking about 30 years into the future sounds pretty much like the talk of medieval religion or a politician. First of all it's a story that sounds somehow logically - but still a story and not reality.
The only positive aspect of the presentation is to point that electricity should be aboundant and cheap. Those two point are frequently forgotten when talking about clean energy.
Fund fusion guys
Maybe the real answer to humanity's carbon footprints is just a lot less feet? two legs bad, four legs bad.
So are you advocating for mass genocide
Wonder when was the last time this guy planted a tree
Alot
Islam al haq
It's cheaper to just take a few steps back from the ocean shore.
Lol ok good luck with that
Build smaller homes, automobiles, warehouses, factories, retail stores .
own nothing and be happy
@@MajkaSrajka one of the scariest quotes from the WEF
@@gregoast5491 Do not mess with Grand Narreative.
Lots of figures (and demands)...
...with zero evidence.
Imagine my shock.
what are your caculations? energy consumption is increasing everywhere, add several billion in the third world all wanting a fridge, cooker and tv soon; you do the numbers?
What I don't get is why do we still have developing countries bye now human beings all over the world should be fully equipped and ready to deal with their own problems well I wouldn't say problems but just basic necessities such as eating giving birth,finding clean water, and just basic human needs for living, if animals can do it and evolved to be equipped to look after theirselves why cannot humans do it why do we still have third world developing countries I just don't get it! Because they still are relient on others , this is not how evolution works
This is all to suppress any possible competition from what we call now a third world. No one likes competition. Western World allowed competition from Far East and is now under serious threat to be dethroned as world center that will shift to Asia.
"...why do we still have developing countries..."
Socialism.
We cannot get everyone on board with the pandemic... burn baby burn! Just kidding, I'm sure we'll get there or we wont.
Disco Inferno!
What makes you think you can effect climate change. It will happen with or without us. It always has.
Global warming usually refers to human-induced warming of the Earth system, whereas climate change can refer to natural or anthropogenic change...complicated huh?
@@brendanoneil3489 you have still not addressed the point he made though
@@gregoast5491 nothing to adress, climate change out of our control, global warming humanity can possibly control. a + b =c
@@brendanoneil3489 so you admit that he is right
@@gregoast5491 no one thinks we can 'effect climate change'... but the rate of global warming could be within our control. An important distinction apparently lost on op: it helps to understand the problem first before dismissing any solutions.
I’ve been talking about this: we have to also cut down population growth (or even shrink the population), eliminate urban sprawl, consolidate our living into smaller areas, remove cars and replace them with green mass transit, turn suburban areas back into green areas…and add more electricity, as he said. We must think in terms of completely re-doing the planet.
We simply have too many humans and too much demand for this way of living for earth to support it without a total environmental collapse.
Every possible change is needed and while change may *seem* hard, the effects of not changing will likely mean the end of humanity, or at least anything the resembles civilization. Almost any cost is worth it at this point. We can’t afford to wait.
We don't necessarily need less humans, but we most certainly need more equitable and logical systems for distributing resources. Individuals in 'developed' nations use hundreds of times the amount of resources that people in 'developing' nations use. We've gotta chill with our lifestyles and learn from the people who get by with a fraction of what we have
Just keep lining up for the juice and it'll become a reality, what did you think it was for? Your health? Carbon reduction - you're the carbon.
@@hootsmin I'm really not sure what you're trying to say dude
@@michaelbulu4079 Second hint. Billy Gates has an equation with a number that has to get close to zero.
@@michaelbulu4079 so just putting in a global communist government will solve all our problems
Well... we have less than 9 years to have about 3 times power electricity than we have now.... good luck.....
I can't get calling energy another mans name on top of it being there fault that we even have to come up with dumb (smart) actions to clean up the negative and chaotic thoughts of the private and secret mindset.
/13 hours deep faked
Net Zero by 2050 is far too late. Even if you hit Net Zero CO2 levels will continue to rise for centuries. We needed Net Zero in 1990.
I can only think of two reasons someone would be purposefully trying to get everyone to just give up on this.
And neither of them are a good look, and one of them is definitely evil too. Just saying.
It's a power grab at this point. Everyone sees what is going on with economies all over the world. Geoengineering will help some areas at the expense of other areas.
I oppose global governance and prefer nuclear war.
@@elinope4745 Geoengineering? Only the Harvard MEER:reflection concept makes any sense (but will never be implemented). Civilization produces heat intrinsically and it is impossible to cool the planet through industry.
@@aylbdrmadison1051 Given up? No one has even started trying in earnest. I doubt there will be a human alive in 2050, let alone Net Zero.
@@JimJWalker Like cloud seeding to get it to rain at target locations. Would you like me to link you some of the very easy to find public webpages posted by the state of California on their own cloud seeding programs? I couldn't tell you the name of the group because I am bad with names, but there was a group that was seeding fine grain iron powder into the oceans as well. But if it rains here, then it won't rain there where it would have rained had you not seeded it to rain here. And farms east of California get screwed a little from time to time. Its a net negative, but some benefit at the expense of others. It's a band-aid not a cure.
6 Ways To Give Your Mind A Break:
1. Stop stressing
2. Stop worrying
3. Give rest to the problems weighing you down
4. Lighten up
5. Forgive yourself
6. Forgive others
Firstly, there really isn't a climate crisis. Second, over-reliance on electricity is a very bad idea. (Having all your eggs in one basket never is)
Yeeea, and you actually think people will take your word for it over the word of more than 98% of all climate scientists in the world. Of course you're about to tell me that it's the 2% of climate scientists who aren't part of some massive worldwide conspiracy to create jobs, clean up the air *and* save millions of species, including ourselves.
