<?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: $60 Million More For Low Cost Solar Power</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/25/60-million-funding-for-low-cost-solar-power/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/25/60-million-funding-for-low-cost-solar-power/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2014 15:57:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: JamesWimberley</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/25/60-million-funding-for-low-cost-solar-power/#comment-188494</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JamesWimberley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Oct 2013 19:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=58252#comment-188494</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The grant to EnergySage was $0.5m. It is a bit surprising they couldn&#039;t raise the money from venture capitalists, but it&#039;s still very cheap. 

Only 26% of the money is going to hardware (though this is supported on a larger scale by other programmes), the rest to soft costs. The impression I get from the list is that Moniz has his head screwed on right.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The grant to EnergySage was $0.5m. It is a bit surprising they couldn&#8217;t raise the money from venture capitalists, but it&#8217;s still very cheap. </p>
<p>Only 26% of the money is going to hardware (though this is supported on a larger scale by other programmes), the rest to soft costs. The impression I get from the list is that Moniz has his head screwed on right.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/25/60-million-funding-for-low-cost-solar-power/#comment-188403</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Oct 2013 02:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=58252#comment-188403</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Let&#039;s hope it works better than the nearing one Billion daollar joke of a website obamacare. It&#039;s also a joke that it&#039;s called affordable seeing the only numbers that actually get out. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s hope it works better than the nearing one Billion daollar joke of a website obamacare. It&#8217;s also a joke that it&#8217;s called affordable seeing the only numbers that actually get out. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marion Meads</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/25/60-million-funding-for-low-cost-solar-power/#comment-188389</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Marion Meads]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2013 21:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=58252#comment-188389</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The $16M though is for the hard costs. I can develop the comparison charts for the solar shopping for half the price. It shouldn&#039;t cost that much with many canned software packages abound. Let us hope that those software will not favor one or few major company that chipped in some &quot;development&quot; costs as what happened with shopping for  airline tickets. It should be more eBay-like.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The $16M though is for the hard costs. I can develop the comparison charts for the solar shopping for half the price. It shouldn&#8217;t cost that much with many canned software packages abound. Let us hope that those software will not favor one or few major company that chipped in some &#8220;development&#8221; costs as what happened with shopping for  airline tickets. It should be more eBay-like.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JamesWimberley</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/25/60-million-funding-for-low-cost-solar-power/#comment-188385</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JamesWimberley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2013 21:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=58252#comment-188385</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you read the article with more care, you would know that most of the grants reported are precisely for soft costs and grid integration, not shiny new panel technology,]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you read the article with more care, you would know that most of the grants reported are precisely for soft costs and grid integration, not shiny new panel technology,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JamesWimberley</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/25/60-million-funding-for-low-cost-solar-power/#comment-188384</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JamesWimberley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2013 21:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=58252#comment-188384</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good article, silly headline. There&#039;s no reason to think that a few grants for rather obvious work to lower soft costs a penny or two will have any dramatic effect. We should value such progress for what it is, not for what it isn&#039;t.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good article, silly headline. There&#8217;s no reason to think that a few grants for rather obvious work to lower soft costs a penny or two will have any dramatic effect. We should value such progress for what it is, not for what it isn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marion Meads</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2013/10/25/60-million-funding-for-low-cost-solar-power/#comment-188378</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Marion Meads]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Oct 2013 20:46:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=58252#comment-188378</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How about much more funding for cheaper or plug-n-play solar PV installation whose savings really get passed down to end users instead of lining the pockets of installers? Solar PV manufacturing is a dead end economics. Even if they get the panels so cheap that they become free, the total installed price is the same!!!

I want the $60M back. It will not give the most bang from the buck when invested into solar PV manufacturing, but rather, that money is best spent for programs and methods that would lower the cost of installations.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How about much more funding for cheaper or plug-n-play solar PV installation whose savings really get passed down to end users instead of lining the pockets of installers? Solar PV manufacturing is a dead end economics. Even if they get the panels so cheap that they become free, the total installed price is the same!!!</p>
<p>I want the $60M back. It will not give the most bang from the buck when invested into solar PV manufacturing, but rather, that money is best spent for programs and methods that would lower the cost of installations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
