As Minnesota gets set to implement the nation’s biggest biodiesel mandate (as we reported back in May), that by the year 2015 could see 20 percent of all diesel sold in the state come from biodiesel, officials are tackling an issue that literally gums up the works: the flow of biodiesel in the cold.
This article from Biodiesel Magazine says the Minnesota Biodiesel Task Force is putting together a committee to look at how to solve the flow of biodiesel problem in the state’s bone-chilling winters:
The Minnesota legislature instructed the task force to create a technical committee to discuss cold weather issues related to biodiesel. Plans are for the committee to start meeting in late July or early August and have recommendations for the NextGen board by January 2009. “That group will be made up of technical folks who will be able to discuss what problems we can anticipate and what can be done about those,” [Ralph Groschen, an agriculture marketing specialist for the Minnesota Department of Agriculture] said.
The article goes on to say that officials are trying to head off some of the problems of a couple of years ago when off-spec biodiesel and cold weather clogged a lot of diesel engines:
The technical committee will create recommendations to make sure that the cold weather problems with biodiesel won’t reoccur in future years. According to Groschen, the industry has already taken a proactive approach to preventing future cold flow problems. “We don’t expect a lot of big changes to be made at this point,” he said.
The percentage of biodiesel in Minnesota’s mandate, as well as the success, is dependent on availability of the green fuel and its quality control.
The world’s superpowers… the current reigning one and the up-and-comer… are also super when it comes to wind power.
A planned biodiesel refinery in Louisiana that will make the green fuel from low-grade, inedible fats and greases is on schedule to open at the end of next year.
There seems to be no end to the rhetoric bouncing around between agricultural experts, critics and media about what’s driving food costs. Biofuels are still one of the most common scapegoats for why we’re paying more for our food than ever before. But the 
U.S. government officials are following up on the success of last March’s Washington International Renewable Energy Conference (WIREC 2008) with a report of that three-day conference.
The summit brings together hundreds of industry leaders in agriculture, petroleum, academia, financial institutions and the government who want to make Florida a leader in the production of renewable energy. Participants will hear about where Florida currently stands with biofuels infrastructure, the latest renewable energy technologies and the growing market for carbon credits. 
Economist Wally Tyner says between 2004 and the beginning of 2008, oil went from $40 per barrel to $120 per barrel at the same time corn prices increased from $2.00 a bushel to $6.00. “Of that $4 increase, about $1 is due to the US subsidy and about $3 is due to the higher crude oil price,” Tyner told a 
University of Nebraska policy specialist Brad Lubben, who gave his analysis of the study at the forum in terms of public policy, said this is an important point to consider when attempting to change the Renewable Fuels Standard in an effort to lower food prices because it is the “easiest” to manipulate. “It’s an important consequence to realize that the easiest policy to attack may have relatively little significance and little impact on the current supply and demand balance for these ag commodities and for energy,” Lubben said.