Okay, perfect.
I guess the context of my question, and where I was going with this, follows from your earlier remarks that Canadian oil production is scheduled to grow by 56% by 2040, if there are no constraints in the system, and that LNG would grow by 22%. Has there ever been a study measuring the environmental impacts of not building a pipeline? I ask because if you were not going to build, say, Energy East or Trans Mountain or Pacific Northwest LNG, that would result in a substantial increase in rail traffic in Canada. What would the environmental impacts be on the environment in Canada as a result of not having access to pipelines, if we were to go it alone on rail? Furthermore, have any financial studies been done on the availability of rail, and whether there would even be enough rail capacity to meet that need and, if there weren't, what infrastructure would have to be employed to meet those needs and what the overall environmental and economic impact would be in Canada?