Russians can pay for saving developing countries from climate change by increasing prices for electricity and heat

The Paris climate agreement, which is supposed to prevent a global increase in temperature, entered into force on November 4. It implies, in particular, the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. Its developers are confident that such measures will prevent global warming on the planet. Our country has signed this agreement, but ratification has been postponed until at least 2020. What are the risks of the agreement? This issue was discussed during the hearings Public Chamber RF (OP). Its experts believe that first it is necessary to develop an appropriate national methodology, since the tools offered by the West do not look indisputable and cause criticism. In addition, the Paris Agreement may entail the introduction of a carbon fee, and this will lead to an increase in the price of electricity for Russians by 1.5 times.

The Paris Climate Agreement, adopted under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in December 2015 and signed by many countries in April 2016, has effectively become a replacement for the Kyoto Protocol. It is aimed at curbing the rise in temperature on the planet.

Last year, environmentalists estimated that the global average temperature had risen by more than 1oC since the 19th century, with most of the increase starting in the 1980s and continuing to this day. According to a number of experts, all this was the result of active processing and combustion of hydrocarbons, which leads to the greenhouse effect. In order to contain rising temperatures, the world's industrialized countries need to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

However, whether the Paris climate agreement will be a way out of the situation and whether it will prevent a tragedy of global proportions is a big question. This document in its current form contains a lot of shortcomings. It was these gaps that were discussed during the hearings in the Public Chamber of Russia.

“Many aspects of the agreement are controversial in expert circles. This is also connected with the general attitude to climatology and warming,” Sergey Grigoriev, chairman of the OP commission for the development of the real sector of the economy, opened the hearings with these words.

The secretary of the OP Alexander Brechalov joined his opinion. “The first point of work in this direction will be the discussion of the results of the analysis of the socio-economic consequences of the implementation of the agreement, that is, the implementation of this idea. Any ill-conceived measures can drastically increase the financial burden on both companies and the population,” he said.

According to the head of Roshydromet Alexander Frolov, one of key issues related to the ratification of the Paris Agreement is its scientific validity. In addition, so far this agreement is only a framework and there is no modality in it. Further climate change is inevitable and the reasons for this process have long been understood. “We need a long-term development strategy until 2050,” Frolov said.

The same thesis was confirmed by Sergei Grigoriev. “The climate has always changed - both in the 17th and in the 18th century. Now the main problem is that there are no national methods. We refer only to foreign ones. The time has come to make efforts to develop a national methodology, because the theses that are put forward as indisputable raise big questions,” he said, emphasizing that “the degree of politicization and politicking around this topic is unprecedented.”

One of the stumbling blocks of the Paris climate agreement is the introduction of the so-called carbon tax - the payment for emissions. These contributions are planned to be sent to the Green Climate Fund, and then to developing countries for the program of "adaptation" to global climate change. Those who seek to limit the import of energy resources are interested in introducing a "carbon fee", for example, countries Western Europe. On the contrary, states whose economy is tied to the extraction of hydrocarbons and fuel production consider this mechanism not ideal. Thus, the budget office of the US Congress noted that the introduction of a "carbon fee" will lead to an increase in prices for many goods. And for Russia in its present form, it can lead to the most unpleasant consequences. According to the calculations of the Institute for Problems of Natural Monopolies, the damage to the Russian economy threatens to amount to $42 billion, or 3-4% of GDP.

“It is not clear from the agreement what we have signed. The draft decision turns the agreement into a liquidation document and involves intervention in internal politics our country through environmental mechanisms. Those who ratified it will supplement it without our participation,” Vladimir Pavlenko, a member of the Presidium of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, believes.

Moreover, he believes that the Paris Agreement is a vivid example of the application of double standards, created to get the opportunity to interfere in the internal affairs of any state, and primarily Russia. “The double standards of the Paris Agreement make it difficult to prove that our absorbing contribution is environmental donation. In the European Union, emissions exceed their absorption by 4 times, in the USA and China - by 2 times. In Russia, the balance is positive in favor of absorption. Our absorption resource is estimated at 5 billion to 12 billion tons, that is, 10 times more than in this document. So are we sinks or polluters? - asks Vladimir Pavlenko.

