That is an excellent question because we always make sure that we measure program results.
To determine the effectiveness of a program, a distinction must be made between ethanol and biodiesel. When it comes to ethanol, we have signed 14 agreements, which is 94% of the target. We subsidize the production of about 2 million litres per year. From that point of view, we are satisfied with the scale of production. Furthermore, analyses lead us to believe that this production will remain cost effective beyond the program. These producers will be able to continue to provide ethanol after the end of the program, because they will have established their position on the market.
As for biodiesel, the situation is more difficult. We have signed eight agreements, which represent 61% of the target. Once again, the fact that this is a partnership that we concluded with producers must be taken into account, as well as the fact that there is a partner on the other side.
Market conditions for biodiesel have been more difficult. Even with the subsidy that we have granted to biodiesel producers, they have not always succeeded in producing the quantity they expected to, nor have they been able to complete their projects. They have not reached the level at which we were ready to support them. Replacing diesel with biodiesel has not met expectations. As for ethanol, we just about broke even.