drilling

SACRAMENTO — Some witty person long ago gave us this immortal line: “No man’s life, liberty or property are safe while the legislature is in session.”

Humorist Will Rogers usually is credited — wrongly. Mark Twain, too, falsely.

The real author was Gideon J. Tucker, a former newspaper editor who founded the New York Daily News. He later became a state legislator and judge, and he crafted the comment in an 1866 court opinion.

Anyway, Californians are safe from further legislative harm for now. State lawmakers have gone home for the year after passing 917 bills. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed 794 (87%) and vetoed 123 (13%).

I’m not aware of any person’s life being jeopardized. Well, maybe after the lawmakers and governor cut back Medi-Cal healthcare for undocumented immigrants to save money.

One could argue — and many interests did — that what the Legislature did to increase housing availability made some existing residential neighborhoods less safe from congestion and possible declining property values.

But kudos to the lawmakers and governor for enacting major housing legislation that should have been passed years ago.

Public pressure generated by unaffordable costs — both for homebuyers and renters — spurred the politicians into significant action to remove regulatory barriers and encourage much more development. The goal is to close the gap between short supply and high demand.

But legislative passage was achieved over stiff opposition from some cities — especially Los Angeles — that objected to loss of local control.

“It’s a touchy issue that affects zoning and is always going to be controversial,” says state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), who finessed through a bill that will allow construction of residential high-rises up to nine stories near transit hubs such as light-rail and bus stations. The measure overrides local zoning ordinances.

Wiener had been trying unsuccessfully for eight years to get similar legislation passed. Finally, a fire was lit under legislators by their constituents.

“The public understands we’ve screwed ourselves by making it so hard to build homes,” Wiener says.

But to win support, he had to accept tons of exceptions. For example, the bill will affect only counties with at least 15 passenger rail stations. There are eight: Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Alameda and Sacramento.

“Over time it will have a big effect, but it’s going to be gradual,” Wiener says.

Dan Dunmoyer, who heads the California Building Industry Assn., calls it “a positive step in the right direction.”

Yes, and that direction is up rather than sideways. California could accommodate a cherished ranch-house lifestyle when the population was only a third or half the nearly 40 million people it is today. But sprawling horizontally has become impossibly pricey for too many and also resulted in long smog-spewing commutes and risky encroachment into wildfire country.

Dozens of housing bills were passed and signed this year, ranging from minutia to major.

The Legislature continued to peck away at the much-abused California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Opponents of projects have used the act to block construction for reasons other than environmental protection. Local NIMBYs — ”Not in my backyard” — have resisted neighborhood growth. Businesses have tried to avoid competition. Unions have practiced “greenmail” by threatening lawsuits unless developers signed labor agreements.

Another Wiener bill narrowed CEQA requirements for commercial housing construction. It also exempted from CEQA a bunch of nonresidental projects, including health clinics, manufacturing facilities and child-care centers.

A bill by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) exempted most urban infill housing projects from CEQA.

You can’t argue that the Legislature wasn’t productive this year. But you can spar over whether some of the production was a mistake. Some bills were both good and bad. That’s the nature of compromise in a functioning democracy.

One example: The state’s complex cap-and-trade program was extended beyond 2030 to 2045. That’s probably a good thing. It’s funded by businesses buying permits to emit greenhouse gases and pays for lots of clean energy projects.

But a questionable major piece of that legislation — demanded by Newsom — was a 20-year, $1-billion annual commitment of cap-and-trade money for California’s disappointing bullet train project.

The project was sold to voters in 2008 as a high-speed rail line connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco. It’s $100 billion over budget and far behind its promised 2020 completion. No tracks have even been laid. The new infusion of cap-and-trade money will merely pay for the initial 171-mile section between Merced and Bakersfield, which the state vows to open by 2033. Hot darn!

Newsom muscled through the bill at the last moment. The Legislature should have taken more time to study the project’s future.