By the way, there is confirmed evidence that many countries that have ratified this document are falsifying information. For example, India records its emissions as a Brazilian sink, while the Americans post them as Canadian. There are also serious suspicions about the intention of the West to use our absorbing territories under bilateral agreements with different countries.

“It is necessary to switch to the format of a thoughtful study of numbers and threats,” agrees Konstantin Simonov, Director General of the National Energy Security Fund. - It is very important to tie the ratification of the agreement to the lifting of sanctions. The world community needs to decide whether we are with it or not. But for this it is necessary to put an end to the trade war.”

Moreover, we must not forget that there is a risk that the Paris climate agreement will result in additional and unexpected costs for ordinary Russians. “We all understand that we live in difficult economic conditions, and any ill-conceived decisions can cause a serious blow to the country's economy,” Sergei Grigoriev believes.

As noted in the report of the Institute of Natural Monopoly Problems, the introduction of a carbon fee could lead to a significant increase in electricity prices. The construction of replacement generating facilities will require about 3.5 trillion rubles. Under this scenario, the cost of a kilowatt for large commercial consumers will increase by 50-55%, for small commercial consumers - by 28-31%, for the population - by 45-50%, that is, 1.5 times. Obviously, without having worked out all the nuances, the ratification of the Paris Agreement will be a premature decision. In this regard, the participants in the hearings in the OP indicated their readiness to promote all initiatives and proposals in the future, up to President Vladimir Putin.

Denying reality is never good. Whether we like it or not, whether it is true or not, scientific world there is a very definite consensus that global warming, which we are seeing right now, is associated with an increase in the share of carbon dioxide in earth's atmosphere which is the direct result of human activity.

In the current situation, it is important to understand what is really happening and how Russia should behave in this case. Climate Games have long been a tool that is used for a wide variety of purposes. It is extremely important for our country not to become a victim once again, but to try to act in the current conditions to our advantage.

First, let's dive into the past and find out how this story developed. It all started back in 1972 with the UN Declaration on human environment environments where there is, for example, the following:

“This is a moment in history when we must regulate our activities around the world with greater concern for the environmental impact of these activities.”

As a matter of fact, the Declaration is a very generalized document, the essence of which is that the international community is aware of the problem of adverse environmental changes and establishes certain principles.

On the basis of the Declaration in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro at the "Earth Summit" a thematic United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change () was adopted. More than 180 states, including Russia, have signed the agreement. Our country ratified the UNFCCC in 1994.

Article 4 of the Convention states general principles the actions of countries to resist negative climate change, as well as the obligations that they take on. Among them, the development and implementation of national and regional programs to minimize negative impact on the climate, large-scale cooperation in this industry between state level, disclosure of information about the real state of affairs in the field of combating global warming.

The Convention, however, for all its timeliness, has only one, but a very serious drawback: there is not a word about responsibility in it. However, this is often the case with international instruments: countries fix "in all respects positive" norms, but do not establish responsibility for their implementation. And then the game begins: someone performs, someone only pretends to perform, and someone applies the provisions only in the part that is beneficial to him. Often there is a classic situation from the fable "Swan, Pike and Cancer." This is what happened with the Framework Convention.

By the way, Russia quite successfully fulfilled the norms fixed in this international document. The fact is that in the 90s, production in our country was, to put it mildly, far from best form, so emissions into the atmosphere were quite modest, especially against the background of other countries.

A new milestone in the history of combating adverse climate change was the Kyoto Protocol, adopted in 1997. It introduced a very interesting innovation — a market-based mechanism for trading greenhouse gas emission quotas. So, the country that has not chosen for the year set limit, could sell quotas to other countries. However, the Kyoto Protocol again did not record responsibility, and countries such as China and India did not assume any obligations at all. Russia, again, diligently implemented the Kyoto Protocol and, foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, even exceeded it.

In general, the shortcomings of the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol were in sight from the very beginning, the idea of ​​a new, more serious document was in the air for quite some time. This is how the Paris Agreement was born.

