<?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: The Future of FutureGen</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 01:35:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Back to the FutureGen: DOE Takes Shine to Controversial Carbon Capture Demo &#171; Earth2Tech</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8744</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Back to the FutureGen: DOE Takes Shine to Controversial Carbon Capture Demo &#171; Earth2Tech]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 21:01:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/2007/12/18/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8744</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] A joint effort between the government, coal industry and utilities that faced massive cost overruns, FutureGen was envisioned as a proof-of-concept project for carbon capture and storage technology, which remains untested on a commercial scale. The 2007 proposal to build a federally-backed &#8220;cleaner coal&#8221; plant put a bee in the bonnets of environmentalists and won big support from lawmakers in Illinois, where the plant was supposed to be built. [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] A joint effort between the government, coal industry and utilities that faced massive cost overruns, FutureGen was envisioned as a proof-of-concept project for carbon capture and storage technology, which remains untested on a commercial scale. The 2007 proposal to build a federally-backed &#8220;cleaner coal&#8221; plant put a bee in the bonnets of environmentalists and won big support from lawmakers in Illinois, where the plant was supposed to be built. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Hansen: Clean Coal Tech Could Be a Decade Away &#171; Earth2Tech</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8743</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[James Hansen: Clean Coal Tech Could Be a Decade Away &#171; Earth2Tech]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 08:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/2007/12/18/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8743</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] expressed frustration with the slow pace with which the Department of Energy has moved to get its FutureGen clean coal plant up and running: &#8220;It is really too bad that the DOE has taken so long to get its demonstration [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] expressed frustration with the slow pace with which the Department of Energy has moved to get its FutureGen clean coal plant up and running: &#8220;It is really too bad that the DOE has taken so long to get its demonstration [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FAQ: Carbon Capture &#38; Sequestration &#171; Earth2Tech</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8742</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FAQ: Carbon Capture &#38; Sequestration &#171; Earth2Tech]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 16:27:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/2007/12/18/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8742</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] build a &#8220;hydrogen economy,&#8221; the FutureGen plant was expected to cost $1.5 billion. The plant&#8217;s site was just announced last month, but the DoE released a statement saying they have not yet approved this site and that projected [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] build a &#8220;hydrogen economy,&#8221; the FutureGen plant was expected to cost $1.5 billion. The plant&#8217;s site was just announced last month, but the DoE released a statement saying they have not yet approved this site and that projected [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: adaptiveNRG &#187; News for Dec. 19th, 2007</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8741</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[adaptiveNRG &#187; News for Dec. 19th, 2007]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2008 22:16:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/2007/12/18/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8741</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] The Future of FutureGenBy Katie Fehrenbacher Whichever state wins will be home to a first-of-its-kind &#8220;clean coal&#8221; plant that uses coal gasification and technology to capture and store carbon emissions underground. The plant will also produce hydrogen on a commercial scale, &#8230;Earth2Tech - http://earth2tech.com  Posted in Industry News [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Future of FutureGenBy Katie Fehrenbacher Whichever state wins will be home to a first-of-its-kind &#8220;clean coal&#8221; plant that uses coal gasification and technology to capture and store carbon emissions underground. The plant will also produce hydrogen on a commercial scale, &#8230;Earth2Tech &#8211; <a href="http://earth2tech.com" rel="nofollow">http://earth2tech.com</a>  Posted in Industry News [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Earth2Tech &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Future Cloudy For FutureGen?</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8740</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Earth2Tech &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Future Cloudy For FutureGen?]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2007 18:57:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/2007/12/18/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8740</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] seems FutureGen&#8217;s clean coal announcement last week was a bit premature. The Department of Energy (DoE), the main financier of the $1.8 [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] seems FutureGen&#8217;s clean coal announcement last week was a bit premature. The Department of Energy (DoE), the main financier of the $1.8 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Future Cloudy For FutureGen? &#171; Earth2Tech</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8739</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Future Cloudy For FutureGen? &#171; Earth2Tech]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2007 18:44:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/2007/12/18/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8739</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] by Craig Rubens   No Comments Posted December 24th, 2007 at 10:44 am in Big Green    It seems FutureGen&#8217;s clean coal announcement last week was a bit premature. The Department of Energy (DoE), the main financier of the $1.8 [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] by Craig Rubens   No Comments Posted December 24th, 2007 at 10:44 am in Big Green    It seems FutureGen&#8217;s clean coal announcement last week was a bit premature. The Department of Energy (DoE), the main financier of the $1.8 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kojiro Vance</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8738</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kojiro Vance]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/2007/12/18/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8738</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;Geology &amp; chemistry will keep the CO2 contained.  Two or three layers of imperiable caprock.&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Geology &amp; chemistry will keep the CO2 contained.  Two or three layers of imperiable caprock.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kojiro Vance</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8737</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kojiro Vance]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/2007/12/18/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8737</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;It is Mattoon, IL&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is Mattoon, IL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/cleantech/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8736</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:10:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://earth2tech.com/2007/12/18/the-future-of-futuregen/#comment-8736</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;Who guarantees the CO2 stays stored underground forever?&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who guarantees the CO2 stays stored underground forever?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

