In March 1980 David Renwick, the Trinidadian journalist, and I wrote an extended feature for the Caribbean Chronicle about the future outlook for the Caribbean as an oil producing region.
In it we observed that although nobody expected the Caribbean to ever become oil or gas rich on the scale of Venezuela, it had been known for many years that two broad strata of rock of a kind likely to bear oil, run the length of the Caribbean Basin. Up to then little interest had been shown in this fact apart from where such strata coincided with island masses; the reason being that the high cost and technical problems of recovery were far beyond the value of such relatively small quantities of crude.
The article went on to say that although there were existing sites in shallow water probably capable of exploitation, most geological structures of interest were far below the Caribbean Sea. Few nations, we observed, had continental shelves and most dropped off very rapidly to depths between 600 to 3000 feet. Somewhat presciently, we then suggested that ‘new drilling techniques and methods of platform construction now mean that it is possible to drill and – by the turn of the century – operate in depths of up to 4000 feet’. This meant, we argued, that it will be possible for Caribbean nations to begin to encourage offshore oil exploration.
Reading these words now it is clear that much of what we forecast has come to pass. The technology to drill and recover oil and gas from huge depths now exists. Oil prices have risen to levels previously thought unthinkable, making the cost of deep sea recovery viable. Demand for energy has surged and will continue to expand as the industrialisation and wealth of advanced economies continues to grow. The potential contradictions between tourism, fisheries and oil and gas recovery have been recognised and spills and environmental disasters of the kind experienced in the Gulf of Mexico have made clear the need for the legal and regulatory frameworks in all nations in or bordering the Caribbean Sea.
There have also been other issues added to the mix, making the region strategically more attractive as an energy supplier: the possibility of greater instability around the world’s major producers in the Middle East as a result of any conflict with Iran; the widening of the Panama Canal making the Caribbean a North South and East West transit a key transhipment point in the Americas; and the opportunity the regions new deep sea ports and anchorages offers for storage and transhipment.
The level of exploration now taking place in the region makes it quite possible to Imagine a Caribbean, a decade from now, that is energy rich, a net exporter of oil and gas and in some cases trying to address the problems associated with wealth that hardly anybody is thinking about.
Some may say this is far-fetched as the US and other nations are beginning to supply an ever greater amount of their energy needs from shale gas and there is the high probability that there are huge quantities of oil and gas beneath the pristine wastes of the Canadian Arctic. However, the pace at which an ever increasing number of global oil corporations have begun actively to invest huge sums in prospecting for oil and gas in the Caribbean Basin suggests that before long more than one Caribbean nation will become an oil or gas producer.
As matters stand there is oil exploration underway, planned or licensing being considered in blocks off the coasts of French Guiana; Suriname; Guyana; Belize; Barbados; the Bahamas, Cuba, Jamaica; and Grenada and it seems in other islands in the Windward chain.
If there is a significant find, and it remains an if as only last week Spain’s Repsol announced that its exploratory well of Cuba’s north coast was dry, the Caribbean will be faced with a range of issues that no regional nation other than Trinidad has faced.
Finding oil is challenging especially for small economies with small populations. It raises questions about security, stability, governance, accountability, the control of corruption and the management of rapid change. It also requires new forms of macro-economic management, a tough and independent regulatory environment and the creation of well managed sovereign wealth funds or the like to invest wisely for a nation’s future. It also challenges every politician’s relationship to their electorate in respect of the equitable distribution of such wealth through to the provision of social programmes and the management of taxation.
For this reason, if oil in substantial quantities were to be found in one or another of the countries above, they would be wise to study closely for best (or worst) practice the experience of countries or regions as diverse as Norway, Ghana, Alaska, or Nigeria.
For the Caribbean there are also important issues relating to the environment and tourism. As the Bahamas is finding, there is a need before agreeing to exploration to reconcile – ideally through an independent and respected national body - the conflicting interests of tourism, the environment and an industry which while essentially safe, will always carry with it recognised risks.
Other issues arise as well. As some Governments like Jamaica and Cuba have already realised, the appearance of an oil industry, even nearby, offers much broader economic opportunity through the huge secondary economic demand the oil sector creates for offshore services, storage and transhipment, let alone, if the size of the find is big enough, refining and downstream industries.
Oil in significant quantities would also bring significantly greater political and strategic attention to the region from the wider world, an issue that the Caribbean if wise would address on a regional basis.
