<?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: Xerox Introduces &#8216;Green&#8217; Paper</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/07/31/xerox-introduces-green-paper/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/07/31/xerox-introduces-green-paper/</link>
	<description>Environmental Leader</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 12:27:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: S.R.</title>
		<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/07/31/xerox-introduces-green-paper/comment-page-1/#comment-4420</link>
		<dc:creator>S.R.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:14:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/07/31/xerox-introduces-green-paper/#comment-4420</guid>
		<description>Wow - are you serious? What makes this &quot;green&quot;? I know EL put quotes around the word in the title, but seriously - this article seems to imply it has NO recycled content. reducing its weight and eliminating extra chemicals is a great step, but without recycled content, this paper falls WAAAAY short of a product like New Leaf or others.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow &#8211; are you serious? What makes this &#8220;green&#8221;? I know EL put quotes around the word in the title, but seriously &#8211; this article seems to imply it has NO recycled content. reducing its weight and eliminating extra chemicals is a great step, but without recycled content, this paper falls WAAAAY short of a product like New Leaf or others.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

