Daily Blog from Collective Biodiesel Conference - Day 1

I'm very excited to be blogging today from our Editor in Chief, Frankie Abralind's house in Washington, DC!

Last night, I flew in from Austin for the 4th annual Collective Biodiesel Conference. Had wonderful Indian food with Frankie, his wife Jessica, as well as Moya, Leif, and Greg from Piedmont.

This morning, I'm headed to American University for "lobbying training", then off to Capital Hill to try and talk to some senators or congressmen.

Tonight, we're attending an advanced screening of the film FUEL, directed by Josh Tickell, the author of several books on biodiesel. I've met Josh and his fiancee a couple of times and attended a screening in Austin. It's a fantastic film and I'm excited that it's getting more exposure.

For those not familiar with the CBC, it is one of two annual events dedicated to the homebrew and small scale biodiesel individuals, businesses, and coops. Those of us in this nascent industry come together twice a year (CBC and the Sustainable Biodiesel Summit, which shadows the NBB conference) to talk about topics relevant to the biodiesel world - workshops, research, and lots of networking.

I hope that our readers will consider joining us at CBC this year if you are in the DC area, and come to Dallas in Feb 2010 for next year's SBS.

By Jason Burroughs (July 31, 2009 - 0 comments)

A visit from the EPA

Yesterday, two men from Bionetics, an EPA contractor, paid us an unannounced visit. They asked to see samples of my biodiesel, thinking I was a producer. I explained that I was only a distributor, but they still wanted samples. After calling the EPA to confirm it was for real, I gave them samples from our tank and explained what we do.

To summarize, we collect oil from restaurants (170 so far) and provide it to biodiesel producers to turn into biodiesel for us, then we sell that B100 to end users to power their vehicles. Right now, we are in an unfortunate position where our biodiesel producers don't have the license to accept our raw grease, so we're forced to sell it on the open market, rather than toll it into biodiesel. We're building our own facility that will give us the legal right to do this processing, which is really just storing the oil before it goes to the producer.

They wanted product transfer documents from our restaurants to us for the oil collection (we only have handwritten driver records, which were acceptable); PTD's from us to the rendering company we sell the oil to; and PTD's from the biodiesel company we buy B100 from.

Anyway, they took a sample of biodiesel and tested it on the spot using an xray machine of some kind, and determined it had 5.2ppm sulfur (must be below 15ppm). Then they took another sample to take back and test for methanol content, flash point, and acid number. They knew little about biodiesel, but were just following orders.

In addition to this, they asked me about our conversion of vehicles to run on vegetable oil. They requested invoices to customers for doing conversions, receipts of buying Greasecar kits and VO Control controllers, and anything else I had on those products.

I could have said no and contacted a lawyer, but I'm in this as a business, not to hide what I'm doing. I gave them everything they asked for and then some. We talked for quite awhile about the grey area of using vegetable oil as a fuel - the IRS takes road taxes for it, while the EPA officially says it's not allowed. However, they asked me NOTHING about using vegetable oil as a fuel, but focused entirely on the conversion business.

They had reviewed our website and had googled for me enough to find things I've written about these topics, so of course I had to wonder what the source of the inquiry was. They said they didn't know, so I called their boss at the EPA, Ross Ruske. He said he "couldn't recall" the source. I pressed him, and said I would just file a Freedom of Information Act inquiry to find out. I also said I suspected it was a complaint by a competitor, and he finally said "why take the time and expense to file a FOIA request when you already know the answer?". So there it is - the competitor apparently called the EPA to tell them that we were doing things they wouldn't approve us, and the EPA showed up on my doorstep.

The good news is that we had an answer for everything they threw at us. I had every document, every rule, every little shred of information to show that we are doing it all above board. Not incidentally, we stopped doing conversions at the beginning of this year, when one of the partners split off to do that himself. So I even had the legal document splitting that part of the business off.

They were really nice guys, and after I explained the trouble we had with our competitor (sending a spy to try and rent a room from us and probing for confidential business information, filing false criminal charges against me, threatening to sue their customer for $8,000 for breaking their contract, etc.) they asked me for their address and said they were going to make an unannounced visit to them!

