Thank you for the question.
We need to understand the environmental situation better in the Arctic. I did that as the chair of CHARS and I do that now at the research institute of Aurora College. We try to bring in new technology to provide energy, removing ourselves from the diesel generators that are putting a lot of soot in the atmosphere. We understand things a little. A big wind generator was built using a steel that did not perform well in the Arctic. There have been different types of processes. People have been telling us that we cannot use photovoltaics in the north, but that winds up being false. You can follow the sun pretty well in the north during the summertime, and it is much cheaper to use these resources than others.
The biggest problem we have—you were told the same thing by my colleagues—is that we need more study of what's going on. We need to do more in our activities. We need to work more with the Inuit, who have a set of knowledge that is critical for us. I'd like to give you an example at one time or another, but that's not the question. Clearly, we need about four times the number of scientists we have right now in Canada. We do not compare with anybody around the world; we compare only with equatorial countries. Most other countries have more people who work there. We need 1,500 more scientists. As was said before, it's hard to keep them on the job, because it's very hard to be in the Arctic and—