31 outubro 2012

Inaugurada a temporada de caça ao petróleo brasileiro

(Veiculado pelo Correio da Cidadania a partir de 30/10/12)

Paulo Metri – conselheiro da Federação Brasileira de Associações de Engenheiros e do Clube de Engenharia

Nos dias atuais, proliferam veículos, na mídia brasileira, que utilizam a desinformação. Como exemplo, surgem artigos, editoriais, notícias e entrevistas dizendo que as rodadas de leilão de áreas para produzir petróleo devem ser realizadas, a Petrobras não tem capacidade para explorar sozinha o Pré-Sal, devido a suas limitações financeira, gerencial e tecnológica e, para ajudar o Brasil a vencer esta dificuldade, as empresas petrolíferas estrangeiras precisam ser convidadas. Nestas mensagens, para atraí-las, é necessário que as concessões do Pré-Sal sejam firmadas sob as regras da lei 9.478, o que significa revogar no Congresso a lei 12.351, recém-aprovada, devolvendo o Pré-Sal à antiga lei 9.478.
Trata-se de uma arrogância sem igual, típica de quem se acha imbatível. Para tentar convencer os leitores ou espectadores, supondo todos desatentos, lançou-se mão de inverdades, acreditando que ninguém vai contestar um grande jornal, revista semanal, rádio ou televisão. Arquitetaram com grande esmero o que pode ser chamado de a “temporada de caça ao petróleo brasileiro”. Felizmente, existem alguns sites, blogs e veículos digitais que estão dispostos a conscientizar a população e publicam novos dados e análises.
Contudo, a mídia do capital, aquela que não prioriza a sociedade, às vezes comete erros, por partir do princípio de que o povo tem um baixo nível de compreensão política. Durante dez anos seguidos (de 1999 a 2008), existiram rodadas de leilões de áreas para exploração de petróleo. Nunca trouxeram para seus veículos uma voz que advogasse a não realização destas rodadas. Em compensação, disseminaram matérias contando as supostas maravilhas das rodadas. Os leitores ou espectadores atentos devem pensar: “Que estranho insistirem tanto em um mesmo ponto!”. Neste instante, eles querem ter acesso a algo, não necessariamente divergente, mas com diferente ângulo de visão, e não encontram, porque estas matérias só existem na imprensa alternativa. Mais cedo ou mais tarde, eles conhecerão os veículos livres, comprometidos com as causas sociais, e entenderão que a grande mídia é um braço camuflado do capital, principalmente o internacional.
Na atual temporada de caça ao nosso petróleo, inúmeras matérias de comunicação satisfazem, sem serem explícitas, aos interesses estrangeiros sobre nosso petróleo. Se fosse rebater cada material divulgado, este artigo iria ficar longo e cansativo; então, comento a seguir as principais acusações dos detratores.
Começo pela que diz que, depois da descoberta do Pré-Sal, o Brasil, em vez de começar a exportar petróleo, está se distanciando da autossuficiência. Para explicar o que ocorre, é preciso desenvolver um raciocínio preliminar.
A velocidade que o governo brasileiro impõe à exploração no setor de petróleo, com uma rodada de leilões por ano, de 1999 até 2008, é do interesse único das empresas estrangeiras, que não têm petróleo em seus países de origem, e dos países desenvolvidos, que precisam do petróleo para mover suas economias. Se não forçassem a Petrobras a ter que participar de tantos leilões, mais recursos sobrariam para os desenvolvimentos de campos e a autossuficiência estaria garantida há mais tempo. Por outro lado, em cada leilão que a Petrobras não participa e não ganha, há uma perda enorme para o país. Além disso, é preciso saber que, entre a declaração de comercialidade de um campo marítimo e o início da sua produção, são necessários em média cinco anos.
Entretanto, estamos hoje bem próximos da autossuficiência, o que não ocorreria, com absoluta certeza, se em 1953 o projeto de interesse das petrolíferas estrangeiras tivesse sido aprovado. No nosso país, hoje, não existiria a Petrobras e a produção nacional seria mínima. As empresas estrangeiras não iriam para a plataforma continental quando a Petrobras foi, em 1974, pois a lógica do capital as levaria para a Arábia Saudita, o Iraque, o Cazaquistão e outros lugares promissores para o petróleo, como de fato ocorreu. Também, certamente ninguém saberia, hoje, da existência do Pré-Sal.
É interessante que não se conta, para garantir a autossuficiência, com o petróleo produzido no país pelas empresas estrangeiras. De forma pouco soberana, raciocina-se que este petróleo é delas e elas não têm a obrigação de abastecer o Brasil. Esta falta de lógica social é resguardada pela lei 9.478 de 1997 e é parte do pensamento subserviente da década de 1990, que imaginava o Brasil como economia complementar à dos desenvolvidos, mero exportador de minerais e produtos agrícolas.
Como boas críticas neoliberais, as matérias lembram sempre os prejuízos da Petrobras no segundo trimestre de 2012. Ela teve prejuízo porque o governo determinou que segurasse o preço dos derivados, uma vez que os aumentos destes preços repercutem muito no índice de inflação. Não se pode beneficiar o cidadão brasileiro em detrimento dos dividendos maravilhosos que seriam dados aos acionistas? Não se pode fazer isto eternamente, mas, de vez em quando, se pode. Além disso, os acionistas não vão ficar sem dividendos. Só não vão ter aqueles maravilhosos.
Acusam gratuitamente as mudanças do setor porque modificaram o sistema de royalties, fato catastrófico, porque desencadeou no Congresso disputa entre os parlamentares dos diferentes estados sobre a distribuição dos mesmos. É verdade que discutir o sistema de royalties foi catastrófico, mas o que os autores não percebem é que, mesmo que a lei 9.478 fosse utilizada para o Pré-Sal, os parlamentares iriam querer modificar seus artigos que estabelecem a distribuição dos royalties arrecadados. O que atraiu estes parlamentares a buscarem mudar esta distribuição foi a perspectiva de arrecadações milionárias deste tributo, quando o Pré-Sal entrasse em operação.
Criticam a lei 12.351 por atribuir à Petrobras participação obrigatória de 30% em cada consórcio e por esta empresa ser a operadora única dos novos contratos do Pré-Sal, determinações estas que seriam desnecessárias, além de outros adjetivos pesados. Assim, transmitem a visão que nos desejam impingir, a qual favorece as empresas estrangeiras. A Petrobras ser a operadora dos consórcios é primordial, pois quem compra bens e serviços para as fases de exploração, desenvolvimento e produção é a operadora. E, dentre as empresas que atuam no Brasil, só a Petrobras compra aqui. As empresas estrangeiras ganharam áreas para explorar petróleo desde 1999 e, até hoje, 14 anos depois, nenhuma delas comprou uma plataforma no Brasil. Os 30% são explicados porque nenhuma empresa consegue ser a operadora com menos de 30% de participação no consórcio.
Criar nova empresa estatal para gerir o programa, que também é motivo de crítica, é na verdade muito importante para, dentre outros objetivos, fiscalizar as contas de todos os consórcios.
Finalizando, os autores invariavelmente criticam o governo por procurar viabilizar uma exploração do Pré-Sal que visa satisfazer a sociedade. Neste momento, dizem que “o governo tenta ressuscitar a ideologia nacionalista de outros tempos”. Buscam impor o conceito de que nacionalismo é ruim. E trazem, como única crítica ao nacionalismo, o fato de ser “de outros tempos”. Além de ser um preconceito contra o velho, chega a ser engraçado, porque princípios liberais estão nos textos de Adam Smith (1723-1790).

