<?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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Offshore Wind Power Capacity Estimates Rise, Yet Support Seems Weak</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/11/13/offshore-wind-power-capacity-estimates-rise-yet-support-seems-weak/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/11/13/offshore-wind-power-capacity-estimates-rise-yet-support-seems-weak/</link>
	<description>Environmental Leader</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 22:05:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill R. Fritz, MBA- Mangaging Director</title>
		<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/11/13/offshore-wind-power-capacity-estimates-rise-yet-support-seems-weak/comment-page-1/#comment-166502</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill R. Fritz, MBA- Mangaging Director</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:06:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.environmentalleader.com/?p=27263#comment-166502</guid>
		<description>Very interesting. Seems to be some real opportunities for offshore wind farms. 

Kind regards,
Bill Fritz</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting. Seems to be some real opportunities for offshore wind farms. </p>
<p>Kind regards,<br />
Bill Fritz</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Wilson</title>
		<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/11/13/offshore-wind-power-capacity-estimates-rise-yet-support-seems-weak/comment-page-1/#comment-162448</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Wilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 02:17:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.environmentalleader.com/?p=27263#comment-162448</guid>
		<description>This is important information to share, thank you.&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is important information to share, thank you..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barbara Durkin</title>
		<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2009/11/13/offshore-wind-power-capacity-estimates-rise-yet-support-seems-weak/comment-page-1/#comment-162013</link>
		<dc:creator>Barbara Durkin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 22:27:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.environmentalleader.com/?p=27263#comment-162013</guid>
		<description>The way to influence citizens to become more receptive to offshore wind energy is for the industry to be honest in your dealings.  

Cape Wind has no manufacturing source for their wind turbines, no purchase power agreement, and no financing after 7 years.  The Cape Wind project proponents have waged a anti-NIMBY campaign; refuse to discuss cost of their energy with Congressmen, tax and ratepayers alike; and they misrepresent adverse impacts to the fishing industry, avian life and mariners.  While Cape Wind contends that their project delay, and the stalled offshore wind industry blame falls on NIMBYs, the project proponents represent a phantom wind project that would if it could produce energy do so at twice the current price AFTER public subsidies. 

Americans need reliable and affordable energy, not rhetoric, misleading claims, bad business practices and name calling. 

The managing director of DeepWater Wind may believe that offshore wind energy makes sense for the Northeast, but New England residents do read the news.  

Presently, offshore wind projects aren&#039;t economically viable or reliable from the rate and taxpayers&#039; perspectives. 

National Grid identified Deepwater Wind off the coast of Block Island &quot;will more than triple the current rate for traditional electricity.&quot; 

Providence Business Journal
10/16/09
&#039;N. Grid rejects Deepwater Wind proposal&#039;

&quot;...But in a letter to the PUC, Grid called Deepwater&#039;s proposal &quot;not commercially reasonable&quot; and said &quot;in pure financial terms, [it] is uneconomic by a significant margin for Rhode Island customers for the entire term.&quot; 

http://www.pbn.com/detail/45500.html

Don&#039;t try to capture our hearts by over selling offshore wind energy benefits, and by understating its risks.  Appeal to our minds.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The way to influence citizens to become more receptive to offshore wind energy is for the industry to be honest in your dealings.  </p>
<p>Cape Wind has no manufacturing source for their wind turbines, no purchase power agreement, and no financing after 7 years.  The Cape Wind project proponents have waged a anti-NIMBY campaign; refuse to discuss cost of their energy with Congressmen, tax and ratepayers alike; and they misrepresent adverse impacts to the fishing industry, avian life and mariners.  While Cape Wind contends that their project delay, and the stalled offshore wind industry blame falls on NIMBYs, the project proponents represent a phantom wind project that would if it could produce energy do so at twice the current price AFTER public subsidies. </p>
<p>Americans need reliable and affordable energy, not rhetoric, misleading claims, bad business practices and name calling. </p>
<p>The managing director of DeepWater Wind may believe that offshore wind energy makes sense for the Northeast, but New England residents do read the news.  </p>
<p>Presently, offshore wind projects aren&#8217;t economically viable or reliable from the rate and taxpayers&#8217; perspectives. </p>
<p>National Grid identified Deepwater Wind off the coast of Block Island &#8220;will more than triple the current rate for traditional electricity.&#8221; </p>
<p>Providence Business Journal<br />
10/16/09<br />
&#8216;N. Grid rejects Deepwater Wind proposal&#8217;</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230;But in a letter to the PUC, Grid called Deepwater&#8217;s proposal &#8220;not commercially reasonable&#8221; and said &#8220;in pure financial terms, [it] is uneconomic by a significant margin for Rhode Island customers for the entire term.&#8221; </p>
<p><a href="http://www.pbn.com/detail/45500.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.pbn.com/detail/45500.html</a></p>
<p>Don&#8217;t try to capture our hearts by over selling offshore wind energy benefits, and by understating its risks.  Appeal to our minds.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

