VZCZCXRO1503
OO RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHDA RUEHDF RUEHFL RUEHIK RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHLN
RUEHLZ RUEHPOD RUEHROV RUEHSR RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHSF #0170/01 0811503
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 211503Z MAR 08
FM AMEMBASSY SOFIA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 4864
RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING PRIORITY 0517
RUEHFSI/DIR FSINFATC WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 SOFIA 000170 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FOR DEPT COORDINATOR FOR ENERGY AFFAIRS JEFFREY AND EEB 
EURASIAN ENERGY COORDINATOR MANN, EUR DAS BRYZA, FSI FOR 
LISA FOX, DOE FOR KATHY FREDRIKSEN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ENRG AFSI EPET ECON APER
SUBJECT: REINVENTING USG ENERGY TRAINING 
 
REF: A) 07 SOFIA 1364 (NOTAL) B) STATE 12018 
 
¶1.  Summary:  The growing strategic importance of energy in 
the 21st century places increased demands on our diplomats to 
become experts in areas where, in the past, a generalist's 
knowledge would suffice.  The training we offer our officers 
must therefore evolve to reflect the fact that this complex 
issue is emerging as one of our country's defining strategic 
interests.  This was the conclusion of more than 40 USG 
energy officers from 30 posts and agencies who gathered in 
Sofia December 6-7 for a conference devoted to midstream 
economics and pipeline projects (ref A).  This was also a key 
conclusion of the Regional Chiefs of Mission Conference on 
Energy held in Istanbul in September 2007.  Recent changes 
announced to FSI's energy course offerings (ref B) are an 
important start.  This cable offers recommendations, 
developed by the more than 40 energy officers at the Sofia 
Energy Conference, to further improve USG training on energy 
issues.  End Summary. 
 
Background 
 
¶2.  Just as U.S. diplomats and civil service employees 
working on arms control issues in the 1970s and 80s were 
expected to speak the language of throw-weights and boost 
phase ratios, today our energy officers need to be able to 
calculate netbacks, evaluate undiscovered reserves and 
understand the strategic context in which all the 
calculations, production sharing agreements, and 
intergovernmental protocols fit.  With the price of oil at 
record highs, increasing world demand, the necessity to 
reverse climate change, and moves by certain players to make 
energy a game based on political, rather than market, rules, 
it has never been more important for our diplomats to be 
fluent in the language of energy.  Our ability to 
successfully navigate the future depends on this fluency and 
expertise. 
 
Recommendations 
 
¶3.  Recent changes announced to FSI energy courses are a 
welcome start to reinventing USG energy training. The new, 
two-day Washington Energy Seminar should be required for all 
reporting officers assigned to any key upstream, downstream 
or midstream post.  It should be highly recommended for other 
reporting and PD officers, including those assigned to posts 
where energy is not a primary focus.  We hope the seminar 
will make broad use of the full range of energy experts 
available in the U.S. Government and Washington area think 
tanks.  We also hope that the participants will receive an 
overview of current U.S. energy and energy security policy, 
including, when possible, talks by key officials at the 
Departments of State and Energy and the NSC who make this 
policy.  For European and Eurasian energy officers, it would 
be helpful to receive a short "cheat sheet" on the major 
current and proposed pipeline projects and how those fit into 
U.S. policy goals.  An overview of how to evaluate energy 
projects, similar to the one presented at the Sofia 
conference by CSIS's Ed Chow, would also be a useful addition 
to the Washington Energy Seminar. 
 
¶4.  Real change should be made to the Houston Oil and Gas 
Industry Course.  While the Petroleum Equipment Suppliers 
Association (PESA) has been a valued sponsor of this course 
for many years, its desire to focus the agenda on equipment, 
drilling techniques, and other specialties of its membership, 
while understandable, no longer meets the changing needs of 
energy officers who have scarce time for formal training. 
Parts of the Houston course are highly relevant and should be 
retained:  the general overview of how oil and gas go from 
the ground to the pipeline to the end user; the tour of an 
oil rig; the economics of energy panel including session on 
LNG; the interaction with oil and gas industry leaders (and 
hearing what they want from the USG in terms of advocacy); 
and the seminars at the Baker Institute.   Otherwise, the 
Houston course should be reformed to focus less on extraction 
technologies and more on energy project finance and viability 
(from the calculation of netbacks to the evaluation of 
political risk); legal aspects of energy agreements 
(production sharing agreements, shareholder, host government 
and intergovernmental agreements), EU regulations affecting 
 
SOFIA 00000170  002 OF 002 
 
 
energy, and the intersection between energy and the 
environment.  One option would be to shorten the Houston 
program to three days and combine it with the two-day 
Washington Energy Seminar, giving officers one week of 
intense, relevant energy training. 
 
¶5.  Many officers suggested the complexity and importance of 
energy calls for the USG to offer an educational continuum on 
this subject.  An introduction to energy issues and policy 
could be offered as early as A-100.  More generalized courses 
could be taken throughout one's career including the current 
Washington, Houston, Alaska (which many officers deemed more 
valuable than Houston), Denver and Pittsburgh seminars.  More 
advanced and specialized courses and seminars - on Eurasian 
and Asian energy issues, the Southern Corridor, energy 
project finance, as well as on nuclear energy, biofuels, and 
other renewables, should also be developed. 
 
¶6.  The timing of course offerings is key.  Energy officers 
present at the Sofia conference suggested that the Washington 
policy course be offered several times throughout the year to 
allow more officers to attend.  Because officers often do not 
know what they need to know about energy before getting to 
post, training opportunities should be geared not only to 
those on summer transfer.  To meet this need, training 
sessions associated with annual regional energy officer 
conferences should be offered.  These conferences offer great 
"bang for the buck" and give officers an invaluable 
opportunity to exchange information and contacts.  Additional 
instructional materials available on-line would also help 
officers once they get to post.  In all training courses, 
special emphasis should be put on the role of policy, 
politics and U.S. diplomats to affect change and influence 
outcomes.  The use of case studies showing why certain energy 
projects succeeded or failed and how U.S. policy influenced 
ultimate outcomes would bring energy work to life. 
 
¶7.  The ideas listed above are just a few of the many 
suggestions current and former energy officers have on 
reinventing USG energy training.  We urge course developers 
to reach out to energy officers for suggestions on topics and 
speakers from the corporate world, academia and think tanks. 
We would also like to thank EEB and FSI for their continuing 
efforts to offer the best possible training on energy and 
energy security. 
 
 
Beyrle