If we analyze the legal history of climate agreements, we will see that there is a clear trend towards concretization. If the UN Declaration on the Human Environment, in fact, only raises the question of the need to care for nature, then the first outlines of the answer to the question: “How can we take care of it?” are already beginning to emerge in the UNFCCC. The Kyoto Protocol, in turn, introduces quite interesting regulatory mechanisms.

Now it's time for the Paris Agreement. What is its essence?

In fact, the Paris Agreement was supposed to be a response to the current situation in which plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by the world community are simply failing. There is an obvious attempt by the UN to somehow solve the problem in conditions where there are no coercive mechanisms, and there is no desire on the part of countries to impose quite definite and tangible responsibility on themselves.

The Paris Agreement is a document after the signing of which the countries committed themselves "to keep the increase in the global average temperature well below 2 ° C", and also declared the goal of "limiting the increase in temperature to 1.5 ° C". Translating from diplomatic into Russian, we can say that countries want to achieve an increase in average temperature in the 21st century no higher than 2 ° C and will try very hard to reach the level of 1.5 ° C, which, most likely, they will not succeed. In addition, the states decided to reach the peak of CO 2 emissions "as soon as possible". Previous national plans to reduce CO 2 emissions have been declared untenable, but now the participating countries have agreed that they will form new “more ambitious” plans and review them every 5 years.

As we can see, the Paris Agreement does not provide for any quotas, nor does it provide for any liability measures. Moreover, the provisions of the agreement do not impose any obligations on the countries at all. The famous climatologist James Hansen, after reading the text of the document, could not stand it and called it.

However, it seems that this is not a matter of ill will at all. It's just that the UN does not have any mechanisms in the current situation real influence to the situation. The organization really wants to, but it can't. Failure awaited the UNFCCC, very interesting decisions of the Kyoto Protocol in practice did not lead to the expected results. In this situation, the UN did not come up with anything smarter than to set a certain benchmark in terms of degrees for the twenty-first century and make "green growth" as prestigious as possible.

In fact, now everything is in the hands of the world community, which seems to be aware of the need to do something about the climate and at the same time does not really want to. Whether countries will be able to voluntarily reach the set targets is a big question.

Nevertheless, we are primarily interested in Russia. Should we zealously apply the Paris Agreement in practice? Let's be honest: Russia followed the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol not only because it had good will, but also because it was not very burdensome for us.

Today, when the country is on the verge of a new industrialization, the Paris Agreement can become a problem. We know one thing for sure: the implementation of international agreements on climate protection has not at all made our country “green and beautiful” in the eyes of the world community, especially the Western community. So for a bonus in the form of a positive image on international arena with dominance Western media you can't hope. At least for now.

However, one cannot fail to notice the obvious trend towards a "green economy", which has already taken shape in the world and which has been enshrined in the Paris Agreement. In addition, although the Paris Agreement does not provide for sanctions for non-compliance, there are great amount non-governmental organizations that will try to loudly remind us of the norms of the document. Naturally, various non-governmental institutions can become a tool in the competitive struggle against Russia. It is important not to give them obvious reasons for this and avoid reputational risks.

Our country is in a very interesting situation: on the one hand, it must develop technologically and at the same time be mindful of the environment, on the other hand, it is important not to fall into environmental populism and even a race with Western countries, when “beautiful” political decisions undermine the real economy.

It is important to keep abreast of the international environmental and economic agenda. How to approach the Paris Agreement? First of all, rationally, without forgetting the main goal - the environmental and economic well-being of Russia itself.

Languages

Paris Agreement- an agreement under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change that regulates measures to reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from 2020. The agreement was prepared to replace the Kyoto Protocol during the Climate Conference in Paris and adopted by consensus on December 12, 2015, and signed on April 22, 2016. Conference moderator Laurent Fabius, French Foreign Minister, said that this "ambitious and balanced" plan marked a "historic turning point" in reducing the rate of global warming.

The purpose of the agreement (under Article 2) is to “strengthen implementation” of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in particular to keep the global average temperature increase “well below” 2°C and to “make efforts” to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C.

