As a corporation, we are, like many organizations in our industry, inherently conservative. When we approach transformative innovation, we are competing for capital internally within the organization, in an extremely capital-type environment. We're a capital-intensive industry and the reins are held pretty tight on that capital.
It's not easy. We have to take baby steps. We move as quickly as we can, but what is of utmost importance is to fail-safe. This is why the integrated or co-located biorefinery approach gains a lot of traction: you have the wood supply coming through an existing facility. As Dr. Price mentioned, if you do a plug-and-play approach, you de-risk the entire venture, and de-risking is critically important.
In terms of the role the government agencies play, active participation in the process is really important. It isn't just the capital that's at play here; it is also the appetite for risk, and reassurance, if you will. I discussed this with a colleague just this morning. There's a very interesting psychology when it comes to launching a high-risk project; that is, if you have universities, research institutions, and government partners, the corporation is much more likely to approve the expenditure of capital and resources on that project, because there's a bit of an external validation that's critically important.
The capital is really important, but I think the collaboration is even more important because of the validity it gives to the enterprise. It's like a group of people holding hands as they jump off a cliff and hope for the best. There is a bit of that, because there is great uncertainty. I would say that is a key to making these projects actually happen: a lot of upfront evaluation by a very conservative group of people who want to hang on their capital and a collaborative multi-stakeholder approach.