One gutsy thing Democratic legislators and the governor did — given that “oil,” among the left, has become the new hated pejorative sidekick of “tobacco” — was to permit production of 2,000 more wells annually in oil-rich Kern County.

It was part of a compromise: Drilling in federal offshore waters was made more difficult by tightening pipeline regulations.

Credit the persistent Sen. Shannon Grove, a conservative Republican from Bakersfield who is adept at working across the aisle.

“Kern County knows how to produce energy,” she told colleagues during the Senate floor debate, citing not only oil but wind, solar and battery storage. “We are the experts. We are not the enemy.”

But what mostly motivated Newsom and legislators was the threat of even higher gas prices as two large California oil refineries prepare to shut down. Most Democrats agreed that the politically smart move was to allow more oil production, even as the state attempts to transcend entirely to clean energy.

Let’s not forget the most important bill the Legislature annually passes: the state budget. This year’s totaled $325 billion and allegedly covered a $15-billion deficit through borrowing, a few cuts and numerous gimmicks.

Nonpartisan Legislative Analyst Gabriel Petek last week projected deficit spending of up to $25 billion annually for the next three years.

In California, no state bank account is safe when the Legislature is in session.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Sen. Scott Wiener to run for congressional seat held by Rep. Nancy Pelosi
California vs. Trump: Federal troops in San Francisco? Locals, leaders scoff at Trump’s plan
The L.A. Times Special: One of O.C.’s loudest pro-immigrant politicians is one of the unlikeliest

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

SACRAMENTO — In a bid to stabilize struggling crude-oil refineries, state lawmakers on Saturday passed a last-minute bill that would allow the construction of 2,000 new oil wells annually in the San Joaquin Valley while further restricting drilling along California’s iconic coastline.

The measure, Senate Bill 237, was part of a deal on climate and environmental issues brokered behind closed doors by Gov. Gavin Newsom, state Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg) and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister). The agreement aims to address growing concerns about affordability, primarily the price of gas, and the planned closure of two of the state’s 13 refineries.

California has enough refining capacity to meet demand right now, industry experts say, but the closures could reduce the state’s refining capacity by about 20% and lead to more volatile gas prices.

Democrats on Saturday framed the vote as a bitter but necessary pill to stabilize the energy market in the short term, even as the state pushes forward with the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy.

McGuire called the bills the “most impactful affordability, climate and energy packages in our state’s history.”

“We continue to chart the future, and these bills will put more money in the pockets of hard-working Californians and keep our air clean, all while powering our transition to a more sustainable economy,” McGuire said.

The planned April 2026 closure of Valero’s refinery in Benicia will lead to a loss of $1.6 billion in wages and drag down local government budgets, said Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson (D-Suisun City), who represents the area and co-authored SB 237.

Wilson acknowledged that the bill won’t help the Benicia refinery, but said that “directly increasing domestic production of crude oil and lowering our reliance on imports will help stabilize the market — it will help create and save jobs.”

Crude oil production in California is declining at an annualized rate of about 15%, about 50% faster than the state’s most aggressive forecast for a decline in demand for gasoline, analysts said this week.

The bill that lawmakers approved Saturday would grant statutory approval for up to 2,000 new wells per year in Kern County, the heart of California oil country.

That legislative fix, effective through 2036, would in effect circumvent a decade of legal challenges by environmental groups seeking to stymie drilling in the county that produces about three-fourths of the state’s crude oil.

“Kern County knows how to produce energy,” said state Sen. Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield). “We produce 80% of California’s oil, if allowed, 70% of the state’s wind and solar, and over 80% of the in-state battery storage capacity. We are the experts. We are not the enemy. We can help secure energy affordability for all Californians while enjoying the benefits of increased jobs and economic prosperity.”

Environmentalists have fumed over that trade-off and over a provision that would allow the governor to suspend the state’s summer-blend gasoline fuel standards, which reduce auto emissions but drive up costs at the pump, if prices spike for more than 30 days or if it seems likely that they will.

