Washington Post Opinions: Why the U.S. should work with Cuba on oil drilling

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-the-us-should-work-with-cuba-on-oil-drilling/2012/02/14/gIQAGLFiKR_story.html

Cuba’s first deepwater oil rig, Scarabeo 9, began drilling last month 70 miles south of Key West, Fla. Cuban officials believe the rig may tap as much as 20 billion barrels of oil. (U.S. officials estimate a quarter to half that amount.) If Cuba’s estimates bear out, this would bring the country’s oil reserves to roughly equal those of the United States. The Spanish oil company Repsol, as well as other international companies with offshore leases from Havana, will drill at depths up to 6,000 feet, as the Cuban government pursues an era of energy independence.

It is vital to the environmental and economic interests of the United States that Cuba get this right.

The Cuban government is overseeing drilling deeper than BP’s Deepwater Horizon well and almost as close to U.S. shores, but without access to most of the resources, technology, equipment and expertise essential to prevent and, if needed, to respond to spills. We are deeply familiar with the two largest oil spills in U.S. history, from the Exxon Valdez in 1989 and following the BP Deepwater Horizon explosion in 2010. In each case, containing and remediating the spill required the mobilization of vast resources from the federal government, the private sector and local communities.

The Deepwater Horizon spill, 5,000 feet below the ocean’s surface, occurred under the watch of experienced U.S. regulators, at a well drilled by one of the world’s largest, most experienced oil companies on one of the world’s most sophisticated drilling rigs. The response effort involved more than 5,000 vessels and is estimated by BP to have cost $42 billion. The International Association of Drilling Contractors estimates that Cuba has access to less than 5 percent of the resources used in combating the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

It is fortunate that a company with a good track record is the first to drill off the Cuba coast. Repsol regularly communicates with U.S. regulators, providing them access to Scarabeo 9 when it was moored in Trinidad, on its way to Cuba. But Repsol is also hampered by this country’s embargo on business with Cuba.
The blowout preventer on Scarabeo, for example, was built in the United States – it constitutes the rig’s maximum 10 percent U.S. content permitted by law. But the company that made it will not commission or maintain it, nor will it supply replacement parts because it does not have a license to operate in Cuba. One hopes that Cuban engineers are as ingenious at jury-rigging a blowout preventer as they are with their old American cars.

Cuban regulators are preparing themselves for the challenge ahead. They have sought guidance from Norwegian counterparts on the implementation of a regulatory regime known as the safety case, where risks are rigorously identified and factored into drilling protocols, and they have sent engineers to Brazil to learn about the deepwater oil industry. They also studied in detail the findings of the Deepwater Horizon commission and its companion technical report, and they have prepared action responses to each of the report’s key recommendations, as we learned on a September visit with these officials.

But these regulators are severely hampered by the embargo. They cannot engage in dialogue or share expertise with their U.S. counterparts. Their engineers can be trained by international companies but cannot attend training in the United States or be certified by any U.S. organization. The Cuban government and Repsol have stated their intention to comply with U.S. rules to the best of their abilities, even though the Cuban government can have no direct contact with our regulators to learn more about those rules.

The U.S. government can, and should, make available the resources that the organizations involved with Scarabeo need to do their job well. It should also be prepared, should something go wrong, to protect the waters and beaches of Florida and the southeast United States from a potential disaster. In the event of an emergency, the U.S. government would likely do that. But the help might well come too late.

The private sector needs considerable time to ready an effective response. Engineers need to understand the rig, well characteristics and marine environment. Companies need to prepare detailed contingency plans and to allocate appropriate equipment. The only capping stack licensed for use in Cuba in the event of a blowout on the ocean floor, for instance, is in Scotland, a week’s trip away, and has no licensed vessel or crew. Certain resources may not be available if summoned at the last minute.

The Commerce and Treasury departments have issued some licenses to spill-response providers and are reviewing others. As welcome as that is, it is not sufficient. The application process and the threat of very significant fines deter many companies from even considering the prospect. The private sector needs a clear signal from the executive branch in order to move forward.

Precedents exist for communication between the U.S. and Cuban governments on common interests. The Coast Guard kept Havana apprised of developments with the Deepwater Horizon spill, at a time when some feared the gushing oil could foul Cuban waters. Cuban and U.S. officials have shared information on drug interdiction, immigration and weather, and the United States exports grain and medical supplies to Cuba. All of this has taken place without an official change in policy since the embargo was imposed in 1962. The Obama administration has the authority – now, without a change in law or regulation – to provide a general license to all qualified U.S. companies that express an interest in helping prevent and respond to a Cuban oil spill.

This is a charged issue, one that many officials might want to avoid in an election year. Some have proposed further restricting access to U.S. technology for companies working with Cuba, in the hopes that this might prevent the Cubans from accessing their oil. It is, however, time to face reality. Providing Repsol and Cuban regulators with access to resources for spill prevention and response will not further the development of Cuba’s oil and gas industry. That’s already under way. What it will do is help protect Key West. It is profoundly in the interest of the United States that we get this right.

