Study Shows Absence Of Oil Dispersion Modeling Corroborates Ibama’s Denial Of Petrobras
The refusal of Ibama (Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources) to Petrobras’ request for exploration at the mouth of the Amazon River generated a lot of repercussions: members of the government itself disagreed on the matter. “This refusal by Ibama comes from a very tortuous process of attempts and from the agency itself asking companies to increase the region’s database. So, we need basic information to be able to assess the impact of such an undertaking, such as: what are the species that occur there? What are ecosystems? What would be the coverage area of this undertaking with a very well done oil dispersion modeling? But the studies that were presented have very serious gaps on all these fronts”, says Professor Ronaldo Francini Filho, from the Center for Marine Biology (Cebimar) at USP.
The region, as the professor puts it, is difficult to explore, given the biological risks that would be presented with the assembly of oil and gas wells: “It has some characteristics that make exploration particularly challenging and the operation imposes various risks from a logistical, environmental, biological and also social point of view”.
Problems
“For example, the block in question is 500 km from the mouth of the Amazon, but it is less than 40 km from the Great Reef System, which was only recently characterized in more detail”, explains Francini. Knowledge about the area, a region that includes a reef with some species that have disappeared from other parts of the world, is still low, says the professor. Therefore, there should be much more care with management and exploration permits: “I followed other exploration requests and, what we have now, Petrobras basically ‘recycled’ a request from a previous request. I really expected Petrobras to take greater care with regard to some very primary points”.
The study of environmental impacts must be independent and not linked to companies, analyzes the expert. “In addition to the issue of the region’s environmental fragility, we have the largest mangroves on the planet on the coast. We also have dozens of extractive reserves that are conservation units and the traditional population depends on the resources there. There is a whole connectivity, interdependence, between these environments”, he adds.
One of the obstacles cited by the professor is the lack of clarity in oil dispersion modeling: “This modeling cannot reliably show us where the oil will end up. We have to remember that there are hundreds of blocks in the region, this is just the first one that could potentially be exploited. If we don’t know where the oil will end up, it’s very difficult to carry out an adequate environmental assessment. This is a crucial point”.
Another point is that, even if the installation were done, the risk of possible leaks still exists. “It has a whole complexity that is not being taken into account by the environmental impact study and that, in the event of a leak, would overcomplicate any type of mitigation strategy. Petrobras itself uses dispersants, which are substances thrown on the surface of the sea and that make the oil sink to the bottom, however, they proved to be extremely toxic. Today there is even a debate as to whether the oil is less toxic than the dispersant itself,” emphasizes Francini.
Possibilities
“We need to rethink, as a society, that nobody is against oil exploration and oil use, but we need to have a licensing process with decisions based on concrete and reliable data. We know the environmental sensitivity, but some believe that exploration is important because, from an economic point of view, it is worth losing that ecosystem for it. However, the real risks were not presented to society”, points out the specialist. The lack of detailed studies and even complete modeling are fundamental points for Ibama’s refusal.
Francini adds: “I think that these data were not collected in detail because, probably, they will demonstrate the unfeasibility of the undertaking. Companies avoid collecting more detailed data about the region in order to make it possible to explore oil there through these blocks. I believe that, for the mouth of the Amazon, the risks are too great for us to advance in exploration”.