Lyceum 2021 | Together Towards Tomorrow
Graham Grant, CEO of Seequent gives a historical and future-looking perspective on the world of geoscience, its importance and significance and Seequent’s place in it.
Together (with BSY) Towards Tomorrow! from Greg Bentley, CEO, Bentley Systems. Greg shares his perspective on advancing infrastructure and the importance of the subsurface through digital transformation to guide us Together Towards Tomorrow.
Keynote from Professor Chris Jackson: As humankind faces the most urgent climate and resource challenges in modern history, we ask how we can best harness, develop and apply individual and collective knowledge, skills and wisdom across the geosciences, to these problems. Professor Chris Jackson, Chair of Sustainable Geoscience, University of Manchester, joins us to debate and explore these issues, together with what can and should be done to ensure a better future for all.
Chair in Sustainable Geoscience, University of Manchester
CEO, Bentley Systems
Executive Director, Commodity Finance, SMBC Bank
Did you know that in 1815,
the first geological map of an entire country
was created by one William Smith.
He’s known as the father of geology,
he was in fact a surveyor.
Now what Smith discovered
was that he could order the chronology of rocks
using fossils as a guide,
and as a consequence, he was nicknamed Strata.
Now William Strata Smith’s map
was so innovative and so profound
that it became known as the map that changed the world.
Last year, an original of that map came here to New Zealand,
and it’s massive, size of a boardroom table,
and frankly a beautiful piece of art.
So there we go.
The history of 3D geological models and visualization
tracing back over 200 years.
Hello, and kia ora.
Welcome to Lyceum 2021,
my name is Graham, and I’m the CEO of Seequent,
and our theme this year is Together Towards Tomorrow.
And over the next three days,
we are going to unpack this theme.
And I trust that you will learn,
that you will contribute and collaborate.
But more importantly,
you will be encouraged and be inspired.
In the next 10 minutes, you will hear from Chris Jackson,
he is a thought-provoking geoscientist,
who spans across commercial and academic fields,
and I trust that you will walk away
also challenged and inspired.
So from 200 years ago, let’s come to 20 years ago.
The time at which Seequent was emerging
with implicit modeling in the mining industry.
Through that phase, we’ve seen
the evolution and specialization of the earth scientist,
from the early pure scientists and surveyors like Smith,
we’ve seen the development
of the specialist earth scientist.
So the engineering geologist, structural geologist,
the geostatistician, the geotechnical engineer,
the geochemist, and so the list goes on and on.
And these deep specialisms
all underpin the roles and activities
of many other professions.
Which includes: zoologists, climate planners,
regulators, even bankers, lawyers, and others in industry.
What’s become very clear through that time,
is how critical it is to understand the intersection
between below ground, and the activities above ground,
in our industries, societies, and communities.
One observation I would make,
that as we’ve specialized in the earth sciences,
you might say that somewhat regretfully,
that we’ve become more disconnected, rather than connected.
Okay, so from 200 years to 20 years,
let’s look back and summarize the last two.
The message we hear from our users is very clear,
they are wrestling with very complex subsurface problems,
with increasingly higher expectations
on them as professionals, and what they need is more tools,
and they need those tools joined up,
so they can triangulate in on problems
and produce more effective decisions
and more effective outcomes.
So what have we been doing at Seequent?
Well, on the tool side, we’ve had a lot join our family.
We’ve had gravity and magnetic geophysics join
We’ve had geo-technical numerical analysis join
We’ve had electrical methods geophysics join
through AGS, from Denmark.
Field image data capture in the cloud, through IMAGO.
And finally, field data management and operational data
with Minalytix, again, all in the cloud.
But the story goes on.
In the last short time, we’ve seen the migration
of all of Bentley’s sub-surface, geotechnical,
numerical analysis and information management technology
come to join the Seequent family, and now,
collectively we have arguably
the largest portfolio in the world.
All the while,
we’ve been seeking to connect these up through central.
And as you’ll learn here at Lyceum,
increasingly through our new platform, Evo.
This has been a time of rapid evolution and of rapid change,
and you might say to some degree, Seequent has come of age.