The parties to the agreement announced that the peak of CO 2 emissions should be reached "as soon as possible".

The participating countries determine their contributions to the achievement of the declared common goal on an individual basis and review them every five years. The agreement speaks of the insufficiency of currently proposed national contributions, as well as "ambition" and "progress" as they are revised. No enforcement mechanism is envisaged, both in relation to the declaration of national goals, and in ensuring the obligatory achievement of them.

Feasibility of warming limits of 2 °C and 1.5 °C

According to current scientific understanding, a given warming limit, combined with the probability of not exceeding it, determines the size of the available emission budget, ie, future total CO 2 emissions. Climate modeling shows that for the 21st century, at least a 50% probability of 2 °C is on the verge of being achievable, and the emission budget for an 80% probability of 1.5 °C is zero.

National contributions

A study published in November 2018 examined the relationship between the declared emission reductions of individual countries and the resulting increase in temperature that would occur if, firstly, such emission reductions actually took place and, secondly, if they became a model for all countries. It is shown that the current climate policy of China, Russia and Canada leads to warming by 5 °C by the end of the century, the USA and Australia look a little better (more than 4 °C). For EU countries, this figure is 3-3.5 ° С.

Criticism

The text of the agreement does not provide for any sanctions in case the parties fail to achieve their declared goals, and in the international legal sense, any emission reductions are not mandatory for them at all. In this regard, the well-known climatologist James Hansen called the agreement "fraudulent", other critics speak of an "agreement to increase emissions".

The experts of the World Pension and Investment Forum believe that the situation when the participants, not bound by any quantitatively defined obligations, nevertheless come to an agreed common goal, is both a condition for the success of the Paris Agreement and, in fact, what they want to achieve with its help. - that is, from the point of view of formal logic, this agreement is based on the principle of a vicious circle.

Some consider it remarkable that the word "fossil fuel" does not appear in the text of the agreement at all.

"The Toronto Principle"

Paris Agreement used by activists environmental groups as a formal basis for requirements aimed at reducing CO 2 emissions. The agreement was first used in this capacity in a campaign to boycott fossil fuel investment at the University of Toronto. Students demanded an end to cooperation with companies that "brazenly ignore international efforts to limit the increase in global mean temperature by 2050 to no more than 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. These are fossil fuel companies, their actions are inconsistent with the agreed on international level goals".

All public institutions are responsible for making the Paris Agreement a reality and must use their status and power to respond in a meaningful way to the challenge of climate change. According to environmental activists, this approach brings together rhetoric and practical action.

September 23, 2019 Children's Fund The United Nations (UNICEF) organized a press conference at which Greta Thunberg and a group of 15 children from different countries announced that they are filing a lawsuit against five countries that ignore the need to reduce CO 2 emissions under the Paris Agreement: Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany and Turkey. The lawsuit was filed in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (in particular, the rights to life, health and peace). If the complaint is upheld, countries will be asked to respond, but any possible solution is not legally binding.

By country

Russia

The agreement does not contain Russian legislation grounds for ratification. In accordance with the Federal Law "On international treaties Russian Federation» Russia's consent to be bound by the Paris Agreement is expressed in the form of its acceptance.

The adoption of the agreement had opponents. So, in the summer of 2016, the business community called on President Vladimir Putin not to approve the document. The RSPP said that the implementation of the agreement would negatively affect the pace economic growth, and the obligation to bring emissions into the atmosphere below the level of 1990, Russia has already exceeded.

In November 2016, Alexander Bedritsky, Special Representative of the Russian President for Climate Issues, stated:

… we do not see the elimination of hydrocarbons as a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as part of meeting our commitments in the medium term. It is necessary to look for new recipes, taking into account the current and projected economic situation, plans for socio-economic development, take into account national characteristics and interests of the country.

By that time, the Paris climate agreement had been signed by 192 countries, 113 of which had ratified it. Russia, ranking third in terms of greenhouse gas emissions among the participants in the Paris Agreement (according to the UN), was the only one that did not ratify the document out of the top 15 countries in terms of emissions. Russia ranks fourth in terms of CO2 emissions in the world (2017) .

