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. :)