So what's the moral of the story: be prepared for this. Don't forget that you're a complaint away from an audit, a site visit, or even just a phone call from the authorities. After we took over a couple of accounts from our competitor last year, we got a visit from the city's zoning board, the air quality, water quality, stormwater runoff, state environmental board, fire marshall, and city planner - literally within a week of each other. Each one said it was complaint driven and they came in about two weeks after we took over those accounts.

Here is a copy of the full report.

By Jason Burroughs (June 4, 2009 - 1 comment)

On barriers to entry and the money trail

For those that don't already know (it's not a big secret), I have initiated an official "arbitration" against the National Biodiesel Board to break their monopoly on the production of biodiesel in the United States. I'd like to lay out my philosophical and economic case for this action and invite questions and comments. Consider this a high-level overview of issues that certainly deserve in-depth discussion; some issues may not be presented in their entirety for legal reasons, or simply to avoid boring the reader. For context, DieselGreen Fuels collects used fryer oil from restaurants and pays a third party biodiesel producer a "toll" to create biodiesel from our oil. The resulting B100 is sold at retail pumps across central Texas. We are not a member of NBB, but eventually would like to make biodiesel. In order to sell a drop of the stuff, we have been led to believe by NBB that we would be required to enter into contract with NBB, which we have refused to do.

Back in 1998 and 2000, the National Biodiesel Board, with roots in the soybean industry, facilitated health effects testing in order to secure EPA approval for biodiesel to be used as an on-road motor fuel in the United States. Some of the funding came from other organizations, but the final tally is in the 2 million dollar range. There are some important subtleties to the approval, such as the standard actually being for a "blendstock" instead of an actual fuel, which has had major consequences in the industry. For example, in California, because of the blendstock snafu, the state does not recognize B100 as a "regular" fuel, and therefore B100 was only allowed with special permission and a complicated membership/tracking system. Despite this limitation, and others, the approval from EPA was a watershed event. Whether or not someone *could* have completed this testing later, there's no denying that the NBB did it.

This important approval empowered NBB with the legal right to charge others for access to the testing data, with some important limitations. They are allowed to charge a "fair" amount for access, are required to settle disputes through arbitration, and lose the lock in 2013 for Tier 1 and 2015 for Tier 2. You may be wondering about these tiers - the EPA has 3 tiers and required NBB to complete Tier 1 and 2, but not Tier 3. Tier 1 is engine testing and some environmental tests, and is all that's required of a biodiesel producer that makes less than $10 million per year in total revenue. Tier 2 includes animal testing (flooding a rat cage with exhaust until they die or don't die, and then analyzing for cancer). I can't speak to the details of Tier 3, but we are fortunate that EPA has not required it of biodiesel. The fact that the rats in the tests never died, even after breathing the biodiesel exhaust, speaks volumes.

For legal reasons, I will leave out the details of how the fair access fee is supposed to be calculated and how that vastly differs from what NBB charges in dues. Let's move now from the law and numbers to the philosophical issues at stake. So what exactly is a trade association? Generally speaking, trade associations represent the interest of their members in regulatory, technical, and industry matters. They help drive standards, ensure quality and conformance to those standards; establish a critical mass that allows the industry to survive and thrive; and create value for their members by working with outside parties for compatibility and broader acceptance. In the emerging alternative fuels industry, that also means promoting the product to the public at large, defending the industry against critics, and plenty of other things. NBB has been successful in some of these areas and unsuccessful in others. Their track record for marketing is terrible in my opinion; their push of OEMs pretty good; their efforts at driving quality lauded by some and criticized by others.

There is another aspect that any new industry needs - to be recognized and accepted by the political establishment, establish a foothold in Congressional subcommittees and state legislatures, and work to get a level playing field against entrenched companies. The problem with NBB is that, unlike any other industry that I am aware of, market access is effectively blocked unless you pony up to an orgainization that in turn uses your dues largely to lobby for favorable legislation, not to repay the testing debt incurred 8-10 years ago. This simple fact is the core of my argument, and I believe has nothing to do with the merits of NBB as an organization, its leadership, or the value proposition of a trade association in general. A lobbying effort should be a separate and distinct endeavor from market access. Pooling money to fund lobbying efforts should be the full choice of interested parties.

