I haven't done that sort of study. I haven't been asked to look at either the siting challenges, and all of the location constraints that would have to go into it, or the economics of actually trying to purchase that land. Something I have talked about, however, with one of my PhD students and actually co-author, Nathan Ayer—we were talking about this earlier today—is that there is also a permanence in the land change. I think that is worth thinking about when you're implementing a land-based recirculating aquaculture system.
We end up digging holes and pouring a lot of concrete. That technology, we hope, is going to remain in place for 20 or 25 years, and if we choose to go down this path, it's going to be kicking out salmon at low inputs and low cost with low impacts. I think that has yet to be demonstrated, but at the end of that process you're going to have a site with a lot of concrete and steel. It's going to have been transformed. It's going to be a one-way transformation of hundreds of hectares or hundreds of acres, depending on how large a system you want to move to. I don't know if anyone's ever been concerned about that.
It's not addressing the issue of upfront cost, but it does represent a relatively irreversible change in that land use from forested land, agricultural land, or whatever it was to begin with. Maybe it was brownfields. Maybe it was previously industrialized and we're just repurposing it, but it does potentially represent a one-way transformation of land use.