<?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: What Should Happen to the  Waxman-Markey Climate Bill?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/</link>
	<description>Business, Better. Since 2005</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:18:23 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: EarthNews &#187; Archive &#187; Thoughts on the Waxman-Markey Climate Bill</title>
		<link>http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-17349</link>
		<dc:creator>EarthNews &#187; Archive &#187; Thoughts on the Waxman-Markey Climate Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 19:29:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/#comment-17349</guid>
		<description>[...]  Read More&gt;&gt;  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]  Read More&gt;&gt;  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WK</title>
		<link>http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-9626</link>
		<dc:creator>WK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:09:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/#comment-9626</guid>
		<description>Skyline Solar hopes to achieve grid parity within the next 18 months. According to research by Clean Edge, solar power and conventional electricity sources will reach a &quot;crossover&quot; point by 2015. In other words, electricity from the sun will be cheaper than electricity from fossil fuels.
One company, Skyline Solar, doesn&#039;t want to wait until 2015. Management hopes to achieve grid parity within the next 18 months with its patented High Gain Solar (HGS) system.
&quot;King Coal&quot; and &quot;big Oil&quot;. The honey moon is almost over.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Skyline Solar hopes to achieve grid parity within the next 18 months. According to research by Clean Edge, solar power and conventional electricity sources will reach a &#8220;crossover&#8221; point by 2015. In other words, electricity from the sun will be cheaper than electricity from fossil fuels.<br />
One company, Skyline Solar, doesn&#8217;t want to wait until 2015. Management hopes to achieve grid parity within the next 18 months with its patented High Gain Solar (HGS) system.<br />
&#8220;King Coal&#8221; and &#8220;big Oil&#8221;. The honey moon is almost over.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jen Boynton</title>
		<link>http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-9625</link>
		<dc:creator>Jen Boynton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 05:56:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/#comment-9625</guid>
		<description>STATEMENT BY KEVIN KNOBLOCH, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS
&quot;We&#039;re thrilled that Congress has finally caught up with science and the American people in recognizing the need to switch on clean energy. Our future is now looking more like the Jetsons and less like the Flintstones.
&quot;This vote was a major hurdle, and we&#039;ve cleared it. President Obama can walk into the G8 summit of world leaders in Italy next week with his head held high. Now we have momentum to move and improve legislation in the Senate and put it on President Obama&#039;s desk so he can go to December&#039;s international summit in Copenhagen with the full backing of the Congress and the American people.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>STATEMENT BY KEVIN KNOBLOCH, UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS<br />
&#8220;We&#8217;re thrilled that Congress has finally caught up with science and the American people in recognizing the need to switch on clean energy. Our future is now looking more like the Jetsons and less like the Flintstones.<br />
&#8220;This vote was a major hurdle, and we&#8217;ve cleared it. President Obama can walk into the G8 summit of world leaders in Italy next week with his head held high. Now we have momentum to move and improve legislation in the Senate and put it on President Obama&#8217;s desk so he can go to December&#8217;s international summit in Copenhagen with the full backing of the Congress and the American people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rod Adams</title>
		<link>http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-9624</link>
		<dc:creator>Rod Adams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 05:02:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.triplepundit.com/wordpress/2009/06/what-should-happen-to-the-waxman-markey-climate-bill/#comment-9624</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I find myself shocked to admit that I am siding with Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth on this one. Wow! Never thought that would occur.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
When it comes to this particular climate legislation, bad is worse than nothing. In its current form, WM includes far too many giveaways to large polluters for there to be any possibility of getting major changes later. The companies will become rapidly addicted to the gifts and defend them with all of their political power.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Polluting our common atmosphere might be inevitable using current technology, but it should come with a cost that encourages the polluter to minimize the amount of waste that is dumped. The government should serve as a pass through fee collector - the atmosphere is owned by everyone with a set of lungs and a right to life since breathing is the most basic life function. Therefore, each one of us should get an equal share of the waste dumping fees (okay, call it a tax, I don&#039;t care) to spend as we desire.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Poor people will pay far less because they often walk to work or take public transit, live in small homes with less lighting, heating and entertainment devices, eat less food and buy fewer goods. They will, however, share in the effect of cleaner air and water and in the collected waste fees for those inevitable emissions.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Of course, atomic fission, my favorite technology, the one I have invested a lot of time and money to promote will benefit. Guess that makes me a vested interest and a shill, but names can never hurt me.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
By the way, when lots of well established polluters line up in favor of a bill, you should get suspicious and start covering your wallet. When the marketing types begin touting their greenness, you should get really suspicious and dig a bit deeper into their economic motives.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Rod Adams&lt;br /&gt;
Publisher, Atomic Insights&lt;br /&gt;
Host and producer, The Atomic Show Podcast&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find myself shocked to admit that I am siding with Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth on this one. Wow! Never thought that would occur.
</p>
<p>
When it comes to this particular climate legislation, bad is worse than nothing. In its current form, WM includes far too many giveaways to large polluters for there to be any possibility of getting major changes later. The companies will become rapidly addicted to the gifts and defend them with all of their political power.
</p>
<p>
Polluting our common atmosphere might be inevitable using current technology, but it should come with a cost that encourages the polluter to minimize the amount of waste that is dumped. The government should serve as a pass through fee collector &#8211; the atmosphere is owned by everyone with a set of lungs and a right to life since breathing is the most basic life function. Therefore, each one of us should get an equal share of the waste dumping fees (okay, call it a tax, I don&#8217;t care) to spend as we desire.
</p>
<p>
Poor people will pay far less because they often walk to work or take public transit, live in small homes with less lighting, heating and entertainment devices, eat less food and buy fewer goods. They will, however, share in the effect of cleaner air and water and in the collected waste fees for those inevitable emissions.
</p>
<p>
Of course, atomic fission, my favorite technology, the one I have invested a lot of time and money to promote will benefit. Guess that makes me a vested interest and a shill, but names can never hurt me.
</p>
<p>
By the way, when lots of well established polluters line up in favor of a bill, you should get suspicious and start covering your wallet. When the marketing types begin touting their greenness, you should get really suspicious and dig a bit deeper into their economic motives.
</p>
<p>
Rod Adams<br />
Publisher, Atomic Insights<br />
Host and producer, The Atomic Show Podcast</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
