<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Coal River Mountain Slideshow</title>
	<link>http://www.ilovemountains.org/crmslides/272</link>
	<description>END MOUNTAINTOP REMOVAL COAL MINING IN APPALACHIA!</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:47:04 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://www.ilovemountains.org/crmslides/272#comment-20562</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Nov 2007 01:37:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ilovemountains.org/crmslides/272#comment-20562</guid>
		<description>Is there a credible source for the "cumulative jobs created" claimed in the graph?  The graph indicates that about 50 permanent (full-time) jobs will be created for a "wind farm" which has 229 wind turbines - approximately one permanent job for every 4 turbines.  However, the wind industry's average job rate is 1 full-time employee per 10 turbines (see current issue of North American Windpower).  The lack of citations for source information about jobs creation of wind energy as well as other far-fetched claims (e.g., a 40% average capacity factor) does not bode well for the credibility of this research.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is there a credible source for the &#8220;cumulative jobs created&#8221; claimed in the graph?  The graph indicates that about 50 permanent (full-time) jobs will be created for a &#8220;wind farm&#8221; which has 229 wind turbines - approximately one permanent job for every 4 turbines.  However, the wind industry&#8217;s average job rate is 1 full-time employee per 10 turbines (see current issue of North American Windpower).  The lack of citations for source information about jobs creation of wind energy as well as other far-fetched claims (e.g., a 40% average capacity factor) does not bode well for the credibility of this research.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George</title>
		<link>http://www.ilovemountains.org/crmslides/272#comment-20430</link>
		<dc:creator>George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 23:00:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.ilovemountains.org/crmslides/272#comment-20430</guid>
		<description>Great display of info!  Would you please supply the height above ground level at which Windlogics' wind class estimates are based?  The "high resolution" wind class estimates for the Coal River Mountain map (3rd from top) may only be applicable at heights that are from 50 to 100 meters above ground level. 

Also, how many tons of coal are estimated to be mined from the 6,000 acres of Coal River Mountain which Massey's subsidiaries are targetting?  Is the coal tonnage estimate based on data found in their permit applications?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great display of info!  Would you please supply the height above ground level at which Windlogics&#8217; wind class estimates are based?  The &#8220;high resolution&#8221; wind class estimates for the Coal River Mountain map (3rd from top) may only be applicable at heights that are from 50 to 100 meters above ground level. </p>
<p>Also, how many tons of coal are estimated to be mined from the 6,000 acres of Coal River Mountain which Massey&#8217;s subsidiaries are targetting?  Is the coal tonnage estimate based on data found in their permit applications?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
