<?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: Toyota&#8217;s &#8216;Green Halo&#8217; Challenged</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/10/05/toyotas-green-halo-challenged/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/10/05/toyotas-green-halo-challenged/</link>
	<description>The Executive's Daily Green Briefing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:02:52 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dani</title>
		<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/10/05/toyotas-green-halo-challenged/comment-page-1/#comment-17426</link>
		<dc:creator>Dani</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:01:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/10/05/toyotas-green-halo-challenged/#comment-17426</guid>
		<description>Will, you make a valid point.  This legislation cannot effect the cars that are already on the road.  However, better fuel economy for future cars does not necessarily entail a smaller car, it means a better made car.  A car that uses lighter, stronger materials, and is more efficient when it comes to gas-using features such as A/C and heating.  

Though Toyota&#039;s lobbyist are having a negative effect on the bill, the concerned public can have a positive one.  I am working for a coalition that is trying to keep the CAFE standards at their current level.  Everyone can help pass this important bill by going to &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.energybill2007.org/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;www.energybill2007.org&lt;/a&gt; and petitioning their representatives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Will, you make a valid point.  This legislation cannot effect the cars that are already on the road.  However, better fuel economy for future cars does not necessarily entail a smaller car, it means a better made car.  A car that uses lighter, stronger materials, and is more efficient when it comes to gas-using features such as A/C and heating.  </p>
<p>Though Toyota&#8217;s lobbyist are having a negative effect on the bill, the concerned public can have a positive one.  I am working for a coalition that is trying to keep the CAFE standards at their current level.  Everyone can help pass this important bill by going to <a href="http://www.energybill2007.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.energybill2007.org</a> and petitioning their representatives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will</title>
		<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/10/05/toyotas-green-halo-challenged/comment-page-1/#comment-14980</link>
		<dc:creator>Will</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 23:46:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/10/05/toyotas-green-halo-challenged/#comment-14980</guid>
		<description>Well, I think that Washington is really trying to hoodwink us into thinking these high CAFE standards are really going to have any progressive environmental change.  There was an interesting article in yesterday&#039;s Financial Times titled &quot;Posturing will not save the planet&quot; that talk about how little effect they would have - they don&#039;t effect consumer habits, they don&#039;t effect cars already on the road, and cars actually only make up 20% of emissions to begin with.  I do some work with the AAM, and Americans want to buy trucks more than SUVs.  If there&#039;s no consumer demand for smaller, more fuel efficient cars this legislation doesn&#039;t make sense.  AutoChoice.org has some good info on current consumer demand right now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I think that Washington is really trying to hoodwink us into thinking these high CAFE standards are really going to have any progressive environmental change.  There was an interesting article in yesterday&#8217;s Financial Times titled &#8220;Posturing will not save the planet&#8221; that talk about how little effect they would have &#8211; they don&#8217;t effect consumer habits, they don&#8217;t effect cars already on the road, and cars actually only make up 20% of emissions to begin with.  I do some work with the AAM, and Americans want to buy trucks more than SUVs.  If there&#8217;s no consumer demand for smaller, more fuel efficient cars this legislation doesn&#8217;t make sense.  AutoChoice.org has some good info on current consumer demand right now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: S.K. CHUTANI</title>
		<link>http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/10/05/toyotas-green-halo-challenged/comment-page-1/#comment-14396</link>
		<dc:creator>S.K. CHUTANI</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:21:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/10/05/toyotas-green-halo-challenged/#comment-14396</guid>
		<description>Recently there have been reports about Toyota going Eco friendly. This attitude of Toyota shows that they have only tried  to reduce the cost of their product by efficent means and are only trying to hoodwink their customers by trying to show they are eco friendly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Recently there have been reports about Toyota going Eco friendly. This attitude of Toyota shows that they have only tried  to reduce the cost of their product by efficent means and are only trying to hoodwink their customers by trying to show they are eco friendly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