We’ve reached a critical mass of scale
that we now believe we’re a force in the subsurface,
and frankly, we do not intend slowing down.
Let’s take a look
at what putting our foot to the gas looks like,
over the next year.
It’s all about connecting.
Our users want things connected together.
And then the technology moved out of the way.
So they can get on and do what they need to do,
as opposed to what they are forced to do.
It’s all about time, and time is our enemy.
So, what you can expect to see from us.
Open APIs and new workflows.
The connection into subsurface IOT for model monitoring.
The evolution of machine learning to remove mundane tasks,
and frankly just speed things up.
Radical increases in computational speed.
Connecting together geosciences in new ways,
to enable new problems to be solved.
And product innovations that will surprise.
We have worked incredibly hard
to get to the position we’re in,
and for your sake, we do not intend stepping back.
Now I’d like to look out into the future,
where we face a vast array of challenges.
Let me just give you three examples.
We’re looking at global scale energy transition,
as we look to change the way
that we power and heat ourselves.
The demand for resilient, safe,
and sustainable infrastructure.
And the demand for key mineral resources
to underpin the growth of our economies and sustainability.
In fact, if you look across
all of the UN’s 17 sustainability goals.
You can see that the majority of them
require the geoscientist for their success.
But as I look through these challenges,
I see one thread pulling through.
And that is, as I turn the pages of the media each day,
I see an outlook that’s continually negative
and a forecast that’s gloom.
And I think that plays to a very human frailty we all have,
which was a bias that we place far greater weight
on things that are uncertain, and of concern,
than things that are certain,
and would give us cause for optimism.
And I would challenge their point of view,
in fact, the data would tell us
that we’re doing a whole lot better than we may think.
Some would say that we’re arguably
the most blessed generation in the history of the world.
Let’s look at two examples.
50 years ago, 60% of the world’s population
was defined as being in poverty.
Today, that’s 10%, and all the while the world’s population
has grown 2.5 times.
I think that’s a miracle we should talk about.
Now, over that same period, that same 50 years,
the land area required to produce one unit of food
has shrunk by 70%.
And yet, notable forecasters of the day,
were of the view that the world would run out of food
by the year 2000.
In fact, I remember that message when I was at school.
So what went wrong?
Or rather, what went right?
And there’s one thing that those forecasters all forgot,
and that was the power of human creativity and innovation.
The compound effect of 1% at a time,
working together, all on the edge.
It was not a collective effort,
it was not an effort by governments,
it was the power of individuals connecting things together
in ways that we would not expect.
And that gives me cause for great optimism.
So we’ve proven the power of technology for good.
If we just think differently, act differently,
and connect things together
in ways that people may not have expected.
I mean, who would have thought 3D geological modeling
from medical sciences technology?
Extracting critical battery minerals
from the brine of an expired tin mine?
Or extracting heat for homes and industry
from old oil wells?
These things are underway.
Now, of course, we’ve got many challenges in front of us.
We’re dealing with access to minerals.
The care and maintenance of our water resources.
Of sustainability, accountability, and greater transparency.
But while these forecasters would forecast doom,
what I see is that role of the geoscientist,
bringing innovation and light to these challenges,
and I think that, frankly, is worth celebrating,
and that’s why we are here.
I think there has never been a better time
to be in the geosciences.
Now is your time.
And Seequent is here to step up
and help you spawn new ideas,
to connect things together, and to innovate on the edge.
So let’s get out there,
all of us, together, towards tomorrow.
Good morning, afternoon, evening everybody.
My name is James Lowry.
It is my pleasure to introduce this keynote session,
for Lyceum 2021.
Today we have a dynamic and outstanding guest speaker,
Professor Chris Jackson,
Chair of Sustainable Geoscience University of Manchester.
<v ->Hi James.</v>
It’s a pleasure to be here. Thank you.
<v ->Lyceum 2021 is to focus on Together Towards Tomorrow.</v>
We’re going to explore some of the global issues
facing society and businesses Today and Tomorrow.
I’d like to start with Together.
Geoscience is a field that’s often referred to
as a board church of many disciplines.
