In a lot of ways, again, it comes back to the data, which is there. The biomass—out in the woods, somebody cutting their own wood and making their own energy for their home—is going to be a very difficult one because they don't fully understand what the cost, the volume, or anything else was. People are looking at that today.
With regard to wind, what I think a lot of people want to understand more about wind is the cost. They want to understand where it's going, and not where it was.
Where we've embedded wind in the country, over the last five to 10 years, it has been at a much higher cost than if we were to do it again today. We can only do that because we've learned and we have a much bigger base and a supply chain, and we have all this knowledge.
I think it's important to have the capacity to understand what happens now and what happens in another 10 years and 15 years. When all of those ones that were more expensive to start off with come off contract, what's the possibility? That's analytical, so it's not so much about the number gigawatt hours of wind. I think people want to know much more about what the cost is and what can we look to for the future. That's analytical.
When it comes to solar PV, understanding a whole lot more.... I don't know of any province other than Nova Scotia that collects that granular level of data on solar PV. Everyone else is sitting there, saying, “I don't know; it comes on; it's in the system,” and we draw analogies to what's happening in southern California or Arizona, but wait a second, they're not exactly like us at all. If we're to get to real energy information decisions and impacts, we need to collect Canadian data that is relevant to Canadian energy needs. That's also about investing in projects, and not just surveys, but also technologies and pilots and things to be able to collect.