US drilling Cuban oil

Cuba has something the US needs: billions of barrels of oil offshore. And the US has something Cuba needs: technology to retrieve it. Today I’ll make the case for comparative advantages of the environment, human rights, and US foreign policy. Three key facts about the current system that I would like to establish: Fact 1. Only one oil rig in the world Cuba can use: http://www.businessweek.com... The Scarabeo-9, a 380-foot-long (115-meter), semisubmersible behemoth that leases out for prices approaching a half-million dollars a day, steamed all the way from Asia at tremendous cost to arrive in Cuba in January. That was the only way companies could avoid sanctions under Washington's 50-year-old embargo against Cuba. The Scarabeo is the only rig of its kind built with less than 10 percent American parts — an extreme rarity in an industry where U.S. technologies play a major role. Fact 2. Cuban oil exploration hampered: http://news.nationalgeographic.com... Leasing the semisubmersible platform at an estimated cost of $500,000 a day, three separate companies from three separate nations took their turns at drilling for Cuba. In May, Spanish company Repsol sank a well that turned out nonviable. Over the summer, Malaysia's Petronas took its turn, with disappointing results. Last up was state-owned Petróleos de Venezuela. It's not unusual to hit dry holes in drilling, but the approach in offshore Cuba was shaped by uniquely political circumstances. Benjamin-Alvarado points out that some of the areas drilled did turn up oil. But rather than shift nearby to find productive—if not hugely lucrative—sites, each new company dragged the rig to an entirely different area off Cuba. It's as if the companies were only going for the "big home runs" to justify the cost of drilling, he said. "The embargo had a profound impact on Cuba's efforts to find oil." Fact 3. Inadequate response to Cuban oil spills: http://thecubaneconomy.com... The United States government enacted stricter regulations governing deepwater drilling in U.S. waters in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and has publicly acknowledged a need to better prepare for a potential major spill in neighboring Cuban waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Yet U.S. policy still does not do enough to lessen the likelihood of such a spill or to ensure that sufficient resources will be at the ready to respond to a spill in a timely and effective manner. Beyond their geographical proximity, Cuba and the United States are tightly interconnected by ocean currents and share ecosystems such that a spill in either country could have profound impacts on fisheries, tourism, and recreation in the entire region. Yet, due to longstanding U.S. economic sanctions, international operators working in Cuba are unable to turn northward to the United States to freely access equipment and expertise in the event of an oil disaster. The plan, to be implemented by Congress through any necessary constitutional means: 1. US embargoes on Cuba are amended to allow any activity related to offshore petroleum or natural gas development. 2. US companies will be pre-authorized to engage with Cuba in response to any marine oil spill. 3. Funding through normal means within existing budgets 4. Plan takes effect the day after an Affirmative ballot 5. Affirmative speeches may clarify the plan as needed. Cuba wants to work with American companies http://www.ogj.com... "Cubans are serious about developing their oil resources," Benjamin-Alvarado said. "They want to work with American companies and use American equipment. That reflects the work Jorge R. Pinon [a former Amoco official who recently became a research fellow at the University of Texas at Austin's Jackson School of Geoscience's Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy] and others have done to lay the foundation." There are 3 major reasons to vote for this plan: 1) The Environment. Our technology would reduce likelihood and impact of Cuban oil spills www.brookings.edu/opinions/2008/0616_cuba_oil_huddleston.aspx If American companies with expertise in oil exploitation and protection of the environment were able to cooperate with the six oil companies that have contracts to search for Cuba's offshore resources, we would have considerably greater confidence that the latest and safest technology would reduce the environmental impact and diminish the possibility of a spill that might impact states along the Gulf of Mexico. Cuban oil spill would be catastrophic to Florida’s economy and environment http://www.time.com... A serious oil spill could scuttle those drilling operations — especially since Cuba hasn't the technology, infrastructure or means, like a clean-up fund similar to the $1 billion the U.S. keeps on reserve, to confront such an emergency. The dilemma for Cuba is that as much as they want the oil, they care as much if not more about their ocean resources," says Billy Causey, southeast regional director for the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's marine sanctuary program. Cuba's pristine beaches and reefs attract sunbathers and scuba divers the world over, and a quarter of its coastal environment is set aside as protected. So is much of coastal Florida, where tourism generates $60 billion annually — which is why the state keeps oil rigs out of its waters. The Florida Keys lie as close as 50 miles from where Repsol is drilling; and they run roughly parallel to the 350-mile-long FRT, the world's third largest barrier reef and one of its most valuable ocean eco-systems. The FRT is already under assault from global warming, ocean acidification and overfishing of symbiotic species like parrotfish that keep coral pruned of corrosive algae. If a spill were to damage the FRT, which draws $2 billion from tourism each year and supports 33,000 jobs, "it would be a catastrophic event," says David Vaughan. 2) Human rights. Allowing US oil companies to trade with Cuba increases the opportunities for human rights and democratic reform in Cuba. It allows US engagement with Cuba’s leaders to promote reforms http://books.google.fr... If U.S. companies are allowed to contribute to the development of Cuba’s hydrocarbon reserves, as well as the development of alternative and renewable energy (solar, wind, and biofuels), it will give the United States the opportunity to engage Cuba’s future leaders to carry out long-overdue economic reforms and development that will perhaps pave the way to a more open and representative society while helping to promote Cuba as a stable partner and leader in the region and beyond. Cubans get a better chance for a stable, prosperous and democratic future. http://books.google.fr... Cuban officials have invited American oil companies to participate in developing their offshore oil and natural gas reserves. American oil, oil equipment, and service companies possess the capital, technology, and operational know-how to explore, produce, and refine these resources in a safe and responsible manner. Yet they remain on the sidelines because of our almost five-decades-old unilateral political and economic embargo. The United States can end this by licensing American oil companies to participate in the development of Cuba’s energy resources. By seizing initiative on Cuba policy, the United States will strategically position to play an important role in the future of the island, thereby giving Cubans a better chance for the future. 3) Enhanced US foreign policy. Engagement with Cuba increases our capability to solve other big foreign policy problems. www.dtic.mil/cgibin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA518053 Today, 20 years have passed since the fall of the Berlin Wall – it’s time to chip away at diplomatic wall that still remains between U.S. and Cuba. As we seek a new foreign policy with Cuba it is imperative that we take into consideration that distrust will characterize negotiations with the Cuban government. On the other hand, consider that loosening or lifting the embargo could also be mutually beneficial. Cuba’s need and America’s surplus capability to provide goods and services could be profitable and eventually addictive to Cuba. Under these conditions, diplomacy has a better chance to flourish. If the Cuban model succeeds President Obama will be seen as a true leader for multilateralism. Success in Cuba could afford the international momentum and credibility to solve other seemingly “wicked problems” like the Middle East and Kashmir. President Obama could leverage this international reputation with other rogue nations like Iran and North Korea who might associate their plight with Cuba. The U.S. could begin to lead again and reverse its perceived decline in the greater global order bringing true peace for years to come.