On December 21 ABG put out a press release about the mothballing of the Berkley Vale plant.

http://www.abgbiodiesel.com/_data/AB...ber%202006.pdf

Note that the press release indicates that some 69% of their sales is used in B20 applications.

Now consider that the Government is likely to dictate a maximum of 5% biodiesel in petrol diesel after the new review.

Standardising Diesel/Biodiesel Blends - Discussion paper

This will likely kill off the ABG and other small commercial producers. Big oil wins again. They set the biodiesel standards, they dictate the legislation regarding grants and subsidies (and recieved the biggest grants for putting in new biodiesel plants) - alternative energy in this country is a joke.

It seems to me after looking through the top link that the firm suffered because of the drought and the change in government policy. You can't do much about the weather (other than use biofuels to stabilise carbon dioxide levels) or the government (other than hire lots of good (expensive) lobbyists .

Availability of feedstocks was always going to be the biggest problem facing the commercial biodiesel industry. I recall trips to SE Asia to try and obtain access to palm oil by a couple of companies. Once those asian countries started producing biodiesel themselves, there wasn't much left over to ship to Austraia. Malaysia has now stopped issuing permits for biodiesel companies as they are concerned that there won't be enough palm oil for food consumption.

To some extent putting all the emphasis into biodiesel production technology was placing the cart before the horse. Now that technology may remain mothballed, if not scrapped.

Your comments about expensive lobbyists is on point. The big oil companies have tremendous power in Canberra.

Liquid fuel is a unique power source. It is what runs our transportation, mining and agriculture industries. As we slide down the backside of Hubert's curve, the government should be doing whatever it can to ensure that every last drop of liquid fuel that can be produced in this country will be produced. Unfortunately, that kind of foresight is sadly lacking in Canberra.

It occurs to me that there is the potential of using some of the big oil’s lobbying to sell biofuels to politicians, and possibly to big oil itself. Is that completely mad?
Ok tell me about using a long spoon and insulated gloves when you're supping with the Devil.
One thing that big oil, engine makers and the great Australian driving public would want is consistancy from biodiesel. I guess that's what the consultation is about among other things...
I've made a short post about this conversation on my blog: the Big Biofuels Blog (http://www.icis.com/blogs/biofuels)

Interesting to note that in the summary to the discussion paper the governement is seeking to

1) This government and any new government needs to recognise that introducing LSD diesel was a mistake and that added lubricity is essential to allow for optimum vehicle performance. 5% BD blend may provide some lubricity but higher % blend would be far better.

2) This government and any new government needs to recognise that BD reduces green house emmissions. The higher the blend the higher the green house emmission savings.

As for the discussion - what discussion. It's already a done deal. Big Oil want 5% they get 5% and you and I talking about it won't change that. BIG OIL has taken out the big stick, or more probably, closed the big cheque book.

BIG OIL recognize that biofuels are the fuel of the future but they are not going to lose 20% of their income by allowing a 20% blend.

And the w***er polies are not going to lose 20% of their BIG OIL slush fund, not without replacing it - the 20% that is.

But hey, I wonder if these same policies are economically savy enough to know that if they reduce this countries reliance on dinodiesel, they will reduce their foreign debt as well.

I just wonder if the savings on foreign debt would replace that "lost" 20%.

Slippery
Small steps taken one at at a time.

A 20% "gain" would be for the country, a 20% cut in big oil slush fund would be a cut the relevant party's income. So the pollie would need to choose between the country or their parties interest. Do I need to even wonder which way they would go?

__________________
cheers
Chris.
1990 landcruiser 80, 1HD-T two tank, copper pipe HE+ 20 plate FPHE, toyota solenoids and filters. 1978 300D, elsbett one tank system. 1979 300D veg oil/ diesel blend for now.

So , what should we, as relatively knowledgeable people, who have an interest in biofuels do??
Should we sit back and wait for the outcome?
Should we prepare a submission to the enquiry?
Should we support the recently formed ABU (Australian Biofuels Users association) and have them prepare a submission on our behalf, so that at least the voices of some of the populace is heard?

I have heard that the closing date for submissions has been extended, so there is a possibility that our voice can still be heard.

Tony

This could be a project that the ABU could try cutting it's teeth on.

For what it is worth I still believe the Government will only listen to big oil but, hey, we have an election coming on, and if someone can open their eyes to the real benefits of a 20% blend, instead of 5%, the better it will be for those of us who do have the environment at heart.

Slippery
Small steps taken one at a time.

Quote:

Review of Diesel - Biodiesel Fuel Blend Standards

Tony,
I missed your earlier thread on the above topic which I guess is one and the same. Noted that the OEM are pushing for the 5% as well.

This probably stems more from a lack of education than anything else.

We have seen dozens of threads were claims are abitrarily made that "damage " is the result of using BD. We know that is 99% not the case but more a bad batch and more often than not, a bad batch of dinojuice- mixed with who knows what.

So how do we go about educating the motor industry and getting them on side?

How do we bring the likes of VP under control and stop them from selling the stuff they evidently do sell? And they are probably not the only money grubbers who sell bad dino diesel mixed with good BD that now gives the BD a bad smell.

Maybe a starting point could be with the ABU starting a think tank meeting - maybe one in all centres around Australia. Lets get our heads together and get some real action going.

Slippery
Small steps taken one at a time

I believe the only way you are going to do it is show them that there is a buck to be made out of it.

Car manufacturers are not interested in safety, the enviroment, emissions or anything else UNLESS, they can put a spin on it to sell more cars.
Governments are the same. Their Policies and absolute motivation is only to win votes.

It would seem to me that if you want to change the policies of the car manufacturers or government, the first thing you have to do is create a demand from the public whom are Car buyers or Voters.

When they see an opportunity to fill their agenda's and get a jump on the opposition, then they will embrace Bio fuels and support it. Until the demand is there, no way are they going to go out on a limb and put themselves at risk by introducing something that their Statistician haven't given them the numbers to show the publics support and approval.

I think going after the car and oil manufacturers along with the govt is putting the cart before the horse. I would suggest that the goal you are after would be far faster reached by educating the public and getting them on side en masse so they give those whom you want to change their polices the pressure and motivation to rethink what their position on these things is.

I believe the situation with VP is similar. While ever there is more money (or less expense) in selling crap fuel than good fuel, they will continue to take the more profitable option.

From what I have read, there are no standards for bio they have to comply with and therefore they are not risking any fines for breaking the law. If there is no penalty for doing the wrong thing, what motivation is there for them to do the right thing? Anyone that believes ethics plays a part in the decision making of big business these days is sadly kidding themselves.

The reality is these days that a lot of businesses knowingly and consiously break the law, particularly civil laws, because they know they have a bigger war chest than the people that could try to take legal action against them and therefore they can operate above and beyond the law.

In the case of VP, unless there are standards regarding the fuel quality brought in and those standards are ENFORCED, or, the public is educated on a widespread basis as to the poor quality of their fuel and the dangers of using it so their fuel sales decrease markedly, they are not going to have any reason to change what they are doing and selling.

Perhaps if someone could get one of those rabble rousing current affairs shows interested in the story and put the right spin on it for them to take it up, some pressure may be brought to bear on VP that way.
I'd suggest a lot of wether they would take the story up would depend on who owns VP and who they are friendly with at the top of the big money tree but it would seem the story has merit for the target audiences.

Big business and governments won't do or change a thing unless they see a benefit in it for THEM.