<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.7" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Green Year</title>
	<link>http://www.greenyear.org</link>
	<description>a keyboard, a calendar, and climate change</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 10:24:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7</generator>

	<item>
		<title>Comment on A lost opportunity. by Ted Rheingold</title>
		<link>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/07/24/a-lost-opportunity/#comment-1063</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 23:05:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/07/24/a-lost-opportunity/#comment-1063</guid>
					<description>Stick to your guns.

There's nothing worse then a prolonged online bicker to sap the life out of any project. The internet is great for airing concerns and awful at developing consensus. In fact if the internet was our only means to communicate no one would ever feel a conversation was ended or a topic closed.

And putting your emotional energy into trying to make every last person on the internet happy is as useful as trying to get evangelicals to think that their daughters should get a complete education. It's just not going to happen.

So then the only option is to put your energy into what you think is the right and best use. Take time to consider other view points, but not expect to be able to change them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stick to your guns.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s nothing worse then a prolonged online bicker to sap the life out of any project. The internet is great for airing concerns and awful at developing consensus. In fact if the internet was our only means to communicate no one would ever feel a conversation was ended or a topic closed.</p>
<p>And putting your emotional energy into trying to make every last person on the internet happy is as useful as trying to get evangelicals to think that their daughters should get a complete education. It&#8217;s just not going to happen.</p>
<p>So then the only option is to put your energy into what you think is the right and best use. Take time to consider other view points, but not expect to be able to change them.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on prepping the soil by Tom</title>
		<link>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/01/22/prepping-the-soil/#comment-189</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2007 17:45:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/01/22/prepping-the-soil/#comment-189</guid>
					<description>Here http://tinyurl.com/3bwc9h , and here http://tinyurl.com/3bp2zp.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here <a href="http://tinyurl.com/3bwc9h" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/3bwc9h</a> , and here <a href="http://tinyurl.com/3bp2zp." rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/3bp2zp.</a>
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Follow the money by Troy Angrignon</title>
		<link>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/03/14/follow-the-money/#comment-54</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2007 19:20:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/03/14/follow-the-money/#comment-54</guid>
					<description>Tom, I am glad to see that you have come around. I studied at the University of Victoria, in their Environmental Studies program. I was the lone capitalist in the class, surrounded by somewhat militant eco-theosophists and philosophers, many of whom didn't appreciate capitalism's real agnosticisms with respect to "doing evil". It is a simple system. Go where the m oney is. If it's in building green and sustainable things, it will go there. If it is in resource industries and there is a free ride because we have no way to cost, and bill back for so-called "externalities", then it will go there. 

It is my goal to push on the triple (or quadruple) bottom line approach as hard as I can where we find and/or educate people to be capitalists with a conscience but I'm also extremely interested in those ventures that HAVE positive social and environmental outputs BUT that can be promoted to single bottom line investors who really just at the end of the day, want a high return. Ten your capital market is as large as possible.

Anyway, glad that you posted this. And we still  have to catch up but I'm travelling now for a while so we'll do it when I return.

Troy</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tom, I am glad to see that you have come around. I studied at the University of Victoria, in their Environmental Studies program. I was the lone capitalist in the class, surrounded by somewhat militant eco-theosophists and philosophers, many of whom didn&#8217;t appreciate capitalism&#8217;s real agnosticisms with respect to &#8220;doing evil&#8221;. It is a simple system. Go where the m oney is. If it&#8217;s in building green and sustainable things, it will go there. If it is in resource industries and there is a free ride because we have no way to cost, and bill back for so-called &#8220;externalities&#8221;, then it will go there. </p>
<p>It is my goal to push on the triple (or quadruple) bottom line approach as hard as I can where we find and/or educate people to be capitalists with a conscience but I&#8217;m also extremely interested in those ventures that HAVE positive social and environmental outputs BUT that can be promoted to single bottom line investors who really just at the end of the day, want a high return. Ten your capital market is as large as possible.</p>
<p>Anyway, glad that you posted this. And we still  have to catch up but I&#8217;m travelling now for a while so we&#8217;ll do it when I return.</p>
<p>Troy
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Getting beaten by the Brits. by Tom</title>
		<link>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/01/31/getting-beaten-by-the-brits/#comment-5</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2007 09:28:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/01/31/getting-beaten-by-the-brits/#comment-5</guid>
					<description>Some context... that Kyoto targets don't include aviation, which is rapidly increasing.

Also, in the early 1990s the UK government replaced a lot of ageing coal-fired power stations with gas ones, partly as the end of the fight to close them down that brought on the huge miners' strikes. Most of that reduction figure came from this switch.

Since 1997 when Labour came into power, if you include aviation then the UK's emissions are actually rising.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some context&#8230; that Kyoto targets don&#8217;t include aviation, which is rapidly increasing.</p>
<p>Also, in the early 1990s the UK government replaced a lot of ageing coal-fired power stations with gas ones, partly as the end of the fight to close them down that brought on the huge miners&#8217; strikes. Most of that reduction figure came from this switch.</p>
<p>Since 1997 when Labour came into power, if you include aviation then the UK&#8217;s emissions are actually rising.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About by Michelle Pariset</title>
		<link>http://www.greenyear.org/about/#comment-4</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2007 00:54:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.greenyear.org/about/#comment-4</guid>
					<description>I'm vaccum-forming Tom Price Action Figures right now. He'll come with turnouts and a laptop. And yes, he has kung-fu grip.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m vaccum-forming Tom Price Action Figures right now. He&#8217;ll come with turnouts and a laptop. And yes, he has kung-fu grip.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on prepping the soil by Ted R.</title>
		<link>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/01/22/prepping-the-soil/#comment-3</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:09:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.greenyear.org/2007/01/22/prepping-the-soil/#comment-3</guid>
					<description>So where are these towns you are talking about?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So where are these towns you are talking about?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

