So this comes to the question of certainty and flexibility, which I think you've both mentioned. I'm thinking of some of the large emitters, the large polluters in the country, that have for years pleaded with government to offer some certainty as to what they're expected to do. There is a cost to uncertainty, I would argue.
I want to get to this intensity question. I'm not yet satisfied with your answer with respect to the interchangeability between intensity and an absolute target. We've heard very consistently from Congress, from the European Union, that it becomes an apples and oranges case to say one country's intensity...because it's an after-the-fact measurement. Intensity means that less energy was used per unit of production, whichever one you want to say. You don't know the energy use to production until afterwards. An absolute cap is something that is measured upfront and in the present. I don't understand how on the Chicago or Montreal exchange a unit of greenhouse gas emissions' equivalent in Canada could be traded in an intensity framework with one that's happening in the U.S.
Professor Dissou, do you want to comment on that?