Well, it appears that there is as much misinformation about biofuels on this site as in the Houses of Parliament! It is difficult to know where to start. Perhaps in date order.
18 November, you reported on the Public Service Transport Fuel Duty Rebate announced by David Jamieson. I must own up to having kicked this one off, otherwise it would not have appeared on the agenda - the Department of Transport were not going to try to set a rate until an operator (blindly) applied for a rebate. As if!
The fuel duty rate on ULSD is 45.82p per litre. The rebate is 36.68p, which means that bus operators pay only 9.14p duty - but only on scheduled routes.
The fuel duty on biodiesel is 25.82p per litre. The rebate is also 25.82p.
However, the reduced fuel duty applied to biodiesel is due to the fact that it costs over twice as much to produce as ULSD - 35p perlitre, as opposed to 15p. Hence, the bus operator would have to pay 35p per litre for biodiesel instead of 24.14p for ULSD. So, Nick Starkey got it right when he said that it is no big deal - bus operators will not be using biofuels, they have to make a profit.
But the object of the exercise was to raise the profile of biodiesel, and this it has achieved by pointing out the anomalies that exist.
Where the NFU is going wrong is to assume that the 20p tax break for biodiesel is not enough to produce results.
It is enough (although marginal) to produce biodiesel from used cooking oil - a process looked down upon by many on the sidelines. The big difference being, of course, that we - the Allied Biodiesel Industries (UK) are making biodiesel and they are not!
We did suggest to Paul Boateng that a 23p tax break would ensure more efficient collection of the used oil and thus avoid the use of the essentially waste product in supplementing animal feeds - potentially harmful to human health (as the forthcoming EU ban indicates) but one apparently acceptable to the farming fraternity!
This, as we learnt from the Chancellor's PBR2002, is not going to happen.
The result of the 20p tax break has been to enable us to sell biodiesel at the same price as ULSD - the object of the exercise - not at 1p a litre more because we have to import the blended fuel from Germany - Greenergy please note! They have one filling station - Rix Petroleum have 40 pumps on a B5 blend - and made in England, as well!
To talk of lowering the duty rate to the same level as LPG is nonsense - biodiesel contains double the energy level of LPG - twice the mpg - so double the rate applied to LPG would be a fairer claim - based on fact, not fiction.
So much for "lobbyists and industry experts".
Going back to Greenergy, the company, as far as I know, is not "processing" biodiesel (22 November report) - it imports the very same 5% biodiesel blend as every filling station in France sells and is making a song and dance about it! A B5 blend was introduced by the French government as a lubricity additive - it does little for the environment. Furthermore, an additional 5p per litre tax break would not make it viable for anybody to set up a plant to produce biodiesel from fresh rapeseed oil, so the investment claim is a rather hollow one. Now, if she had said an extra 15p ....
The next gaffe must be by Lord Whitty (26 November). Yes, your lordship, it does cost a lot (about £1800) to convert a vehicle to use LPG, but there is a handsome government grant available from the Energy Savings Trust - the Powershift scheme - to compensate the motorist. Now, if the latest £10m block grant to Powershift had been put into renewable biofuels instead .....
Finally, I would take issue with Andrew Owens (Greenergy again!), when he says that "home-brew biodiesel producers could struggle to produce the quality (of biodiesl) required.
Twelve months ago, there were less than 30 home-brew enthusiasts who knew how to make biodiesel in the whole of the UK. From used oil, that is - from fresh oil is simple. Some of these have now gone commercial - with no assistance from the likes of Greenergy, Cargills, the NFU and more - on a small scale, and I would put my biodiesel up against any produced in Austria to their specification C1191 from the same waste oil feedstock .
It is not what you have, Mr Owens, it is knowing what to do with it - and it is evident that your knowledge base is sadly lacking. We were doing it whilst you were thinking about it. And 14 of us were actually registered with HM Customs and Excise as Substitute Fuel Producers and paying the full 45.82p per litre fuel duty for the privelege of being allowed to both make and use an environmentally beneficial fuel.
Furthermore, the tests to prove compliance with the biodiesel fiscal specification cost £200, not the "£1000 per batch" you claim.
My final query is for Ben Gill - where are these "cowboy" suppliers you talk of? Do you know them? Have you reported them to the Trading Standards Branch?
Where were you three years ago, when others were fighting your case with Treasury? To criticise an otherwise fledgeling industry, four months into the tax break, for only producing enough biodiesel to run 30 lorries - your sums are wrong as well, by the way - is like flogging a colt because it cannot pull the hearse. It is unjustified and an insult to the enormous amount of (unpaid) work that has gone into getting this far.
We have done more than our bit to benefit the farming economy by persuading HMG to take the first step - and you have the gall to sneer at our efforts.
Where were you when the Green Fuel Challenge was issued by HMG - at our behest?
See www.biofuels.fsnet.co.uk/yearzero.htm for the progress we have made under extremly hostile circumstances and be prepared to eat crow!
One further question - have you ever run your car on biodiesel? Has anybody in the NFU? Or government?
Stop knocking and start supporting - but do it on the basis of fact, not toilet chat.
A rather tetchy - and justifiably so -
Terry de Winne
Biofuels Northern Ireland
028 91 853318