The probability is that oil and gas will be found before too long off one or another Caribbean nation.
The implications require sober thought and careful analysis.
David Jessop is the Director of the Caribbean Council and can be contacted at david.jessop@caribbean-council.org
Previous columns can be found at www.caribbean-council.org
Written by: RoyStone, 3 Jun 2012 8:10 AM
From: Australia
The most attractive feature of the Dominican Republic for oil companies may be the country's lack of environmental regulation.
Written by: Mart1n, 3 Jun 2012 9:47 AM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
why spend all that energy looking for natural gas and oil. When if they would spend that money looking free energy like magnetic motors that run for 4 hundred years and don't pollute
Written by: RoyStone, 3 Jun 2012 8:34 PM
From: Australia
Good joke, Mart1n,
You were joking, weren't you?
If not, I have an excellent bridge in Sydney I can sell to you wholesale. Interested?
Written by: Mart1n, 6 Jun 2012 4:43 PM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
If they would stop killing the inverters and spend money in helping we would of had it years ago. Big oil companies will discredit any challenge and if not even kill the person who stands in their way. Don't fall for the joke that it is impossible that is what they want you to believe
Written by: RoyStone, 6 Jun 2012 9:49 PM
From: Australia
Mart1n,
"They" being the whole body of main-stream physicists who say your perpetual-motion machine is thermo-dynamically impossible? How come no one has ever made one that works, despite the availability of government and private funding?
Written by: Mart1n, 7 Jun 2012 2:01 PM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
As far as governments and others are not as powerful as the oil industry and they are scared of competition. As far as prof all you need to go to youtube and put in perpetual-motion or free energy. You can find Stan Meyers who had a car that ran on water they tried to buy him but refused so they killed him and threaten all his fellow workers. Main-stream physicists are changing there minds and the day they can put a meter on the technology you will see it.
Written by: RoyStone, 7 Jun 2012 7:44 PM
From: Australia
sorry, Mart1n, main-stream physicists are not changing there minds.
Regardless, you can buy complete, detailed plans on how to make one of these motors, on-line, and build one yourself, then prove me, the physicists and the laws of thermodynamics wrong. I'll even refund your costs. However I won't need to, because the banks and investors will be beating a parth to your door, to give you money.
Until then, you are a gullible, conspiracy-theory fool.
Written by: Mart1n, 8 Jun 2012 7:53 AM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
The information is out there if you want to look for it. Science is changing daily and more and more is being learned about physicists and the laws of thermodynamics. There are fuel cells that are in use today and there is water powered cars. What information you get in books are about 7 years old and science is changing faster than that. Knowledge is doubling every 6 months and it will increase
Written by: RoyStone, 8 Jun 2012 8:07 AM
From: Australia
Isaac Newton died in1727 and Albert Einstein in 1955. Yet there is not one single modern device that does not obey Newton's and Einstein's Laws - not one!
Have you made your perpetual-motion machine yet? When it works I'll eat my hat!
Written by: Mart1n, 8 Jun 2012 9:13 AM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
Russian proved Newton law was wrong they have also found atoms that travel faster than the speed of light. So both Newton and Einstein have been proven wrong. Please do the research and don’t call me names until you at least check it out. Have you put in perpetual-motion in you tube yet. Check out Tesla had a car that would do 90 miles per hour and it only had a electric motor and no batteries just an antenna. Hope your hat taste great
Written by: RoyStone, 8 Jun 2012 9:52 AM
From: Australia
Mart1n,
Have you ever considered stand-up comedy?
Written by: Mart1n, 8 Jun 2012 1:04 PM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
Have you ever considered checking thing out before you belittle. I know it is safe to hide under a rock and pretend nothing ever changes. I know it is easier to criticize than do research.
Written by: RoyStone, 8 Jun 2012 5:21 PM
From: Australia
Mart1n,
Reading advertisements from snake-oil salesmen and conspiracy-theorists is not scientific "research". Make your machine and generate electricity and you will prove the entire mainstream scientific community wrong, have the last laugh and the pleasure of seeing me eat my hat.
Written by: Mart1n, 8 Jun 2012 9:22 PM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
Why should I make it when it is already made. Just take a minuet and look.
