This is a very interesting question. I have to say first that, as you all probably know, Alberta has a price on carbon. It's $15 a tonne, and the way it works is that in the oil and gas industry large emitters can either invest in renewable energy projects, or they can improve their energy efficiency, or they can pay $15 a tonne into the CCEMC, which currently has $400 million to invest.
I think the challenges have to do with risk and with how capital is deployed by asset managers, as shown on the first page of the presentation I made earlier. The hurdle rates required for investment in the oil and gas industry are set by those shareholders, and they're very high, obviously. In order for capital to be deployed to energy efficiency projects, there has to be something else to make that happen. That something else could be a higher price on carbon. It could be bringing different types of capital to the situation. For example, pension funds may want—well, they all want—to be invested in projects that have recurring revenues or recurring payments, and energy efficiency projects have those characteristics.
So there's innovation that could occur on the financial side. You've heard me speak in the past about the notion of risk insurance. I used the idea of a CMHC for technical risk. I know it's not exactly the same thing, but we do have the issue that in order to get capital deployed we have to meet different hurdle rates. At the moment the price on carbon at $15 will get us a little bit of that, but if we want more of it, we will need different tools.