It is a question that is often asked. I talked in my opening remarks about the nuclear industry having internalized these so-called environmental effects that people refer to as external costs. In many countries with substantial nuclear programs, like the United States and Canada, the generators of nuclear waste deposit cash into a fund that is intended to pay for the future disposal of the waste generated.
I ask you to remember that it doesn't go into the atmosphere or the water. It is a solid, very controllable, very manageable, and minuscule amount of waste. In fact, all of the waste generated in the 50-year history of this industry in Canada would fit within a hockey arena. You're talking about a very small amount of waste.
So, one, we've paid for it, and two, every country and think tank that has looked at this issue--and this includes Canada--has come to the conclusion that geological waste disposal is the answer. The difficulty the industry has routinely had, posed by the critics, is what political jurisdiction is going to accept it. That's been a very intractable problem, whether it be in Canada or the United States.
Technically, it's not an issue. It's paid for already from cash in a specially designated escrow fund. As I say, we have now internalized, including in the mining industry, the waste we generate. We've internalized the external costs that other industries, other forms of electricity generation, have not.