Approval Of Petrobras Plan For Oiled Wildlife Generates Crisis At IBAMA, With Criticism From Employees And Accusation Of Political Interference In Technical Decision
The approval of the new Oil Wildlife Protection And Care Plan (PPAF), presented by Petrobras, caused an immediate reaction within the Brazilian Institute Of Environment (IBAMA).
The decision of the agency’s president, Rodrigo Agostinho, opposed the technical opinion and paved the way for drilling a well at the mouth of the Amazon River.
The measure was harshly criticized by the National Association Of Environmental Specialists (ASCEMA).
-
Oil surges again after attacks and standoff between the US and Iran increase global tension
-
HIDDEN TREASURE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA? Oil discovery nearly 20,000 feet deep challenges engineering limits off the coast of Brazil
-
90 billion barrels of oil, 1.669 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 84% of probable reserves in offshore areas are under the Arctic, and the melting ice that opens maritime routes and exposes this energy treasure is turning the North Pole into a strategic dispute between the USA, Russia, China, and Canada for oil, gas, navigation, and military power.
-
IBS and CBS regulations change credit reimbursement and raise financial alert in the oil and gas industry
The entity released a public protest statement, classifying the act as a break with the technical opinions of the agency itself. For the employees, it represents a “serious institutional setback.”
According to ASCEMA, the technical team at IBAMA had already positioned itself against the release of exploration in block FZA-M-59. In October of last year, the analysts recommended the definitive dismissal of the environmental licensing process.
Even so, the new opinion was ignored by Agostinho, generating outrage among professionals in the field.
In the dispatch that approved Petrobras’s plan, Agostinho stated that there were no “greater questions” regarding the resources for the rescue of the affected wildlife.
However, the technical opinion from February presented more compelling criticisms. The document stated that, instead of correcting flaws, Petrobras preferred to highlight the alleged excellence of the project.
ASCEMA also stated that Agostinho tried to give a “technical veneer” to his decision, attempting to disguise a political motivation.
According to the association, this pressure has been exerted by government members favorable to the expansion of oil exploration, such as the Minister of Mines and Energy, Alexandre Silveira, and the president of Petrobras, Magda Chambriard.
The group also has the support of the President of the Senate, Davi Alcolumbre (União Brasil/AP), and President Lula himself. For the employees, decisions of this type undermine the credibility of IBAMA and put environmental protection in the country at risk.
“Similar expedients have been used in the past for issuing controversial environmental licenses, which turned out to be catastrophic when the ventures were implemented. The substitution of technical knowledge for political or administrative decisions undermines the institutional credibility of IBAMA and represents a serious setback in the country’s environmental protection,” highlighted ASCEMA.
With information from Environmental Racism.

Be the first to react!