_________________________

By William K. Reilly and Megan Reilly Cayten, Friday, February 17, 5:33 PM
William K. Reilly was a co-chairman of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling and, under President George H.W. Bush, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Megan Reilly Cayten is an energy expert with extensive experience in Latin America and Asia.

Special thanks to Richard Charter

Pensacola News Journal Editorial: State lands drilling a bad idea

– February 16, 2012

We know that the environmental movement has had an impact on Florida politicians. Because today, when they want to do something bad for the quality of our water, the health of our forests or the integrity of wildlife habitat, they are always sure to say that they want to protect the environment.

Then they go ahead and do the bad thing.

So in the interest of protecting Florida’s natural resources, state Rep. Clay Ford, R-Gulf Breeze, is restricting his bill to open state lands to oil and gas drilling only to the Panhandle. State Sen. Greg Evers, R-Baker is sponsoring similar legislation in the Senate.

Ford is willing to put the Everglades off limits — we can be thankful for small favors — but apparently doesn’t see his home-county Blackwater River State Forest, with its creeks, rivers, wetlands and pitcher plant prairies, and its endangered plant and animal species, as environmentally sensitive.

Of course, on the upside, maybe local tourism promoters can add “oil field tour” to the hunting, fishing, swimming, canoeing, hiking, biking, bird watching and camping they tout the forest for today.

There was a time that even conservative legislators understood that areas like the Blackwater were put aside to preserve remnants of Florida’s natural landscape (which does not include the extensive industrial tree farms many Floridians mistake for natural forests).

Healthy, natural wildlands produce myriad direct benefits for Florida residents, including the many recreational activities. But preserving natural forests, wetlands, watersheds and other habitats preserves both water quality and quantity, air quality and wildlife in a growing state.

These lands were originally protected precisely to be a natural asset that belongs to all the people — including future generations.

Now, with the state rapidly cutting back on services to residents, from education to health care, and the Legislature clearly identifying its role as serving corporations (after all, the Supreme Court says corporations are people), the pace of legislation is increasingly sweeping aside anything that impedes corporate interests, while the interests of state residents get put next in line.

So naturally business lobbies and the Florida Petroleum Council support Evers’ and Fords’ legislation. And if you lose a favorite hunting area or camping spot, or a once-pristine creek is dirtied in what you thought was protected public land, well, so it goes.

Special thanks to Sierra CLub’s Frank Jackalone

House passes Drilling Friendly Energy Bill

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-17/keystone-pipeline-advances-as-house-passes-oil-drilling-bill-1-.html

Bloomberg

Keystone Pipeline Advances as House Passes Oil-Drilling Bill
By Katarzyna Klimasinska – Feb 16, 2012 4:01 PM PT Fri Feb 17 00:01:41 GMT 2012

Enlarge image
TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL pipeline is opposed by groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club, that say the crude to be carried is corrosive and air pollution will increase during production and refining. Photo: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg

The U.S. House passed legislation that would force U.S. approval of TransCanada Corp. (TRP)’s Keystone XL pipeline and open Atlantic waters to offshore drilling over objections from the Obama administration.

The bill, approved 237-187 today, would strip President Barack Obama’s authority to decide on TransCanada’s $7 billion project and give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 30 days to approve the pipeline after it’s deemed safe.

Obama rejected Keystone last month and asked the Calgary- based company to find a route that wouldn’t endanger a Nebraska aquifer.

“This legislation would create hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs for American workers,” Representative Doc Hastings, a Washington Republican and chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, said during a floor debate. “It’s time to secure our own future with American-made energy.”

The measure is part of the House Republicans’ three-bill plan to add jobs, lower energy imports and finance highways and mass-transit programs. A portion of the revenue would come from giving oil producers access to federal waters off the coasts of California, Florida and Virginia. The House plans to complete action on the measures after taking a recess next week.

The House and Senate are examining proposals for funding projects from non-transportation sources. Lawmakers plan to next consider forcing federal employees to pay more toward their pensions. The Senate began debating a separate measure last week, which doesn’t include a Keystone provision.

Wildlife Refuge

The House bill passed today would permit energy production in a part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, an area the Obama administration wants to keep off-limits. The measure also allows production from oil-shale deposits in Colorado.

“We all know these places are not going to be developed in the near-term at all,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said during a hearing at the House’s natural resources panel this week. “They will not fund the transportation needs of the United States of America.”

The bill would raise $4.28 billion by 2022, less than 10 percent of the revenue needed to pay for transportation projects, Representative Ed Markey of Massachusetts, senior Democrat on the committee, said on Feb. 15.

Democrats and environmental groups said the beaches of California and Florida are too pristine to risk being spoiled by an oil spill, while oil-shale production may taint Colorado’s drinking-water sources.

