If you look at the situation in 2018 compared to now, the risks have significantly gone down because the pipeline has been expanded; it's in operation. These types of risks related to the construction and the operation of the pipeline have gone down significantly. Oil is flowing, so from that perspective, risks have gone down, which suggests a lower discount rate.
The risks that remain relate to future oil demand, which could be affected by the demand on the world markets, the price at which Canadian oil can be sold compared to cheaper alternatives—if that were the case—and whether or not policies, not just in Canada but globally, will affect oil demand. That's why there is still an element of risk.
The question of whether a lower discount rate should be used is a very valid question, and I'm sure that various proponents or potential buyers could see a different discount rate being applied, be it higher or lower. That's why, this being subjective and a value judgment, we decided to use CDEV. They benefit from the expertise of owning and operating the pipeline indirectly and also of having a good window as to the potential market and government policies, as does each and every one of us.
We could have gone for a lower, or maybe higher, discount rate, recognizing that it is a value judgment. That's why we have the sensitivity analysis in our report. Others can have a different perspective on the proper discount rate to use, and they can look at the sensitivity analysis that we performed to use a slightly different discount rate.