By the way, in Ontario there are some very aggressive targets for conservation. Conceptually, it's hard to grasp, but fundamentally, Toronto has to be taken off the grid by 2025. It's a big city. It's a lot of demand, but conceptually, that's a big, big challenge. That's being met by an integrated supply plan for Ontario that includes renewable energy, that includes nuclear redevelopment, that includes very aggressive conservation.
Net zero truly is this idea that at any given time over the course of the year there will be enough energy put back in the grid as was taken from the grid, not necessarily synchronously with peak demands...that's very hard to do. But if in fact we went from having a dozen net-zero homes to having 50,000 net-zero homes spread across the country, there would be a noticeable contribution to the grid.
Again, this is evolving. The technology has been around for a long time. The first photovoltaic panels were much more expensive than they are now, much like a compact source of light 20 years ago was $35 and now it's $3. Or a pocket calculator used to be $80; now it's free in a cornflakes box.
So technology will help us along the way, but a lot of this is that many people think they're getting an energy efficient home just by buying any home, so I think that's something we have to work on for labelling. Many people would like to be part of a solution, but they don't necessarily have the discretionary extra capital to do so, so are there ways of stimulating that until it becomes more de rigueur? And price signals can help take us the rest of the way.