<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Environment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://votedaniel.wordpress.com/policies/environment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://votedaniel.wordpress.com</link>
	<description>Jersey election campaign 2008, Deputy of St. Mary</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:27:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: daniel wimberley</title>
		<link>http://votedaniel.wordpress.com/policies/environment/#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>daniel wimberley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 06:04:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://votedaniel.wordpress.com/?page_id=24#comment-14</guid>
		<description>Hello Linda

You are quite right that we need an &quot;efficient waste management system&quot;. 

To get that we do NOT build the biggest incinerator we can think of, we build small, modular, in Nick Palmer&#039;s words &quot;future-proof&quot; See his quote below:

As Nick Palmer has said: “If TTS were truly worried about breakdowns before a replacement was ready, they would choose technology such as pyrolysis or plasma gasification which could be in place far earlier, would be much smaller, much more flexible, more future proof, half the cost and far better for any sustainable waste/resources strategy”

To see what real waste reduction would look like, please go to the Environment page where I have added (will shortly add) a link to an article i read recently

Daniel</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Linda</p>
<p>You are quite right that we need an &#8220;efficient waste management system&#8221;. </p>
<p>To get that we do NOT build the biggest incinerator we can think of, we build small, modular, in Nick Palmer&#8217;s words &#8220;future-proof&#8221; See his quote below:</p>
<p>As Nick Palmer has said: “If TTS were truly worried about breakdowns before a replacement was ready, they would choose technology such as pyrolysis or plasma gasification which could be in place far earlier, would be much smaller, much more flexible, more future proof, half the cost and far better for any sustainable waste/resources strategy”</p>
<p>To see what real waste reduction would look like, please go to the Environment page where I have added (will shortly add) a link to an article i read recently</p>
<p>Daniel</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Linda Haynes</title>
		<link>http://votedaniel.wordpress.com/policies/environment/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Linda Haynes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 07:50:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://votedaniel.wordpress.com/?page_id=24#comment-11</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not so sure about scrapping the incinerator completely. With the best will in the world we will never be &#039;waste free&#039;. An efficient waste management system has to be in place alongside reduce, re-use &amp; re-cycle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not so sure about scrapping the incinerator completely. With the best will in the world we will never be &#8216;waste free&#8217;. An efficient waste management system has to be in place alongside reduce, re-use &amp; re-cycle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
