Energy performance contracting in those kinds of situations becomes more complicated—there's no way around it—because now you have yet another contract in place: the lease.
I think you've had a briefing on green leases. By adopting those, by being forthright and specific about what you will accept in a building as you negotiate the lease with the owner—such that “these are the kinds of conditions we expect to be met”—you get into energy density targets. I think it needs to be that specific, because the owner can and in a P3 situation does take ownership of the usage of that energy and of controlling the energy.
You cannot invest in the facility, because you do not own it; the owner of the building owns it. So it has to be done through a lease. It is more complicated, but it can be done.
The other thing is that we have been involved in projects in which the developer or owner of the building uses a performance contract format to make improvements to the building. As a matter of fact, in the cases I'm thinking of specifically, they're actually repositioning or re-marketing the building. There are some success stories out there in which it can and will work. There needs to be an insistence on the part of the government, whether it's Public Works negotiating the lease or whoever, to make sure that the plan goes forward.