I think those are very good questions.
Our analysis, in terms of the inventory analysis, is based on the assumption that most of the residues at the mill are already being used, and indeed the forestry sector has had a strong incentive to use those as a source of energy because of the higher energy prices, particularly gas prices. As a result, our focus has been on two things. One is to look at some of the forest residues, taking only the larger forest residues, leaving essentially 30% of the residues behind in order to make sure they have the nutrients and the carbon stocks for the soils, for the environmental values. What we would do is take some of the remaining residues.
But the real focus in terms of the carbon sink that I talked about and also for the long-term bioenergy is to increase, through forest management practices such as replanting after sowing with species or genotypes that are better adapted, especially to future climate in those areas; using a low-level fertilizer occasionally; pre-commercial thinning—some of the more intensive forest management practices that will result in a much faster growth and a higher-value product in a shorter period of time. This also generates a bioenergy byproduct during the process, for example through the pre-commercial thinning.
Now, these are more expensive than our current forest management practices in Canada, but certainly you've talked to some of the forest companies. Many of the provinces and forest companies are interested in moving in this direction, but trying to get the economics to work has been a challenge.
The carbon benefits and the bioenergy benefits are being seen as a potential way of meeting and helping with the economics to make it happen.