How do we harness the knowledge, skills,
and wisdom and the field to advance the science
and address some of the issues we’re facing today
and for the future?
<v ->Yes, I think it’s important to recognize</v>
the kind of history of Geoscience is a discipline.
It is a melting pot of lots of different,
formerly defined scientific disciplines like:
Biology, Chemistry, Maths, and Physics.
So we are a, naturally almost by design,
And therefore, bringing people together to work
towards these complicated problems,
is almost within the DNA of Geosciences as a discipline.
What’s interesting when we think about geoscience
often in the professional realm, however,
is that we often then resile different bits
of the underlying activity.
So Geochemistry may be one department,
Geophysics might be in another department,
So we have this disperse structure.
So it’s important to recognize
that it’s in our blood to work together
and leverage the wisdom and the knowledge
from different skillsets, to solve complicated problems.
And that bringing people together
would be useful, in a corporate sense, as well.
<v ->And with so many different fields,</v>
you have a diversity of thought and backgrounds
and creativity and ideas coming through there.
<v ->Yeah. And I think rooted in all of those</v>
disciplines is still, you know,
a very formal quantitative approach
to defining a problem and
then putting in place an experimental scheme
that will allow us to answer that problem.
And then the reporting of it.
So whether it’s Math, Physics, Chemistry, or Biology,
they all share that in common.
And then Geosciences is kind of almost built on top of that
or is an umbrella for those different disciplines.
I think there’s some shared approaches in
how those things are being done
and how they’re being reported.
And that means that in the future, synergistically,
we should be able to be doing maybe a lot better
than we have in the past and we currently are doing now.
<v ->We’ve seen an evolution from the nice to</v>
have perhaps a corporate social responsibility
to the now must have environmental sustainable
and governance principles
through the sustainable development goals
that have become mainstream and a priority.
How do you feel that Geoscience is placed
and the fields places, in industry and body individuals,
and collectively are prepared and positioned to help.
<v ->A really great place to start thinking about</v>
what that might look like is
the UN Sustainable Development goals
and Geosciences maps on to over two thirds of those,
in terms of the role that Geoscientists
will play in achieving those goals.
And in there are clearly technological
and technical challenges to resource extraction
and resource provision for growing economies.
But also there’s things like Geohazard Mitigation.
So, which some sometimes arise
from the resource extraction activities.
Historically, like a lot of sciences,
Geoscience has been very focused on
the technical capability of the people practicing it.
So what we’ve been training people to do,
is to do hard sums and to look at rocks
and know where they came from and what they tell us
about the structure and evolution of the earth.
With an increasing awareness of the societal
and ecological and environmental concerns,
My feeling is that as individuals it’s probably
not going to be enough to simply be a Geoscientist
or we need to reimagine what a Geoscientist is.
So it’s not somebody who’s simply as concerned with the
structure and evolution of the earth.
It’s somebody who, also, has an awareness
of those concerns societal and environmentally.
So they’re aware of those things
but they’re also able to understand
how their actions in their professional practice
can impact people and places
which are outside of their immediate geography
and outside of their immediate view.
And so what does that mean practically?
That means that when we’re educating people,
we need accreditation bodies to be a lot more incisive in
their requirements for professional practitioners to
demonstrate awareness of that.
<v ->And when you take the perspective of</v>
the power of the individual
and the responsibility of the end of the individual,
it’s not enough just to have the subject matter expertise,
perhaps, in the Geoscience field
but it’s all also that broader responsibility of
what their actions may have on society
and on the environment around them.
<v ->Yes. How we deploy those skills.</v>
Because those decisions we make
which might be based on incredibly robust pieces of science,
which are deeply impressive, may then have a legacy-
a negative legacy on different communities and environments.
Not next week but in ten to a hundred years time.
<v ->Taking that theme a bit further,</v>
through a sustainability lens,
How do you think public and private sectors
are working together to solve some of the issues today
and to work out how to solve these issues going forward?
<v ->Yeah, there’s a lot of challenges.</v>
Which I think in both sectors,
we are still currently defining what the questions are
and we’re also then trying to shape schemes to
and science, which can help us with the answers.
