As Guy has pointed out, there are not only questions around the economic viability, there are also still a number of technical issues that need to be explored for the full life-cycle production. For example, as Alistair Struthers mentioned earlier, the assumption is that we grow fish at a much higher density. Certainly small-scale projects have indicated that fish grow as fast at around 50 kilograms per cubic metre as they do at lower densities. But we really don't know if we're able to do this day in and day out over several production cycles, and whether the fish will stay healthy over that period of time. So there are also a number of fish health and fish health welfare issues that do need to be explored, for example, through pilot-scale studies that look at whether the fish can indeed perform consistently over one production cycle to another, in order to give that certainty to growers that there is lower risk in growing fish in closed-containment systems.
As well, from a technology perspective, certainly the technology is developing. It's been used for hatchery production for a number of fish, and it does offer the potential for a relatively stable environment. But again, to assure growers and farmers that you can do this consistently year after year, and that the technology can hold up production cycle after production cycle such that you don't get catastrophic failures....
Because the risk of a catastrophic failure in a closed-containment type of system is much higher than in an open ocean type of system, where you have a much more controlled environment in terms of temperature, in terms of your oxygen, and a number of other variables in terms of dealing with the wastes and things like that.
There are still a lot of technical and biological assumptions that need to be investigated on a commercial scale over several production cycles to demonstrate not only the economic viability but also the technical viability to ensure there's a lower level of risk there.