Protecting the vital functions of Horul Azim should be the priority for decision making about oil development / the possibility of compatibility of Horul Azim wetland with oil development should not be assumed in advance

Ali Arwahi, an expert in the management of wetland ecosystems, said about the contradictory news published about the suspension of the development of 6 pads in Sohrab Square: until a clear and evaluable decision is announced about the fate of permits, environmental obligations and how to monitor their implementation, it is better not to consider the situation as a definite sign of a change in approach. The post of protection of vital functions of Horul Azim should be the priority of decision making about oil development / compatible possibility

According to Ambassador Arjan, the development of Sohrab oil field in Horul Azim wetland has been accompanied by expert discussions and considerations due to the ecological sensitivity of this wetland and concerns about the environmental consequences of oil activities. In recent days, the publication of different reports about stopping or continuing the implementation of a part of this project has once again brought attention to the issue of how to develop Sohrab Square and its relationship with the protection of Horul Azim.

As reported by Ambassador Arjan, Nasrullah Zarei, the CEO of Oil Engineering and Development Company, said about the company's latest decision to develop the Sohrab oil field in Horul Azim lagoon: "The license to develop this field has been issued in stages and has specific clauses, notes and obligations. Currently, the activity continues in the 2 pads that have already been licensed; But the execution of 6 other pads is not done at the moment.

After that, in a conversation with Shana, Zarei denied his statements in a way, and referring to the phased nature of the Sohrab Square development permit, he said: "This permit contains several clauses, notes, and commitments, and the executive operations are currently underway on the two pads that have received permits before." The next stages of the project, including the development of 6 other pads, will be followed according to the conditions and obligations contained in the license and executive requirements."

He continued: "My statements did not mean stopping the development of 6 pads of the Sohrab oil field, and Ambassador Arjan's perception that "temporary stop" or "operations are not on the agenda" in these pads was incorrect."

Regardless of this dispute about the implementation status of the project, the main question is whether recent developments can be evaluated as a positive sign in the way of wetland protection.

In this context, Ambassador Arjan had a conversation with Ali Arwahi, an expert in the management of wetland ecosystems, which you will read below.

The detailed executive status of the development of Sohrab oil field should be officially and transparently determined / until a clear and evaluable decision is announced regarding the fate of permits, environmental obligations and how to monitor their implementation, it is better not to consider this situation as a definite sign of a change in approach.

* Considering the accumulated damage to the Horul Azim lagoon and the environmental problems caused by the development of the Sohrab oil field, can the current suspension of the implementation of six new pads be considered a positive step and a sign that environmental considerations are being taken seriously? Or, considering that the activity in the two licensed pads continues and no decision has been announced about the cancellation of the development license, should this stop be considered merely a temporary postponement?

In response to the first question, in my opinion, if the implementation of six new pads is really stopped or postponed, this action can be considered a positive opportunity from the point of view of preventing the expansion of interventions in the wetland.

However, it should be noted that simply announcing a stop is not a sign that environmental considerations are taken seriously; Rather, the main criterion is to make an official and transparent decision about the fate of these pads and how to deal with the environmental effects of the project.

It is necessary to pay attention to the fact that in the published reports, it has been mentioned about the suspension of six pads and the continuation of activities in two previously licensed pads; But at the same time, another news indicates that the CEO of the Oil Engineering and Development Company has denied stopping the project. Therefore, the exact implementation status of the plan should be officially and transparently specified.

In my opinion, the issue should not be limited to stopping or continuing the activity of several pads. It should be clarified whether the cumulative effects of oil development on hydrology, water quality, wetland habitats and ecological continuity of Horul Azim have been properly assessed. If expert concerns remain, the suspension of new operations should provide an opportunity to conduct an independent evaluation, review previous decisions, and ultimately, consider the possibility of eliminating or relocating high-risk portions of the plan.

Until a clear and evaluable decision is announced about the fate of permits, environmental obligations and how to monitor their implementation, it is better not to consider this situation as a definite sign of a change in approach.

It is necessary to seriously review the development of Sohrab oil field, including the previously licensed pads / Issuing a license in the past should not prevent the review of decisions

*According to the experience of the development of previous oil fields in Horul Azim, including the Azadegan field, and considering the ecological sensitivity of the wetland and the damage caused by oil activities, should there be a serious review today about completely stopping the development of this field, including the previously licensed pads? Or can a balance between oil extraction and wetland protection be established by modifying the development method and applying environmental restrictions?

In my opinion, considering the ecological sensitivity of Horul Azim and the experience of construction and oil interventions in this wetland, a serious review of the development of the Sohrab oil field, including the previously licensed pads, is necessary. Issuance of licenses in the past should not prevent the review of decisions; Especially if new information, changes in wetland conditions or a more detailed assessment of cumulative effects show that the implementation of the plan can cause serious or irreparable damage.

At the same time, a distinction should be made between the principle of oil activity and the place, method and scale of its implementation. In a sensitive ecosystem like Horul Azim, it is not possible to conclude that the conflict between oil extraction and wetland protection has been resolved simply by relying on the implementation of a set of predetermined technical requirements. It remains to be determined whether environmental risks can actually be reduced to an acceptable level by exploring alternatives, including relocating pads, using less efficient technologies, and eliminating damaging routes.

As a result, in such an assessment, issues such as water diversion and exchange, interruption or limitation of natural flows, destruction of habitats, water and soil pollution, cumulative effects of infrastructure and long-term consequences of the project on local communities, including its effects on people's livelihood, health and hygiene, should be investigated. In addition, the evaluation should be independent, transparent and based on field data. The mere existence of a permit cannot be considered as a substitute for proving the adequacy of the environmental protection considerations and measures of this project.

The priority should be to protect the vital functions of Horul Azim, and decisions about oil development should be made based on the true limits of ecosystem resilience.

If valid evaluations show that the implementation of parts of this plan is not compatible with maintaining the vital functions of the wetland or there is a risk of serious and irreparable damage, stopping those parts, revising the permits or canceling them should be seriously considered and put on the agenda. On the other hand, the continuation of the implementation of each part of the plan must also be conditional on proving the possibility of real reduction of environmental effects, compliance with measurable requirements and having independent supervision; rather than simply based on the assumption that it is possible to balance oil development and wetland protection.

Therefore, the priority should be to protect the vital functions of Horul Azim, and decisions about oil development should be made based on the real limits of ecosystem resilience; Not that the capacity of the wetland or its compatibility with oil development is assumed in advance.

In conclusion, it can be said that stopping or postponing the implementation of new pads is considered a real step in the protection of Horul Azim wetland only when it leads to a transparent review of the entire plan, an independent evaluation of cumulative effects and a decision based on the ecological capacity of the wetland. In other words, the protection of Horul Azim should not be limited to meeting a few executive conditions; Rather, it should be ensured that the vital functions of this wetland will be maintained in the long term.