I put that out as a possibility in your discussions with the provincial government, because I think what you're trying to do is have a transparent costing of the two alternatives all in, and that externalizing of pollution for free is a disadvantage for you in the calculations. British Columbia, in my experience, has had an appetite to price pollution.
As an aside, when I was the environment minister, I was successful in increasing the price of the compounds that were being regulated and charged for by 48% over three years. Industry accepted that as a reasonable part of being a corporate citizen. They actually are paying for the cost of their pollution. To translate that into this industry, even on a theoretical basis, is very legitimate.
This is a bit of a detailed question. You were talking about your power savings. You showed the model in which you excluded the smolts, the feed, and the harvest-to-market for greenhouse gas emission calculations. Did you also exclude those parts of your value chain when you made your energy calculations, the 90% savings calculation?