I have two comments. My initial reaction to the CO2 issue is that we're trying to solve the problem in one swoop. It's going to be extremely difficult for our industry to do that, and that's going to manifest in what people come to tell you--that the lights will go out if that's what the regulation is going to be. That's true. We cannot do without coal-fired power plants in the parts of the country where we have them now.
My calculations tell me that 50% of the acid gas problem in Ontario is due to emissions from the United States that flow north over the border and 30% comes from the motor vehicle problem. Somewhere between 12% to 15% comes from the point sources--coal-fired power plants. If those plants were refitted with brand-new current technology--and most of them have no technology on them today--that 12% to 15% would be reduced to something like 2% to 3%. We'll never get it to zero, but significant improvements can be made using existing technology. Certain power utilities in the country and in the United States have gone to that kind of technology.
Trying to do without those plants is going to lead us in one direction, and doing nothing with them will lead us in exactly the opposite direction. There is some middle ground here with the acid gas problem.
With the carbon dioxide problem, conventional plants will take us, as Dave has said, to improvements that are 20%, maybe better, on an intensity basis. But proper integration with biomass, alternate fuels, and producing other than electricity at these plants will also have the effect of allowing us to avoid using other fossil fuels. That can then become a credit toward the power plants that are there now.