Today's the day. On a proportional basis, the U.S. has effectively run out of domestic oil for the year and will be forced to rely completely on foreign imports for the rest of the year. For seven months straight—every time we fill up our cars and trucks, we'll be sending our money directly overseas. In 2006, we'll spend some $230 billion on foreign oil—nearly $450,000 every minute.

To mark the day, Environmental Action has pulled together a diverse coalition of groups including security experts, environmentalists, consumers, and labor unions—all of whom agree that America's dependence on oil is one of our greatest threats and that it is time to move beyond decades of rhetoric to actually do something.

We've lauched a snazzy interactive new website: www.dependenceday.org.

Check it out. Get involved. Tell your friends. Call your Members of Congress. Help turn the tide.

If there was any doubt left that GM was the last great holdout from a different era, this should end it. The company is offering to cap gas payments at $1.99 for one year for some of their most fuel efficient SUVs.

Now hopefully the average consumer won't get duped into this—recognizing that the payoff only lasts a year, after which point they would be stuck with an inefficient and expensive car. The other hope of course is that gas prices continue to shoot through the roof this summer, sticking GM with another big fat bill.

(Hat Tip to TP)

Gregg Easterbrook, who I am not all that familiar with, has a "I have seen the light/I am feeling the heat" piece on global warming in today's NY Times. While flirting for a paragraph or two with the potential benefits of global warming, Easterbrook eventually concludes that the dangers outweigh any upswing. In the end, Easterbrook offers a hopeful review of our success in tackling other challenges from smog to acid rain—and celebrates our ability to do so at a fraction of the projected cost. While global warming certainly appears to be a much greater challenge with far-reaching consequences, it is always a welcome reminder to highlight other problems we have tackled.

Apparently President Bush won't be seeing Gore's new movie.

ExxonMobil is under fire from investors at CERES who argue that the planet's most profitable corporation puts itself at risk by failing to cut carbon pollution or to invest in alternative fuels.

Exxon's response? People who accuse ExxonMobil of denying that global warming is happening are just perpetrating "an urban legend." Give us a break, they're saying at company headquarters in Texas.

"We believe that these risks justify actions now, but the selection of actions must consider the uncertainties that remain," Exxon said in the report.

No, I'm not sure what that means, either. The response, the Dallas Morning News notes, is the same one ExxonMobil offered to the same charges last year -- but this time, the company spent two pages in a report on global warming, not two paragraphs.

I wasn't sure whether to file this story under global warming or humor. The Competitive Enterprise Institute is running a couple of ads attacking environmentalists and virtually every major newspaper (given that almost everyone is in agreement on this issue).

These are actually quite funny, I kept feeling like I was watching an episode of "Deep Thoughts" by Jack Handy.

It might not seem like a big deal in other, more disaster prone parts of the country, but the flooding in New Hampshire this week is so serious the newspapers are calling it the worst disaster in a century. Tens of millions in damages. Hundreds of people evacuated. Roads torn up and schools closed all around the state.

The state climatologist draws the link to a warming planet.

The Center for American Progress has launched a new energy campaign including a snazzy new site—you guessed it: www.kicktheoilhabit.org.

I'll have more to say on this later today, but you have to check out the sweet web video they've pulled together, drawing together the story of our dependence on oil.

Ah the Onion. My favorite line: "Power To The Petroleum-Producing People"

One funny note is that they've clearly doctored a photo from a Democratic rally (on Social Security I believe), so that you can see Reps. Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, and Sen. Debbie Stabenow mingling amidst the Saudi princes and oil tycoons.

If you are one of those people that think "Small is Beautiful" it doesn't get much more beautiful than this. The tiny home movement is all about simplicity and efficiency.

Now my girlfriend and I have a home that by most American standards is small (1200 sq. ft) but this story confirms what we've often felt, which is that it sometimes feels palatial. Ok, maybe that's an exaggeration...but it does feel like plenty of space—when we aren't entertaining, it's more then we need. (Especially when compared to the 70 sq. ft tiny homes).

Obviously, the tiny home movement isn't going to make much of a dent in the housing market, but it's always nice to know that some people continue to live simple lives out of choice rather than necessity.

SNL had a little fun last night imagining where the U.S. would be today under a Gore presidency. Check out the video at C&L Pretty Funny.

