That's a very good question.
You're very right. Hydro provides a tremendously stable potential for electricity generation, but it takes a long time. This is why we need to think short-, medium- and long-term. It's the same as nuclear, for example. There are lots of conversations in Ontario.
These technologies take time to be at the product's full capacity. Hydro is an option. Again, thinking long-term, we're looking to develop a new way to scale up an industry here. We think about the volumes we want to produce in 2040 and 2050. At that time, obviously, the hydro power facility will likely be up and running—if it is approved, of course.
In the meantime, you think about what is quicker to develop. There are renewable energy projects, for example, like solar and wind. Wind also has its lead time to production, but it tends to be a little bit shorter. There's solar as well.
Then there's always the utilization of the grid. Again, think about what times of the day are the most optimal. There's also the possibility of producing hydrogen through all our methods, which are not necessarily producing hydrogen by electrolytic means. There's also pyrolysis, etc.
It's about looking at the overall mix and thinking about how many tonnes we want to produce, for example, for 2025, 2028, 2030 and 2050. When will the hydro plant come in and what do we need before then? Then work backwards.
I know companies like Hydro-Québec are looking at the whole mix of the options in Quebec. Right now, Quebec is leading the charge, if you will, in the production of hydrogen from electrolysis.