As an academic, I’m always hesitant to say
that the private sector and the industrial sector
are not aware of what these challenges are
and we need these bright,
clever academics to come and tell us
because clearly there are more scientists
working outside of academia than inside.
I think that’s one thing to always tell people.
And so it is that collaborative effort
that will bear fruit in the future.
So for example, you know,
Industrial Practitioners will be working
in other parts of the world
and maybe have more specific regional knowledge
of the, okay if you develop this technique,
this is how we’re going to implement it
in this part of the world
because there are series of economic powers that play here.
There’s some governmental, you know,
there’s cultural barriers
to implementation of this great thing
that you as an academic have come up with.
On the flip side, Academia has more of a drive
and maybe more time and more of a
immediate focus on longer term solutions.
So these problems are not going to be solved overnight.
We need to come up with something,
which is going to take a five or ten year research efforts.
So we have more time and space to be able to do that.
And we don’t have maybe some of the financial
and economic pressures
that our Industrial partners might have.
So there’s clearly a synergy between those two
and I absolutely loaf the idea that there is,
you know, one is stronger than the other.
I think both of them need to work together
for the reasons I just outlined.
When it comes to, say, climate change, right?
It’s a big, big problem.
It’s got many, many different facets
and to tackle that problem,
we’re going to need to work together.
We’re going to have to put aside our differences now.
Our feeling that there’s more intellectual fire power
in our house than the other one.
I think the other thing is the timescale
of which this needs to be, this challenge needs to be met.
So what is the scale?
The other thing is it’s a big problem
that needs to be tackled in a short period of time.
And therefore we need to take all of the ability
across the Industrial and Public Sector,
the private and public sector,
to try and tackle that problem.
Do I think it’s being done well?
I think in pockets, it is.
I think there are
probably an awareness growing
within, you know, Academic Institutions
to have Industrial partnerships
and to make research more relevant is very important.
I think some of that has been driven by the way, in which,
universities are being measured.
It’s not simply in terms of paper outputs
and where the papers are published.
It’s also is your work actually transforming society
for the good.
And I think that’s a good thing
because what it does is it moves us away
from only valuing fundamental science
and actually starts to value people
within academic institutions,
whose work is more around a translation of
that site into, let’s say, Public Policy
or Governmental Policy and we’ve seen that recently
with COVID, right?
The quality of science is going to be limited by
whether we can actually convince people it’s, you know,
it’s robust and trustable and its a…
<v ->And its applicability, of course.</v>
So we, you know, I think that’s come partly
from the funders and also from the government
that we’ve seen that.
And clearly there’s still financial powers at play
from the industrial side because clearly
there’s still are confidentiality concerns.
And, you know, there is a tension there,
as well as, about how much Industrial Partners
might want to allow you to give away
and how much they may want
to give away themselves and disclose.
But I think some of those conversations,
at least in my 17 years of academia,
have been more open and they’ve started earlier
in the life cycle of a project
that there’s an understanding
that the impact of the work will be heightened.
If we are able to talk about it.
<v ->There’s many forecasts over the next 50 years</v>
will take us through to 2100, even.
<v ->Many different scenarios, depending on what we do.</v>
How does Geosciences help craft and form the ideas there?
What part does Geosciences play in
delivering better efficiencies and supporting transition
and supporting policy and change?
<v ->And taking that forward to a better outcome, frankly?</v>
<v ->Well I’m a Geoscientist, so I’m going to say</v>
that Geoscience is going to save the world, of course.
I’m kind of bias but it’s probably not a stretch
to really claim that because whether we’re looking at,
you know, the end of life
of fossil fuel based energy provision, you know,
that is still going to exist in some parts of the world
because the pace of change for the energy transition
is going to be, you know,
it’s going to get different pastes in different places.
So it’s going to be slow.
So how do we, in those places,
how do we make sure that fossil fuel based research
is making sure that the extraction is done efficiency
So there’s still a place for that discussion to happen.
If we’re then going to talk about the energy transition
and what’s required to make that happen.
We think about alternative energy sources.
And we start talking about wind and solar.
And we talk about batteries.
And we talk about mining, of course.
