You were interested, I think, in the cost structure in the pipeline industry as well as the regulatory requirements if you were to change what's flowing through the pipeline.
Certainly, costs are a factor. When operations become more complex and switching and batching is involved, they cost more.
Some liquid pipelines are designed to do just that. The Enbridge system is a good example of a system that carries many different products. They have about six parallel pipelines that have been built over time. They are run like dedicated highways, and within each highway there are batches. This does cost more.
Ultimately that cost is borne by the overall value chain, and so by the shippers. Of course, when you impact overall cost structures, ultimately it trickles back through to lower tax revenues, lower royalty revenues, and the like. We all have a vested interest in making things efficient and effective to the maximum effect possible.
On the regulatory side, when you change the type of product, regulatory approval is generally required, and sometimes so is renegotiation of land easements and that sort of thing. It is not trivial. My points were simply that in the measure of public interest, which is ultimately the measure that matters most, a repurposing of assets is entirely plausible. It is something that we do in Canada, and it can be effective.
One final comment—