Thank you for the question.
With respect to carbon capture and storage not being mandated, our view is that companies need to be allowed to choose their approach to meeting climate change reduction obligations. For some companies, carbon capture and storage may be the sensible and most cost-effective approach, but for others it may not be.
If you have a wholesale mandating of carbon dioxide capture, one of the outcomes that's unintended but anticipated to happen is a huge supply of carbon dioxide that's produced, and any potential revenues that we might have been hoping to have in the system for purchasers for enhanced oil recovery will fall to zero because just simple supply and demand economics will suggest that they shouldn't pay anything for the carbon dioxide. One of the opportunities for keeping the overall cost of the system down would be destroyed in that type of initiative.
With respect to the idea of a carbon tax, we think that's a policy consideration that really goes above and beyond the purview of what our group is involved in. Each of our companies has its own respective opinions on that mechanism as a climate change approach. However, what our subgroup of these various companies has been working on is really the implementation of and the attempts to move forward on implementation of carbon capture and storage, rather than the overall climate change policy objectives.