Some progressive Democrats voted against the bill, including Assemblymember Alex Lee (D-San José), the chair of the Legislative Progressive Caucus. The bill, Lee said, was a “regulatory giveaway to Big Oil” that would do little to stabilize gas prices or refineries, which are struggling because demand for oil is falling.

“We need to continue to focus on the future, not the past,” Lee said.

The bill also would make offshore drilling more difficult by tightening the safety and regulatory requirements for pipelines.

Lawmakers also voted to extend cap-and-trade, an ambitious climate program that sets limits on greenhouse gas emissions and allows large polluters to buy and sell unused emission allowances at quarterly auctions. Lawmakers signed off on a 15-year extension of the program, which has been renamed “cap and invest,” through 2045.

The program is seen as crucial for California to comply with its climate goals — including reaching carbon neutrality by 2045 — and also brings in billions in revenue that helps fund climate efforts, including high-speed rail and safe drinking water programs.

Also included in the package was AB 825, which creates a pathway for California to participate in a regional electricity market. If passed, the bill would expand the state’s ability to buy and sell clean power with other Western states in a move that supporters say will improve grid reliability and save money for ratepayers.

Opponents fear that California could yield control of its power grid to out-of-state authorities, including the federal government.

SACRAMENTO — Amid concerns that refinery closures could send gas prices soaring, California legislative leaders Wednesday introduced a last-minute deal aimed at increasing oil production to shore up the struggling fossil-fuel industry while further restricting offshore drilling.

The compromise, brokered by Gov. Gavin Newsom, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and Senate Pro Tem Mike McGuire, would streamline environmental approvals for new wells in oil-rich Kern County and increase oil production. The bill also would make offshore drilling more difficult by tightening the safety and regulatory requirements for pipelines.

With support from Rivas and McGuire, Senate Bill 237 is expected to pass as part of a flurry of last-minute activity during the Legislature’s final week. Newsom’s office said the governor “looks forward to signing it when it reaches his desk.”

The late introduction of the measure may force the Legislature to extend its 2025 session, set to end Friday, by another day because bills must be in print for 72 hours before they can be voted on.

The bill was introduced Wednesday as part of a package of energy policies that aims to address growing concerns about affordability and the closure of California oil refineries.

Valero and Phillips 66 plan to close plants in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles County’s South Bay, which would reduce California’s in-state oil refining capacity by an estimated 20%. Industry experts warn that losing refining capacity could lead to more volatile gas prices.

The closures have become a sore spot for Newsom and for state Democrats, pitting their longtime clean-energy goals against concerns about the rising cost of living — a major political liability.

The package tries to strike a balance between the oil industry and climate activists, but neither side seemed particularly pleased: Environmental groups panned the agreements, and industry groups said they were still reviewing the bill.

“I don’t think what’s in that legislation is going to keep refineries open,” said Michael Wara, the director of Stanford University’s Climate and Energy Policy Program.

Crude oil produced in California makes up a fraction of what refineries turn into gasoline, he said, so although increasing production may help stabilize the decline of local oil companies, it won’t benefit the refineries.

The bill would grant statutory approval for up to 2,000 new wells per year in the oil fields of Kern County, the heart of California oil country, which produce about three-fourths of the state’s crude oil. That legislative fix, effective through 2036, would in effect circumvent years of legal challenges by environmental groups seeking to stymie drilling.

The state, which has championed and pioneered progressive environmental policies to slash carbon emissions, also is home to a billion-dollar oil industry that helps power its economy and has significant political sway in Sacramento. Despite steady declines in production, California remains the eighth-largest crude oil producing state in the nation, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Hollin Kretzmann, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, said the legislation “acknowledges the harms of oil drilling yet takes radical steps to boost it.”