Market access should not be contingent upon funding an organization that prioritizes its lobby efforts on issues that are not uniformally supported by all market participants. Nor should dollars paid to enter the market be directed to firms that have a vested, long-standing tie to a single feedstock and a single component of the overall industry. CASE IN POINT: while many in the industry agree that a subsidy is a good thing, it's clear to most that the subsidy flows upstream to the feedstock provider. A quick study of commodity prices will show that the value of soybean oil and other feedstocks went up substantially when the subsidy passed. So instead of a biodiesel producer getting a huge break in price, the suppliers to the producer have gobbled up most of the funds.

So, to sum up my position: NBB has tied access to the market to financial contributions to issue advocacy that is not limited to issues that all market participants agree upon. Whereas OEM acceptance is an effort everyone in the market can support, soy-focused lobbying in D.C. is not. The result is that NBB, through the misuse of the fuel registration regulations, has unjustly deprived potential biodiesel producers of the right to produce without signing an extremely limiting contract with a very unfavorable (to the producer) cancellation policy and requiring what are in some cases extremely large dues payments. We need to decouple the access to market from the political lobbying, and support the creation of separate lobbying budgets and PACs for groups of market participants with aligned interests.

Furthermore, the cancellation policy is absurd. It locks the signer into a 10 year deal, even after the NBB loses the lock, and opens them up to breach of contract penalties if attempts are made to get out of it. The few lawyers that I've met that have actually read the thing say that it is so invasive as to be unenforceable.

Thus far, I'm out of pocket about a thousand bucks, which is about a thousand bucks more than I had in our legal fund. I hope that supporters of this effort will consider chipping in if costs get much higher and a fundraising effort is begun.

Until 2013, no organization will be able to produce biodiesel without a multi-million dollar contract with NBB - Boy Scouts and churches, non-profits, individuals - no possibility to produce biodiesel in America without jumping through those hoops and making a major commitment to a lobbying organization masquerading as a health effects data sharing. Wouldn't you think that if the NBB really wanted biodiesel to be successful, they would just give everyone access? I believe that we should open this up to the public, encourage small-scale biodiesel production, and free the biodiesel industry from the monster it unwittingly created. Let NBB scale back and provide real value to members, establish a lobbying arm and let producers opt in if they want to lobby. That's an organization I would join and be proud to support.

By Jason Burroughs (March 16, 2009 - 3 comments)

Regulatory Updates - Jan 2009

Due to a publishing lag, some of these updates may old news, but here goes:

First, the big news. The recent financial crisis led to an almost-
missed extension of the biodiesel tax credits. In true bipartisan
style, they crammed it into the bailout package as a pork barrel
earmark. Not only was the credit extended for another year, the credit
for WVO-based biodiesel has been bumped up to $1, to match so called
agri-biodiesel! Those making biodiesel from yellow grease can rejoice
in the sudden parity between recycled oil and virgin oil. Expect the
commodity market to heat up, with at least some of the new money going to the
rendering industry. Just another reminder that he who owns the
feedstock owns the market.

Additional changes: the IRS will now reimburse 50% of the cost of an
alternative fuel refueling station (up from 30%), which can make a
major difference in a project being approved by a customer. Also, co-
processed renewable diesel will be limited to 50 cents per gallon in
credit instead of the current $1. And, the 'splash and dash' loophole
that allowed producers of biodiesel overseas to ship their product
into the Houston ship channel, squirt a bit of diesel in and take $1
per gallon in subsidy, then ship to Europe, has been closed! And to
make it better, they did it retroactive to June 15, 2008.

IRS has proposed a drastic change to the way biodiesel is taxed. To
start with, a bit of history. Years ago, diesel fuel was taxed at the
point of retail sale. Refineries sold to wholesalers tax free, who
sold to retailers tax free. As consumers filled up, the filling
station collected tax and remitted to state and federal agencies, very
similar to sales tax. At some point, the rules were changed so that
all diesel fuel is taxed at the refinery, and any non-taxed fuel must
be dyed red to show it is for off-road or other non-taxable use.
Because of this system of taxation, the IRS refers to diesel as "a
taxable fuel" - this refers to being taxable *at the refinery*.

