<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Technology Research vs. Technology Deployment</title>
	<link>http://climateprogress.org/2006/11/15/technology-research-vs-technology-deployment/</link>
	<description>The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 23:31:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: calvin jones</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2006/11/15/technology-research-vs-technology-deployment/#comment-305</link>
		<author>calvin jones</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2006 01:20:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://climateprogress.org/2006/11/15/technology-research-vs-technology-deployment/#comment-305</guid>
					<description>Just a quick note to lett you know that your blog is included in a recent post on my blog. 

I have just put up a post with a series of links to the best blogs that i have found covering the Nairobi climate talks.
 
http://climatechangeaction.blogspot.com/2006/11/blogs-onfrom-unfccc-cop12-mop2-talks.html
 
I think some of these may be of interest. If you have any additions then let me know and I will append them. 
 
It is my intention that this post serves as a hub for blog coverage of the talks, if you would like to link to the post that would be great. Many of these blogs are new and therefore difficult to find through technorati/google blog search,  and I think there is some value in highlighting blogs that are from rather than mearly about the events unfolding.
 
Regards
Calvin Jones</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a quick note to lett you know that your blog is included in a recent post on my blog. </p>
<p>I have just put up a post with a series of links to the best blogs that i have found covering the Nairobi climate talks.</p>
<p><a href="http://climatechangeaction.blogspot.com/2006/11/blogs-onfrom-unfccc-cop12-mop2-talks.html" rel="nofollow">http://climatechangeaction.blogspot.com/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>2006/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>11/<span style="font-size: 1px;"> </span>blogs-onfrom-unfccc-cop12-mop2-talks.html</a></p>
<p>I think some of these may be of interest. If you have any additions then let me know and I will append them. </p>
<p>It is my intention that this post serves as a hub for blog coverage of the talks, if you would like to link to the post that would be great. Many of these blogs are new and therefore difficult to find through technorati/google blog search,  and I think there is some value in highlighting blogs that are from rather than mearly about the events unfolding.</p>
<p>Regards<br />
Calvin Jones</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wotzi</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2006/11/15/technology-research-vs-technology-deployment/#comment-316</link>
		<author>Wotzi</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2006 05:49:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://climateprogress.org/2006/11/15/technology-research-vs-technology-deployment/#comment-316</guid>
					<description>hi,

Not too sure about Blair.. he's baselining innovative large-scale future energy in nuke technology. Okay, maybe for one or several as needed to uptake failing older tech plant - ie coal - but widespread nukes utility is down-the-track resources demand. Just tpo run the things and keep them safe. 

They'll defend Thorium - ie NewGen nuke - but like a lot of things which have arisen from slack vision and management in these so-called "abundance" industries - there's a deal of work needed on it before safe deployment is possible.

OTOH I'll back calls to efficiency efficiency efficiency and renewables diversity as the solid way forward. One thing about efficiency that should be stressed is for manufacturers to get off their (I sometimes think) gravytrain with established energy and make like much sharper appliances. No power waste operational appliances, for example.

best now</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hi,</p>
<p>Not too sure about Blair.. he&#8217;s baselining innovative large-scale future energy in nuke technology. Okay, maybe for one or several as needed to uptake failing older tech plant - ie coal - but widespread nukes utility is down-the-track resources demand. Just tpo run the things and keep them safe. </p>
<p>They&#8217;ll defend Thorium - ie NewGen nuke - but like a lot of things which have arisen from slack vision and management in these so-called &#8220;abundance&#8221; industries - there&#8217;s a deal of work needed on it before safe deployment is possible.</p>
<p>OTOH I&#8217;ll back calls to efficiency efficiency efficiency and renewables diversity as the solid way forward. One thing about efficiency that should be stressed is for manufacturers to get off their (I sometimes think) gravytrain with established energy and make like much sharper appliances. No power waste operational appliances, for example.</p>
<p>best now</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lisa</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2006/11/15/technology-research-vs-technology-deployment/#comment-418</link>
		<author>Lisa</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Dec 2006 19:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://climateprogress.org/2006/11/15/technology-research-vs-technology-deployment/#comment-418</guid>
					<description>this article proves that global warming is a true affect,</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this article proves that global warming is a true affect,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