“Removing environmental safeguards won’t reverse the terminal decline of California oil production but it will allow the industry to do more damage on its way out the door,” Kretzmann said, adding that it will have “no impact on refinery closures or gas prices.”

Ted Cordova, a vice president of E&B Natural Resources, an oil and natural gas company with operations in Kern County, told reporters earlier this week that California needs to reverse falling oil production to keep refineries operating. He said his firm gets emails from pipeline companies saying they are operating “at dangerously low levels, can you send us more?”

The bill also has the potential to create new hurdles for Sable Offshore Corp., the Texas oil firm that is moving toward restarting offshore drilling along Santa Barbara County’s coast, depending on when the company navigates through a litany of ongoing litigation and necessary state approvals.

The company has moved forward on repairs to the network of oil pipelines that burst in 2015 in one of the state’s worst oil spills, despite opposition from the California Coastal Commission.

The bill, which would take effect in January, reasserts the authority of the commission to oversee pipeline repair projects and requires the “best available technology” for any pipe transporting petroleum from offshore. That could add lengthy governmental reviews for Sable if the operation isn’t running by January.

The company, despite reports that it’s running low on capital and has suffered repeated setbacks, continues to say it hopes to begin sales as soon as possible.

Representatives from Sable did not respond to questions Wednesday.

Mary Nichols, an attorney at UCLA Law’s Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, said the bill probably wouldn’t affect the ongoing project off Santa Barbara County’s coast — which remains tied up in litigation — but makes clear that there’s no easy path for any other company looking to take advantage of offshore oil in federal waters under the oil-friendly Trump administration.

“This was designed to send a message to anybody else who might be thinking about doing the same thing,” said Nichols, a former chair of the California Air Resources Board.

Lawmakers also introduced a tentative deal on cap-and-trade, an ambitious climate program that has raised roughly $31 billion since its inception 11 years ago. The revised language would extend the program from its current 2030 deadline until 2045.

The program, last renewed in 2017, requires major polluters such as power plants and oil refineries to purchase credits for each ton of carbon dioxide they emit, and allows those companies buy or sell their unused credits at quarterly auctions.

Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson (D-Suisun City), one of the authors of SB 237, said she was glad to make progress on the push and pull between the state’s fuel needs and its commitment to green energy. She said she understands there are environmental concerns, but “at the end of the day, our purpose was an issue of petroleum supply.”

“We all don’t want an import model,” she said.

Times staff writers Melody Gutierrez and Hayley Smith contributed to this report.

Los Angeles County Museum of Art’s new Peter Zumthor-designed David Geffen Galleries are alive with sound and activity. Voices echo through the vast, concrete space and a cacophony of drills and electric lifts beep, buzz and blare. A unique colored glaze is being applied to gallery walls, and paintings and photos are being installed throughout.

That gritty whir? It’s the Hilti TE 4-22 cordless rotary hammer drill. “A very fine product,” says senior art preparator Michael Price with a sly smile. He’s been drilling holes in the concrete walls with the large red contraption, which comes with a small attached vacuum that sucks up concrete dust as it penetrates the wall. The work is simple and done in a matter of seconds.

Senior art preparator Michael Price drills into concrete walls to hang art in LACMA’s new David Geffen Galleries. He jokingly calls the Hilti TE 4-22 cordless rotary hammer drill “a very fine product.”

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Some of the first holes were drilled a little more than a week ago for the installation of a photo sculpture LACMA commissioned for its entrance by Los Angeles-born artist Todd Gray, titled “Octavia Butler’s Gaze.” Last Wednesday, Gray, along with LACMA director and Chief Executive Michael Govan and curator Britt Salvesen, watched the final panel of the 27-foot-long assemblage being hoisted onto the wall and put in place using wooden cleats that fit together much like a jigsaw puzzle.

“This is another thing that concrete makes possible,” says Salvesen, the head of the photography, and prints and drawings, departments, noting with satisfaction how flush the photographs sit against the wall. “The traditional sheetrock drywall used in many museums have been painted and repainted so many times, they’re not exactly pristine when it comes to leveling.”

