First of all, let me explain this graph of potential GHG emissions as if we use a business as usual case. If we simply say to continue on with the existing technologies and with more plants, that's what will happen. There will be modest improvements in GHG emissions, but an overall increase in the absolute amount.
But as I mentioned, the industry is already moving to new technologies. My plea is that we need to find ways of accelerating technological information in order to make certain that we bring down that curve, in terms of GHG emissions per barrel, as rapidly as we possibly can. The industry is making progress, but I think it is incumbent on all parties to find ways in which we can work together—and by “parties”, I mean all levels of government and the private sector—to move emissions lower as fast as possible.
With regard to whether tax treatments can drive that or not, I really feel I'm not really the right person to answer that question. We need to provide incentives, and I've certainly given you areas...encouragement, I should say, rather than incentives. I want to get away from the word “incentives”. We need to provide encouragement. I think people far more able than me in financial and tax matters might be able to comment on which are the most effective measures.
I can say that, in general, some of the very generous tax measures for research and development in Canada have not alone stimulated the kind of research and development we need to see. That might not be a fault of that generous tax treatment.
It comes back to my point that innovation isn't thought of holistically. What we've done is say that we should have a good tax regime for R and D in Canada. If we did that, combined with a bunch of other things to really make that supply chain robust, it might be a very good policy, but only along with a number of other policies alongside it.
To your question of water, again, the industry is making progress, but the rate at which the industry is making progress is not the rate that will get us to the three million to five million barrels a day of oil sands production that we need to supply our own domestic needs, to maintain some export revenues, and to provide energy security in this country without serious issues, then, for the Athabasca River.
So, yes, they're recycling water, but the difference that you're finding in some of the numbers you're seeing arise simply out of whether it's being recycled in the sense of it going out into the tailings ponds or it truly going back into the Athabasca River. Again, the industry is making efforts in that regard, but only fundamental shifts in technology—I mentioned the THAI process, which uses very little water at all—will get us to the point where we can have three million to five million plus barrels a day coming out of the oil sands without serious water shortages there.