Washington state must not delay biodiesel goals

AS the founder and CEO of Imperium Renewables, which runs one of the nation's largest biodiesel production facilities, I was disturbed by aspects of a recent Washington General Administration document on the status of biodiesel adoption in the state.

The state will miss by a year it's goal of having biofuels comprise at least 20 percent of its fuel use in state vehicles and ferries — the deadline was June 1. Further, the report recommends the state postpone use of biofuels for another year.

The GA report is the latest blow to the biofuels industry, which effectively began in January 2005, when then-Gov. Gary Locke set a goal for state agencies to use at least 20 percent biofuel by Sept. 1, 2009. In 2006, Gov. Chris Gregoire accelerated the timeline for compliance to June 1 of this year.

Unfortunately, in the past 18 months, the state has sent mixed messages and pushed inconsistent policies regarding biofuels. This has had a chilling effect on investors, biofuel producers and farmers who are key to producing feedstocks needed for fuel. The good news is that the governor has an opportunity to reinforce her long-standing commitment to the biofuels industry. I'm confident that she'll rise to this challenge.

First, let me address the GA's wonderfully bureaucratic justification for why the state will fail to hit its goal: "limited supply." Since January, Imperium has been storing 2 million gallons of biodiesel at our Grays Harbor facility. (Ironically, the state included this volume in its calculations to determine that the state's Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was being met.) For the GA to say there is "limited supply" of biodiesel is both wrong and misleading.

Our facility is capable of producing 100 million gallons per year. But we need buyers. As long as the state chooses not to buy biodiesel from us, it is hypocritical for the GA to turn around and blame us for not making more. If the state commits to a contract, my company will happily supply the best fuel in the nation, produced by Washington state workers.

Second, the report hints that there are quality issues with biodiesel. Our fuel has been independently tested and consistently meets or exceeds the highest standards of the biodiesel industry, such as BQ9000 of the National Biodiesel Accreditation Commission.

Third, the report blames a lack of infrastructure for problems in accessing fuel. Shell, Sound Refining and Exxon/Mobil have collectively invested millions of dollars into biodiesel infrastructure, including terminals, tanks, blending racks and truck/rail loading facilities. I'm puzzled as to how GA overlooked these facts.

Most shameful of all is the recommendation to postpone the biofuel use requirement for another year. The answer is not to buy less biodiesel — it's the opposite. There are many reliable, cost-effective sources of biodiesel, whether it's produced by Imperium or other producers such as Gen X, Inland Empire Oilseed and many others.

While I appreciate that biodiesel currently costs a little more than petroleum diesel (a gap that is closing), there is a compelling economic reason to purchase biofuels from state suppliers.

Our facility in Grays Harbor, when it is fully staffed and operational, contributes more than $50 million in total revenue to the state, including sales tax, lease agreements, port, terminal and utilities revenue, as well as more than 40 family-wage jobs in Grays Harbor.

That community deserves better than to have a bureaucratic agency like the GA recommend that the biodiesel use requirement be changed to an "encouragement." That's like a parent "encouraging" a child to eat vegetables.

We need the state to lead by example and become the leading purchaser and consumer of biodiesel produced in Washington. I sincerely hope the governor looks beyond the flawed GA report when she meets with her department heads in the coming weeks and seizes the opportunity to drive increased use of renewable fuels.