NRDC Opposition

Keystone XL is opposed by groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council and Sierra Club, that say the crude to be carried is corrosive and air pollution will increase during production and refining.

The number of people needed to operate and maintain the 1,661-mile (2,673-kilometer) pipeline may be as few as 20, according to the U.S. State Department, or as many as a few hundred, according to TransCanada.

Senate Republicans on Feb. 15 introduced legislation that would bar the Obama administration from using the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve unless Keystone XL pipeline is approved.

The bill is H.R. 3408. The other measures are H.R. 3813 and H.R. 7.

To contact the reporter on this story: Katarzyna Klimasinska in Washington at kklimasinska@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jon Morgan at jmorgan97@bloomberg.net

______________

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2012/02/16/house_passes_drilling_friendly_energy_package/

Boston.com

House passes drilling-friendly energy package
By Dina Cappiello
Associated Press / February 16, 2012

WASHINGTON-The Republican-controlled House endorsed a plan Thursday to vastly expand oil and gas drilling off the nation’s coasts to help pay for a $260 billion transportation bill.

The legislation has no chance of passing the Senate and faces a White House veto. But for Republicans, the 237-187 vote showed they’re willing to go further to boost U.S. energy production than President Barack Obama. Obama lately has embraced increased oil and gas production on the campaign trail, and has touted how the U.S. in recent years has produced record amounts of oil and natural gas.

“The bill we are considering … is an action plan that clearly contrasts President Obama’s anti-energy policies with the pro-energy, pro-American jobs policies of Republicans,” said Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee.

The legislation, which 21 Republicans voted against and 21 Democrats voted for, would open the eastern Gulf of Mexico off Florida and areas off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to drilling, lift a ban on drilling in a small portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and order leases to be offered for Western oil shale.

Obama has said he would not pursue drilling off the Pacific and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and has pushed back offering leases in the Atlantic until at least 2017.

The measure also would force the approval of the Keystone oil pipeline within a month, which Obama recently rejected, saying there wasn’t enough time for an adequate environmental review.

Democrats argued that the bill amounted to a gift for an oil industry that was headed nowhere and would pay only a fraction of the cost of the transportation bill. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the offshore drilling portions alone would bring in $4.3 billion between 2013-2022, a number Republicans say is underestimated.

It was also unclear whether the energy provisions, which were added as a sweetener to get tea partiers behind the expensive transportation bill, will help save the measure.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, put off action on the legislation until after next week’s congressional recess when it became clear even his own party wasn’t enthusiastic about it.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, echoing the sentiments of other Democrats, said this week that the additional drilling provided “phantom revenue.”

“We know that these places are not going to be developed in the near-term at all,” Salazar said at a congressional hearing Wednesday on his agency’s budget. “It will not fund the transportation needs of the United States of America.”
——
Follow Dina Cappiello’s environment coverage on Twitter: (at)dinacappiello

Special thanks to Richard Charter

KSAZ Fox 10: Bill Aims to Open Up Oil Exploration in Florida

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpps/news/bill-aims-to-open-up-oil-exploration-in-florida-dpgapx-20110215-to_17966787

Updated: Wednesday, 15 Feb 2012, 1:15 PM MST
Published : Wednesday, 15 Feb 2012, 1:15 PM MST

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) – A bill that would encourage public-private partnerships in exploring for oil and gas in Florida now has been restricted to the state’s Panhandle.
The amended bill (HB 695) cleared the House Appropriations Committee along party lines Wednesday.

Bill sponsor Clay Ford said he changed the bill after hearing concerns over possible drilling in the Everglades and other environmentally-sensitive areas. The Pensacola Republican wants to encourage revenue for the state while protecting its natural resources.
Environmental advocates oppose the bill. They have concerns over exploration in Panhandle conservation lands. The bill would not allow offshore drilling.

The measure allows oil companies to approach the state first instead of having to wait for land-leases on the open market. Business lobbies and the Florida Petroleum Council support the bill.

Special thanks to Richard Charter.

Friends of the Earth: 24 hours to convince senators to reject Keystone XL

https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/455/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=9501

February 14, 2012

24 hours to prevent senators from reviving Keystone XLUpdate: We have blown past 600,000 signatures. But we still need yours! Add your name to the petition and stand with us when we deliver our message to the Senate this afternoon.

We have 24 hours to keep the Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline dead.

The Senate could vote as early as Tuesday on a deal that would greenlight construction of the pipeline — overturning President Obama’s rejection of Keystone XL last month. Help us blow past our goal of delivering 500,000 messages demanding that senators reject the Keystone XL pipeline before the vote. The clock is ticking! Add your name to this petition to senators using the form below.

Senators: Block any efforts to revive the dangerous Keystone XL pipeline. We need a safe climate, not dirty tar sands oil.

"Be the change you want to see in the world." Mahatma Gandhi