           Aliás, seria bom reconhecermos que, graças ao nacionalismo, o Pré-Sal é nosso. Em primeiro lugar, porque o nacionalismo o descobriu. Em segundo lugar, porque foram visões nacionalistas de órgãos do governo brasileiro que lutaram para o estabelecimento da Zona Econômica Exclusiva de 200 milhas, onde se encontra mais de 90% do nosso Pré-Sal. E a conquistaram junto às Nações Unidas.

28 outubro 2012

Basis of a Computer Game that Consists of Choosing Sources for the Expansion of Electric Capacity

(Paper submitted to the 2011 International Nuclear Atlantic Conference - 2011 INAC)

Paulo Metri - Engineer

Abstract

An interactive computer game can show to the average citizen concepts that make the electric power planning unique. There are so many variables, relations and constrains in this planning that it is impossible for the non- technical citizen to answer with rationality. Interested in winning the game, players allocate generation sources to meet the expanding electric market in order to achieve economic goals as well as minimize social and environmental damages. At the beginning of the game, the players must choose exactly what objectives are to be accomplished, for example, the cheapest electrical energy or the lowest investment of the electric sector or the minimum rate of CO2 emissions or any other output. Obviously, the player that makes the better choices is the champion. At the end of the game, the players will understand all the consequences of their choices. As a collateral effect, they will also realize that electrical planning have not the same characteristics of other planning activities. The objective of expanding capacity with minimum economic, social and environmental impacts, the information about the main generating sources and the demand requirements represent the basis for the development of this planning model. Many of them are shown throughout this work. So, this work describes conceptually the game, which is, in deed, a consequence of the defined planning model. After the definition stage, a computer technician can develop the appropriate program for the game. With the use of this game, the choice of the sources is taken more rationally and the subjective aspects have less influence in the decision process. As added benefit, the players will also learn that each generation source has its positive and negative aspects.

1. Introduction

Untrained people in the subject of available technologies for electricity generation often adopt a position favorable for one of the options, based on superficial information about them. Usually, they do not consider a full analysis of the impacts of possible alternatives.

Unfortunately, there is not a single conclusion obtained from this decision process, because there is no source whose outputs are better than those of the other sources. However, there are some specific conclusions of this process that escape the comprehension of a non-technical citizen and they are relevant.

An interactive computer game may show to the average citizen concepts such as the lack of attractiveness of the intermittency of wind and solar power generation, as well as the possibility of hydroelectric generation to follow the variation of the demand curve during the day.

In order to understand the consequences of the player’s actions, the game will provide for each decision taken, the variation on the select objectives, achieved by him. For example, each decision will bring impacts on the CO2 emissions, on the averaged cost of electricity, on the level of investment required, on the area of flooding of lands and on the population displaced from their lands.

The player that better satisfy the objectives will win the game. The inherent competitiveness of human being will push him to play the game and, as a consequence, will help him to understand more about the electrical planning.

2. Development of the Game

The game begins with the players loading into the program, the additional demand for electric generation that Brazil will need every year between 2016 and 2045 [1] [2]. However, the players may accept a conservative value that is already in the program, which can be, for example, 30 terawatt hours per year (TWh/year). If they do so, there is no need of the loading. The decisions for additional generation constructions from now to 2015 have already been taken and the constructions must be in course at this moment. Also, in the model, this additional generation capacity of hydroelectric plants in construction is already allocated, beginning in the year when the generation starts.

At this right moment, the intensity of use of electricity in Brazilian society and economy is being decided. Notice that the population estimative for the period 2016-2045 exists and, so, the consumption of the population for this period can be estimated. More difficult to choose is the desired degree of electrification of the economy. For example, if Brazil is a major exporter of electrical intensive products, like aluminum, the consumption per capita will be high, while the society itself may not be a great consumer. On the other hand, if the electric car is introduced in the period, it will bring benefits to society, when compared with other transportation options, and electricity consumption will grow dramatically [3].

Each player chooses a mix of electricity sources, following his own understanding of the problem, in order to increase generation and to meet the additional electricity demands of the period. The sources or forms of energy available in Brazil to supply reasonable amounts of electricity are hydraulic, nuclear, natural gas, fuel oil, diesel oil, coal, crushed sugarcane and wind power. We want that solar energy, tidal energy, the one obtained from nuclear fusion and others become technical and economic viable before 2045. Unfortunately, at the present moment, we are not sure that these sources will provide large amounts of electricity before this year.

Obviously, each of these alternative sources will become viable in different years. Today, solar energy is already technically feasible, missing only new developments that will reduce the cost of the electricity. But, we cannot say today, with certainty, that nuclear fusion will be some day technically feasible.

Each mix of electric power sources allocated to satisfy the demand expansion brings different result, for instance, for the additional investment required, the average cost of additional electricity generated and the additional emissions of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere. These three outputs may be selected, for example, to measure the performance of each mix of sources chosen by the players. But, they, in the beginning of the game, must define the list of outputs that will be considered in order to rank the players’ choices.

Notice that the players will choose the additional capacity of each source to be expanded, which will provide increases in the electricity supply to the country, and these increases must satisfy the additional demand required. We have to be aware for the fact that the same increase of installed capacity, obtained with two different mixes of sources, does not necessarily generate, for technical reasons, equal addition of electricity.

The developer of the game must show the outputs obtained with the mix of sources chosen by a player to meet the additional need of electricity for the Brazilian market in the period. Nevertheless, he must show also a grade related to the mix chosen by this player. Using the example given previously, there will be three tables inside the program that will permit to get grades related to the three outputs of each choice.

In the first table, ranges of variation of the investment required will permit to determine the first grade. In the second table, ranges of variation of the average cost of additional electricity will help to determine the second grade. Finally, in the third table, ranges of variation of additional emissions of CO2 due to the mix of sources chosen will determine the third grade.