When biodiesel was approved as a motor fuel, it was considered "a non-
taxable fuel", which means the burden of taxation is technically up to
the retailer who pumps the fuel into an actual motor vehicle tank.
From the sound of it, B100 and B99 should never have taxes paid on
them until they reach the end user, leaving the burden of registering
with and paying the IRS on the retailer. For those in the industry, we
know that producers often sell "B99 wholesale" which has been blended
for tax credit purposes, but not had the taxes paid. Also because of
this rule, biodiesel is not required to be dyed red for off-road use.

Under proposed IRS rules out for public comment at press time, all
biodiesel would be taxable the moment it is blended with diesel fuel.
So once again, the IRS decision to provide refundable credit only to
blended fuel rears its ugly head. Anyone blending to B99 or lower will
now be forced to register with the IRS and pay the taxes, and
optionally take the credit. This has a number of implications. First,
any B99 sold without taxes must be dyed red. This means it cannot
later be turned into taxable fuel, as many people do now by applying
for credit when taxes have been paid in advance, but turn out not to
be due if sold for non-taxable purposes. Second, producers would be
less likely to sell B99 because they have to endure more complicated
reporting requirements. This burden will affect the smaller
distributors and retailers who may not have the cash to float the cash
needed to wait 30-90 days for IRS refunds. It may have a side effect
of causing every blender to register as a bulk terminal, which brings
additional registration and reporting requirements.

Additionally, the often misquoted "400 gallon exemption" will go away.
Many in the homebrew community have claimed that there is somehow an
exemption to road taxes if an individual produces less than 400
gallons per quarter. Some have extrapolated this assumed exemption to
mean that a coop of 50 people can have an exemption if they produce
less than 20,000 gallons per quarter. The IRS requires taxes to be
paid on all fuel used in on-road vehicles, even if that fuel is water
or ranch dressing (to quote Jeff Plowman). However, if you are a
blender, AND the end user you sell to is liable for the taxes, the
burden of taxation is shifted to the end user in these small
transactions. With the new rules, the blender is both liable for the
tax and eligible for the credit.

More information can be found in the Federal Register at
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-17270.pdf

In other news, the ASTM has approved what some are calling the most
important update to the biodiesel specification since it's
introduction in 1995 (fact check that date). ASTM D6751-08 includes a
major addition - a cold soak filtration test that is designed to
prevent the kind of filter clogging that has made headlines when
spectacular failures (Minnesota, 2005, for example) occured. This
addition has paved the way for two important changes: B5 is now
included in the definition of straight diesel (D975) and home heating
oil (D396). This means that virtually all diesel in the Unitied States
can be blended with 5% biodiesel with no labeling, no special
handling, and no consideration about use or possible issues. Insiders
at the NBB are concerned that even the major producers who voted for
the change are not yet ready to meet this standard, which is the
current standard as of October 16, 2008. It remains to be seen what
effect the new standard has on the industry or on pricing.

Greasy tidbits:

Griffin Industries filed with the state of Texas to become a "diesel
fuel producer" this summer, an indication they are considering or
actively building a biodiesel plant in Texas. With a major rendering
plant outside Austin currently providing a good amount of chicken fat
to area biodiesel producers, expect the competition for yellow grease
to intensify. I heard through the rumor mill that Griffin's plant in Kentucky
has not been as successful as they had hoped, and with the recent
dip in the market, this project may not get off the ground.

There is a movement afoot to try and remove the NBB's lock on EPA
health effects data early (the lock is set to expire in 2015). If
successful, anyone could make and sell biodiesel that meets ASTM
standards without needing a membership in the NBB. Stay tuned for a future
post in detail on this subject.

The 2009 Jetta TDI has been approved by the EPA for a $1300 refundable
tax credit due to clean diesel technology. Only 13,000 were imported
for 2009, and most were sold out before they hit the dealership
showrooms. Too bad they don't run on B100 - but at least they get 40+ MPG!

