<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>ross millar &#187; environment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.rdmillar.com/tag/environment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.rdmillar.com</link>
	<description>attempting to make pictures and write words.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 18:15:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>alternate fuel sources</title>
		<link>http://blog.rdmillar.com/2007/05/14/alternate-fuel-sources/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.rdmillar.com/2007/05/14/alternate-fuel-sources/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 22:44:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ross millar</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[automotive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sustainability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rdmillar.com/2007/05/14/alternate-fuel-sources/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I flew home from Ft Lauderdale today, and I enjoy picking up a random magazine for a flight &#8211; like junk food for the brain. Today I bought the May 2007 copy of Popular Science, in it a special on the &#8220;Future Of The Car&#8220;. Interesting read, as a gearhead I have been reading articles [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I flew home from Ft Lauderdale today, and I enjoy picking up a random magazine for a flight &#8211; like junk food for the brain. Today I bought the May 2007 copy of <a href="http://www.popsci.com/popsci/" target="_blank">Popular Science</a>, in it a special on the &#8220;<em>Future Of The Car</em>&#8220;. Interesting read, as a gearhead I have been reading articles on alternates for some time. One thing that strikes me as poor design in the <a href="http://www.time4.com/time4/microsites/popsci/futureofcars/concept_javelin.html" target="_blank">Javelin Speedsled</a> &#8211; a design flaw that seems to be commonly overlooked in several designs (see <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKI8hEPDjh8&#038;eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eautobloggreen%2Ecom%2F2007%2F02%2F21%2Ffuturecar%2Dreport%2Don%2Dthe%2Dgm%2Dskateboard%2Dcar%2Don%2Dyoutube%2F" target="_blank">GM&#8217;s Skateboard concept</a>); are hub mounted motors at each wheel. It has obvious benefits, like an open frame for liberal seating and body configurations. The flaw is this: disregard for <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsprung_weight" target="_blank">unsprung weight</a>, and rotating mass. It&#8217;s simple: the lower the weight of a wheel, brake and suspension assembly, the better the vehicle will &#8216;hold the road&#8217;. I don&#8217;t know about you, but I feel that future cars should out perform existing ones, in safety, as well as balls to the wall performance. The solution is a simple one, move the motors to the chassis, thus becoming sprung weight, and run short drive shafts to the wheels. I&#8217;m more than willing to retain a &#8216;conventional&#8217; (read: existing) seating arrangement for function, these seating arrangements have served human transport well for over a century, why change it now?</p>
<p>I have more to discuss here than I have time right now, so more to come on this in future posts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.rdmillar.com/2007/05/14/alternate-fuel-sources/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>sustainability is the new green</title>
		<link>http://blog.rdmillar.com/2007/05/06/sustainability-is-the-new-green/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.rdmillar.com/2007/05/06/sustainability-is-the-new-green/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2007 02:45:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ross millar</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[sustainability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TED]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[video]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.rdmillar.com/2007/05/06/sustainability-is-the-new-green/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just watched two videos from Ted. The first about MIT&#8217;s FabLab and the second about sustainability, by the founder of World Changing. Having a look around on the World Changing site I realised that sustainability is the new green. This may sound like a negative thing to say, but that&#8217;s not my meaning. 
This [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just watched two videos from <a href="http://ted.com" target="_blank">Ted</a>. The <a href="http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/90" target="_blank">first</a> about MIT&#8217;s <a href="http://cba.mit.edu/projects/fablab/" target="_blank">FabLab</a> and the <a href="http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/74" target="_blank">second</a> about sustainability, by the founder of <a href="http://www.worldchanging.com/" target="_blank">World Changing</a>. Having a look around on the World Changing site I realised that sustainability is the new green. This may sound like a negative thing to say, but that&#8217;s not my meaning. </p>
<p>This is a good thing, a really good thing. In order for a real change to happen in the world, some think we need grassroots change, or a revolution. I disagree. We need business and political leaders to believe in change. The &#8220;green&#8221; that I speak of is the &#8220;tree-hugging&#8221; variety, the kind that the average person doesn&#8217;t take seriously, let alone the leaders. World Changing speaks of a balanced, yet encompassing approch to sustainability. Incorporating technology, politics, business, and conservation &#8211; thus, it is sustainable, not green. What we need is evolutionary change, not revolutionary. Leaders are begining to believe in sustainability. </p>
<p>The current Bill C-288 aside &#8211; I&#8217;ve been following the Kyoto Protocol since the Kyoto Summit. The Canadian Government has shown nothing but complete incompetence. The protocol essentially states: <em>by 2008-2012, Annex I countries have to reduce their GHG emissions by an average of 5% below their 1990 levels</em>, wait a minute, that&#8217;s next year! Even if we take untill 2012, 4 1/2 years from now, we have no hope of acheving it. The summit was held in 1997, and the best the politicians can do in ten years is come up with a Bill? Come on.</p>
<p>Getting back to the point. The only reasonable change in environmental concerns is a balanced one, one that creates jobs. Not one that destroys jobs. That balance should include a phasing of current technologies and markets. People have to eat &#038; put a roof over their heads. <a href="http://blog.rdmillar.com/2007/04/27/simple/">Simple</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.rdmillar.com/2007/05/06/sustainability-is-the-new-green/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
