<?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: Excellent Year for Canadian Wind in 2011, Looking to Move Forward in 2012</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2012/01/16/excellent-year-for-canadian-wind-in-2011-looking-to-move-forward-in-2012/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/01/16/excellent-year-for-canadian-wind-in-2011-looking-to-move-forward-in-2012/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2014 16:54:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zachary Shahan</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/01/16/excellent-year-for-canadian-wind-in-2011-looking-to-move-forward-in-2012/#comment-111484</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Zachary Shahan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 12:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=33894#comment-111484</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the catch, Bill.

you&#039;ve got the eye of a hawk!! :D]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the catch, Bill.</p>
<p>you&#8217;ve got the eye of a hawk!! <img src="http://cleantechnica.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif" alt=":D" class="wp-smiley" /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/01/16/excellent-year-for-canadian-wind-in-2011-looking-to-move-forward-in-2012/#comment-111386</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 18:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=33894#comment-111386</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;... 3.9 Terawatts an hour (Twh), ...&quot;

Terawatt-hours (TW-h), not terawatts per hour (TW/h). The former is a measure of energy production; the latter would be a ramp rate. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230; 3.9 Terawatts an hour (Twh), &#8230;&#8221;</p>
<p>Terawatt-hours (TW-h), not terawatts per hour (TW/h). The former is a measure of energy production; the latter would be a ramp rate. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
