Approval by Brazilian Institute of Environment (Ibama) of the Petrobras to animal rescue (PPAF) Na Foz do Amazonas left a crack in the organ. According to the calculation of CNNtechnicians do not hide frustration with the high -level decision to disallow your opinion.
The crack is in the following chronology: In February, technicians recommend rejecting the license to the oil company and the opinion is subjected to the high level; The area coordinator, Ivan Werneck, moves away from the organ and exempts; And three months later, the general coordinator, Itagyba Neto, refutes the guidance and earns the president, Rodrigo Agostinho.
The main change in the Petrobras plan in relation to that rejected in 2023 was the construction of a fauna rescue base in Oiapoque, Amapá. It turns out that it is necessary to ensure that the animal transport to a rehabilitation base occurs within 24 hours (if there is structure to “stabilize it” in the way).
Earlier, the closest installation to the drilling site was in Belém, capital of Pará, at a distance traveled between 22 hours and 31 hours. The Oiapoque Center can be reached between 10 hours and 12 hours. In addition, Petrobras ensured ability to stabilize the animal on its vessels on the way.
In 22 pages of opinion, Ibama criticizes especially the “border” character of the Petrobras rescue plan. That is, it points out that the company meets minimum conditions regulated, but would be able to ensure the safety of fauna only in “optimal conditions”, with no margin for unforeseen events.
According to reports to CNNone of the technicians’ arguments is that the silent (part of the hull that is submerged) of the ships that will work in the region of exploration are too large to enter the Oiapoque bay. Thus it would be necessary to overflow by transferring the animal to a smaller vessel.
The concern of the technicians increases with the fact that Petrobras does not overflow at night or if the current and climate conditions are unfavorable.
These employees believe this can delay the operation and burst the expected time – as well as the complexity for animal capture, for example.
The agency’s general coordinator contradicted these arguments in his opinion. He indicated that adverse weather conditions and night period may impact the guidelines of the rescue plan, but said that “this fact has not been a cause for licensing by Ibama, except when spilled oil can impact the coastal sensitive ecosystems.”
“In exceptional cases, where such conditions lead to an overcoming of the established time, something that in fact deserves the alert of the technical team, it is a matter of safeguarding human life, in which rescue fauna should take place, without justifying the non-approval of the plan,” he wrote.
At the conclusion of his eight evaluation pages, Itagyba Neto acknowledges that the conditions are challenging at the mouth of the Amazon, but states that the purpose of the practical test is exactly proving Petrobras’ ability to execute PPAF.
Thus, it approves the plan and authorizes pre-operational evaluation (APO), next step of exploration.