Written by: RoyStone, 8 Jun 2012 9:47 PM
From: Australia
Why? Because you will solve the energy and AGW problems of the world, and become wealthy and influential beyond your wildest dreams, and if that's not enough, have the pleasure of seeing me choke on my hat.
Until then, the joke is on you.
Now about that bridge I have for sale - for you I will make it half price, okay?
Written by: Mart1n, 9 Jun 2012 7:19 AM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
You sound like the people who said the world was flat and all the sciences of the day agreed. Until one person proved they where wrong and laughed. Well l would not want you to fall the edge of your world. Have fun with your dream and please don't wake up to find the world has changed.
Written by: RoyStone, 9 Jun 2012 8:04 AM
From: Australia
"the people who said the world was flat and all the sciences of the day agreed."
Wrong again!
Almost every civilization knew the world was spherical, long before the Dark Ages. The Egyptians measured the diameter to within 2%. Only the Catholic Church insisted the world was flat, to fit in with their Biblical Creation myth. Geographers, cartographers and astronomers knew it was spherical, but didn't make too much noise about it to avoid being brought before the Inquisition (as Galileo was). Europeans thought Columbus was foolhardy, not because he would fall off the edge of the world, but because they calculated it would take about 2 months to sail due west to Asia, and no one have been able to sail for more than a month before, without re-stocking for fresh supplies.
Scientists have open minds, but yours is so open, your brain has fallen out.
Written by: Mart1n, 9 Jun 2012 2:35 PM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
You seem to find it easier to insult a person than to check things out do feel sorry for you
Written by: RoyStone, 10 Jun 2012 12:59 AM
From: Australia
Don't waste your pity on me, Mart1n
I thought it would be obvious I have done far more "checking out" than you. Perhaps you are confusing "checking out" with "feeding deluded fantasy"?
Let me know when you see Elvis making a call on his iPhone.
Written by: Mart1n, 10 Jun 2012 8:03 AM
From: Dominican Republic, North coast
The John Bedini motor has now been running for 20 years with no power input How do you and the scientific experts explain or do you just criticize
Written by: RoyStone, 10 Jun 2012 12:37 PM
From: Australia
Very simple explanation, John Bedini is a total fraud.
"John Bedini claimed development of several free energy devices. Bedini has refused to allow independent investigation."
Now I will up the bet. I will not only eat my hat, but any other hat you may care to produce.
You were joking, weren't you?
If not, I have an excellent bridge in Sydney I can sell to you wholesale. Interested?
"They" being the whole body of main-stream physicists who say your perpetual-motion machine is thermo-dynamically impossible? How come no one has ever made one that works, despite the availability of government and private funding?
Regardless, you can buy complete, detailed plans on how to make one of these motors, on-line, and build one yourself, then prove me, the physicists and the laws of thermodynamics wrong. I'll even refund your costs. However I won't need to, because the banks and investors will be beating a parth to your door, to give you money.
Until then, you are a gullible, conspiracy-theory fool.
Have you made your perpetual-motion machine yet? When it works I'll eat my hat!
Have you ever considered stand-up comedy?
Reading advertisements from snake-oil salesmen and conspiracy-theorists is not scientific "research". Make your machine and generate electricity and you will prove the entire mainstream scientific community wrong, have the last laugh and the pleasure of seeing me eat my hat.
Until then, the joke is on you.
Now about that bridge I have for sale - for you I will make it half price, okay?
Wrong again!
Almost every civilization knew the world was spherical, long before the Dark Ages. The Egyptians measured the diameter to within 2%. Only the Catholic Church insisted the world was flat, to fit in with their Biblical Creation myth. Geographers, cartographers and astronomers knew it was spherical, but didn't make too much noise about it to avoid being brought before the Inquisition (as Galileo was). Europeans thought Columbus was foolhardy, not because he would fall off the edge of the world, but because they calculated it would take about 2 months to sail due west to Asia, and no one have been able to sail for more than a month before, without re-stocking for fresh supplies.
Scientists have open minds, but yours is so open, your brain has fallen out.
I thought it would be obvious I have done far more "checking out" than you. Perhaps you are confusing "checking out" with "feeding deluded fantasy"?
Let me know when you see Elvis making a call on his iPhone.
"John Bedini claimed development of several free energy devices. Bedini has refused to allow independent investigation."
Now I will up the bet. I will not only eat my hat, but any other hat you may care to produce.