<?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: MANUFACTURING &amp; SUSTAINABILITY: Two Brands Weigh In</title> <atom:link href="http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/06/03/manufacturing-sustainability-brands-weigh-in/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/06/03/manufacturing-sustainability-brands-weigh-in/</link> <description>Future-forward design for the world you inhabit</description> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:06:50 -0500</lastBuildDate> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <item><title>By: Will</title><link>http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/06/03/manufacturing-sustainability-brands-weigh-in/comment-page-1/#comment-46808</link> <dc:creator>Will</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2007 23:31:27 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/06/03/manufacturing-sustainability-brands-weigh-in/#comment-46808</guid> <description>I think a change in understanding needs to be made for changes to happen.  Corporate transparency cannot be maintained by a corporation.  Money corrupts and the amount of companies to keep track of for consumers, even conscientious ones, is to large.  Regulation is key.  Self-regulating companies need not complain if they are in fact cooperating.Excessive consumers need to learn to respect the clothes that they have.  Though &quot;green&quot;, &quot;organic&quot; and maybe better looking clothes cost more these standards are what we ought to, at least, be working towards; and not just one but all these points.  Most people I know don&#039;t wear things until they wear out.  New things are nice but should we really rely on such things for personal representation.  Individuality can not be embodied in wearing something that is essentially garbage.  This is an age where information is treated like garbage.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think a change in understanding needs to be made for changes to happen.  Corporate transparency cannot be maintained by a corporation.  Money corrupts and the amount of companies to keep track of for consumers, even conscientious ones, is to large.  Regulation is key.  Self-regulating companies need not complain if they are in fact cooperating.</p><p>Excessive consumers need to learn to respect the clothes that they have.  Though &#8220;green&#8221;, &#8220;organic&#8221; and maybe better looking clothes cost more these standards are what we ought to, at least, be working towards; and not just one but all these points.  Most people I know don&#8217;t wear things until they wear out.  New things are nice but should we really rely on such things for personal representation.  Individuality can not be embodied in wearing something that is essentially garbage.  This is an age where information is treated like garbage.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: lynda fassa</title><link>http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/06/03/manufacturing-sustainability-brands-weigh-in/comment-page-1/#comment-46766</link> <dc:creator>lynda fassa</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 20:13:39 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/06/03/manufacturing-sustainability-brands-weigh-in/#comment-46766</guid> <description>I just wanted to say that bananas do, in fact, use a huge amount of pesticides. Consumer Reports, however, put them in the &#039;doesn&#039;t matter if you buy convention or organic&#039; category because the end user consumes very little of the pesticides, as most is on the skin. However, not so for the plantation workers. or the grocery store clerks, or for that matter our water supply. Plus of course, the pesticides get brought into our cars, sit on kitchen tables and soon enough sit in landfills as the fruit is consumed and the peel gets thrown away. It really always makes sense to buy organic.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just wanted to say that bananas do, in fact, use a huge amount of pesticides. Consumer Reports, however, put them in the &#8216;doesn&#8217;t matter if you buy convention or organic&#8217; category because the end user consumes very little of the pesticides, as most is on the skin. However, not so for the plantation workers. or the grocery store clerks, or for that matter our water supply. Plus of course, the pesticides get brought into our cars, sit on kitchen tables and soon enough sit in landfills as the fruit is consumed and the peel gets thrown away. It really always makes sense to buy organic.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Cannon</title><link>http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/06/03/manufacturing-sustainability-brands-weigh-in/comment-page-1/#comment-46763</link> <dc:creator>Cannon</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2007 17:05:23 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/06/03/manufacturing-sustainability-brands-weigh-in/#comment-46763</guid> <description>I think a lot of different ideas for how to bring better transparency to sustainable production/distribution were covered but the one in particular that is the most important is the &quot;life cycle analysis.&quot; If companies start revealing how much carbon, non-renewable packageing, etc... was produced to deliver &amp; manufacture their product consumers will have the information available to  make sustainable purchasing deceisons. Companies that are delivering the most sustainable products will be rewarded. Legislation and regulation will only cloud consumers purchases and limit the potential of sustainability. Customers need to understand the total &quot;life cycle&quot; of the products their buying in order to understand the impact of their consumption. Right now we only have a price, description, and marketing to go by to make that deceison.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think a lot of different ideas for how to bring better transparency to sustainable production/distribution were covered but the one in particular that is the most important is the &#8220;life cycle analysis.&#8221; If companies start revealing how much carbon, non-renewable packageing, etc&#8230; was produced to deliver &amp; manufacture their product consumers will have the information available to  make sustainable purchasing deceisons. Companies that are delivering the most sustainable products will be rewarded. Legislation and regulation will only cloud consumers purchases and limit the potential of sustainability. Customers need to understand the total &#8220;life cycle&#8221; of the products their buying in order to understand the impact of their consumption. Right now we only have a price, description, and marketing to go by to make that deceison.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss><!--
This site's performance optimized by W3 Total Cache:

W3 Total Cache improves the user experience of your blog by caching
frequent operations, reducing the weight of various files and providing
transparent content delivery network integration.

Learn more about our WordPress Plugins: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using memcached
Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 24/31 queries in 0.011 seconds using memcached

Served from: 72.52.195.188 @ 2009-11-25 04:39:52 -->