<?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: Blog Action Day: Environment</title> <atom:link href="http://www.rocketfinance.net/2007/10/15/blog-action-day-environment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.rocketfinance.net/2007/10/15/blog-action-day-environment/</link> <description>Finance is not rocket science, unless it is government finance.</description> <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Jun 2010 22:48:26 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" /> <item><title>By: admin</title><link>http://www.rocketfinance.net/2007/10/15/blog-action-day-environment/#comment-69</link> <dc:creator>admin</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:14:33 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.rocketfinance.net/2007/10/15/blog-action-day-environment/#comment-69</guid> <description>I have read this statement before, I&#039;ll try to find it, but I was under the impression that it was somewhat axiomatic. US companies are researching ways to combat pollution at an astounding rate - increasing MPG in cars, reducing smokestack emissions, growing food using less energy, etc. Pollution in the US has steadily dropped since the Industrial Revolution. The water treatment plant in our town takes in raw sewage and after processing it (with technology), puts it back in the river - cleaner than the water that is already in the river.
Third world and developing countries are unable to afford the technology that reduces pollution. China is one of the greatest polluting nations because they cannot afford or choose not to use technology that reduces pollution. Ethanol is a product of years of research and development. Farming technologies that grow more with less, reduce runoff and erosion are everywhere in the US.
Much of environmental rhetoric targets successful corporations, not real poluters.
Google &quot;technology and polution&quot;</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have read this statement before, I&#8217;ll try to find it, but I was under the impression that it was somewhat axiomatic. US companies are researching ways to combat pollution at an astounding rate &#8211; increasing MPG in cars, reducing smokestack emissions, growing food using less energy, etc. Pollution in the US has steadily dropped since the Industrial Revolution. The water treatment plant in our town takes in raw sewage and after processing it (with technology), puts it back in the river &#8211; cleaner than the water that is already in the river.</p><p>Third world and developing countries are unable to afford the technology that reduces pollution. China is one of the greatest polluting nations because they cannot afford or choose not to use technology that reduces pollution. Ethanol is a product of years of research and development. Farming technologies that grow more with less, reduce runoff and erosion are everywhere in the US.</p><p>Much of environmental rhetoric targets successful corporations, not real poluters.</p><p>Google &#8220;technology and polution&#8221;</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: plonkee</title><link>http://www.rocketfinance.net/2007/10/15/blog-action-day-environment/#comment-68</link> <dc:creator>plonkee</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:14:04 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.rocketfinance.net/2007/10/15/blog-action-day-environment/#comment-68</guid> <description>I value openmindedness, but I&#039;m not perfect. I&#039;ll honestly admit that I&#039;m not going to read the article because I&#039;m too tired right now. Is this statement taken from it, (or do you have some other evidence to support it)?
&#039;the richest, most technologically advanced countries are easier on the environment than third-world nations&#039;</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I value openmindedness, but I&#8217;m not perfect. I&#8217;ll honestly admit that I&#8217;m not going to read the article because I&#8217;m too tired right now. Is this statement taken from it, (or do you have some other evidence to support it)?</p><p>&#8216;the richest, most technologically advanced countries are easier on the environment than third-world nations&#8217;</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: rocket finance &#187; Blog Archive &#187; I Am Not Anti-Environment</title><link>http://www.rocketfinance.net/2007/10/15/blog-action-day-environment/#comment-62</link> <dc:creator>rocket finance &#187; Blog Archive &#187; I Am Not Anti-Environment</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:35:08 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.rocketfinance.net/2007/10/15/blog-action-day-environment/#comment-62</guid> <description>[...] of you might think so after reading my post for Blog Action Day. However, please check out Five Cent Nickel&#8217;s matching donation effort on behalf of The [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] of you might think so after reading my post for Blog Action Day. However, please check out Five Cent Nickel&#8217;s matching donation effort on behalf of The [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