Before the game starts, the players must agree also about the weight or the importance level of each one of the grades to be obtained. The players may also follow the recommendation of the developer about these weights, which is in the default on the computer. Thus, the program may calculate the weighted average grade of a player, using the above-described weights of each output, obtaining the final grade. Obviously, the player with the highest final grade wins the game. He is the one who has electrified the country with the best choice for the mix of generating sources, under the established criteria. So, one possible name for this game can be “Electrifying Brazil”.

The players will learn, with this trial and error process, how each one of their choices contributes to the output and to the final grade. This game will serve as an educative tool for the common citizen, who is not a technician. The decision of the electricity sources to satisfy the demand and to bring maximum benefit to the society cannot be taken emotionally, after a simple analysis. Acquiring this knowledge with the game, the citizen may also stop the work of lobbyists, because he identifies their effort to convince with wrong and tendentious arguments.

The improvement of electrical efficiency is not a source, but it frees generation that is already committed. So, the effort to increase efficiency decreases the need for expansion in the immediate future. However, since the efficiency increase is limited, the need to expand the generation in a medium horizon is not eliminated. Therefore, it is possible to program the game so that it contemplates the efficiency increase of the electricity sector as a source of limited resource. Information can be obtained from technical literature to show how difficult is to improve substantially the efficiency of the electricity sector. Some Non Governmental Organizations state fabulous figures for the results of electricity efficiency. Many of these figures can only be obtained if we change some habits of our way of living. For instance, to replace 10% of the actual electric showers by solar collectors is necessary a reasonable effort of propaganda to encourage people to accept the change. The cost of an effective campaign to advice people to use less warm water will be huge and will have a limited result. Thus, it is not so easy to obtain great electricity consumption economy.

Some program information and data to be used by the game developer are listed below. These information and data make the planning of the electricity sector expansion unique.

The size and the investment ​​of industrial modules for each generating source are reported to the program [1] [2] [4] [5]. In the case of hydraulic power, since it is not possible to have module, the investment of each remaining hydraulic generating capacity is reported.

When the generating unit must be constructed far from consumption centers, transmission lines investment must have influence on the generation cost in the program. This is the case of hydraulic and wind power sources. When the source chosen is the hydraulic, the payments to displace people from the area of the dam should be added to the investment generation. When the source chosen is the nuclear, the contribution to a fund for the final disposal of radioactive waste should be included in the cost of this energy. All these observations can be resumed with the following statement. The costs related to specific energy characteristics, like an expected environmental damage, should be allocated to the investment or the cost of this energy.

The electricity costs obtained from different sources should incorporate all existing distinctions between these sources [6]. In that conception, all source differentiations will be considered and a fair comparison will be obtained. For example, the need for transportation and storage of fuel to operate a generation unit of 1,000 MW during a year is quite different for some possible sources [7]. The nuclear thermal unit requires 30 t of uranium; natural gas thermal unit needs 1.1 million t of gas; diesel oil thermal unit, 1.4 million t of oil; and coal thermal unit, 2.2 million t of coal. The corresponding transportation and storage costs must be contained in the respective electricity generation costs.

Other interesting information that helps to establish a comparative model is the following. The area required to place a nuclear or a fossil thermal unit with installed capacity of 1,000 MW varies from 1 to 4 km2 [7]; the corresponding area for solar panels is 20 to 50 km2; the same area necessary for eolic generators is 50 to 150 km2; and, finally, the unit that uses crashed cane as the source needs an area of 4,000 to 6,000 km2.

The availability factor of each source, which influences the cost of generated energy, should be introduced in the model [2] [5]. For example, this factor for nuclear plants is around 85% and for hydropower is 55%. However, since the country is now building hydroelectric units with very small accumulation areas, the hydroelectric lakes, in order to contain the flooded area, the number of projected turbines is smaller, which reduces the generation capacity. Thus, all the turbines of these new units will be used to generate steady electricity and they will not follow the demand curve during the day. In these new conditions, the availability factor will increase. For wind power, this factor is close to 30%, since there are moments when the wind is not blowing.

The transformation efficiency of each energy source to electricity should also be informed. For example, the transformation efficiency of thermal energy obtained from coal burning to electricity is around 35%. It is obvious that this efficiency influences the cost of electricity generated from coal.

The model of power sector expansion, described in this game, should positively consider the capability of some sources, which related technologies follow the daily demand curve. As an example, nuclear power cannot follow this curve. However, the introduction in the model of the possibility of some sources to satisfy the daily demand curve increases the complexity of the model, what requires greater ability from the programmer.

Beside all costs related to investment, the operational and maintenance cost, and the fuel cost, if there is any, should be also introduced. The cost of generated electricity is calculated with all mentioned information and following the traditional methodology [6].

The emission of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere of each generation technology option will be featured, including the amount related to the fuel cycle, if it is the case [8].

Brazilian government agencies have even more sophisticated models for this purpose, but none was specifically developed to be an interactive model with non-technical people, seeking for their understanding of the planning difficulties in the electricity sector.

3. Conclusions and Recommendation

This game consists of a step-by-step learning process that will look forward the rational choice of electricity sources. It should help the common citizen to increase his understanding of the problem. After playing this game, he will become less vulnerable to the attacks from biased interest groups in the existing war of information. The Brazilian Government or some non-profitable entity has to assume the task of giving precise, not biased and complete information about these sources to the population.

The economic interest groups gain a lot of money if the common citizen remains without understanding this issue. Any decision taken by Government will satisfy the common citizen, no matter how bad it is, if he is in an unskilled condition. This explains the existence of strong economic lobbies acting near the Government’s decision makers and why the media try so much to form people’s opinion in some direction. A model of this kind can be classified at the same category of a transparence effort of the Government.

No great promotion effort needs to be made for the acceptance of the game by the population, since it is a fun diversion. Thus, while the players are enjoying the game and start to understand the positive and negative aspects of each generation source, it will happen an awareness process.

Any student of engineering, economics, information technology and other areas related to this theme, that needs a challenging thesis subject, may develop this game, if he finds it interesting.

References

1. Ministério de Minas e Energia, Matriz Energética Nacional 2030, MME, Brasília, Brasil (2007).
2. Ministério de Minas e Energia, Plano Nacional de Energia 2030, MME, Brasília, Brasil (2007).
3. International Energy Agency, Energy to 2050 – Scenarios for a Sustainable Future, OCDE/IEA, Paris, France (2003).
4. Empresa de Pesquisa Energética, Balanço Energético Nacional 2010: Ano Base 2009, EPE, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (2010).
5. Empresa de Pesquisa Energética, Plano Decenal de Expansão de Energia 2010/2019, EPE, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (2010).
6. Royal Academy of Engineering, The Cost of Generating Electricity, The Royal Academy of Engineering, London, England (2004).
7. De Almeida, Ivan Pedro Salati, A energia nuclear no contexto da produção de energia no Brasil, transparências apresentadas no Seminário “O futuro da matriz energética brasileira”, UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (2011).
8. Alvim, Carlos Feu, Comparação da emissão de gases de efeito estufa (GEE) na geração nuclear de eletricidade no Brasil com as de outras fontes, ECEN, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (2010).

