Mr. Chairman, I'm curious, then. If the government should backstop the risk, does that mean we should also share potential revenues if there is a breakthrough in technology? Perhaps we invest in mechanical batteries or something and that really takes off and the government had backstopped it. I don't know if that's the way the industry looks at it, but certainly from a business perspective, I would think that would be the case.
I find it interesting that we're encouraging a lot of industry to do many different things for us, and the government has put some money towards it. In the north I watch communities really struggling to move away from diesel generation power. For example, we've had a community go to co-generation, using solar and diesel. They put in a new diesel system backed up by solar. But the reality is that if that weren't subsidized by the government or hadn't been paid for by the government, there is no way they could afford it. The cost, they tell me, is amortized over 10 years, but in 10 years everything has to be replaced.
I'm just wondering if we're seeing anything on that front of storage. Storage is the big issue. I like the whole concept of mechanical batteries. Is that being tested anywhere? Is there any new clean technology that's being de-risked for the north?