This whole issue in terms of decreasing emissions versus focusing on production is important, and not just from a constitutional perspective and a jurisdictional perspective. If you think about global demand, all of the projections for global demand for oil show oil demand going either a little bit up, or, in the case of the IEA 1.5° scenario, a little bit down by 2030.
Between now and 2030, we have to make significant reductions in emissions. Of course, the reason that production won't go down significantly by 2030 is that you don't have a broad enough deployment of zero-emission vehicle technology. We need to ensure that we are driving down emissions at a time when the world is still demanding similar amounts of oil to what it is today. That is something that this cap is focused on: finding ways to incent and drive innovation to reduce emissions at a time when global demand is not declining.
After 2030, of course, with lower-carbon content barrels, the work that is done to drive down emissions so that the production emissions are very small is going to have value in the international community.
At the end of the day, we need to ensure that this cap will actually drive technology deployment that will reduce emissions, whether that's CCUS, hydrogen—and it's a range of other things—and that is exactly what this is intended to do.