17 outubro 2012

Reflexões sobre o julgamento do dito mensalão

(Veiculado pelo Correio da Cidadania a partir de 17/10/12)
 
Paulo Metri – conselheiro da Federação Brasileira de Associações de Engenheiros e do Clube de Engenharia
 
Mesmo não tendo saber jurídico algum, posso usar a livre interpretação das questões políticas no emaranhado de informações do momento atual. Cultura jurídica em pessoas de mau caráter, combinação infelizmente existente, não ajuda a conscientização da sociedade.
Apesar de compreender o raciocínio da teoria do domínio do fato, é óbvio que se entra no terreno das alternativas probabilísticas, não existindo a certeza absoluta. No fundo, se está dizendo, sobre aqueles poucos para os quais não se tem prova concreta de participação no delito, que a maior probabilidade é que eles sejam culpados. Então, esta condenação é baseada na concepção subjetiva da culpabilidade.
Quantas condenações à morte nos Estados Unidos foram baseadas na alternativa mais provável de ocorrência de algum fato e, com o passar do tempo, tecnologias mais avançadas de investigação ficaram disponíveis, como os testes de DNA, e foram aplicadas a estes casos passados, comprovando que o menos provável tinha acontecido?
Tomo a liberdade de explicar o conceito de probabilidade, por acreditar ser elucidativo. Se um experimento com alta probabilidade de ocorrência de determinado resultado for repetido um grande número de vezes, na maioria delas dará o esperado. Entretanto, o não esperado, um resultado diferente, também ocorrerá. Em menos vezes, mas ocorrerá. A proteção às minorias, na nossa sociedade, é uma das mais belas conquistas da humanidade. Não é por outra razão que a tese da presunção do acusado dizer a verdade, quando não há prova alguma em contrário, é de extremo valor humano.
Outro ponto que agride minha compreensão é o por que de se ter esquecido de averiguar mais e julgar o mensalão mineiro, a compra do voto do ex-deputado Ronivon Santiago para a reeleição, a Operação Castelo de Areia, a Satiagraha e tantas outras. Um marciano inteligente, recém-chegado a Terra, que estiver recebendo informações sobre o espetáculo do julgamento, sem nenhuma distorção dos fatos, poderá exclamar: “Parece até perseguição! O que o pessoal do suposto mensalão tem de diferente deste outro povo?”
O processo do chamado mensalão tem algo especial, sim! A apresentação pela mídia do julgamento, de tão ardilosa que foi, poderá resultar na intenção da grande massa de não mais votar em um representante do grupo para a presidência da República.
Entretanto, os leitores podem pensar que estou pregando clemência para os autores do desvio de recursos públicos. Absolutamente, não! É louvável que os ministros do Supremo estejam buscando apurar a verdade e julgar. De forma espetacular, sob constrangimentos causados pela mídia, mas dentro do que era esperado deles. Em grande parte, o apurado pelos ministros é a mais pura verdade! E aqueles que tiverem suas culpas comprovadas devem ser sentenciados, sem sombra de dúvidas.
Por outro lado, sei que os ministros do Supremo, equânimes que são, irão julgar o suposto mensalão mineiro e a compra de votos em 1997 para reeleição, de forma que o fim dos julgamentos se dará exatamente na semana que irá preceder o primeiro turno da eleição presidencial de 2014. Sei também que a sorte do ministro Joaquim Barbosa irá ocorrer de novo, pois será escolhido como relator destes novos processos e brilhará mais uma vez usando o conceito do domínio do fato.
A classe dominante brasileira, através da sua sempre aliada, quiçá um dos seus próprios tentáculos, grande mídia comercial, aproveitou e transformou o julgamento recente em arma política, pois expandiu a culpa, baseada na suposição da tese do domínio do fato ser verdadeira.
A verdade é que o grupo que transformou os dez anos, que começaram em 2003, na década aproveitada, em contraposição à década perdida dos anos 90, graças, em muito, ao governo de Fernando Henrique Cardoso, não faz parte desse processo, a menos José Dirceu, que é o maior estrategista do grupo. Por isso, havia a preocupação da classe dos donos do capital de tê-lo atrelado ao processo. Notem até que a periodicidade mensal e o envolvimento de grande número de integrantes do PT não foram provados.
Informação preciosa para os pouco atentos, para entender o que se passa. O governo da década aproveitada retirou dezenas de milhões de pessoas da miséria, mas, a miséria é necessária na visão da classe privilegiada. Portanto, para eles, este fato tinha que ser combatido, de qualquer forma, para não continuar a distribuição de renda, imaginando que este contingente fora da miséria é menos manipulável politicamente, o que é verdade.
Neste momento, forças estrangeiras se aliam à classe dominante, com a aceitação desta, pois querem se apossar das nossas riquezas. E as forças estrangeiras não têm nenhum escrúpulo quanto a manipular a população politicamente.
Assim, o que assistimos nestes dias foi exatamente mais um capítulo da luta de classes no Brasil. A classe abastada teve uma vitória no seu plano maquiavélico.
Resta saber se o povo não está consciente da manipulação que buscam com ele fazer.

13 outubro 2012

Decision Process Regarding Nuclear Generation: The Brazilian Case

(Paper submitted to the 2009 International Nuclear Atlantic Conference - 2009 INAC)

Paulo Metri - Engineer

Abstract

Countries face a constant need to expand their electricity generation capacities. Electricity sources in a country and the respective generation technologies have different technical, economic, environmental, social and political characteristics. The evaluation criteria of the generating sources and their technologies must not be restricted to the supply of the increased demand at the lowest cost. Compliance with other public policies must be considered in the decision process of the expansion, for instance, maximize local acquisition and minimize foreign fuel purchase. Countries have different energy resources, as well as different levels of technology and development in their industrial parks. Brazil has many mineral reserves, besides the hydraulic potential, for supporting the expansion. The decision process in this sector, which includes nuclear energy as a sub sector, requires analyzing and evaluating various information and data. In this stage, a quantitative model providing a first approach for the decision may be applied. The new institutional structure adopted in the sector during the 1990s and 2000s brought about new conditions into an already complex decision process. In such context of methodology complexity, political aspects gain relevance, becoming of increased importance. The political environment is described and the players are identified. One conclusion and few recommendations are provided.

