Sure.
If you look at some of the developments that have taken place in remote locations, for example in the James Bay region, and look at the challenges that they had there in developing large hydroelectric power in that region, and multiply that by four, that's basically what you're looking at.
When you get up farther north, those problems are just further exacerbated in terms not simply of just running the project, but in fact building the project. There are challenges of moving equipment, of building access to those facilities, and things as simple as Mr. Mackey mentioned earlier, such as not even having cranes in some of these areas. First off, there is the challenge of getting equipment up to these locations, and then there is the whole issue around the geography itself, which is clearly more challenging than it would be in the south.
On the other hand, the benefits are significant. While we were talking earlier about whether or not it's economical to do some of these projects, specifically on a strict business case basis, we need to look beyond that. We need to look more broadly at overall, holistic impacts. It isn't just a question of the cost, for example, of putting in a hydro facility in the north and there being a reduction in the cost of diesel.
There's a greater benefit, not just to the customers who would be getting supplied with a source of more reliable and cheaper power, but there's also a benefit to the airshed as a whole if we're moving away from diesel. So that isn't just a benefit to the people in the north, it's a benefit to Canadians and, in fact, to people all around the world.