GM has decided to discontinue the Hummer H1, which gets 10 mpg. Apparently there were 374 people (fill in appropriate expletive) enough to buy the $130,000 tank-of-a-car in 2005.

One Hummer down two to go.

The folks over at Worldchanging pointed out this very cool site, Worldmapper, where they've created a 100 different world maps along various parameters: exports of fish, imports of vegetables, tourism loss, etc.

Check out this one on vehicle freight:

I thought our own map of oil reserves was pretty cool. But 100 of them? Even cooler.

We want the big companies to invest in environmentally beneficial products, right? BP should be leading the way on solar energy. ExxonMobil should be investing in biofuels. And, Wal-Mart should be the biggest seller of organic food. Right?

A fascinating article in the NY Times sheds light on the beleaguered company's push to bolster sales of organic products. And unlike Safeway and other supermarkets that have entered the market by branding their own line of organic food, Wal-Mart is pushing the big players like Kraft to provide organic varieties of their staple products such as macaroni and cheese, and Rice Krispies.

Some organic food advocates are not exactly jumping for joy. They fear that while the final product may be the same, the process (beyond what is required by law) will be very different. Moreover, they worry that Wal-Mart's pressure to keep prices low will undermine the viability of small-scale organic farms.

One thing is for sure. Like the vast majority of businesses that do the "right thing," it's first and foremost about the bottom-line.

As Wal-Mart's Executive said:

"Organic agriculture is just another method of agriculture — not better, not worse." "This is like any other merchandising scheme we have, which is providing customers what they want. For those customers looking for an organic alternative in things like Rice Krispies, we now have an alternative for them."

(This is clearly one of those posts where I wish we were set up to take comments—something that we'll be adding very soon).

A new poll commissioned by Defenders of Wildlife found that 52% of likely voters would choose someone other than Richard Pombo.

In head to head matchups, both Democratic challengers were favored. I was mildly skeptical given who funded the poll, but Republican pollsters and even Pombo's consultant admitted that these are tough, tough times for a Republican.

What was that Bruce Springsteen song? "It's hard to be a Republican in the City"

Sometimes the less we know about our leaders in Washington the better.

The more the press talks to them, the more likely they are to say something like this:

"Global warming has been happening since the glaciers started to recede," Burns said in an interview. "You remember the ice age? It's been warming ever since, and there ain't anything we can do to stop it."

An interesting article in today's NY Times about the ever-so-subtle shift in how Michaganders are responding to foreign auto companies.

The accompanying graphic is fascinating. There's ultimately no reason to be surprised but I wouldn't have guessed that 88% of Michagan residents still buy from the big three. In fact, the last time I was in Detroit, I was rather surprised at the number of Toyotas and Hondas that I saw.

A Grist interview with Al Gore about the climate crisis and the release of Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth spends some time on the role nuclear power can/should play as a solution to global warming.

Happily, Gore sees no bright future for nukes. And he goes through some of the problems: Waste disposal. Impossibly expensive to build. Vulnerable to terrorist attack. Nuclear proliferation.

It's a thoughtful analysis and the right one for the Grist audience, but it points to a problem the environmental community - or at least those of us who oppose a new generation of nuclear reactors - still wrestles with in addressing other audiences.

What's the 10-second sound bite, the one strong enough to counter the industry's succinct, simple repackaging of nuclear power as the solution to global warming? The industry makes its case in a handful of words. Nuclear: the clean air energy.

Here is a good example of how the media (and the public) get star struck by a politician's image rather than focusing on their actions.

McCain has built up such strong credentials as a fighter of government pork that when he starts peddling it himself no one bats an eye.

Case in point, listen to McCain's speech at the Clean Cities conference. Standing on his reputation for being bold, he repeats twice that he opposes federal subsidies for ethanol and thinks the industry should stand on its own. But then McCain pulls out the pompoms and breaks out in cheers for nuclear power. Of course, he doesn't mention the indisputable fact that no new nuclear power plant will be built in this country without significant federal subsidies.

In fact, the federal government is now teed up to provide the industry with more than $10 billion in subsidies. This is after providing the industry with more than $60 billion in research and development support over the last half century.

