Impact of 0.054% on an indigenous reserve prevents Ferrogrão from advancing

The Federal Supreme Court (STF) may decide this week whether to maintain the embargo or release referrals from one of the main logistics works in the country. On the agenda, the constitutionality of Law 13,452/2017, which changed the limits of the Jamanxim National Park, in Pará, by 0.054% and authorized the advancement of studies and projects for the construction of the Ferrogrão railroad.

This authorization was suspended in 2021 in an injunction granted by Minister Alexandre de Moraes to PSOL, who claimed potential damage to the environment and indigenous communities.

At the time, Moraes did not respond to manifestations from the Senate, the Chamber of Deputies, the Attorney General’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office, all taking a stand for the rejection of PSOL’s request and, in the case of Parliament, attesting that the conversion of Provisional Measure 758/2016 into law was made within the constitutional and regimental procedures.

The 933-kilometer railroad will connect Sinop, in Mato Grosso, to the port complex on the Tapajós River in Miritituba, in Pará, transporting crops from the north strip of the green belt in the Center-West of Brazil in a cheaper and more efficient way, one of the most productive soybeans and corn in the world.

The PSOL and environmentalists are against the railroad because it will cover a 53 km stretch along the edge of an indigenous reserve, requiring the use of 862 hectares for the bed and right of way for the tracks.

It is this lane, which corresponds to 0.054% of the total park in Jamanxim, and which runs parallel to the route of the BR-163, the Cuiabá-Santarém highway, which has prevented the green light for the project. It is an area already deforested, along a road that already existed long before the creation of the national park, in 2006.

The railroad’s environmental balance is admittedly positive

In defense of the constitutionality of Law 13,452/2017 , the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) argued that Ferrogrão, in addition to “reducing the emission of pollutants caused by the circulation of trucks transporting cargo, does not violate, but, on the contrary, implements the principle of sustainable development”

“No significant environmental damage caused by the small reduction in the area of ​​environmental protection in relation to the economic development provided by the construction of the railroad”, maintains the PGR.

Thus, although there is jurisprudence in the STF that the Constitution prohibits the alteration of territorial spaces specially protected by means of a Provisional Measure, even if later converted into law, in this case the reading would not apply, because the purpose of the constitutional provision is “to ensure the everyone’s right to an ecologically balanced environment”, which would be ensured by the benefits of the work.

During the Bolsonaro government, the Advocacia-Geral da União (AGU) had expressed its opposition to PSOL’s request, and therefore in favor of the constitutionality of the 2017 law. Indigenous Peoples, Sônia Guajajara, the AGU aligned itself with the arguments of the leftist party. And he went on to state that “there has been a decrease in the area of ​​integral protection in an environmental conservation unit – which entails, in practice, a reduction in the protection of the environment”.

Railway will mitigate truck traffic and pollution

The AGU said, however, to be in favor of continuing the technical studies. And he recognized the benefit of the railroad. “Notwithstanding all of the previous explanation, it is only worth reiterating that the understanding now exposed does not, as said, in any way reflect an institutional position in the sense that the implementation of the EF-170 railroad, considered by itself, would be harmful to the environment”, says the opinion.

“In fact, when completed, and provided that all environmental requirements are observed, Ferrogrão will mean high transport capacity and competitiveness in the flow of production through Arco Norte, a role that is currently performed by the BR-163, making it even possible to mitigate the truck traffic on that highway, providing less greenhouse gas emissions resulting from this traffic”, continues the AGU.

According to the calculations of the Association of Soy and Corn Producers in Brazil (Aprosoja), a harvest of 15 million tons would already justify the construction of Ferrogrão. Mato Grosso, however, already produces 90 million tons of corn and soybeans, not counting the production of beef, poultry and pork.

“Because of the production in the region, if it were all for the railroad, it would already be strangled from birth. From the Mutum region upwards, there are 40 million tons of grain. Today we already have the North-South railroad, which carries from Rondonopolis to Santos. From 70% to 80% of production would certainly go to the railroad”, says Antonio Galvan, president of Aprosoja.

Cost-benefit does not compare to the Belo Monte plant

Critics of the railroad have compared the work’s cost-effectiveness to the Belo Monte hydroelectric plant, as it supposedly causes a great impact on indigenous communities in exchange for little power generation. At this point, the Brazilian Association of Vegetable Oil Industries (Abiove) says that the comparison makes no sense.

“First, the impact on the communities is small, although it does occur, and second, the improvement in efficiency that the railroad will bring is indisputable. What it will mean in terms of offering services and logistical efficiency is a huge benefit. In that sense, you can’t even compare one thing to the other”, assures André Nassar, president of the Brazilian Association of Vegetable Oil Industries (Abiove).

As for environmental impacts, Nassar emphasizes that they are undeniably positive. “Because you are going to change trucks for railroads, so from the point of view of emissions and energy efficiency, there is nothing to discuss. You are going to take a modal that is not suitable for carrying large volumes of bulk and you are going to put a modal that is totally suitable for that, ”he says.

As it cuts through the Amazon biome, Abiove points out that the construction of the railroad will be subject to high exposure and surveillance. In addition, the main users will be exporters, the soy industry, who already practice a series of preventive and compliance measures to ensure that their products do not come from deforestation areas, have no connection with slave labor, or impact on indigenous communities. or violation of any other right.

Logistics corridor does not interest competitors

The soy producers’ association says that the game played by PSOL and environmentalists serves the interests of Brazil’s competitors, who would like to freeze the country’s agribusiness.

“Our big problem is with Brazilians who buy these crazy ideas from Europeans, and come to disturb us. As I said back in Brussels, in 2018: who are you to want to talk about Brazil or Mato Grosso on the environmental issue? Are we going to institute the Brazilian environmental law here to see if you accept it here in Europe?”, says Galvan.

The agricultural leader says, however, that he does not see how the work will be indefinitely embargoed. “They want to boycott us, but they won’t succeed. They can delay, we will lose two, three years, but it will end up leaving. The STF itself is already aware that it may even block it because of this MP, but it is a matter of passing another bill and we automatically resubmit the proposal. This always brings harm to the weakest, the poorest, to whom the product could arrive much cheaper, with a cheaper mode of transport”, he assures.

The columnist of People’s Gazette José Roberto Guzzo stated, in 2021, that what PSOL and its associates are doing against Ferrogrão is a crime, an aggression against Brazil and Brazilians. The exclusion of a minimum portion of the indigenous reserve, the so-called 0.054%, was decided by law of the National Congress.

“There is absolutely nothing wrong with the measure, except for one thing: PSOL is against it and, as has become common practice in Brazil, every time the extreme left loses a vote in the Chamber or Senate, its militants turn to the STF. to turn the table. They take almost all of them,” wrote Guzzo. In comparison, while Brazil has spent years debating the licensing of a 933 km railway, China annually builds 4,000 km of new railways, half of them for high-speed trains.