Chevron is still pursuing its desperate fight to stonewall the process of justice in Ecuador, but in Brazil the company has found that escaping a similar pollution scandal is not so easy.
On March 21, Brazilian officials are expected to file criminal charges against Chevron, alleging that the company acted irresponsibly before and after the November leak of 3,000 barrels of oil at Chevron’s $3.6 billion Frade field off the coast of Rio de Janeiro.
Fabio Scliar, head of the environment unit of Brazil's federal police department, told Brazilian media this week that the deep water well "could not and should not have been drilled under the conditions presented in the area," adding that an "absurd" amount of pressure was used at the site situated off the coast of Rio de Janeiro state. "All indications are that a desire for profits led (Chevron) to take the prohibitive risk" of drilling at the site, Scliar concluded.
On March 16, a Brazilian judge barred Chevron's Brazil Chief, George Buck, and 16 other executives from leaving the country until an investigation of the company's offshore oil spills has been completed.
Chevron's longtime strategy in Ecuador—deny everything, bluster angrily and counter-attack with hundreds of lawyers—just doesn't work in Brazil.
The government's oil regulatory agency has ordered Chevron to stop drilling any new holes, although it allowed production to continue at existing wells. Federal prosecutors asked a federal court to levy an $11 billion fine on Chevron and to shut down the company's operations altogether.
On Feb. 29, a judge declined to issue a preliminary injunction shutting down the company—a move that no doubt raised Chevron executives' hopes that the company would soon be scot-free.
But lo and behold, on Friday, March 16, government officials announced that they had detected another leak coming from Chevron's wells in Frade. A kilometer-long slick was seen spreading over the ocean surface, and Chevron said frantically that it would try to capture the oil in containment devices.
This time, the Brazilian judiciary seemed to realize that the kid gloves needed to come off. Federal Judge Vlamir Costa Magalhães quickly barred the Chevron executives from leaving the country. "There is no doubt the exit of these people from the country, at this moment, would generate considerable risk to the investigation," he said.
For Chevron, the stakes are high. Brazil's offshore oil reserves are considered one of the world's untapped frontiers for oil development, potentially holding as much as 100 billion barrels of crude. The so-called pre-salt fields lie two miles below the ocean surface and another two to four miles beneath the seabed. Chevron has a 52 percent operating stake in the Frade field and has spent around $2 billion so far on its development. Brazil is seen as a big part of Chevron's announced strategy of raising its global oil output by 20 percent over the next five years.
For Brazil, these geological difficulties mean that oil companies need to show know-how and sensitivity, not a callous, "drill, baby drill" attitude. But in an industry full of bad actors, Chevron has proven itself to be beyond the pale, due its record of environmental negligence and rights violations in Ecuador and around the world.
Brazil is slowly realizing what it signed up for. Caveat emptor.
For more information, click here.
By Robin Scher
Beyond the questions surrounding the availability, effectiveness and safety of a vaccine, the COVID-19 pandemic has led us to question where our food is coming from and whether we will have enough.
- Can Urban Farms Prevent Hunger in 54 Million People in the U.S. ... ›
- New Report Finds Malnutrition World's Top Killer Amid Pandemic ... ›
- Oxfam Warns 12,000 Could Die Per Day From Hunger Due to ... ›
- Three Ways to Support a Healthy Food System During the COVID ... ›
- Trump USDA Resumes Effort to Cut Food Stamp Benefits - EcoWatch ›
- Pandemic Threatens Food Security for Many College Students ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Tearing through the crowded streets of Philadelphia, an electric car and a gas-powered car sought to win a heated race. One that mimicked how cars are actually used. The cars had to stop at stoplights, wait for pedestrians to cross the street, and swerve in and out of the hundreds of horse-drawn buggies. That's right, horse-drawn buggies. Because this race took place in 1908. It wanted to settle once and for all which car was the superior urban vehicle. Although the gas-powered car was more powerful, the electric car was more versatile. As the cars passed over the finish line, the defeat was stunning. The 1908 Studebaker electric car won by 10 minutes. If in 1908, the electric car was clearly the better form of transportation, why don't we drive them now? Today, I'm going to answer that question by diving into the history of electric cars and what I discovered may surprise you.
As bitcoin's fortunes and prominence rise, so do concerns about its environmental impact.
- 15 Top Conservation Issues of 2021 Include Big Threats, Potential ... ›
- How Blockchain Could Boost Clean Energy - EcoWatch ›
By David Drake and Jeffrey York
The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.
The Big Idea
People often point to plunging natural gas prices as the reason U.S. coal-fired power plants have been shutting down at a faster pace in recent years. However, new research shows two other forces had a much larger effect: federal regulation and a well-funded activist campaign that launched in 2011 with the goal of ending coal power.
- Major Milestone: More than 100,000 MW Worth of Coal-Fired Power ... ›
- Coal Will Not Bring Appalachia Back to Life, But Tech and ... ›
- Renewables Beat Coal in the U.S. for the First Time This April ... ›