Let me be very clear. The land-based farms are significantly lower in GHGs and energy consumption.
Net-pen farms are not free. They run generators to run the lighting systems that illuminate the nets for photoperiod manipulation. They run generators to blow feed into the nets, and they run generators to support the services of the residential areas on the farms. They're all diesel-powered, low-efficiency generators in the middle of nowhere.
We, on the land-based side, will be using hydro, which is GHG-free. Only 5% of electricity in British Columbia is produced from fossil fuel. It is 95% dam hydro power. When you do a fair, accurate audit of a closed-containment farm in British Columbia versus a net-pen farm in the Broughton Archipelago, using the comparative analysis work that we showed, the farms have identical...with 200 metric tonnes in the favour of land-based, not including methane production. If you include methane production from the ocean floor, then the net-pen becomes appropriately worse, by the amount that you would apportion to being methane off-gas.
Let me be very clear. Using modern technology with a modern design, land-based farms have a lower footprint, period. How much lower needs to be accurately assessed.