By Jason Burroughs (February 10, 2009 - 6 comments)

Sustainability is a metaphor

A great weekend comes to a close. For the sixth consecutive year, the Sustainable Biodiesel Summit was held in advance of the National Biodiesel Board meeting. Three days of inspiration, reconnecting, and sharing stories. I'm blogging while on an early morning flight back to Austin, reading notes from the conference and resting my aching feet. In addition to a great gathering of friends, I spent hours walking the streets of San Francisco and missing my family. Chris Continanza, my new General Manager, came with me, and together we absorbed as much as we could, shared our experiences, and came away with renewed inspiration.

The SBS is an important flipside to an industry chock full of monocropped GMO soy, splashing and dashing, and overreaching government regulations. It was born as a reaction to the first NBB conference in 2004, and has seen increasing legitimacy and relevance. Although not an actual organization at all, the SBS founders continue to pull together thought leaders and stakeholders from around the country to speak on small-scale biodiesel issues and larger sustainability topics. For me, it is as much about networking with like-minded business owners that I have come to see as friends as it is about seeing presentations about greening the biodiesel industry. I have only been to two SBS meetings, and never to an NBB conference, but I go to the Collective Biodiesel Conference in Colorado each year, which serves a similar (but more technical) purpose.

San Francisco is a fascinating market and city. I lived in San Jose and then Mountain View for a year each in 2000 / 2003, but was consumed by the tech industry I'm now crawling my way out of. The times I spent in SF proper are wonderful memories of seeing the city for the first time from the Golden Gate bridge, watching the sun set from the Sunset District, and a later vacation with my wife some years later. The biodiesel scene in the Bay area is a vibrant community of true believers, having built a legion of consumers of high-blend biodiesel over the last six or seven years. It was a real treat to get to know some of the local leaders and find out more about how things work. With multiple local retail outlets and multiple "local" distributors, there is an interesting dynamic of competition and camaraderie. In addition to grass-roots businesses, a major rendering company has announced plans for a plant in the middle of the city, and even the city itself has gotten involved. It's easy to see the Bay area as a model for other communities, and although I admire many who have pioneered biodiesel there, its unique characteristics make it less of a model and more of an anomaly. The steep hills put restaurant drums at risk for tipping; the antiquated sewage system woefully inadequate for the size of the population, coupled with years of lax regulations on the disposal of waste grease, has created an unenviable environment for used fryer oil haulers.

The start of the conference was a three hour tour to notable biodiesel sites in the area. First stop was Dogpatch Biofuels, a relatively new retail station on the north side of the Bay. Michele and Robin put $150k of their own money into building a fantastic 8000 gallon double walled tank with two pumps dispensing B100, at a current premium of about $1.50 over diesel (about 60% higher). They also sell eco-convenience items such as Clif Bars and organic shirts, as well as a nice selection of books about alternative living. Michele and Robin are well known in the SF biodiesel community, and I hope they do well. The long-term viability of a retail station such as theirs is very important; it's a model many of us would like to see replicated across the country, but some see as impossible in most markets. With fuel margins usually razor thin, profits must be augmented by sharply higher prices or by other products for sale. The era of the eco-convenience store may be on the way.

Our next stop was the Biofuels Oasis, a similar operation but at a slightly larger scale. The ladies (5 of them) that own it are true pioneers, and the new location that is just getting ready to open is a beautifully designed and constructed base of operations. With over 2700 customers, they enjoy unparalleled community support. They also plan to sell non-fuel items, which should help them reach solid financial ground for the long term.

We were fortunate to be invited to the San Francisco "Greasecyle" program headquarters on our tour, and got to learn about the city's new free program to collect oil from restaurants and residences. Trevitt Shultz of People's Fuel, a contractor who helped the city get rolling with the program, explained the intricacies of oil collection in Chinatown, the B20 mandate, and plans for future experimentation with brown grease as part of a grant program. I was very skeptical about the city taking over what I believe should be handled by the private sector, and asked some pointed questions. What I learned from Trevitt and later from Karri Ving, the program manager, eased my fears. It turns out that only half of restaurants in San Francisco have a grease trap, which means hand and dish washing goes right into the sewer. Those that do have grease traps are under no obligation to clean them out, which means that once the ratio of grease to water gets too high for the trap, it simply gets pumped into the sewer. Worse still, since they don't require chain of custody paperwork from grease haulers, a nightmare scenario in which a hauler pumps OUT his entire truck into one companies grease trap (and therefore into the sewer) is quite common. Although the city definitely could have made more of an effort to reach out to private industry (I was told by the city that Darling rejected their offer; a local hauler doing biodiesel says the city never told the public about their plans until it was too late to try and participate), they are making the best of a bad situation. Because the city is not for profit, they gladly give out their promotional materials (like grease handling instructions in four languages!) and could eventually hand the program over to the private sector once their goals are met. I no longer worry about the city of Austin trying to duplicate their efforts, and that alone is worth the time spent on the trip.