And the environmental concerns that Geosciences role,
there is absolutely fundamental again,
because to understand where to go
and look for minerals,
as a many people will know in this audience.
We need to understand how the earth
has evolved over tens to hundreds of millions of years.
And that is firmly in the domain of a Geoscientist,
to answer that question.
We also then have a role to play in
when you think about Geohazards, as well.
So if we’re going to be mining
and there are hazards related to groundwater quality
and there are hazards related to Mine Tailings.
Geoscientists can work with engineers to understand
what the bedrock is like and
what the associated risks are there.
<v ->Water is arguably a problematic issue</v>
to the Geotechnical Engineer, its a risk.
To the Miner its both risk and a resource they need to use.
To the Hydrologist it’s a pure resource.
How do we deal with this issue, of water?
And are we managing this resource appropriately
in the Geosciencetist field?
<v ->I feel it’s like a lot of resource related discussions</v>
as we need to make sure that all the stakeholders
are represented in there because if we have one of
those stakeholders being particularly powerful in that,
it sends that particularly loud, in terms of their voice,
in the decision making processes.
Then the benefit-the resource will start to be
more important or the risk will not be
appropriately considered and mitigated for.
Likewise, the communities, who upstream may be
benefiting from water being stored by a dam there.
May be penalizing those downstream community.
So making sure that all of those groups are in the room
when decisions being made seems to be
the most appropriate way forward to me.
<v ->If we think about tomorrow.</v>
And we think about yesterday.
And you’ve just talked about 40 50 years
or we would go back a hundred years
with the evolution of the use of oil and gas,
as we have done it in other minerals
and rare earth materials. And we move forward.
And we think about batteries, electric vehicles,
and other technological advances
that are coming to the fore.
We think about the oil bodies that have been discovered,
the oil bodies left to be discovered
and how economic or marginal they might be, to extract.
How do we learn from the past?
How do we use the science
and the experience to design a better outcome
to develop better solutions
and innovations to meet the demands of tomorrow?
<v ->I think this is an incredibly exciting place, right?</v>
So take this.
So we’ve got this big challenge coming with mining, okay.
We’ve developed all these technologies.
We’ve developed all these techniques
that have historically been applied to mining
but also to a bunch of other sectors, okay.
And we’ve applied them in a, maybe, a very blunt
and not socially and environmentally conscious way.
So we’ve got this chance to do things better
with this specific challenge.
So what other big challenges is there?
One is I think in terms of the technology, Okay.
So we’ve got tools with increasing resolution.
We have Geophysical and Geological tools
with better resolution, meaning we can locate smaller
and more marginal bodies and
perhaps produce them in a better way.
I think one of the existing challenges still there
is communicating uncertainty and risk.
And I think with subsurface Geoscientist,
which is my area of expertise,
we are not particularly great at doing that.
We’re not particularly good at telling people
how unsure we are of something and
that uncertainty maps directly onto risk, of course.
Because then if you’re very certain, there is no risk,
if you believe you’re within your risk threshold.
Whereas if you’re wildly uncertain,
it’s important to be aware of that.
And that relates to how reproducible a resort is,
in terms of analysis.
So I think we’ve got a huge
step to make in terms of communicating on certainty.
And risk both to the shareholders within any given company
but also to the local populations,
in which, we’re operating.
I think the other thing that I’m really excited about is,
you know, if we look at these negative legacies
of our operations and our actions,
where communities have effectively been decimated
and have been left with the absolute worst of our mining
or, you know, oil and gas expiration.
Productions facilities that we’ve had in different places,
how do we avoid that in future?
How do we make sure that
when we find a margin law buddy
and we want to go and exploit that.
Having corporate social responsibility
at our first decision gate, okay.
If we go and work in this particular environment.
What are the cultural sensitivities means, to be aware of?
What level of investment are we going to put in
training people in those communities
to contribute to the production facility itself?
What are we going to do around education
and health in these communities?
<v ->I think that ties back nicely to</v>
your thoughts around the individual.
The holistic approach, the legacy,
but also the life cycle of a project.
End to end the full life cycle.
<v ->Yeah. Where are we at?</v>
what’s your Wikipedia entry going to be as an individual?