Gray steps back and looks at the finished product, nodding with quiet pride. The L.A. native attended Hamilton High School and CalArts and felt deeply honored to have been tapped for a permanent commission. He was therefore among the first people to take a hard-hat tour of the building when it was under construction so he could familiarize himself with the space. The new building opens in April 2026.

“I was kind of overwhelmed,” Gray says. “I had never been in an architectural space like this so I was just really curious. But I must admit, I was much more concerned about this wall.”

The wall is big — a blank, concrete slate — and Gray’s piece will be the first work of art guests see when they walk up the broad staircase leading to the new galleries. In Butler’s portrait, which Gray took in the 1990s, the influential writer looks contemplatively off into the distance — whether near or far, one can’t be sure. Her expression is unreadable, at once thoughtful, curious, interested and detached.

A portrait of Octavia Butler, taken by Todd Gray in the 1990s, anchors the 27-foot-long photo sculpture commissioned by LACMA for the entrance of its new David Geffen Galleries.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Her face is in a gold, oval frame and the viewer’s eyes follow hers to other aspects of the piece — an assemblage of large and small photos taken by Gray in places around the world, including Versailles, Norway and Ghana. It includes an image of an idyllic-looking path through bright green foliage that leads to a slave castle in Cape Coast, Ghana. There is also a striking image of stars in the cosmos, a lovely fresco from a church in Rome, a picture of traditional sculpture housed at the AfricaMuseum in Belgium and a series of stoic Greek columns.

“A lot of my work is contesting art history, or talking about art history, or photography’s place in history, my history, various histories culturally,” said Gray, explaining why he likes that LACMA’s collection will not be exhibited chronologically, or by medium or region, but rather in a series of interwoven exhibits that connect vastly different art in dialogue. “So it was really a commission made in heaven.”

The new galleries, explained Govan, will focus on “migration and intersection, rather than American art over on one side of the museum and European art in a different wing.”

Gray’s photo sculpture, for example, will be adjacent to a gallery featuring African art and near another with Latin American art.

It will also be directly across from a floor-to-ceiling window. These giant windows are a key part of Zumthor’s design — and a flash point for controversy, with critics arguing that too much sunlight could harm fragile art.

Translucent curtains are being designed for some of the windows, but won’t be used throughout, and not in the entrance across from “Octavia’s Gaze.” For that reason, Gray said he employed a relatively new technique called UV direct printing that was developed for outdoor signage. The process involves intense ultraviolet lights that cure and harden the ink, ultimately searing it into the printing material. These prints won’t fade, Gray said.

Todd Gray, left, oversees the installation of his photo sculpture “Octavia Butler’s Gaze.” The piece used a new UV printing technology to ensure it won’t fade in the sunlight coming in through the floor-to-ceiling windows across from it.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Delicate and old art will not be put at risk by light, Govan said. The interior of Zumthor’s building is dotted with boxy, windowless galleries that Govan and Zumthor call “houses.” And like houses, the interior of galleries are being treated to color — not in the form of paint, however.

Zumthor conceived of three colors that he wanted used in the galleries, explained Diana Magaloni, senior deputy director for conservation, curatorial and exhibitions, who has been mixing the glazes and working with a team of four trained artists to apply them. The colors are a reddish black, a Renaissance ultramarine blue and a blackish burgundy that Zumthor hoped would conjure a cave-like dimness. Overall, Magaloni said, Zumthor wanted the color to look as if it were emerging from darkness.

There are 27 galleries and the colors will be divided by section: Nine on the south side are red, nine on the north side are black and the nine in the middle are blue.

The glazing technique was conceived by a friend of Zumthor’s who lives in Switzerland, and LACMA is currently the only organization to employ it, Magaloni said.