One of the most inspirational presentations I saw was given by Kumar Plocher of Yokayo Biofuels. I originally thought that he was from San Francisco, and survived on the "easy" customer base that exists there. Yokayo is actually several hours north, which made his story of producing a million gallons a year of biodiesel from used fryer oil they collect from 850 restaurants that much better. Kumar is very outspoken, has good ideas, and isn't afraid to put them into action. After my presentation on Diesel Particulate Filter issues in newer vehicles, he announced a letter writing campaign to auto manufacturers to discontinue using "late ignition post combustion fuel injection" style DPF systems. As you may have read about in my 2009 Jetta TDI story, this kind of system leaves the engine oil contaminated with biodiesel, and fails to adequately recharge the DPF. I'm sad to conclude that the 2009 Jetta TDI is simply not high-biodiesel-blend compatible. The speaker that followed me, Gary Parsons from Chevron, provided incredible clarity on this issue with his detailed technical presentation on the interplay between fuel system, emissions systems, and engine oil. This artfully balanced system relies on a narrow band of viscosity, acidity, and other properties that are just not the same in biodiesel. I walked away from that presentation seeing B5 and B20 mandates as a great medium-term goal for Austin and other municipalities. I'll always support and foster the B100 community (using B100 myself), but feel like the tide is slowly shifting away from the B100 market and toward petroleum blends. If every vehicle made in 2008 and beyond is incompatible with high blends, our market will continue to shrink as vehicles are replaced and fleets get refreshed. Either auto makers will create fuel-neutral emissions systems, or the growth of the B100 market will become secondary to needing revenue to survive. I would encourage anyone considering making a large investment in B100 to carefully consider our world 3 or 5 years down the road before making that leap. Kumar is one of the most die-hard B100 advocates, and I hopes he rallies the faithful to put pressure on the right people and companies to prevent this from happening.

One other important outcome of the conference was a great impromptu meeting of oil collectors from around the country to discuss the formation of a group. Sharing equipment ideas, sales and marketing suggestions, and collaboration on collection software could benefit everyone, and the seed was planted for a monthly conference call, each led by a different host, covering a different topic. Moya from Piedmont led the discussion and Steve from Yokayo will get us all in an email thread.

Other tidbits:
• A lifecycle analysis of yellow grease biodiesel production showed it is 2x better than soy and 8x better than petroleum diesel in terms of environmental impact
• The City of Santa Cruz has their own "Fryer to Fuel" program, but in concert with a local rendering company
• EPA has a new grant program with up to $400 million in funding for biofuels
• Clean Cities has just issued an RFP for a grant proposal for public education and community outreach
• Algae is still controversial. GMO algae is purported to be "crippled" so as to not be an invasive species outside the laboratory. Conference goers not convinced

As Lyle put it, there were many "Attendees of Note" - Frankie, Matt, Caleb, Rachel, Bob and Camille, Jeff and Tanner from the SBA, Emily, Dr. Dan, Rob "The Celebrity" del Bueno, Nataka, Kimber, SaraHope, Moya, and many others. We also met some new faces and put faces with familiar names. Although I have expressed some reservations about the SBS in the past, the networking aspect alone is something that we need to continue doing. There was some talk of consolidating the Collective Biodiesel Conference in Colorado and the SBS, and I expect a lively debate on the issue in the months to come.

So, why is sustainability a metaphor? Because what we are really trying to sustain is the connection we have with each other and the movement. The sustainability of "local biodiesel" is rarely in question, and big biodiesel producers rarely attend the SBS. The two day conference is really more of a group hug than anything else - a chance to have our stories heard, our efforts validated, and our common struggles understood. It's a Who's Who in Local Biodiesel, a labor of love for organizers, a chance for new faces to be seen and voices heard. Please join us next year in Dallas!

