Broadly, carbon capture is applicable to things like fertilizer production, for example, cement production and electricity production. These are materials that need to be made for the economy. Carbon capture assists in reducing emissions from the production of these items.
In the United States, 45Q provides 12 years of certainty as to the total volume of dollars that are to be earned for each tonne of CO2 that's captured and sequestered into the ground. When you do your financial model, you understand exactly what the size of the pie is.
In Canada today, we have a combination of the investment tax credit, which would alleviate up to 50% of your up-front investment, and then the operating costs and the return on the capital is relying on the carbon price, and the carbon price is subject to change from a political perspective.
What I'm suggesting is a contract with the government where a developer enters into a contract with the Government of Canada so that, if the carbon price is changed by a subsequent government, the contract would state that any differences would be made up for if the carbon price ended up being changed to a lower number. There would be no benefit per se if it was increased faster, but the certainty on a floor price would be visible and contractual.
Then I could approach the Royal Bank of Canada, CIBC or whoever, and say that they should lend me money, that they could provide me a loan because I have certainty on the cash flow. Without that certainty in the form of a contract, it's basically a political risk, and that's highly problematic, given the capital-intensive nature of these projects.