<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: NRG Energy to acquire SunPower solar farm for $450 million</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2010/11/30/nrg-energy-to-acquire-sunpower-solar-farm-for-450-million/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2010/11/30/nrg-energy-to-acquire-sunpower-solar-farm-for-450-million/</link>
	<description>Global environmental challenges</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 01:40:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: DEVASSOCX</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2010/11/30/nrg-energy-to-acquire-sunpower-solar-farm-for-450-million/comment-page-1/#comment-348118</link>
		<dc:creator>DEVASSOCX</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jun 2011 03:25:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=19053#comment-348118</guid>
		<description>Energy sources that are economical are very good things.

From what I understand, this project is subsidized via a nearly 2B$ DOE loan guarantee and putting the rate payers on the hook for expensive power does not meet that test. There
may be other subsidies that exist but are not yet announced.

Further, this project soaks up 1000&#039;s of acres of land.

The claim of increasing employment is a joke as the
number of jobs is minimal.

I&#039;m afraid this is just another expensive boondoggle that
the taxpayer and ratepayer ultimately has to pay for.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Energy sources that are economical are very good things.</p>
<p>From what I understand, this project is subsidized via a nearly 2B$ DOE loan guarantee and putting the rate payers on the hook for expensive power does not meet that test. There<br />
may be other subsidies that exist but are not yet announced.</p>
<p>Further, this project soaks up 1000&#8242;s of acres of land.</p>
<p>The claim of increasing employment is a joke as the<br />
number of jobs is minimal.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m afraid this is just another expensive boondoggle that<br />
the taxpayer and ratepayer ultimately has to pay for.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ellietrent</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/2010/11/30/nrg-energy-to-acquire-sunpower-solar-farm-for-450-million/comment-page-1/#comment-346866</link>
		<dc:creator>ellietrent</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 06:54:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/environment/?p=19053#comment-346866</guid>
		<description>this is the kind of stuff that we need more of to help our environment. it may cost a lot of money to start out with, but if others offer to sponsor or donate money, we could have a lot more solar powered farms. it says that it&#039;s powerful enough to power 100,000 homes! that is absolutely insane! it seems like environmental issues like these are not taken into consideration lately and other things have more importance. i think that environmental issues is in the list of top ten issues.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this is the kind of stuff that we need more of to help our environment. it may cost a lot of money to start out with, but if others offer to sponsor or donate money, we could have a lot more solar powered farms. it says that it&#8217;s powerful enough to power 100,000 homes! that is absolutely insane! it seems like environmental issues like these are not taken into consideration lately and other things have more importance. i think that environmental issues is in the list of top ten issues.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