1. Problem Definition

Countries must provide their populations with growing electrical power generation capacities, unless when their economies are undergoing a period of recession. However, Governments struggle to overcome recession periods, which, fortunately, do not last forever. According to the Brazilian electrical sector’s planning, the country would have to add generation capacities exceeding 3,000 MW per year, for a reasonable period, to comply with the growth rates presented prior to the global economic crisis. Decisions regarding nuclear energy are also based on this plan, which will be analyzed in the following pages.
Each country at each time has their own decision-making criteria to evaluate electricity generation increase options. Some criteria considered during the decision process are expressed by figures, though others may only be expressed in qualitative terms, turning the process subject to subjective evaluations. In articles, the technical performances of power generation options are mentioned as the most important points for the sector’s expansion decisions; however, this is not the only aspect of relevance. Economic, environmental and social impact, as well as the impact on other public policies, must also be considered.
In the economic aspect, the generation of large blocks of electrical energy is restricted today and in the near future to a few technological alternatives. These certainly include hydroelectric and thermal generation, whether by using natural gas, fuel oil, diesel oil, sugarcane bagasse, mineral coal or nuclear fuel. Some studies include aeolian generation among competitive electricity generation alternatives. Solar and tidal generations, for example, are still hopes for the future. Nuclear fusion will take long to prove technically and commercially viable.
Environmentalists claim that electrical energy must be preserved as the way to meet increased demand, as preserved energy is released to comply with new energy demands. However, this proposal must be analyzed, since there are two ways to preserve electricity. The first comprises the manufacture of more energy-efficient equipment, machines and apparatus, the design of buildings demanding less internal lighting and refrigeration, urban planning preventing against the construction of increasingly taller buildings with higher needs for elevators, water pumping, etc. These measures may be applied immediately, if they have not yet been, but have limited capacity for energy saving.
The second way requires a change in the behavior of the society and demand more time to bring about significant effects. It comprises, for instance, encouraging migration to the countryside, for each urban resident consumes four to five times as much electricity as countryside resident. In the same line, environmentalists blame society for wasting, since goods are designed to have limited lifetimes, to maximize profit, rather than to preserve natural resources and minimize waste disposal. Such allegations are true, and we must start now to work for a more energy saving and less polluting society; however, this demands touching existing privileges. Therefore, the wasting model will remain for quite some time.
In the Brazilian case, there is an aspect affecting electrical power needs, which is the fact that energy consumption is as badly distributed in the society as income. Therefore, should income distribution improvements hold, they will bring about one more factor increasing energy consumption, offsetting savings generated by preservation measures.
Investments in thermal generation plants, including nuclear, tends to be constant, upon determination of the technology and generation capacity. On the other hand, investments in hydroelectric plants will be different for each hydraulic exploitation, due to different terrains, demanding different needs for dams, as well as distinct river flows and water pressures demanding distinct projects. If we are going to compare generation units, under an economic point of view, it must be assumed that the alternatives will place the energy generated close to consumption centers, thus demanding the addition of complementary investments in energy transmission in the case of hydroelectric generation, since the remaining hydraulic potential is located far from such centers.
Furthermore, the useful life of civil works and equipment of the different generation alternatives are distinct. In thermal options, the future price of fuel, expected to grow above global inflation throughout the useful life of the plant, will influence their economic attractiveness. In view of those factors, technicians claim that the average cost of energy generated and placed in a consumption center, throughout the useful life, should be used as term of comparison, once it encompasses all data. Actually, the calculation of such cost does encompass most data regarding each alternative, though some, such as the possibility of complying with the daily load curve, is left out.
The discussion regarding the competitiveness in generating large block of electrical energy often does not consider the cost of mitigation of or prevention against environmental damage, caused, for example, by emission of greenhouse gases, sulfur and solid particles into the atmosphere, in the costs of the energy generated for comparison purposes. Should these costs be included, the competitiveness of thermal generation alternatives – except nucleoelectric – will be jeopardized. Thermal plants, when placed at tips of the electric system, increase its stability.
The definitive destination of waste from nucleoelectric generation is beginning to have a solution in the world, through different proposals. Furthermore, there is the unfounded fear that a nucleolectric plant may have an accident of large proportion, even though such is proven to be unlikely. These plants were designed to work at the base of the electric system, with little capacity to follow the daily load curve.
Hydroelectric plants also have greenhouse gas emissions, though much less than fossil-fuel thermal plants. The nuclear plants emit no greenhouse gas. On the other hand, hydroelectric plants flood farmable areas or forests and require relocation of riverside population. In some cases, they may flood villages, roads and accesses to mineral deposits and archaeological sites. Like fossil-fuel thermal plants, they may follow daily load curves, with a number of turbines connected to generators exceeding the need for generation of firm energy, aiming at increasing supply during daily peak hours. This super-motorization of the plant generates a low capacity factor. The operation of an electric system with a predominantly hydroelectric base, such as in Brazil, with reservoirs which may hold rain water for over a year, must consider the multiple use of water, the randomness of rainfall and the interference caused by the generation at one plant in generation plants downstream. To generate electricity today or to keep the water in the dam for generation tomorrow is not a simple decision and will be always present.
Aeolian mills are blamed for killing birds, besides supplying intermittent energy, for wind speed is not constant. This is also the case of photovoltaic cells, which depend on sunlight. In short, there is not one-generation alternative that stands out as the best among all, since all are subject to some level of criticism by specialists.
The criteria to evaluate generation technologies may be minimization of average cost of energy generated, maximization of local acquisition of goods and services during implementation, minimization of foreign fuel purchases during operation, maximization of the use of renewable sources, maximization of firm energy supply, capacity to follow daily load curves, maximization of employment generation, minimization of environmental impact, maximization of use of technology available in the country, maximum contribution for the stability of the electric system, possibility of geopolitical and strategic attraction for other countries, etc.
With this initial information regarding technological options for generation and evaluation criteria, the adoption of each technology to expand the country’s generation capacity may be easily supported, upon enhancing the positive impacts of the technology chosen. A set of judgment criteria favoring the option desired will be implicitly chosen. This will facilitate the work of lobbyists and impair the work of the honest decision-maker.
