Let's say there's steel facility A in Hamilton and steel facility B outside of Rio. Let's just make the assumption that those are apples-to-apples steel facilities. The Canadian steel, if it's used in Canada, is still going to be far better from the GHG perspective because we have much readier access to the fundamental inputs associated with steel. There is iron ore in Brazil, but we have iron ore very close in Quebec and Labrador. We have metallurgical coal very close, and we have clean transportation links. We have a largely renewable power grid. All of those things combined make our steel quite environmentally responsible. There is also, obviously, no shipping to end market from a Canadian perspective.
There's also something from a regulatory responsibility perspective. You can make the assumption that those facilities are apples to apples, but I don't think that's something that should be casually done. Environment Canada can come and have a look at any of our producers. We regulate our behaviour on a provincial, municipal, and federal level, know our emissions standards, and are very clear about how environmentally responsibly we are behaving.
If you take a look at global steel, when that kind of material shows up in bulk on a dock, you know that it is on dock but you don't really know anything else about how it was produced. You can say what it is, but you really can't say how it got there. If you want to be environmentally responsible, it's probably not the best way to build one's infrastructure.