Want true energy security? We need to focus on more than just oil imports.

Last week, while speaking at Georgetown University, President Obama made a bold claim that the United States will cut oil imports in ten years by one-third. In his speech, he offered solutions by calling for increased vehicle efficiency requirements and investing in biofuels as an alternative energy source. It is an admirable and welcomed goal, but President Obama’s plan still defines energy security in the narrow scope of being “independent from foreign oil.”

Unfortunately, this has the unintended consequence of focusing the nation’s energy policy debate down the path of finding an “all of the above” energy solution, which heavily depends on domestic oil, natural gas, and increased coal production. Substantial reliance on fossil fuels only benefits the scarcity model where a small fraction of American society profits, rather than celebrating the abundance model of renewable energy where we can all participate. The current policy frame just delays the inevitability of energy insecurity for the rest of us. We need to expand the debate of energy security to a renewable energy policy that welcomes the participation of all communities, especially in communities of color where the energy burden remains heaviest.

Energy security is more than oil imports. Energy security means that energy costs will not force families to choose between food or clothing; it means that residents can breath clean air and drink clean water without fear of pollutants and contamination from our energy sources; and it means that communities are building economic opportunity by investing in clean energy jobs.

BP stanches the gushing of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, begins pressure testing

85 days into one of the worst environmental disasters in United States history, BP has stanched the flow of oil from their underground gusher in the Gulf of Mexico.  Now begins a 48-hour period of testing the pressure along various points of the well and anxiously hoping that the current temporary sealing cap does not cause worse, harder-to-control leaks in the well.

Additional coverage on the aftermath of the disaster to come after testing is finished; for more in-depth coverage about the pressure testing, see Business Week's coverage.

25% of BP's market cap disappears in 4 days of trading

On June 4th, when we broke the story of the incredible rate at which BP's liability is increasing, the market valued BP at $122.6 billion USD.  Today, less than a week later on June 9th, their market cap has plummeted about 25% to $93.68 billion USD.  Today's announcement from U.S. DOI Secretary Ken Salazar that the government is about to revisit its estimates of the BP's gusher's flow rate, appears to have triggered today's one-day market decline of 15%.

The rest is probably due to a combination of factors including their promising but less than perfect attempts to cut and cap the well in addition to reports over the past few days that BP may need to begin pursuing a strategy of sequestering its massive Deepwater Horizon liabilities and shopping itself around for acquisition.

In general, you don't want a graph of your stock price over a week to look like this:

Perhaps that's why we're starting to see articles from the wags on Wall Street with titles like "BP May Not Make It" and "BP is Toast!"

The death of British Petroleum? BP's Clean Water Act liability goes up by at least 1% of their current market cap every 2 weeks. Maybe that's why they're trying to move $10 billion dollars off their books before the amount of the fine can be certified.

Fun fact of the day: if you believe the latest, relatively conservative government flow rate estimates of the BP oil leak (19,000 barrels/day), BP is accruing fines at a rate of $81.7 million dollars per day, just for their statutory Clean Water Act liability ($4300/barrel, up from $3,000/barrel in the case of gross negligence under Title 33 USC § 1321).  BP's market cap at the moment is $122.6 billion dollars.

"Top Kill" operation fails to stop BP oil leak

BP COO Doug Suttles: "After three full days of attempting top-kill, we have been unable to overcome the flow from the well," he said. "So we now believe it is time to move on to the next of our options, which is the LMRP, lower marine riser package cap."

More coverage to come.

BP and the Coast Guard now walking back early reports indicating that "Top Kill" may have been successful in capping the BP oil gusher

Reports started trickling in last night that the gusher is now gushing mud rather than oil, which would be an early indication that the Top Kill is working and that the leak has been plugged.  This morning, the L.A. Times reported that U.S. Coast Guard Admiral Thad Allen is claiming that the operation was a success.  Meanwhile, BP is more cautious, denying that the oil leak has been plugged, but saying that the operation is going "according to plan."

Update: 11:07AM EST, Adm. Allen claims to have been "misunderstood" by reporters and is now on message with BP that the operation is simply going according to plan and still in progress.

We'll be updating here as details are confirmed. We've embedded a live stream of the gusher after the break.

Tar balls found off Key West suspected to be from BP Oil Disaster

According to the Coast Guard, twenty tar balls have been found off Key West, FL but the Coast Guard "stopped short" of confirming that they originated in the Gulf of Mexico.

If these tar balls, found during a Key West shoreline survey, are indeed from the BP oil disaster, it indicates that the oil has begun entering the Loop Current, a strong current that circulates water from the Gulf of Mexico through the Florida Straits.

Independent analysts discover that the BP oil disaster is 10 times worse than BP says

NPR reported Friday that independent analysis has shown the BP "eventual worst-case" estimates to not even cover the current rate of flow from the oil leak they caused in the Gulf of Mexico, which has now been discovered to be about 70,000 barrels per day.  BP's current estimate of the leak is an order of magnitude off and they are in fact causing the equivalent of the Exxon-Valdez Oil Spill every four days. According to the New York Times, oil plumes "as large as 10 miles long, 3 miles wide and 300 feet thick" have begun to form in the Gulf of Mexico.

Below the fold you can see aerial video of this terrible spill with poignant commentary.

Has BP created an extinction level event?

I hate being alarmist, I really do.  In the case of the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Disaster, however, I think a bit of potential alarmism may be appropriate.  Indeed, the worst case scenario is that this disaster turns out to be the first extinction level event caused by mankind.  And perhaps Though probably not the last.

The High Environmental and Human Costs of Oil Exploitation

As the world watches the scramble to save the shoreline and wildlife trapped in the path of the Beyond Petroleum (BP) oil spill in the Mexican Gulf, many unanswered questions resurface. Notably: what are the true costs of oil exploitation? And do the benefits really outweigh the costs?

How to reduce our dependence on foreign oil

There are memes out there that even hardened cynics like myself can end up internalizing and taking as truth. One of these is the idea of "reducing our dependence on foreign oil" by drilling domestically. As Chris Hayes breaks down in the following segment (starting at 5:40), there is no set aside for oil extracted domestically; it all ends up in the same commodity market, so the idea of reducing our dependence on foreign oil by drilling domestically is mostly self-serving, brilliant PR proffered by oil companies designed to leverage nationalism and national security interests to curry favor for increasing their drilling footprint.

Fox Refuses Climate/Security Ad

The "reducing dependence on foreign oil helps security" argument has been made many times, but Fox just refused to air an ad making that claim because it's "too confusing."

Of course, because Fox is always telling its viewers that they need to be anti-climate and tough on national security, it probably would confuse a great deal of them.