As I said, the 35% is where we would be in 2035 according to the National Energy Board's latest projection. That would be if we went to five million barrels a day, which we do not endorse for a whole number of reasons. I think it's utterly unsustainable. But if we did, we would be at 35% being upgraded.
You could look at the value-added part in two ways. You can look at it in the economic models, and Jim is better at it than I am, for sure. That's why we hired Informetrica back in 2006 just to take the volume that was going to go down in Keystone I. We asked Mike McCracken what it would mean in terms of jobs if this was upgraded and refined in Alberta. He came up with the 18,000 figure. You can always run an economic model to see how those are going to play out.
In a more practical sense, in the business world, there's only so much capital and there's only so much readily available resource. How is the model being built? The problem with having pipelines driving the development model is that first of all, the export capacity is created and then the producers expand to fill the capacity in the pipeline. There's an idea that somehow pipeline capacity is trying to catch up to production. In fact, it's not that simple. They are very much linked together. Nobody is going to spend millions of dollars opening up a new field if they don't have a ready market for it. The model is being built for bitumen export. Capital is being diverted that way. For example, right now there's a proposal for a 150,000 barrel a day upgrader to make diesel fuel in the North West refinery in Alberta. It's a great idea. What they need is the capital, and they also need a partnership with a producer.
Thank you.