At Trail’s Travel Center, where 50 to 70 percent of the gas is sold to shipping fleets, a half-cent per-gallon price difference has been enough to send customers into Iowa to get their fuel, owner Rocky Trail said.

Friday, March 08, 2002

At Trail’s Travel Center, where 50 to 70 percent of the gas is sold to shipping fleets, a half-cent per-gallon price difference has been enough to send customers into Iowa to get their fuel, owner Rocky Trail said.

That’s why Trail, along with representatives of transit operators, trucking companies and fuel retailers, are opposing the latest push for a state requirement that part of all diesel fuel be made up of biodiesel – a measure they say is guaranteed to increase diesel costs in Minnesota, driving business across the borders and passing extra costs on to consumers.

Biodiesel is a type of fuel made from vegetable oil, often from soybeans. Some in Freeborn County have supported a biodiesel mandate, hoping to capitalize on the requirement by building a biodiesel plant on land near the EXOL ethanol plant near Glenville.

A bill requiring all diesel fuel sold in Minnesota to contain at least 2 percent biodiesel is making its way through the Minnesota House and Senate, and could be up for floor votes next week, said Bob McFarlin, a consultant for the Biodiesel by Choice Coalition.

The coalition estimates that a biodiesel mandate would cost diesel consumers $48 million to $200 million each year.

Beyond that extra cost, Trail said his business would be further hurt because the truck stop now gets its fuel from a terminal in northern Iowa; if he is forced to use biodiesel, drivers will have to travel to someplace in Minnesota to get the fuel. Because of special difficulties in storing and transporting biodiesel – it must be kept heated, for instance – it’s possible that it will only be available at a handful of locations in Minnesota. That means extra shipping costs for many retailers, Trail said.

Trail and McFarlin said as the only state with a biodiesel requirement, Minnesota would not be able to compete with its neighbors.

&uot;Truckers will fill up with the lesser-cost biodiesel fuel in Mason City and drive right on through the state of Minnesota,&uot; Trail said.

And, they said, one of the main reasons the bill gets support – its perceived benefit for farmers – isn’t a lock, either. There is no guarantee the biodiesel fuel used to fulfill the mandate would be produced in Minnesota, and the added fuel costs will hurt farmers, too, McFarlin said.

&uot;If you’re not a soybean farmer, this is a net loss with no upside,&uot; McFarlin said.

Members of the coalition say they support biodiesel as a fuel, and even use it when possible, but simply disagree with the idea of a state mandate. A federal mandate would make more sense, they said, because it would keep everyone on a level playing field.