<?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: Bigger Is Better for Wind Turbines</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2012/06/21/bigger-is-better-wind-turbines/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/06/21/bigger-is-better-wind-turbines/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2014 13:14:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave2020</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/06/21/bigger-is-better-wind-turbines/#comment-124887</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave2020]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jun 2012 09:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39268#comment-124887</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;more clean power without the large increases in the amount of material necessary for construction&quot;



Sounds great, but this is not true of bigger HAWTs floating off-shore. Their platforms would need to deal with the top heavy nature of the wind loading - longer blades, taller tower. In addition to that, installation and O&amp;M costs could well increase, at a time when everyone&#039;s desperately searching for ways to make off-shore wind cheaper to install and maintain.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;more clean power without the large increases in the amount of material necessary for construction&#8221;</p>
<p>Sounds great, but this is not true of bigger HAWTs floating off-shore. Their platforms would need to deal with the top heavy nature of the wind loading &#8211; longer blades, taller tower. In addition to that, installation and O&amp;M costs could well increase, at a time when everyone&#8217;s desperately searching for ways to make off-shore wind cheaper to install and maintain.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ToddF</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2012/06/21/bigger-is-better-wind-turbines/#comment-124726</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ToddF]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2012 05:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=39268#comment-124726</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This was an important result, thanks Joshua! It is truly amazing what humans can construct when the &quot;will to achieve&quot; is present. I would like to note that for many, it is not &quot;supersizing&quot;, but &quot;right sizing&quot; and the &quot;will to achieve&quot; a life &quot;off the grid&quot; that motivates installing microturbines to power part or all of their own household needs. This trend is very likely going to grow in parallel to the &quot;supersizing&quot; of the big wind farm turbine models.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This was an important result, thanks Joshua! It is truly amazing what humans can construct when the &#8220;will to achieve&#8221; is present. I would like to note that for many, it is not &#8220;supersizing&#8221;, but &#8220;right sizing&#8221; and the &#8220;will to achieve&#8221; a life &#8220;off the grid&#8221; that motivates installing microturbines to power part or all of their own household needs. This trend is very likely going to grow in parallel to the &#8220;supersizing&#8221; of the big wind farm turbine models.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