Each country has an availability of reserves of generation potentials and an industrial park, with a given technological level. Universities and research centers in each country have different capacity levels for development of technology. Countries have different policies regarding the use of local manpower and different level of environmental concern, expressed in their legislations and in concrete actions against environmental abuse. In view of all that, there is no optimal choice among technological options to supply the expansion of the generation capacity of any country.
In the Brazilian case, there are abundant energy reserves or electric generation potentials. According to the 2007 National Energy Balance, published by the Ministry of Mines and Energy, the country held, as of 12/31/2006, 12.2 billion barrels of oil, 348 billion cubic meters of natural gas (both figures do not include the reserves of pré-sal), 70 GW firm of hydraulic energy remaining capacity, 309 thousand tones of Uranium, some portion of biomass energy (hard to assess, for sugarcane bagasse, the main biomass item for electricity generation, is associated to the production of sugar and ethanol), and 32 billion tones of mineral coal, plus unaccounted aeolian potential. Thus, the country will not suffer an electricity shortage for lack of generation sources.
The adoption by many countries of the world of economic liberalism and the consequent deregulation of their economies, which also occurred in Brazil, as from the 1990s, brought about institutional changes in the role of the State in the expansion model of the energy sector, i.e. the State ceased to determine the technologies to be used and the magnitude of such use, although it may still influence the choice through public bids and contracts to be signed. For such, the State would be constantly carrying out studies, aiming at ensuring such expansion is made in the interest of the society. However, it would be market agents who would build this new capacity to supply the expected growth in electricity demand.
Thus, the new role of the State consists, in many cases, of letting economic agents free to participate in bids with different technological options. Some of these bids may turn out unsuccessful, requiring that the State take another direction towards expansion. However, it is said that the inconvenience of this new philosophy implemented is exactly letting the market perform the investments at its discretion, for it may occur that no agent takes interest in a given choice of interest to the society, that is, the capital logic will not necessarily arrive to the same recommendation as the social logic. In theory, the State should, in these cases, create new incentives for the production despised to turn it into an attractive alternative for the market or invest directly in the production. In the case of the Jirau and Santo Antônio hydroelectric plants, a mixed solution was adopted, with investments made by a State company and a private company together. It is worth noting that the sector comprises highly qualified professionals, but who cannot and, maybe, do not want to become involved in political matters in the sector.
Some specialists advocate that decisions regarding the nuclear power generation sector in Brazil should remain in the hands of the State, which as per the law holds the monopoly existing since the beginning of the sector’s development, under the argument that this subsector requires long-term large investments and introduces some technologies with high impacts on the country’s level of technological development. More specifically, the isotropic enrichment of Uranium has a high level of technological difficulty and is also a sensitive technology, for it may serve peaceful or belicist purposes, such as electricity generation or the development of a nuclear weapon.
When some scholars talk about the Brazilian State, there is the impression that this is the entity controlling the Brazilian Nation, aiming at reaching superior targets for the development of our society towards maximum welfare and economic, technological, environmental and social development. As a utopia, the Brazilian State may represent such desire, though the sad reality is an entity dominated by groups of interests, especially domestic and foreign economic ones. The Brazilian society participates in elections, therefore expresses a partial opinion, though its potential wishes, those the society would have should the questions be really clarified, and even its conscious desires, are not transformed, in numerous cases, into targets for the country, the State and the Nation. In given situations, the market does certainly impose alternatives a free Brazilian society would not adopt.
In Brazil, except for investments in uranium mining and in the construction and operation of nuclear plants, recently requested by private enterprises, all investments in nucleolectric generation were never asked for. Assuming emerging economic sectors, actual bottlenecks for development, as private investors do not feel attracted to take part in their development, has been the policy successfully adopted by the Brazilian Government between de 1940s and the 1970s, in order to promote the expansion of many sectors within the country’s infrastructure, such as oil, steelmaking, hydroelectric energy generation and telecommunications.
Recent requests by the private enterprise should generate a lot of discussion. Doubts are already arising, such as whether private uranium mining should be destined for exportation, since domestic needs are already supplied by state-controlled enterprises. By becoming an exporter of uranium with no beneficiation, would Brazil not be assuming the position of a country destined to the exportation of primary products, therefore a loser in the world market?
Another doubt lies on the existing proposal towards the existence of private nucleolectric plants, subsidiary of foreign groups, importing the fuel material necessary for their operation.
Would Brazil, with the 6th largest uranium reserves in the world, likely to ascend in this position, import beneficiated uranium, with high added value? Thus, the proposal for nucleoelectric generation to stay out of the liberal opening of the economy, remaining in the hands of the State, is not unreasonable.
Another relevant factor for understanding the decisions taken regarding the nuclear sector is the fact that this is a sensitive technology, as mentioned earlier, which has a great global control apparatus aiming at its non-dissemination, including the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which controls nuclear developments in countries not yet holders of technology, basically developing countries, as well as the use of nuclear reactors using technology imported by these countries. Therefore, there is the world nuclear geopolitics, exercised basically by countries having nuclear weapons, in the sense that nations not yet holding this technology remain so. This instrument of control of nuclear technology dissemination also serves to create a market reserve regarding nuclear products for pacific purposes, estimated of being worth US$ 40 billion/year.
The change occurred in the activity of the State in the energy sector represents one more complicating factor for an already complex problem, though such change does not prevents against the continuance of the line of research regarding the sector’s decision process, especially because the State remains holding an inducing role. Since there is no technological option proving much superior to the others, by using the judgment criteria described, the concerns towards attracting private investments and as investments and revenues in the expansion of the electric system represent huge figures, there are favorable conditions for the influence of political aspects in the decisions regarding expansion alternatives be increased.
On the other hand, the political differential of the alternatives bears relevance in many of the public decisions occurred in various sectors where the State holds regulating power or is the producer itself.