Pigments made of minerals including hematite and rocks like lapis lazuli are ground into nanoparticles and suspended in silica, resembling “melted glass,” as Magaloni describes. The glaze is then applied to the walls, a process that must be done at once in order to prevent any impression of brushstrokes, and also because the glaze hardens quickly. Once it’s dry, the team applies a second coat of glaze pigment infused with black carbon nanoparticles. The effect is dark and mottled — it looks as if the concrete has swallowed the color.

“The concrete has all this life in and of itself,” said Magaloni. “You can walk through the building and you can see that those surfaces are not really homogeneous. The material expresses itself with no artifice, and we wanted to preserve that.”

Painting the concrete would erase that life, she added.

A gallery blushing in a deep wine color, with the theme of “Leisure and Labor in the American Metropolis,” is almost ready. Work by George Bellows, James Van Der Zee, Mary Cassatt and Robert Henri adorn the walls, and there is a table ready to receive a Tiffany lamp. Govan points out that such paintings would not have been originally displayed on white walls but rather on walls of richly colored fabric.

“She’s asking you something,” Todd Gray said of his portrait of Octavia Butler.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Gray’s piece will also be in dialogue with this room, calling to it from another time and place — asking viewers to turn their gaze to history, slavery, transcendence, salvation, power and so much more.

At this moment in time, when arts institutions are grappling with the implications of the Trump administration’s claim that the Smithsonian Institution presents “divisive, race-centered ideology” and vow to monitor what other museums around the country are putting on display, Gray’s piece feels like a small bit of resistance.

“She’s asking you something,” Gray says of Butler.

The answer is yours to declare.

Sao Paulo, Brazil – In the far north of Brazil, where the Amazon River collides with the sea, an environmental dilemma has awakened a national political debate.

There, the Brazilian government has been researching the possibility of offshore oil reserves that extend from the eastern state of Rio Grande do Norte all the way to Amapá, close to the border with French Guiana.

That region is known as the Equatorial Margin, and it represents hundreds of kilometres of coastal water.

But critics argue it also represents the government’s conflicting goals under Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva.

During his third term as president, Lula has positioned Brazil as a champion in the fight against climate change. But he has also signalled support for fossil fuel development in regions like the Equatorial Margin, as a means of paying for climate-change policy.

“We want the oil because it will still be around for a long time. We need to use it to fund our energy transition, which will require a lot of money,” Lula said in February.

But at the start of his term in 2023, he struck a different stance. “Our goal is zero deforestation in the Amazon, zero greenhouse gas emissions,” he told Brazil’s Congress.

As the South American country prepares to host the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) later this year, those contradictions have come under even greater scrutiny.

Nicole Oliveira is one of the environmental leaders fighting the prospect of drilling in the Equatorial Margin, including the area at the mouth of the Amazon River, known as Foz do Amazonas.

Her organisation, the Arayara Institute, filed a lawsuit to block an auction scheduled for this week to sell oil exploration rights in the Equatorial Margin. She doubts the government’s rationale that fossil-fuel extraction will finance cleaner energy.

“There is no indication of any real willingness [from the government] to pursue an energy transition,” Oliveira said.

“On the contrary, there is growing pressure on environmental agencies to issue licenses and open up new areas in the Foz do Amazonas and across the entire Equatorial Margin.”

Last Thursday, the federal prosecutor’s office also filed a lawsuit to delay the auction, calling for further environmental assessments and community consultations before the project proceeds.

A government reversal

The fate of the Equatorial Margin has exposed divisions even within Lula’s government.

In May 2023, the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) — the government’s main environmental regulator — denied a request from the state-owned oil company Petrobras to conduct exploratory drilling at the mouth of the Amazon River.

In its decision, the IBAMA cited environmental risks and a lack of assessments, given the site’s “socio-environmental sensitivity”.

But Petrobras continued to push for a licence to drill in the region. The situation escalated in February this year when IBAMA again rejected Petrobras’s request.