So what's the difference between subsidizing ethanol and nuclear power? None. Ostensibly, they would both be deployed to reduce global warming emissions. Yet McCain can comfortably bound about the country, high on his reputation, spewing glaring contradictions that no one will scrutinize. Except for little ol' me.

Here's another: McCain has repeatedly opposed Senate efforts to create a 10% renewable energy standard. These standards have been created in nearly half of all states in the country. Even Arizona is considering a similar proposal. But John McCain—the climate crusader—(or is that Gore?) continues to oppose renewable energy when it counts.

To be honest, I really don't understand it. Because I don't doubt for a second McCain's sincerity in addressing global warming. But is he trying to avoid appearing too green? Does he just not get the solutions as well as he gets the problem?

It's tough to say, but given his reputation, he won't have to answer to any of these contradictions.

The blogging these days has been pathetic—lot of work going into Dependence Day, blah, blah blah. We'll pick it up soon, I promise.

Anyway, you can always count on Toles for an easy post. Enjoy.

Things are getting tougher for Florida Sen. Bill Nelson and his allies in the fight to protect Florida's coast from oil and gas drilling.

This time, there's trouble with Cuba.

The New York Times reports this morning that Castro's government is negotiating to allow Chinese companies - among others - to drill on the Cuban side of the Florida Straits.

Here's Idaho's Larry Craig revving up on the Senate floor:

"Red China should not be left to drill for oil within spitting distance of our shores without competition from U.S. industries."

When was the last time you heard somebody say Red China? Two decades ago? Three?

You can tell by the way Craig is careful to use the phrase that he's stretching to tap into some lingering Cold War mentality, all in the service of a more-of-the-same won't-make-much-difference energy plan.

This NPR story is one of the best I've ever heard. Reporter Daniel Zwerdling looks behind the oil companies' huge ad campaign to get federal taxpayers to foot the bill for their destruction of Louisiana wetlands. It's the destruction of those wetlands that removed the buffer that had protected New Orleans from hurricanes. The oil lobbyists are arguing they shouldn't be held accountable because the canals they built to facilitate oil and gas drilling were built legally.

But they seem to be ignoring basic principles of common law - if you're responsible for damage, you pay for it, even if you didn't know it was going to cause harm when you did it in the first place. This has been enshrined in U.S. law under the "polluter pays" principle. The oil and gas industry is so powerful with Lousiana's corrupt government that they've got the state government to back their scheme.

Check out this picture of some of the damage the oil companies have done in Louisiana.

Also, check out my posting on the political implications of Louisiana corruption on politics at Democratic Courage.

So Mark Rey, architect of the Bush plan to sell off national forests to raise money for the federal budget, gets a letter in the mail:

"So what is the deal with cutting down the Croatan National Forest? How would you like it if we cut down some trees around your house?"

This from a sixth grader at the Broad Creek Middle School in Newport, North Carolina.

Mr. Rey's response? Flying south to talk to the class and to defend the plan to sell off national forests.

Today's New York Times covers the exchange. Suffice it to say, the students weren't impressed.

Well it appears that the Cape Wind project has got some serious life again. Despite the underhanded and highly objectionable effort of the Teddies (Ted Kennedy and Ted Stevens), Senators are starting to speak up and are threatening to hold up the Coast Guard bill until the anti-Cape Wind provision is removed.

Senator Bingaman deserves much of the credit for spearheading this fight, and has succeeded in bringing Senator Pete Domenici (Chair of the Senate Energy Committee) along. The two of them sent a letter to senate leadership tonight stating that they will hold up the Coast Guard bill until the provision is removed. Download file

But can they do that to Ted Kennedy? The Senate Lion? Hear him roar.

Dirk Kempthorne's confirmation hearing today was expected to be entirely without fireworks - and it was. The biggest surprise: Kempthorne's opposition to a Bush scheme to sell off up to 800,000 acres of public lands because the government is running short on cash.

It's unusual of course to see a president's nominee opposing one of the president's policy initiatives, particularly one still alive in Congress.

Why did Dirk do it? Because the plan has been especially unpopular in the West? Because it is obviously in trouble in Congress? Because he really thinks it is crazy?

Either way, opposition from the sure-to-be-confirmed Interior Secretary is a big nail in the plan's coffin.

