First of all, I think that's a legitimate question. It's a concern for me and it's a concern for AECL. Even though they identified the MAPLE as a high-risk project and advised against it, they are concerned about that. But I will say emphatically that the MAPLE technology is completely separate. It's completely different from the ACR technology, which they're doing. And to their credit, the ACR technology, the advanced CANDU reactor, is built on the CANDU 6 platform. About 80% of the parts, or even more, in the CANDU 6 are interchangeable with the ACR. So that's the platform.
Look at their record. That's what I say. Look at the record. I was in Argentina, and I went inside the reactor. They have awards for the most efficient reactor in the world.
In China there is Qinshan 1 and 2. I was there a few weeks ago. Again, if you listen to the engineers there, of all the Chinese reactors in the entire Chinese fleet, the two CANDUs have the shortest construction time, are the most efficient reactors, were on time and under budget, are the least expensive per unit of energy, and use the least amount of uranium per unit of energy produced. They're marvellous pieces of technology.
It's the same thing in Korea. They have 20 reactors. Ours are four of the top five, and soon, I'm told, will be four of the top four.
Let me just finish.
The record is very strong.
As far as the England bid in the U.K is concerned--you raised this, so I just want to touch on this if I can--the cost of just doing the bid is $25 million to $30 million. They have opportunities here at home. They want to do what they do, and they want to do it well. So they had to make a strategic decision.
We have a lot of work here in Canada. We have New Brunswick talking to us. We have Ontario. And we're hearing interest in Alberta. Let's focus our priorities on Canada right now to get the ARC platform and get it producing electricity. I actually think it's going to be award winning, from everything I read.
So I think they made the right decision, a strategic decision, to not continue the U.K. bid process. That's not to mention the cost.