If I could just answer your original question, I think another issue is the land base. When the British Columbia industry looked at the concept, the scenario, of taking the current industry and moving it on land, the current footprint of the industry would have had to be increased 40 times. Doing that on land, doing that close to power, and being potentially close to market requires a huge footprint that we don't currently have.
In New Brunswick they were looking at what it would take to replace the production there if they were to move everything on land. You're looking at 18,000 football fields, I think, is what they came up with. That's not insignificant; it's not a minor issue.
The other factor is fresh water. We now have a hugely growing population, and as I think was on the news last night, one of the major issues is lack of fresh water. Closed containment has huge needs for fresh water, which we don't have with current net-pen technology.
I think there are other factors here. The bottom line is this: if Canada wants to have a role in food security and in strengthening jobs in rural communities, closed containment may be a small niche but isn't going to provide what you're looking for in your province.