Rojo,
I just read an article on the proposal to make ethanol from waste.
However in a energy depleted world will there be enough waste to feed
such a plant.

http://tinyurl.com/24nffpa

Will take you to the article.
I note that Nestle is opposed to using food to make ethanol.

Rojo, I appreciate your comments and “It should come down to the best financial result for NSW, exporting less grainfed beef or reducing petroleum imports?” is valid. I am no fan of lotfeeding. However financial is the operative word. Grain ethanol is heavily subsidized and import protected, increased further by Windsor’s deal and will remain so. Where is the financial gain for NSW grain ethanol versus feedlotting.. You cannot say that because the Federal taxpayer is footing the bill, NSW gains.

With respect to low protein grain, such grain is grown, in most cases, in lieu of higher quality food grade grain. Thus the use of low protein grain in either a feedlot or ethanol plant impacts the supply of food for human consumption, ethanol to a greater extent than feedlotting.(1:6)

We agree that variability of our cereal grain harvests is the key factor in discussing the merits or otherwise of a grain ethanol industry.
The grain grower will receive no more than export parity price when there is an exportable surplus, why would a grain ethanol plant pay more? So having a domestic grain ethanol industry will make no difference to the grain grower
In times of poor harvests and domestic shortage grain prices rise to import parity. Then the ethanol producer cannot compete with oil, exporting and import competing grain end users cannot compete in the market either. If total grain used for feedlotting and ethanol increases with the development of a grain ethanol industry, these import parity situations become more frequent with the obvious impact on existing rural businesses.

Comment on the economics of the Dalby grain ethanol plant to follow after the grandkids leave.

When ethanol is made from grain the grain does not disappear. The resultant grain is of higher food value than before. Animals fed on grain alone will starve. Feedlotts are fed on paletized foods containing all sorts of natural foods, of which modified grain is a small part.

A quick look at the economics of a grain ethanol plant such a the one at Dalby shows the following.
With unleaded retailing for say $1.20/litre, ethanol with two thirds the energy is worth $0.80c/l. Allowing $0.20 c/l freight and retailing costs, we could say that unleaded ex refinery is worth $0.80c/l and ethanol ex Dalby $0.60c/l.
There is an excise to be paid to the Government on unleaded petrol of $0.38c/l with the excise prorata energy content of $0.25c/l on the ethanol currently rebated. This is the subsidy for the conversion of the grain to ethanol.
It is a nonsense to discuss the economics of grain ethanol while including the subsidy so the excise must be deducted from unleaded and ethanol to get ex plant prices of $0.62c/l unleaded and $0.35c/l ethanol.
In converting grain to ethanol, the starch, 70%, is used for ethanol. The remaining 30% is the distillers grain. This distillers grain is worth about the same as whole grain to the feedlotter so, taking Rojo's $200/tonne sorghum, we can see that the starch portion of that tonne, making 400 litres ethanol is worth $140 making the feedstock costs of this ethanol $0.35c/litre.

In summary, the real price received for ethanol only covers the cost of the grain, delivered weighbridge at the Dalby plant.

It is little wonder that the Dalby grain ethanol plant is reported as being under administration and Tony Windsor made a deal with labor to increase even further the subsidisation of ethanol production.

Bazz, ethanol doesn't have a high EROEI, something like 1.67 to 1. biodiesel is much better at 3 to 1. Most Australian and US cars are petrol so ethanol is the biofuel in vogue. I'm not sure how the energy content of the grain, and byproducts, is taken into account.
Transportation is part of the equation whether grain heads to port or factory.

Geoff, a barrel of crude oil costs about $80. 50 cents a litre, before transport, refining, more transport, and retailing. Thats not taking into account not all of the barrel is able to be distilled into usable fuel.

I don't see why ethanol should be treated any less favorably than LPG which has no excise. let alone LPG conversion subsidy.

The eastern states are approaching a point of nil grain export, having to accept export parity prices may become the exception rather than the norm.

Its all in the chemistry, specifically the number of carbon bonds. The bigger question, is what is the objective of ethanol blending? If its just the warm fuzzy you get from using words like "sustainable" and "renewable", maybe take a quick look at the environmental problems associated with Brazil's ethanol. If it is the warm fuzzy from helping the environment, paying extra for premium will help more (more complete combustion). If it is to help our struggling sugar farmers, take a quick look at the average farm and count all the new landcruisers.
Some people reckon ethanol cleans their fuel injectors, just as many will say it attracts water and corrosion. My opinion would be to remove all subsidies and rebates, remove all the tarriffs and extra taxes, make it 10% GST like everything should be, and let both market forces of the free market economy and individual motorists make their own choice which fuel they use.