Environment committee  Thanks for the question. Yes, we are on track for the 2026 target, and that would constitute the first time that one of these targets has been met. In terms of that individual year, I don't know, Derek, if you have that handy or not.

Environment committee  We have it in a range of 31% to 36%. The range is a result of whether or not you count land use, land use changes in forestry, as part of the calculation.

Environment committee  On farm fuels...?

Environment committee  There's an exemption for the carbon tax for the fossil fuels used in farm operations, and then John can correct me if I have this wrong, but I think there's also a refundable tax credit for the fuels that might be used for crops and so forth.

Environment committee  Can you repeat the first part of your question? I should note, by the way, just in answer to the other.... In terms of the fuels I was referring to, it's gasoline and the light fuel oil, also known as diesel.

Environment committee  I'm sorry. I don't have that number in front of me.

Environment committee  We can return to the committee with fuller details on that.

Environment committee  I do not have right in front of me the backward years for the NIR. I will note that one of the things that happens in the NIR is that the historical numbers get revised after the fact. I know that sounds counterintuitive—how can the past change?—but the reality is that, because methodologies and the UNFCC approaches change, sometimes the numbers do get revised upwards.

Environment committee  I'll start. I just think it's important to note up front the decisions related to the Trans Mountain pipeline were not made within our department, so we might not have been doing that kind of analysis. I'll turn to Derek, if he wants to add anything.

Environment committee  I can't speak personally to whether that was done, but that doesn't mean it's not the case.

Environment committee  Derek, it might be useful if you spoke a little bit to the peer review of the model and its operation that we have done to date and continue to do. It's not really just a matter of Environment Canada's modellers determining that this is a good model. There is an ongoing process of peer review.

Environment committee  I'll turn to my colleagues in a bit because they were in the department at the time when some of this thinking went on. I would note that the policy is ultimately based on recognizing that there's really not just one tool that you would use. The value of the carbon price is that it sends a market signal and it finds efficient ways to invest in those technologies.

Environment committee  Just to.... I'll make the base. When we're talking about the one-third, we're talking about the combination of the carbon price and the OBPS. Just to go through the individual numbers themselves, if you took our reference case in 2022, we would go—

Environment committee  —from 674 megatonnes in emissions in 2020 to 641 megatonnes in 2030. In the absence of carbon pricing, we'd be going from 691 megatonnes to 720 megatonnes. When you look at those numbers, the 641 megatonnes versus the 720 megatonnes, that is how we get to 79 megatonnes in reductions.

Environment committee  I think what we have provided is all the assumptions that go into the model, everything that's assumed in terms of what measures are being put in place or are already in place or are going to be put in place—a comprehensive list of that from the federal and provincial governments.