<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nuclear Plants: High Cost in Time and Money</title>
	<atom:link href="http://popularlogistics.com/2008/05/17/nuclear-plants-high-cost-in-time-and-money/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://popularlogistics.com/2008/05/17/nuclear-plants-high-cost-in-time-and-money/</link>
	<description>the intersection of emergency preparedness, public health and environmental policy</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 14:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nuclear v Wind: The Answer is Blowin&#8217; In The Wind. at popular logistics</title>
		<link>http://popularlogistics.com/2008/05/17/nuclear-plants-high-cost-in-time-and-money/#comment-2142</link>
		<dc:creator>Nuclear v Wind: The Answer is Blowin&#8217; In The Wind. at popular logistics</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 20:37:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://popularlogistics.com/2008/05/17/nuclear-plants-high-cost-in-time-and-money/#comment-2142</guid>
		<description>[...] in May, Rebecca Smith reported in the Wall St. Journal ( click here for Popular Logistics posting ) that Florida Power &#38; Light wants to spend $12 to $18 Billion to build a 2.2 GW or 3.0 GW [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] in May, Rebecca Smith reported in the Wall St. Journal ( click here for Popular Logistics posting ) that Florida Power &amp; Light wants to spend $12 to $18 Billion to build a 2.2 GW or 3.0 GW [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
