That's a very helpful question.
Bankers will look at a project in terms of different elements of the project. If you're working on renewable energy, for example, you need to have an agreement in place for your municipal waste if you're going to do waste to energy, so you need tipping fee agreements and things like that, and you need an off-take agreement, someone who will take the electricity.
If the technology has not been in place and doesn't have, let's say, two years of operating data, they will see that as being a technical risk. It may be that the technology is proven in the sense that it has been operating for a year or something like that, but banks take no risk technically.
It depends on how our government decides to proceed, but if, for example, under the negotiations for the next approach on climate change we decided to participate in that, the technologies that Canada has will generally be viewed as having technical risk even though they are deployed at some level. This means that the next round of climate-related technologies could all be from China because there is no technical risk associated with five megawatt turbines, wind turbines, and Chinese-produced solar panels. We need to think about what we're going to do, if we want some of the more novel technologies deployed.