The Canadian Space Agency received additional funding to participate up until 2030, and we're very grateful for it.
At some point, with spacecraft.... As you heard my colleague mention, we've kept some of our satellites for 23 years. We have a mission life of five years, but we keep them for much longer, which we're very proud of. That might sound responsible in terms of a return on investment. The only issue is, increasingly, we need to plan for de-orbit and save enough fuel so that we can do a controlled re-entry, just as we saw with Artemis II. Their re-entry was controlled. They reached 3,000°C as plasma burned up around them, and there were parachutes.
It's the same thing with the International Space Station. We have to make sure that there's enough control over the International Space Station to be able to de-orbit it responsibly. You may have seen some of the issues with space debris lately, so a controlled re-entry is the most important thing.
Will the structure last that long? I mentioned the persistent leak in the Russian module. That's a problem. We're doing what we can to maintain it. Will other issues arise as the structure ages? We hope not. We're doing preventative maintenance, but it is already reaching beyond what we anticipated when we first launched it.