2. Political Aspects in the Decision Process

In Brazil, the favorable political forces towards nucleoelectric expansion are domestic and foreign manufacturers of equipment for nuclear plants, the foreign supplier of nuclear technology, plant construction companies, Brazilian military who see the adoption of nuclear generation as a step towards the construction of nuclear-powered submarines, the group within Brazilian Diplomacy who sees as correct the conduction of a nuclear program with pacific purposes concerned with mastering the technology, the state apparatus in the sector, environmentalists who see the increased use of nuclear energy as a solution to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, some scholars and businesses who intend to become suppliers of nuclear products, should the state monopoly in the sector come to an end.
The forces against nuclear energy generation include civil constructors of large dams, domestic and foreign manufacturers of equipment for hydroelectric or thermal energy plants (natural gas, fuel oil, etc), representatives of foreign Governments which do not wish Brazil to have a nuclear-powered submarine, the part of the country’s Diplomacy favorable to a position more closely attached to that of developed countries, foreign groups producers of goods and services for the nuclear industry who do not wish to see Brazil become a global supplier, the state apparatus of hydraulic or thermal (fossil-fueled) generation, environmentalists who believe that increased nuclear generation would bring about increased chances of accidents, and some scholars.
It is worth noting that part of these groups of interest or political forces do not have financial motivations, whereas others have. The political forces mentioned are the groups of interest which, acting politically through claims and imposition, aim at obtaining benefits, whether by increased power, money or social benefits. At times, these forces seek political support among politicians in the office, though they are not the only holders of political power. These forces wish their positions to be accepted by the group of decision-makers, which sometimes, even for a decision as relevant as the expansion of the nuclear sector, does not involve a large number of people. Furthermore, the reasons behind the decisions taken are not always exposed in a transparent manner, and the documents supporting the decisions always regard technical argumentation, apparently logic, though not always impartial.
The accuracy of the process could be ensured by an informed society, which may occur only if such society has a satisfactory level of technical information and political awareness, as well as with the existence of means of communication truly democratic and interested in promoting informative, constructive debate. Anyway, decision-makers, whether socially committed or not, seek not to confront the public opinion, should one exist, which may be a consequence of manipulation by groups of interest. On the other hand, decisions based on popular approval will be irrefutable in the short and midterms.
Thus, those bearing interest in a given decision, arrange the publication of paid articles, encourage lectures, congresses with carefully chosen specialists presenting opinions of interest to the sponsors, in short, our society is bombarded with camouflaged propaganda through various types of media. As the ordinary citizen does not have the technical, economic, environmental (among others) knowledge to make a sound judgment of the arguments, and the messages it receives are actual marketing pieces, this citizen becomes then an advocate of the decision which suits best its values, or refrains from taking a position.
It is worth noting that these various lobbying activities are not unethical, under a legal standpoint, for there is the understanding that, in advertising, one may omit the flaws of its own product. One may not provide untrue information regarding the positive aspects of it, nor regarding the negative aspects of third parties’ products.
Therefore, the complex technical, economic, environmental and social settings of the electricity expansion alternatives, which must be judged under relevant criteria, many of which may not be quantified, added to lobbyists’ activities, to the lack of constructive, democratic mass communications, and to the governmental decision-making process inaccessible to the ordinary citizen, result in a situation where a rather small number of decision-makers, under strong influence by groups of interest, defines the future of the Brazilian energy sector, and consequently, the country’s nuclear sector as well.
This work seeks, exhaustively, to present the complexity in the decisions towards the expansion of Brazil’s generating park, the social responsibility required by such decisions, the fierce dispute for the appropriation of the sector’s exceeding output, the strong interests involved in the decisions and, in the case of nuclear energy, the struggle for power through the possession of its technology. It is expected that the reader, from now on, recognize the traps in articles with argumentation focused in a few points, clearly aiming at enhancing a given source of generation and with a restricted scope of analysis.
As the government in any country will be, despite the popular vote, a representation of dominating political forces, which may not reflect the force of the people, the hypothesis of the government undertaking, in the Brazilian case, the task of straightening out this complex political issue does not exist. This is because Brazil’s weak representative democracy does not offer mechanisms for a judgment socially committed for proposals regarding infrastructure sectors, even when the proposal has a strong social impact. Only a highly conscious and wellinformed population, strongly claiming their rights, could offset the pressures by forces acting on decision-makers in the electrical and nuclear sector with particular interests.
This paper does not propose an authoritative alternative, not only for it may also be biased and do not necessarily improve the decision process, but also because it contributes for the increase of political unawareness of the society. The practice of successive elections, without suppressing responsibility and the people’s right to present their claims is key to the development of political awareness in our society.
Despite these analysis are being presented now, they do not refer specifically to the present Government, but to all Brazilian Governments of the last 40 years. Besides this fact, we recognize that the nuclear decision is one of hundreds of relevant ones that Governments had to take.

3. Conclusion and Recommendations

Considering that (i) the representatives of the people often do not act as such, (ii) details of the electrical and nuclear sector are normally not included in the programs of Presidential candidates, and also of candidates running for other positions, (iii) in the Brazilian culture, the programs of winning candidates do not necessarily have to be fulfilled, (iv) there is no tradition of frequent direct consultation to the society in relevant issues, (v) foreign, economic and power-related interests involved are considerable, (vi) the civil society does not have a significant number of entities overlooking decisions important to the society, (vii) there is no media unrelated to groups of capital, (viii) the strong dependence of government leaders on the economic power sponsoring their campaigns, and (ix) in the absence of hopes of fast awareness of the society, decision-makers enjoy full freedom to follow in the direction indicated by the most active forces. The less politically aware and conscious a population is, the easier it will be to approve programs of interest to the dominant political forces, with little importance given to the program’s merits or demerits.
Actions could be proposed to improve the levels of education, information and political awareness of the people, but such qualities are important for the country to have better citizens. Therefore, they would not acquire such characteristics only to be able to make better decisions regarding the electrical sector, though this would be a consequence. It is obvious that our society needs to improve political awareness, and in this regard, educational and cultural development is necessary, though not enough. Exposition to political matters, their discussion and the improvement in perception through reading and lectures, schooling, etc. are the only antidotes against political alienation.
One recommendation, aiming at increasing the responsibility of the society in the decisionmaking process, is the inclusion of aspects regarding the alternatives for electricity generation in secondary education (High School), possibly in Science classes. State organs in the energy sector should increase the number of public hearings – currently few and far from where the population is, for these often provide excellent opportunities of discussion between State representatives and the people. However, these hearings must be for the public in general or for the segments to be affected by the measures at issue. They should not be like some hearings, so-called public, hold by Congress Commissions, where only representatives of the economic power get invited.
A Referendum is an option, but the execution is difficult, for instance, there are so many issues to be addressed and so many judgment criteria that the people would have to answer, forming a considerable number of questions. It is not guaranteed either that pre-vote television campaigns would suffice to clarify such a complex subject.
Concluding, a better mass communication system will be necessary if we wish to have a more representative democracy in our country. It is not possible to achieve a public discussion in the society if this discussion is promoted by groups of interest.

References

1. Ministério de Minas e Energia, Resenha Energética Brasileira: Exercício de 2008 (Preliminar), MME, Brasília, Brasil (2009).
2. d’Araújo, Roberto Pereira, Setor Elétrico Brasileiro – Uma Aventura Mercantil, CONFEA, Brasília, Brasil (2009).
3. Empresa de Pesquisa Energética, Balanço Energético Nacional 2008: Ano Base 2007, EPE, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (2008).
4. Empresa de Pesquisa Energética, Plano Decenal de Expansão de Energia 2008/2017, EPE, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil (2008).
5. Ministério de Minas e Energia, Matriz Energética Nacional 2030, MME, Brasília, Brasil (2007).
6. Ministério de Minas e Energia, Plano Nacional de Energia 2030, MME, Brasília, Brasil (2007).

03 outubro 2012

Falta de sustentabilidade da 11a rodada de leilões do petróleo

(Veiculado pelo Correio da Cidadania em 03/10/12) 

Paulo Metriconselheiro da Federação Brasileira de Associações de Engenheiros e do Clube de Engenharia

Em 18 de setembro, o ministro das Minas e Energia Edison Lobão anunciou para maio do próximo ano a 11a rodada de leilões de blocos do território nacional, visando à exploração e à produção de petróleo. Metade deles será de blocos terrestres e a outra metade de blocos marítimos, mas não pertencentes à área do Pré-Sal. A 12a. rodada está prevista para novembro do mesmo ano e contemplará blocos da área do Pré-Sal.

