Beginning on September 1, the first federal renewable fuels standard (RFS) program takes effect. Starting on Saturday, "major refiners, blenders, and importers must meet reporting, registration, and other key compliance requirements," according to the EPA, so it may be a busy weekend for paper-pushers.

So transportation fuel companies now have to document their renewable energy supplies, and the law will get some holdouts (hello ExxonMobil) to blend a bit of renewable fuels into their products. To help cross the T's and dot the I's in meeting the requirements, a hotline has been setup that will remain open during the holiday weekend.

For 2007, 4.02 percent of the fuel (approximately 4.7 billion gallons) sold in the U.S. will have to come from renewable sources, largely from corn-based ethanol. The renewable fuels rush has spiked corn prices, resulting in higher prices for milk and meat, which may not be a bad thing.

The RFS program requires that at least 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuel be blended into fuel sold in the United States by 2012, but that increase is below the expected amount of biofuels based on current state portfolio standards.

Earlier this month, the House passed a bill HR (3221) that would require a national renewable portfolio standard that would include electric utilities. I've heard rumor that if the Senate approves a similar measure it challenged in court as being unconstitutional for infringing on state's rights. That could be an interesting battle.

Image: Wikimedia

Burning Man, the celebration of freedom of expression, was supposed to be different this year because the carbon burned in the desert was going to be offset, with some referring to the event as "Greening Man.".

And different it is. Today's date will go down in infamy as a San Francisco knucklehead set fire to the Burning Man prematurely, destroying the 40-foot high pyre days ahead of schedule. Event organizers have promised to build another Burning Man in its place, but who will offset the additional carbon?

Shame on you, Paul Addis for taking the artistic burning into your own grubby hands. In this case immolation is not the sincerest form of flattery. (Photo: Hollywood Today)

It's the main event in the battle over how to close a bottle of wine: Cork vs. screw cap. To some, it's a matter of style. To others, it's an issue of quality. And now, it's a question of what is best for the environment.

Cork was the standard closure for ages. But winemakers began moving to alternatives in the past decade because of problems with cork that were ruining wines. Screw caps became a popular option and are now seen topping many fine wines, such as some bottles from Napa's PlumpJack winery that sell for $100 or more.

But some winemakers and environmental groups are urging wineries to return to basics — saying cork is the best choice for the environment.

Read more here.