And, you know, you might have on your CV, this amazing,
you know, mining site that you contributed to
but are you looking at that in the round?
In terms of, you’ve got this many tons of this iron oil
but, you know, if it polluted the downstream waterways.
and then, you know, after you died
there was a mine tailings burst
and then, you know, few thousand people died.
That’s, that’s a problem.
I think people should be viewing
that as their professional responsibility,
as much as it is to deliver quote unquote
value for your shareholders.
It’s your broader society responsibility
outside of your immediate employer.
<v ->You talked about uncertainty and risk.</v>
I’d like to talk about data and how data plays into that.
Id talk about the quality of data, the accessibility,
and the availability of data.
The ownership of data owned by public bodies
owned by private organizations
that have captured, invested,
and capturing, analyzing that data.
There’s some great examples of data
being made widely available.
There’s other data that’s captured and not available.
Is there a concept of making data more open source?
How do we make the best of the data
that’s available in the pockets?
And mine that as effectively as we can.
<v ->I think it was Brian Nosek is a….</v>
I think he’s an experimental psychologist in America
but he had this saying which was,
“Transparency is a replacement for trust.”
And I think they speak to them to making data available
because it’s based on those data that decisions are made.
And so if you want people to trust you one way is
by making it transparent,
the process by which you came to that decision.
So, yeah, I think making data available is really important
because if you make it available
than a number of different workers can analyze that data.
And then you can actually see almost in a,
slightly deterministic/ stochastic way,
like what the outcomes are of that analysis.
And that gives you a bit more of a view of
what your real uncertainty is and then your associated risk.
The other thing that’s really powerful in
that respect, for private organizations,
is that if you make your data public
and actually engage with public bodies to analyze that data,
it does give you a bit more credibility in terms of
that public trust, that perception of public trust.
Because if it’s all, “Trust us, we know what we’re doing
because we’ve seen this data.”
I think that as a citizen,
forget me being a Geoscientist here,
as a citizen I would find that response quite problematic
because I would have absolutely no line of sight of like
what the qualifications were of the person doing that,
you know, what their biases might be
that came to play in that analysis.
So there is a reason to make those data
readily available from the private sector.
But I can see why it’s tension
then against the financial investment
they’ve already made in acquiring that data.
There may be a hesitancy to do that.
<v ->Can we explore that a bit further,</v>
the format or homogeny of data.
<v ->When we’re collecting data and processing data.</v>
We should be thinking about it
not in the short term of what we,
as an individual corporate entity, can derive from it
but we might be wanting to think longer term
about the interoperability of that data.
So while we are using this data now
there may be a company out there,
whose data in 10 years time we’re going to get access to,
and we need to be able to have
that in a readable and sensible format we can utilize.
So I do like this idea of corporate bodies coming together
and thinking about, you know, almost formatting standards,
if you will.
And to do that, I really think you need to
then start to think about more collaborative ways of working
or the fact that longer term,
you may need to use a piece of data
that you didn’t collect yourself.
<v ->Is there also, given the public good,</v>
an issue around the ownership of
that data or those standards?
And the governments have a huge amount of influence on that.
And they’ve got a huge amount to say about that
because as part of your licensed to operate
in a certain environment.
And we see this for the oil and gas industry.
In certain countries, all data have to be
made publicly available after two to five years.
And that’s because the governmental body
or the government itself says that you’re collecting data
that is to the benefit of that particular country
therefore that data needs to effectively be public
and for the public good.
So I think again, the government have a
very strong hand in this despite the
kind of natural instinct to the corporate entity
to keep that data siloed.
Are you storing up problems by not being transparent now?
because then in, you know, 10,
20 years time when there is a problem
and then it’s mapped back to these decisions
that were made on this close data,
you could mitigate for that by releasing
that data earlier and accepting the fact
that you may be giving away some
of your short term competitive edge.
<v ->Yes and the economic gain from that</v>
or we talk about the democratization of data.
<v ->Yeah. There’s a huge issue to see</v>
the democratization of data, right?
Because if we want to engage with communities
around the world and we want them to
have access to all of the education opportunities
that we currently enjoy then one thing
that they need is data and training data sets.
