Now that the seemingly immortal Fidel Castro has finally stepped aside in Cuba, a whole new set of questions arises. At some point, the U.S. trade embargo my finally be lifted after more than four decades, opening the possibility of trade with the island nation. In the years B.C. (before Castro) Cuba was the world's sugar producer but the intervening years have not been kind to the industry. Cane production is one tenth of what it once was. The development of a whole new market beyond crystallized sucrose and Bacardi may well play a part in revitalizing the Cuban economy in future years. Land use studies of the island have concluded that Cuba could produce 2-3 billion gallons of cane ethanol annually. The relatively small local demand means that most of the biofuel could be exported, earning the country a lot of hard currency. It's only a small fraction of what the U.S. needs, but it's a start. If cellulosic processes that could utilize more of the biomass are developed, the export amount could potentially be a lot more. We'll just have to wait and see.

[Source: Wall Street Journal]

So, it turns out that the debate on whether ethanol is a good or bad alternative fuel stretches not just across our readership, the the whole world. That is the argument being made by Cuban President Fidel Castro. Castro writes in an article published in Cuban state media on Thursday that the use of food crops for fuel use is robbing many developing countries of nourishment. Instead of using corn, sugar cane or any other food crop for fuel use, Castro would rather see the U.S. and the rest of the world reduce their use of energy in general, for instance, he suggests stopping the use of incandescent light bulbs in favor of fluorescent.

Castro does not like the U.S. using its own corn or foodstocks for ethanol, but he also does not like the U.S. paying other countries for theirs either. He would rather see the corn or sugarcane that the U.S. or Brazil may use for fuel used for food for smaller developing countries. Comments, questions or snide remarks are, as always, welcome.

[Source: Monsters and Critics]

After closing 70 of the island's 156 sugar mills as part of a restructuring plan in 2002, Cuba recently changed course and plans to triple sugar production to 3 million tons in order to produce alcohol from sugar cane. The plan means a huge increase over the 1.2 million tons of sugar to be harvested this year, and is brought on by the surge in sugar and ethanol prices, and expectations of further increases. Half of the land that was occupied by sugar cane before the 2002 restructuring has since been changed to other crops and ranching, a move which will have to be reversed to implement the ambitious plan.

[Source: MercoPress]

While the U.S. has a ban on drilling in the Florida straits, Cuba has no such restrictions and is cashing in on the oil and natural gas reserves there. Cuba's drilling plans have been known for years, and it has now found some willing partners in China, India and others. Obviously, a growing number of U.S. lawmakers and business leaders are complaining about the drilling ban and giving two economic competitors access to energy at the United States' expense. While the article does not report how much oil reserves are available on the U.S. side of the Florida straits, the reserves available are equivalent to just a few months of the United States' total energy consumption. As is to be expected, a number of bills are currently proposing to open driling in coastal waters. While we do want to promote alternative fuels and conservation above anything else, additional drilling might relieves some price pressure on crude oil, and ease some of the tension created by China trying to acquire all available energy resources.

[Source: The New York Times]