Hoje, no Brasil, existem duas leis que regem os benefícios e as obrigações das empresas petrolíferas que arrematam blocos nestes leilões. A lei 12.351 para blocos da área do Pré-Sal e a lei 9.478 para os demais blocos do país.

A lei 9.478 é de 1997 e, portanto, foi redigida no auge do autoritarismo neoliberal no país, quando as forças progressistas estavam bastante acuadas e impotentes. Nesta época, existia um rolo compressor dos neoliberais no Congresso.

Esta lei, apesar de ser conhecida como a “lei do petróleo”, em seu primeiro artigo, define os objetivos a serem alcançados com a política energética nacional. Os leitores podem testemunhar o grau de neoliberalismo da lei ao constatarem, nos tais objetivos, que consta “proteger os interesses dos consumidores” e não existe “proteger os interesses dos cidadãos”.

Existem, também, nos objetivos: “promover a livre concorrência” e “atrair investimentos na produção de energia”, que devem existir mesmo. No entanto, não existem objetivos do tipo: “garantir energia para as populações de baixa renda” e “utilizar o fornecimento garantido de fontes energéticas abundantes do país para atingir usufrutos geopolíticos”.

Pode existir algum leitor que não esteja a par das questões do setor e, em respeito a ele, repito, resumidamente, os prejuízos da lei 9.478. Os blocos são leiloados entre as empresas que se inscrevem para os leilões e nenhum privilégio é dado para as empresas genuinamente nacionais. Em diversos países e em muitas situações, empresas nacionais são privilegiadas.

Além disso, o petróleo é entregue na sua totalidade a quem o descobre, eliminando a possibilidade de seu uso geopolítico, pois, ao passar a pertencer a uma empresa privada, será impossível o Brasil fechar com outro país um acordo de garantia de suprimento de médio prazo baseado neste petróleo, obviamente com alguma contrapartida vantajosa para nós.

A lucratividade de um campo de petróleo é imensa. Por exemplo, o bloco BM-C-33 foi arrematado por cerca de US$ 15 milhões na sétima rodada em 2005 por um consórcio em que a Repsol era a operadora. A composição do consórcio foi modificada e, hoje, a Repsol Sinopec detém 35% da propriedade do mesmo, a Statoil 35% e a Petrobras 30%. O campo Pão de Açúcar foi descoberto neste bloco com 1,2 bilhão de barris, correspondendo a US$ 72 bilhões de lucro líquido.

Continuando com a análise da lei, as empresas pagam pouco royalty e participação especial, quando comparados com o que ganham. Inclusive, a participação especial só é cobrada para campos muito produtivos. Para municípios e estados, o royalty e a participação especial representam arrecadações razoáveis; entretanto, a perda de riqueza para o Brasil é incontestável.

Apesar de, nos editais dos leilões com esta lei, constar a exigência de compras locais, ela tem se mostrado inócua, uma vez que, por exemplo, só a Petrobras compra plataformas e sondas no Brasil. Além disso, só a Petrobras encomenda engenharia e desenvolvimento tecnológico no país. Como consequência, a Petrobras é a maior empregadora de brasileiros.

Os lobistas das empresas estrangeiras e os representantes delas travestidos de funcionários do governo brasileiro dizem que o Brasil aumentará sua produção futura e conseguirá exportar, graças às próximas rodadas. Realmente, estes fatos irão acontecer, mas o que não é dito é que irá ocorrer com pouco usufruto para nossa sociedade. Os acréscimos de produção serão das empresas, representando mais lucro para elas e, sendo estrangeiras, o lucro extraordinário gerado será remetido rapidamente para o exterior. O petróleo é exportado sem pagar nenhuma outra taxação, além do royalty e da participação especial, porque a Lei Kandir libera qualquer imposto sobre produtos exportados.

A sustentabilidade representa o conceito de uma geração deixar para sua sucessora um mundo com um grau de uso igual ou menor do que foi recebido. Assim, o nível de poluição ou de degradação do meio ambiente deve diminuir ou, na pior das hipóteses, permanecer o mesmo de uma geração para a seguinte. Também, os recursos naturais não renováveis e não abundantes devem ser consumidos com extrema parcimônia. Em resumo, deve-se viabilizar o maior número possível de gerações humanas que irão viver bem em nosso planeta.

Em nível mundial, o petróleo é um caso de recurso natural não renovável e não abundante. Contudo, quanto ao petróleo “dentro da cerca Brasil”, há diferença, pois existe alguma folga para o suprimento nacional, não se podendo dizer que ele é escasso. Dependendo do nível de exportação, ele poderá durar mais de 50 anos, tempo suficiente para o surgimento de uma fonte alternativa, graças a desenvolvimentos tecnológicos, ou uma nova maneira de satisfação energética da população. Entretanto, de nada servirá termos recebido esta dádiva do criador se não cuidarmos bem do seu destino.

Desta maneira, o conceito de sustentabilidade pode ser extrapolado, exigindo que uma geração só utilize uma reserva mineral abundante no país em seu próprio benefício e no de gerações futuras. Se for escolhido um uso para a reserva que signifique jogar fora a oportunidade de desenvolvimento que ela representa, não há sustentabilidade neste uso. A lei 9.478 acarreta o citado mau uso do nosso petróleo, com perda quase total do bem para a sociedade, o que nos permite atestar a falta de sustentabilidade da 11a rodada de leilões, respaldada nesta lei.

O que ocorreu na Noruega, quando o petróleo do Mar do Norte foi descoberto, é um ótimo exemplo. Existiam leilões para algumas áreas e a estatal deles participava de alguns consórcios. Entretanto, a taxação era justa e a maior parte do lucro ia para um Fundo do Petróleo, que tinha que trazer benefícios para diversas gerações de noruegueses, mesmo depois que o petróleo acabasse. Portanto, eles investiram em algumas áreas, inclusive muito em pesquisa, desenvolvimento e inovação. Com isso, conseguiram dar um salto no nível de desenvolvimento tecnológico do país, o que acarretou menos produtos com conteúdo tecnológico sendo importados e mais produtos deles competindo no mercado internacional.

A lei 12.351 procurou incorporar este conceito, mas isto é um assunto para outro artigo, inclusive porque só a 12a rodada será regida por esta lei. Finalizando, toda propaganda recente a favor da 11a rodada feita pela mídia do capital foi com o objetivo de garantir um lucro excepcional para as empresas estrangeiras e petróleo para os países desenvolvidos. Esta mídia é tão vergonhosa que, na época do anúncio da 11a rodada, cinco articulistas de um mesmo jornalão, além do editorial, falavam sobre os enormes méritos da decisão. Deve ser difícil ser articulista deste jornal e ter consciência, uma vez que é impossível haver tanta visão nebulosa e coincidência de pensamento, de forma espontânea.