Talk about being bullheaded and just dense. lols
@@aylbdrmadison1051 😂😂😂 fuckin amazing
@@aylbdrmadison1051 but if you’re a climate scientist wouldn’t it be in your best interest to convince the masses that you are the solution to a global problem.
If you focus on the science of climate change then you do no fully understand the problem because climate change is a not a science problem, it is a currency problem.
The worlds wealthy be it individuals, corporations, or governments have most of their assets in US dollars. The US dollar is backed by oil. It's referred to as the "petrodollar". Saudi Arabia will only accept US dollars for their oil. So if any country wants to buy Saudi oil they would first have to go to a US bank and exchange their own currency for US dollars, inflating the dollars demand and thus it's value. This is how the US dollar is "backed" by oil.
This started in 1971, it worked so well that the US dollar became the default global currency. So now the value of the dollar is determined by the worlds demand for oil because the rest of OPEC does the same.
This was a good thing at the time because it made the dollar a stable currency. Using it meant planning a long term budget was much easier, think the Weimar Republic.
This was long before climate change was well understood. Once climate change was better understood the worlds wealthy were not eager to do anything about it because if the world stopped needing oil, then the world would stop needing dollars and it's value would drop and they would find themselves with a ton of currency that nobody wanted (i.e. they would be poor).
What makes things even worse is to keep the value of the dollar stable the US had to print more dollars as the global demand for oil grew. If the US didn't do this the dollars value would have become unstable. A large increase in value can be just as bad and a large decrease. So there are more dollars around than there were back in 1971. It's gotten to the point now that if the world stops needing oil the value of the US dollar drops not only from lack of demand but also from a glut of supply.
Global warming will not truly be solved until the world can agree on a common currency thats value is not determined by the worlds demand for oil, i.e. the petrodollar.
You might say what is required is a "global financial reset", or a "second Bretton Woods". Just so happens that the worlds wealthy are talking about just such a thing. You might have heard it's about debt forgiveness. It is, but it is also about establishing a new default global currency.
Is it because they care about funding technology for fighting climate change? Possibly, but I think it has more to do with the fact that the US has sanctions on over 30 countries. Countries they would like to do business with but they can't. The way the global banking system is set up currently is if you want to buy something internationally in US dollars, those dollars have to go through a US bank. Thus the US can stop any purchase once those dollars hit a US bank. That would make the buyer out their dollars and out the product they wanted to buy as well.
Thus all this talk about a financial reset means that it appears that the global elite (or non-US and Saudi elite that is) are ready to move on from the pertodollar. That will allow them to invest in technology to fight climate change without destroying their wealth.
Hmm, so this must be why nixon got rid of the gold standard in 1971 too.
I'll have to read about this and learn something new today. Thanks for posting. ^-^
But when you say most of the worlds elite don’t support the push back on “climate change” you’re wrong
No
yis
This man thinks he can engineer a "stable environment." Perhaps he can also create "good people" and "free wealth" next.
the problem?
Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.
"For good measure" is a requirement in things like this.
Why not change our lifestyle, instead of trying to change the planet?
Have you accounted for the sulfate particulates from coal pollution that reflects light back into space via the aerosol masking effect? If stop polluting the earth's heat will rise. If coal power plants continue the rise will occur. Nothing can stop the enviable loss of habitat for vertebrates. Evolution does not happen that fast.
The talk was about how much electric energy will be needed for a net zero future. I don't see the connection to aerosols. That aerosols are considered in climate models is obvious, but climate models were not the topic of the talk.
@@bernhardschmalhofer855 If you do not see a connection than we have nothing more to discuss. I could produce dozens of peer-reviewed studies....but what does that matter? Live in you bubble. Happy?
@@JimJWalker Well, I simply don't understand what aerosols have to do with a summing up of how much electric energy is needed for a carbon negative future. I understand that aerosols from coal plants have negative effects on health and a cooling effect on the climate. But, as said, that was not the topic of the talk.
So who's supposed to pay for all of this?
Also, wind farms are bird-o-matics and bat-o-matics. What's your answer to this?
Clearing large areas of land for solar is anti-environment. What's your answer to this?
The answer to the last two questions is mostly nuclear energy.
Luckily he mentioned nuclear two times instead of following usual "vapor bad, must close and plant more trees" line of greenminded individuals.
Nuclear energy is a ticking time bomb. We have no good plans for the waste. If there is a disaster that causes an industrial collapse, which is likely, the waste storage sites won't be able to pump water to cool waste. That's a huge problem no one wants to talk about. Not to mention events like Fukushima or a war could cause a radioactive disaster.
Other renewables destroy huge pieces of land in the form of mining and depend on fossil inputs for mining, refining, and manufacturing. The obvious solution is to deindustrialize and engage in a planetary permaculture process.
cats, buildings, power lines, fossil fuel plants all kill more birds than wind turbines.
@@shway1 cool let's get rid of those things too!
@@shway1 Now. We need 100x if not more green energy production.
Additionally cats kill only smal birds.
We need birds-killed-per-MWh stat lol
What a bunch of impractical and unnecessary goals. Oh, and did he actually say that we need more electricity to lower the birth rate? Does he not realize that we need to sustain society with more children, not less children?
Absolutely right
TED | Good luck to you all:
American Leaders!
TED | Welcome: to- A New History 2022- and A New Live 🌍🌏🌎!
TED | Thank you.
And May God's peace 🌍🌏🌎 be upon you all:
Staff and Crew of the TED!
TED | - I thank you.
🌍🌏🌎
...
.