I think we can conclude on this note here honestly because we seem to have reached the limit of this debate. I think that money today is worth more than money in the future, and that therefore that you might get an additional “bonus” return in 100 years is worth very little as a justification for upfront investment you have to pay for in the present day when renewables are cheaper and don’t require that “bonus” in their economic argument, which is an opinion shared by all investors and energy policy experts and can be seen in the investment tools and models we use and the fact that nobody is willing to finance nuclear generation. You clearly have an alternative opinion, which is okay. Everybody has some fringe opinions. Nothing more can be gained when we disagree on this fundamental point.