Here are some photos from a clever campaign to build support for fighting air pollution in Chicago. The shape and text was created by power-washing filthy sidewalks using a large stencil form.

I don't know how effective this would be in terms of an actual response rate but it's way cool in terms of a public awareness strategy.

Jesse Freese—Columbia College Chicago

(HT to Ads of the World)

For those of you who don't know the Gentleman from Medford, MA, he is truly one of the most humorous (and pro-environmental) members of Congress.

A case in point, his press release last week, mocking the Bush administration for arguing that they don't have the authority to increase fuel economy standards.

It's worth the quick read. (Ignore the wonky stuff in the middle)
Download file

With both Republicans and Democrats sinking so pathetically low these days in their efforts to pander to Americans suffering under the weight of high gas prices it's pretty hard to tell the difference between them. The leading Republican proposal—offering Americans a $100 rebate—has now been scrapped. The Democratic proposal that has gained the most attention is to temporarily repeal the gas tax while funding the shortfall by repealing oil and gas tax breaks.

Is it any surprise that American Idol is one of the most popular shows in the country? I work on these issues and even I'm having trouble holding down my lunch.

Clearly both parties are eager to appease public anger over gas prices. But if you ask me, this is an opportunity for some "straight talk". Americans need to be told that there are consequences to consuming oil. If you want to drive a Hummer or a Chevy Tahoe you will have to pay for it. Oil isn't cheap.

Oh, and don't forget, that we have more than 100,000 soldiers over there in the Middle East making the ultimate sacrifice. And the more oil we consume, the more soldiers we will have to send abroad in years to come to protect our right to drive Chevy Tahoes.

There are consequences to consuming oil.

Then we need to straight talk with Detroit and tell them to change their business plan. No more emphasis on size and power. From now on, it's all about fuel efficiency. And perhaps this will involve a bailout to set the industry straight, but so be it—if it will guarantee that more efficient cars will come off the assembly line.

And, then of course, there are the policies that Congress needs to implement.

My use of the words "straight talk" in no way imply that John McCain is the person to lead this effort. In fact, I doubt he would. But the opportunity to seize this moment is sitting out there for someone. And unlike Thomas Friedman's column today (behind the Times Select wall), it doesn't have to be a third party candidate. It's there for anyone who can see through the short term political pain of being honest and focus on the long-term public gain of doing so.

I wouldn't have framed it as a supply problem, since the demand side is clearly where we should focus, but Toles does highlight the emptiness of the ideas' well.

Not everyone is grandstanding against the oil industry. You can count on Rep. Richard Pombo to stay true to his friends. Last Friday, Pombo held a campaign fundraiser in Houston with colleagues lobbyists from the oil and gas industry.

This shouldn't be any surprise. And at least his staff acknowledged that:

Pombo's campaign manager, Wayne Johnson, said Pombo is doing what all members of Congress do—accepting contributions from people who agree with their policy positions.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

You don't have to be in politics to know that today's gas prices are a problem. But it does take a special kind of animal to respond with a $100 rebate check as the solution. There are really only two ways to analsyze Bill Frist and the Senate Republicans' energy proposal: 1) they are utterly and completely clueless when it comes to solving this problem; or 2) they actually think that throwing money straight at the voters is too good a political opportunity to pass up.

Apparently, a couple of free fill-ups is not quite the proposal Americans were looking for. According to the NY Times, the Senate has heard an earful from people an all sides of the spectrum.

And today, to make sure that the main message isn't muddled too much, Frist has dropped the one proposal that would raise revenue from oil companies by changing their accounting system. I won't get into the arcane details of the LIFO (last-in, first-out) proposal, but the bottom-line is that it would raise $4.3 billion from the top five oil companies in one year. There's a lot that could be done to reduce our dependence on oil with that money. $4.3 billion is more than half of the total amount the federal government spend on transit each year. You could give hundreds of thousands of consumers a rebate for buying a fuel efficient car. And so on.

But according to a trade paper, Frist wants to stay focused on the rebate and drilling in the Arctic, without getting sidetracked by anything targeting the oil industry.

The direct quote from Frist's staff:

We wanted the debate to focus on our full proposal, including the rebate and ANWR, rather than a distraction on an unrelated tax and accounting policy issue," the aide said.

Good use of the word "unrelated".