And there’s something I’m very excited about is
sharing those data and those training technologies
and those hardware and software
to analyze those data as widely available as possible.
Because then we can democratize access
to science full stop, You know.
This idea of a science capital,
we call it, so everybody can then start to learn.
And I think as well, there’s another thing,
even if people don’t become scientists themselves,
if they’re aware of the scientific process,
they are going to be more willing to engage with scientists.
So we can’t then complain when we see
differential uptake rates in, say, COVID-19 vaccines.
One reason is because there’s a lack of trust in
those doing the science and those communicating the science.
So your science is great
but it’s not being implemented
as well as it could be because of this problem
you hadn’t really thought about before.
You hadn’t really considered the fact
that the translation would be hampered by a lack of trust.
<v ->Chris, my last question,</v>
you’re a public enthusiastic advocate for Geoscience.
What makes you look forward with hope
and enthusiasm for Geoscientist and the future?
<v ->I’m very excited about Geosciences reinventing itself.</v>
There’s a really good chance to reimagine what we do
and what our role in society is.
Maybe cast ourselves in a more positive way.
Can we look back in a hundred years time
and say that Geoscience has entered
the public psyche in the same way
that virology and immunology has over the last year.
You know, Geoscience is going to be
central to resource provision.
It’s going to be central to Geohazard Mitigation
and prevention of harm as we have expanding cities.
So there’s a real central role for Geosciences to play.
It’s something that the public are very aware of.
It is the science which provides us with life saving
and life changing resources.
That’s a hugely positive thing to think about.
I think when we talk about the future of Geosciences.
<v ->Chris, thank you for your time today,</v>
sharing your insights and thoughts on
some really weighted issues.
<v ->It’s been an absolute pressure, James.</v>
Thank you for having me here.
Hello, Greg Bentley here.
I appreciate this chance to participate in Lyceum.
Lyceum sessions introduced me to Seequent
and have helped me to learn
about new to me, Geoscience professions.
I have intended for Lyceum to continue.
And in fact, to grow,
as we say this year together toward tomorrow.
And the reason in particular is I think
that together we have a mutual interest.
I like to put it this way in advancing infrastructure,
by going digital.
Infrastructure for Bentley Systems,
is everything constructed to improve our planet,
sustaining both our economies and environment
at the same time.
And where the risks so often have to do
with conditions in the subsurface,
which would be our work in the Geoscience professions
to help with that.
Our responsibility, I think
is for resilience digital twins,
and to deepen their potential to the subsurface
from 3D to 4D living digital twins
that would help us with
when we talk about sustainability,
resilience and mitigation and adaptation,
requiring all of our work together.
So that notion of living an environment,
takes us to ESG,
a concern for every public company
and public company CEO.
But I like to think of it this way,
that while all of us are concerned about that,
it’s the work of those in infrastructure
and supporting infrastructure,
that actually makes a difference.
So I say not ESG,
but ask our folks to think about ES(D)G
and I put the D in paren, so ES paren DG,
would be empowering sustainable development goals
as a way of thinking about our responsibility uniquely
together toward tomorrow.
And that takes us to our keynote for today.
We’ve asked for our keynote
to be moderated by James Lowrey.
He’s the global head of research and analysis
for Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation in London,
but he served in similar roles in Singapore
and in his native New Zealand,
which he shares with many others you’ll hear from.
James is also the deputy chairman
of Business for Development,
which is a for purpose project consultancy
that assists companies and communities globally
to develop sustainable value chains
for improved outcomes and poverty reduction, ES(D)G.
James will interview our keynote Geoscientist,
Professor Chris Jackson.
He’s the chair of Sustainable Geoscience
at the University of Manchester.
So I’d like us to think as we hear
from James and Chris to go beyond our ESG footprint,
to an ES(D)G handprint,
and in which we help Geoscience professionals
and in infrastructure engineering
in going digital.
Over to you, James and Chris,
to help kick off Lyceum and our thinking in this respect,
about our responsible,
but also gratifying handprints,
together towards tomorrow.
Over to you, James and Chris.
(bright uplifting music)