I would just like to add one point to that discussion.
With Shell, there were refining facilities. I would point out, by the way, that they are not yet dismantled, but are supposed to be this spring. There was also a level of consumption. There was a balance there. Why was Shell allowed to close? Why was that refinery allowed to shut down, whereas Valero had a refinery in the Delaware Bay that was in the same situation? Valero wanted to shut it down, but the government very actively stepped in. It told the company that if it no longer wanted to be in business, someone else would take over the refinery's operations. So it was sold and is currently in operation.
I am saying that we should adopt a strategy on the basis of similar real-life examples. We have a refinery, but a decision was made to close it. Afterwards, we hear all this talk that it would cost $7 billion to build a new refinery, but we had one. And yet in this same environment that is the North American market, others have not shut down. In this case, the fall guy was us.