Lula responded by criticising the agency for holding up the process. He argued that the proceeds from any drilling would help the country and bolster its economy.

“We need to start thinking about Brazil’s needs. Is this good or bad for Brazil? Is this good or bad for Brazil’s economy?” Lula told Radio Clube do Para in February.

On May 19, the director of IBAMA, a politician named Rodrigo Agostinho, ultimately overruled his agency’s decision and gave Petrobras the green light to initiate drilling tests in the region.

Petrobras applauded the reversal. In a statement this month to Al Jazeera, it said it had conducted “detailed environmental studies” to ensure the safety of the proposed oil exploration.

It added that its efforts were “fully in line with the principles of climate justice, biodiversity protection, and the social development of the communities where it operates”.

“Petrobras strictly follows all legal and technical requirements established by environmental authorities,” Petrobras wrote.

It also argued that petroleum will continue to be a vital energy source decades into the future, even with the transition to low-carbon alternatives.

Roberto Ardenghy, the president of the Brazilian Petroleum and Gas Institute (IBP), an advocacy group, is among those who believe that further oil exploitation is necessary for Brazil’s continued growth and prosperity.

“It is justified — even from an energy and food security standpoint — that Brazil continues to search for oil in all of these sedimentary basins,” he said.

Ardenghy added that neighbouring countries like Guyana are already profiting from “significant discoveries” near the Equatorial Margin.

“Everything suggests there is strong potential for major oil reservoirs in that region. The National Petroleum Agency estimates there could be around 30 billion barrels of oil there. That’s why we’re making such a major effort,” he said.

A ‘risk of accidents’

But critics have argued that the area where the Amazon River surges into the ocean comprises a delicate ecosystem, lush with mangroves and coral reefs.

There, the pink-bellied Guiana dolphin plies the salty waters alongside other aquatic mammals like sperm whales and manatees. Environmentalists fear exploratory drilling could further endanger these rare and threatened species.

Indigenous communities at the mouth of the river have also resisted Petrobras’s plans for oil exploration, citing the potential for damage to their ancestral fishing grounds.

In 2022, the Council of Chiefs of the Indigenous Peoples of Oiapoque (CCPIO) formally requested that the federal prosecutor’s office mediate a consultation process with Petrobras, which has not taken place to this date.

The federal prosecutor’s office, in announcing Thursday’s lawsuit, cited the risk to Indigenous peoples as part of its reasoning for seeking to delay the auction.

“The area is home to a vast number of traditional peoples and communities whose survival and way of life are directly tied to coastal ecosystems,” the office said.

However, in its statement to Al Jazeera, Petrobras maintains it had a “broad communication process” with local stakeholders. It added that its studies “did not identify any direct impact on traditional communities” resulting from the drilling.

But some experts nevertheless question the safety of oil exploration in the region, including Suely Araujo, who used to chair IBAMA from 2016 to 2018.

Now the public policy coordinator for the advocacy coalition Observatório do Clima, Araujo pointed to practical hurdles like the powerful waters that gush from the Amazon River into the ocean.

“The area is quite complex, with extremely strong currents. Petrobras has no previous exploration experience in a region with currents as strong as these,” Araujo said. “So it’s an area that increases the risk of accidents even during drilling.”

Still, she fears there is little political will within the Lula government to stop the oil exploration — and that awarding drilling licences could be a slippery slope.

“All the evidence is there for this licence to be approved soon,” she said, referring to the project planned near the river mouth.

“The problem is that if this licence gets approved — let’s say, the 47 new blocks in the Foz do Amazonas that are now up for auction — it will become very difficult for IBAMA to deny future licences, because it’s the same region.”

Oliveira, whose organisation is leading the legal fight against the exploration licences, echoed that sentiment. She said it is necessary to stop the drilling before it starts.

“If we want to keep global warming to 1.5 degrees [Celsius], which is where we already are,” she said, “we cannot drill a single new oil well”.