<?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: A Level Playing Field Cuts Both Ways: Why We Should Encourage More Chinese Investment In U.S. Clean Energy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2012/05/29/a-level-playing-field-cuts-both-ways-why-we-should-encourage-more-chinese-investment-in-u-s-clean-energy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/05/29/a-level-playing-field-cuts-both-ways-why-we-should-encourage-more-chinese-investment-in-u-s-clean-energy/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 13:45:00 +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/2012/05/29/a-level-playing-field-cuts-both-ways-why-we-should-encourage-more-chinese-investment-in-u-s-clean-energy/#comment-123055</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Zachary Shahan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2012 00:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=38606#comment-123055</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[yep.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yep.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/05/29/a-level-playing-field-cuts-both-ways-why-we-should-encourage-more-chinese-investment-in-u-s-clean-energy/#comment-122379</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 14:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=38606#comment-122379</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[China&#039;s energy policy breaks WTO rules, YES. But at least they have a energy policy. In this country it has been a mess for a long time.
- We pick LWR for nuclear over LIFTer not because it was safer, but because it help build bombs. Who knows if LIFTer would have been chear Tricky Dick turn off all research funding (after the reactor ran full power for 6 years).
- The fed goverment appears to be doing all it can to kill solar and wind. Because they get too much money from coal/oil/gas.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>China&#8217;s energy policy breaks WTO rules, YES. But at least they have a energy policy. In this country it has been a mess for a long time.<br />
&#8211; We pick LWR for nuclear over LIFTer not because it was safer, but because it help build bombs. Who knows if LIFTer would have been chear Tricky Dick turn off all research funding (after the reactor ran full power for 6 years).<br />
&#8211; The fed goverment appears to be doing all it can to kill solar and wind. Because they get too much money from coal/oil/gas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
