"But Europe can't feed itself,"
The European Union pays farmers money to *not* grow food on land they own. Europe produces more food than it consumes and the export of its subsidized food actually harms farmers in Africa.

"and as the North Sea petroleum runs out, won't be able to heat itself."
well, the coming shortage of nat gas is a serious problem (mainly a political one as we will be at Putins mercy...), but mostly to electricity generation. Heating can be done with coal, of which we have plenty, while Germany, for instance, moves more and more towards housing insulation standards that require houses to need little to *no energy at all* for heating ("Passivhaus").

"But give the devil his due and acknowledge that Denmark is a postage stamp sized country ."
Europe as a whole isn't really that much smaller than NA. Germany certainly isnt "postage stamp sized", uses no more energy than Denmark and its climate is not milder than the USA. Sweden, whose population density and climate ought to be really similiar to Canada, even plans to use zero oil by 2020. They can do this precisely because of the low pop density! (i.e. enormous forests to turn to use for producing energy biomass for not so many people). Canada could probly do something siniliar. From what I know, however, Canadas apperent energy use is only so high because of all the energy intensive resource production going on (tar sands ...), otherwise it wouldnt be that bad.

While I agree we are all in the same boat in this, there sure are differences of degree as to the severity of the problem and the progess done towards solving it. High gas and energy taxes, heavy public investment in renewables, a well working public transportation system are what makes europeans consume only half as much oil as north americans and certainly will go a long way towards making coming oil shortages less socially disruptive.

I "Up-Arrowed" you, inasmuch as I, generally, agree with your statements. That being said, however, I do think Europe has a problem coming down the pike as regards "Diesel."

As the rest of the world, and especially the U.S., replaces more, and more, of it's gasoline with ethanol Diesel supply is going to get shorter, and more expensive. The price "spread" has widened in my area from 57% to 62% in just the last couple of weeks.

It looks to this Mississippian that you guys really need to start working on the Veg oil/biodiesel thing pretty quick. Jes Sayin. :)

I dont think ethanol is a viable option in substituting oil outside of warm countries like Brazil. This has been discussed a lot here on the Oil Drum.
As for the Biodiesel, you can now buy this here in many gas stations. There is also working pilot plants converting any biomass to synthetic diesel. Look here: http://www.choren.com/en/
http://www.choren.com/en/choren_industries/information_press/press_relea...

I even know a guy who owns block of apartment houses in the city and powers both the heating and the electricty needs of these houses with a rape seed oil fueled generator in the basement.

However, Central Europe can not produce enough Biofuls to replace all motor fuel because of too little land for too many cars and people. The United States and Canada should do better on this, at least if they give up EROI-negative ethanol production and go for second generation biofuels.

I dont think ethanol is a viable option in substituting oil outside of warm countries like Brazil.

The U.S. will blend 10% Ethanol in 2009. per the EPA

However, Central Europe can not produce enough Biofuls to replace all motor fuel because of too little land for too many cars and people.

The operative phrase, here, is "all motor fuel." The goal probably should be something like 20% bio. It looks to me like the oil companies have managed to tie some European countries up in knots with some "environmental" red herrings as regards imported biodiesel. I think this could end up costing you, greatly. I could be wrong, however; it IS a long drive from Memphis to Madrid. :)

"The U.S. will blend 10% Ethanol in 2009. per the EPA"

Sure, i am not arguing you cant mandate such an amount or even produce it, but given the low EROI of ethanol production in the US, how much oil will you have displaced? According to many analysis here on TOD and elsewhere, probably very little.

Actually, quite lot, Old One. It takes about 8 gallons of diesel to produce 154 bushels of corn (462 gallons of ethanol.)

The ethanol coming from an "average" newer refinery has about 30,000 btus of nat gas, from fertilizer, drying, and refining, embedded in it; but, by using This technology that can be lowered to about 2, or 3,000 btus (for a gal of ethanol that can replace 116,000 btus of gasoline in the proper blend/engine.

Of course, you could add in THIS Technology and be down to NO nat gas, diesel, and electricity embedded in the ethanol. The DDGS, at 8400 btus/lb (17.5 lbs/bu) would more than cover all energy used.

Personally, it seems to me that "cost of production" is a much better metric than trying to ascertain eroei. Although you, or I, might miss an energy input the guy that supplies the inputs Won't. :)