By Jason Burroughs (February 9, 2009 - 0 comments)

Welcome to the party

Welcome to the newest addition to BiodieselSMARTER! On these pages, you will find news about the biodiesel industry, updates on regulatory issues, legal matters, announcements, and sometimes personal philosophy. My grandmother used to tell me I had diarrhea of the mouth, and I have sometimes been known to put my foot in my mouth (don't mix those metaphors).

Before we begin, let me tell you a little about myself. After test driving a Prius in 2005, I heard about biodiesel from a friend. A google search led me to an local messageboard, which led me to a meetup of people interested in using biodiesel. To sum up the next year, I wasted a lot of time trying to put together a coop on unsuitable land with unsuitable people. The fruit of the labor turned out to be the business formed - DieselGreen Fuels was born as a biodiesel distributor with an initial delivery of 300 gallons of B100 to my back yard, complete with full body spray as the hose popped out of the tote and onto my driveway.

Two and a half years later, we've got a vac truck, a fuel truck, employees, and a loyal customer base. Austin went from no biodiesel to the most number of biodiesel stations in America (35), thanks to my predecessors at Austin Biofuels. No thanks to our overreaching regulatory body, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, we now have ONE biodiesel station. We are working hard to change that, and our collection of used cooking oil gets turned into the B100 that we sell to hundreds of customers.

Along the way, I've tried to further the cause in a number of areas. Things I've worked on: In 2007, I was the first company registered with the IRS to sell vegetable oil as a fuel in order to get a refundable tax credit; in 2008, I began an arbitration against the National Biodiesel Board to break their lock on health effects testing data for biodiesel, and bought a 2009 Jetta TDI to record my experiences using B100. In 2009, I was elected to be the Vice President of Membership of the Biodiesel Coalition of Texas, helped with the SBS conference, and started to participate in an effort to understand the effects of the brand new emissions systems on the ability to run B100 in 2008+ vehicles.

I've spoken at the Collective Biodiesel Conference every year; given presentations to vendors, partners, and customers; educated producers and distributors about the credits from RINs generated from producing biodiesel; shared my experiences through my company's blog; and through it all, managed to hang on to my job at a major tech company, where I work from home and consult enterprise customers on how to manage data storage. Since discovering biodiesel, I've traveled around the state of Texas, to California, Colorado, and even Colombia. I also got married and had a son, which mean more to me than all the biodiesel in Texas (there's not quite as much as tea in China, but we're working on it).

In addition to news I pick up on my own - from blogs, press releases, and personal connections - I invite you to share your news with me. Email me plant openings, plant closings, layoffs, hiring notifications, regulatory updates, lawsuits, industry gossip, or anything else that's on your mind. The IRS tells you that B100 isn't subject to road tax because it's not 4% paraffin? Email me! You hear about that Monsanto patents the DNA of an emu to make biodiesel from it's blood? Email me! For now, use jason@dieselgreenfuels.com and put "BLOG" in the subject line. Dedicated email address to come soon.

Stay up to date by subscribing to the RSS feed - right now, we just have a single feed for the magazine - feed://www.biodieselsmarter.com/rss.xml - but hope to have a feed just for the blog soon.

You may be wondering about the title, Through the Sight Glass. For those not familiar with the Appleseed biodiesel processor, a common element is the sight glass, a glass plug that gets inserted into a T fitting so that you can see the flow of liquid through the pipe. The title of the blog is a word play on Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking-Glass and What Alice Found There. Alice looks into a mirror, where nothing is what it seems. I chose this title as a reflection (pun intended!) of the incredible complexity of the biodiesel industry, and how issues are often nuanced to the point of being ridiculous. So let's take a look through the sight glass together and see what's on the other side.

My next post will talk about the biodiesel credit extensions that were passed at the last minute (including details you may not realize), a proposed change in taxation for biodiesel at the producer level, the 400 gallon "exemption" for homebrewers, ASTM changes, and more.

I want to thank Frankie for inviting me to blog here, and I'm looking forward to helping us all learn more about the industry we are part of!

Jason Burroughs

By Jason Burroughs (January 30, 2009 - 0 comments)