<?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: Guest Opinion: Clean Water Or Profit? You Decide</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cruciansinfocus.com/2010/01/26/guest-opinion-clean-water-or-profit-you-decide/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cruciansinfocus.com/2010/01/26/guest-opinion-clean-water-or-profit-you-decide/</link>
	<description>&#34;We knew the job was dangerous when we took it.&#34;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:07:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: T</title>
		<link>http://cruciansinfocus.com/2010/01/26/guest-opinion-clean-water-or-profit-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-13085</link>
		<dc:creator>T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:29:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cruciansinfocus.com/?p=3563#comment-13085</guid>
		<description>Point of View, we cannot argue that WAPA is one of the biggest polluters and energy consumers in the territory.  However, we have to consider how burn trash and pet coke would affect our environment in the long-run.  Even if you cannot see smoke being emitted from a plant, it does not mean that there are no particles in the air.  How would these particles would affect our health if they end up on our roofs, and in our cisterns?  

Although WAPA and Waste Management feel that we need this deal with alpine to go through in order to save on money and energy, we also must consider how much it would cost us socially, physically, and economically.  It would be unwise to rush into a deal if it ends up costing us things that are more precious to us that a few dollars.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Point of View, we cannot argue that WAPA is one of the biggest polluters and energy consumers in the territory.  However, we have to consider how burn trash and pet coke would affect our environment in the long-run.  Even if you cannot see smoke being emitted from a plant, it does not mean that there are no particles in the air.  How would these particles would affect our health if they end up on our roofs, and in our cisterns?  </p>
<p>Although WAPA and Waste Management feel that we need this deal with alpine to go through in order to save on money and energy, we also must consider how much it would cost us socially, physically, and economically.  It would be unwise to rush into a deal if it ends up costing us things that are more precious to us that a few dollars.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Another Point of View</title>
		<link>http://cruciansinfocus.com/2010/01/26/guest-opinion-clean-water-or-profit-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-13065</link>
		<dc:creator>Another Point of View</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 05:19:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cruciansinfocus.com/?p=3563#comment-13065</guid>
		<description>Just think for a moment that WAPA as it currently sits is one of the biggest poluters on St. Croix. Alpine would dramatically reduce emissions. The benefits to Alpine are two fold, where by WAPA offers non. Consider the obvious; FAA, EPA, Lower Energy Cost, less emissions,Solution to Landfill, need I say more...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just think for a moment that WAPA as it currently sits is one of the biggest poluters on St. Croix. Alpine would dramatically reduce emissions. The benefits to Alpine are two fold, where by WAPA offers non. Consider the obvious; FAA, EPA, Lower Energy Cost, less emissions,Solution to Landfill, need I say more&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

