Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do appreciate the issue with respect to time.
Thank you to our witnesses.
Professor Keith, I found it a little satirical, if you will. You gave your overview. You talked about whether the oil sands were dirty. You said, well, greenhouse gases are high, but relative to other emissions are probably not--maybe two times as bad as conventional, maybe 20 times as bad. You mused about that to some extent.
With respect to water issues, you talked about how it didn't appear that there was a huge problem. But then you came down to your bottom line: your job is implicated with respect to whether we go along with some of the suggestions to just shut the oil sands down. You said that you thought the sacrifice was too much, and that we then fall back on serious regulation.
I would take it that serious regulation would let you and the people who have their homes in the west...that they wouldn't be following the situation that is in the United States.
I guess my question is about the area of serious regulation. It would be similar to the question I would put to Mr. Dyer, because he comes down to that bottom line too. He talks about water quality, wildlife issues, and about caps on pollution.
So where do we go in terms of matching our ability to produce...but to produce in an environmentally sustainable way? Where are you in terms of that?