Thank you for the question.
I'm very familiar with the study that you are referring to. It does indeed include a number of assumptions and errors that are incorrect.
Our model does track the carbon and the impacts of harvesting, including the impacts on dead organic matter pools in the litter, on the forest floor and in the soil, as well as in harvested wood products. There are limitations to the spacial resolution of the kinds of models that we use to apply to all of Canada. We're currently working on that, to go to much higher spacial resolution and spatially explicit approaches. The specific concern that the industry has expressed is with regard to inadequate regeneration on roads and landings, and they have shown examples of that. This is clearly something that we need to address, but we have also already done analysis of the potential impact of that, and it is much smaller than what is suggested by the report.
Having said that, it is clear that the cement industry will also undertake efforts to improve its carbon footprint. As all sectors evolve towards more competitive greenhouse gas strategies, the substitution benefits and displacement factors that we use in our models need to improve over time as the other sectors become more competitive as well. These are areas of ongoing research, but it's incorrect to claim that we're not accounting for these various issues.