It was reported today that the Chicago office of the EPA has alleged that a BP refinery in Whiting, Ind. has violated the Clean Air Act.

Evidently, the BP refinery made some 'major modifications' without getting a permit, and as a result have increased their output of nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide.

According to the EPA, the plant also exceeded sulfur dioxide emissions, failed to monitor emissions, and didn't conduct performance tests of hydrogen chloride emissions.

What was BP's response? They said in a statement that the dispute reflects "differences of opinion" in how certain environmental rules should be interpreted.

Huh? If that law says you can't emit more than X amount of a substance, and you do, it seems pretty black and white to me. If you're supposed to conduct tests, and get permits, and don't, well, that seems pretty black and white as well.

If you fudge your taxes because you have a 'difference of opinion' with the IRS over tax code, guess what? The IRS wins. How about this, next time you get a parking ticket, try telling the officer that you have a 'difference of opinion' in what '2 hour limit' means, and see how far it gets you.

I would be remiss in my duties if I failed to also point out that the reporter who covered this story for the Chicago Tribune didn't make any time of comment on BPs ludicrous claim of 'difference of opinion'. Where is the journalistic integrity?

Ahhhh, BP. They're 'Beyond Petroleum', right? Well, not far enough beyond for my tastes, thank you very much.

It was reported today that BP has agreed to pay $20 million in fines for spilling 200,000 gallons of crude oil in Prudhoe Bay, an area on the north slope of Alaska. For the record, that works out to about $100/gallon.

In case you think $20 million is a lot of money, that amount represents 0.09% of BP's 2006 profits. For comparison - if you take my salary and subtract taxes, which I guess is my version of 'profit', this would be like a $27 fine for me. So, for dumping 200,000 of crude into a fragile ecosystem, BP basically got a parking ticket.

Prudhoe Bay sits about 100 miles from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge, which has been off limits from oil and gas development, is at the center of a massive environmental battle with environmentalists on one side pointing out that oil drilling is allowed on 95% of the North Slope, and the oil industry gunning to drill every last drop.

As if the spills in Prudhoe bay, and paltry fines, weren't enough, BP also agreed to pay $353 million (1.5% of profits), "over the manipulation of energy markets in the Midwest and in connection with a refinery explosion that killed 15 people in Texas".

Want to hear the sick part? BP stock rose 2.42% yesterday.

I heart Google.com. And you should too. Not only have they made searching the internet easy, they're now setting out to save the world.

According to a story in the SF Chronicle, Google is going to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into renewable energy.

They've already made a commitment to become carbon neutral, and if they approach renewable energy with the same zeal they approach organizing the web, we're in for some solid results.

Their plan isn't 100% finalized yet, and there are some questions of how they're going to proceed, but their stated goal is to get renewables to be cost-competitive with coal, and have set an ambitious goal of generating 1 gigawatt of renewable energy, enough to power a city the size of San Francisco, or almost the 1.21 gigawatts need to power Doc Brown's time-traveling Delorean.

In case you haven't seen it, there's a great site up, Carma, which is perhaps the most easy to use, and exhaustive database of power plant CO2 emissions I've ever seen.

You can simply enter your zip code to see who provides your energy, which plants they get energy from, and what the breakdown is of coal, oil, nuclear, hydro, and renewables. Also you're able to send info into Carma about your plants, your providers, and your interactions with them.

According to their site, "CARMA reveals the carbon emissions of more than 50,000 power plants and 4,000 power companies in every country on Earth." Which is pretty amazing. On top of that, they've partnered with organizations to actually take this information and turn it into grassroots action via email alerts and whatnot.

Definitely go check it out. It's scary, but important.

Amidst the news of Sen. Clinton's support of a 55mpg fuel economy standard, there was the horrific news of two terrible oil spills.

Most attention seems to be focused on the 58,000 gallon spill in the San Francisco Bay. There's been a lot of focus on the everything that went wrong and how on earth an oil tanker could hit the Bay Bridge. Beaches have shut down, reaction from clean up crews has been slow, and it's been labeled the worst spill in that region in decades.

Move over to Russia, where news came out last week that the Volganeft-139 oil tanker broke up in a storm, and spilled 1/2 of its 4800 metric tons of oil into waters near the Black Sea. For those of you reading in the U.S., a metric ton=about 308 gallons of oil, meaning about 739,000 gallons of oil spilled into those waterways.

To date, over 30,000 birds have been killed as a result of the spill, and nobody is clear on the number of fish or other aquatic life lost yet. According to one news report:

"The head of the World Wildlife Federation's Russian oil and gas program, Alexei Knizhnikov, said the Volganeft-139 was constructed for use on rivers and was unfit to endure severe weather and heavy waves at sea."

Really? We've got one boat that somehow can't miss an 8-mile long bridge that's been there for 70 years, and another that shouldn't even be on the ocean? I'm flabbergasted at the utter inanity of both situations, and the fact that both disasters could've been prevented.

It's terrible that we need reminders like this of the true cost of our addiction to oil.

I don't know if I can describe the width of the grin on my face when Sen. Hillary Clinton announced last week that she will increase the U.S. fuel economy standard to 55pmg if elected President.

Guess what? 55mpg is double the current gas mileage standard.

After months of sending her emails and petition signatures, it appears she has heard and listened to us.

In full disclosure, I heard nothing from the Hillary camp on this prior to the announcement, so I can't say with 100% certainty that this is a straight up Environmental Action slam dunk, but I can say that as far as I know, nobody else has been talking about this concept, and the announcement seemed pretty out of the blue.

Either way this is a massive victory for us, and for America. Because as the front-runner, the other candidates are going to attempt 'outdoing' her, which on this question is only a good thing.