<?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: BP Reverses Decision To Sell Wind Business</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/bp-reverses-decision-to-sell-wind-business/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/bp-reverses-decision-to-sell-wind-business/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2014 21:40:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: wattleberry</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/bp-reverses-decision-to-sell-wind-business/#comment-176983</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[wattleberry]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Aug 2013 22:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=54575#comment-176983</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you can&#039;t beat &#039;em.......]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you can&#8217;t beat &#8216;em&#8230;&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/bp-reverses-decision-to-sell-wind-business/#comment-174966</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Matt]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2013 17:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=54575#comment-174966</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Could be with the PTC extension, others got a better value for their money making a new 2.6GW than buying BP existing. Maybe they like the new turbines better. Maybe BP can/will sell it off in few years. Still hard to say that BP has decide to make wind/PV a major portion of the BP brand. All you  can really say is &quot;BP decided the revenue from the wind business is more valuable than the bids they received&quot;.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Could be with the PTC extension, others got a better value for their money making a new 2.6GW than buying BP existing. Maybe they like the new turbines better. Maybe BP can/will sell it off in few years. Still hard to say that BP has decide to make wind/PV a major portion of the BP brand. All you  can really say is &#8220;BP decided the revenue from the wind business is more valuable than the bids they received&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SkyHunter</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/bp-reverses-decision-to-sell-wind-business/#comment-174956</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SkyHunter]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2013 15:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=54575#comment-174956</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is that the market I hear whispering?
BP decided the revenue from the wind business is more valuable than capital investment, based on the bids they received. 
Since renewable energy in the US is growing fast, the market indicates that investing in future renewable energy installations is a better value than buying existing infrastructure.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is that the market I hear whispering?<br />
BP decided the revenue from the wind business is more valuable than capital investment, based on the bids they received.<br />
Since renewable energy in the US is growing fast, the market indicates that investing in future renewable energy installations is a better value than buying existing infrastructure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: h2osmb</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/bp-reverses-decision-to-sell-wind-business/#comment-174927</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[h2osmb]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2013 13:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=54575#comment-174927</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve been reading a number of articles about energy diversity in business and in countries. These articles talk about countries and businesses (BP had that thing in the Gulf, that they kinda botched)  that have not necessarily been friendly or kind to the US, but they are looking at clean energy alternatives to there energy portfolios either to diversify or for more independence from petroleum based economies. It seems to me that the US is always seen as a taker of resources&#039;, why can&#039;t we extend the olive branch and give something back to the world in the way of independence into the clean energy world. There will always be a need for oil, in the form of grease and fuel for or current set of vehicles. But, if we continue to be on the for front of clean energy innovation we can give back to the world, instead of taking all the time. This may seem pie in the sky with our current congressional mess, but instead of spying on these other countries lets give them and us the ability to be forward thinking and independent in the future.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been reading a number of articles about energy diversity in business and in countries. These articles talk about countries and businesses (BP had that thing in the Gulf, that they kinda botched)  that have not necessarily been friendly or kind to the US, but they are looking at clean energy alternatives to there energy portfolios either to diversify or for more independence from petroleum based economies. It seems to me that the US is always seen as a taker of resources&#8217;, why can&#8217;t we extend the olive branch and give something back to the world in the way of independence into the clean energy world. There will always be a need for oil, in the form of grease and fuel for or current set of vehicles. But, if we continue to be on the for front of clean energy innovation we can give back to the world, instead of taking all the time. This may seem pie in the sky with our current congressional mess, but instead of spying on these other countries lets give them and us the ability to be forward thinking and independent in the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DoRightThing</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/08/02/bp-reverses-decision-to-sell-wind-business/#comment-174896</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DoRightThing]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2013 09:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=54575#comment-174896</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Renewable energy technologies are on the verge of going viral. This will depress fossil fuel demand, depress oil revenue, and make borderline reserves such as tar sands uneconomic to continue extracting.

There is so much more room for growth in renewables than in old-fashioned, mature and atrophying fossil fuels, and I think we can be sure that after the pollution and climate-hammering that China has received recently we will see them go all-in to ramp up solar and wind generating capacity and force the world to follow.
Fossil fuel companies would do well to rebrand as energy companies, and retool as appropriate if they want to survive the next few decades.

It&#039;s encouraging that BP seems to have seen the writing on the wall at last.
&quot;The stone age didn&#039;t end because of a lack of stones&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Renewable energy technologies are on the verge of going viral. This will depress fossil fuel demand, depress oil revenue, and make borderline reserves such as tar sands uneconomic to continue extracting.</p>
<p>There is so much more room for growth in renewables than in old-fashioned, mature and atrophying fossil fuels, and I think we can be sure that after the pollution and climate-hammering that China has received recently we will see them go all-in to ramp up solar and wind generating capacity and force the world to follow.<br />
Fossil fuel companies would do well to rebrand as energy companies, and retool as appropriate if they want to survive the next few decades.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s encouraging that BP seems to have seen the writing on the wall at last.<br />
&#8220;The stone age didn&#8217;t end because of a lack of stones&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
