<?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:go='http://ns.gigaom.com/'
xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: DOE Funds Carbon Capture With $340M &amp; Solar $24M, Sigh</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/cleantech/doe-funds-carbon-capture-with-340m-solar-24m-sigh/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/doe-funds-carbon-capture-with-340m-solar-24m-sigh/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 08:45:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/doe-funds-carbon-capture-with-340m-solar-24m-sigh/#comment-14842</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:19:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/?p=5817#comment-14842</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;The FutureGen Project is not scuttled. It&#039;s changed from one giant mega IGCC plant to a bunch of smaller IGCC plants with carbon capture deomstrations. It&#039;s budgeted to cost the government as much as it was going to end up putting into the one big FutureGen plant ($1.8 billion if memory serves). So FutureGen is still on.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Considering the chances of carbon sequestration actually working, I think this is worse news, personally.&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The FutureGen Project is not scuttled. It&#8217;s changed from one giant mega IGCC plant to a bunch of smaller IGCC plants with carbon capture deomstrations. It&#8217;s budgeted to cost the government as much as it was going to end up putting into the one big FutureGen plant ($1.8 billion if memory serves). So FutureGen is still on.</p>
<p>Considering the chances of carbon sequestration actually working, I think this is worse news, personally.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