In April 2019, Putin stated that Russia would ratify the Paris Agreement after a comprehensive analysis of the consequences of its implementation. On July 5, Deputy Prime Minister Alexei Gordeev instructed the Ministry of Natural Resources, together with the Russian Foreign Ministry, to submit to the government a draft federal law on the ratification of the agreement by September 1.

However, on September 23, 2019, the opening day of the UN climate summit, the Russian government announced that two days earlier, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev had signed a resolution under which Russia accepted the Paris Agreement. According to a government press release, neither the agreement itself nor the federal law "On International Treaties of the Russian Federation" provided for its mandatory ratification. According to Bloomberg sources, the adoption of the agreement, bypassing the State Duma, allowed the Kremlin to avoid criticism from the deputies, who were in alliance with the opponents of the Paris Process, in particular, with energy and metallurgical magnates.

USA

see also

Notes

1. Final draft of climate deal formally accepted in Paris (indefinite) . CNN. Cable News Network, Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. (December 12, 2015). Retrieved 12 December 2015.
2. Paris climate talks: France releases "ambitious, balanced" draft agreement at COP21 (indefinite) . ABC Australia(December 12, 2015).
3. 175 countries have signed the Paris Climate Agreement (indefinite) . TASS. Retrieved April 22, 2016.
4. World seals landmark climate accord, marking turn from fossil fuels (indefinite) . Reuters. Thomson Reuters (December 12, 2015). Retrieved 12 December 2015.
5. Based on IPCC data (see p. 64 Table 2.2 of IPCC’s 5th AR Synthesis Report). Emissions for 2010-2014 are based on Global Carbon Project estimates, current emissions data from Friedlingstein et al 2014.
6. Meinshausen, M. et al. Greenhouse gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 458, 1158-1162 (2009)
7. Carbon Tracker & The Grantham Research Institute - Unburnable Carbon 2013, p.11 (PDF)
8. Yann Robiou du Pont & Malte Meinshausen Warming assessment of the bottom-up Paris Agreement emissions pledges Nature Communications vol. 9, Article number: 4810 (2018)
9. Paris equity check
10. James Hansen, father of climate change awareness, calls Paris talks "a fraud" | environment | The Guardian
11. At COP21, the world agreed to increase emissions
12. M. Nicolas J. Firzli Investment Governance: The Real Fight against Emissions is Being Waged by Markets Dow Jones Financial News, 25 January 2016
13. Report of the Advisory Committee on Divestment from Fossil Fuels , University of Toronto, December 2015
14. Benjamin A. Franta On Divestment, Adopt the Toronto Principle , Harvard Crimson, February 8, 2016

The problem of global warming is so often considered at the most different levels that has ceased to be something frightening for ordinary people. Many do not understand and do not realize the catastrophic situation that has developed with the Earth. Perhaps that is why, for some, a very serious event passed by, which concerned the settlement of issues related to minimizing the amount of harmful emissions resulting from anthropogenic activities.

It took place back in 2015 in France, it resulted in an agreement known to the world like the Paris Agreement. This document has a rather specific wording, which is why it has been criticized more than once by environmental activists. Let's see what kind of agreement this is and why the United States, one of the main initiators of the conference during which the discussion of the agreement took place, refused to take part in this project.

Invisible atomic attack

In 2017, scientists made a shocking conclusion - over the past twenty years, as a result of human activity, as much energy has been released into the atmosphere as multiple explosions of atomic bombs would have released it. Yes, it was explosions - not one, but many, many. To be more precise, every second for 75 years on the planet should have been undermined atomic bombs, equivalent to those that destroyed Hiroshima, and then the amount of heat released would be equal to what a person produces, “just” doing his economic activities.

All this energy is absorbed by the waters of the World Ocean, which is simply not able to cope with such a load and heats up more and more. And at the same time, our long-suffering planet itself is heating up.

It seems that this problem is far from us, the inhabitants of safe regions where tsunamis are not terrible, because there are no oceans nearby, where there are no mountains, and therefore there is no risk of landslides, powerful floods and destructive plates. Nevertheless, we all feel unstable, atypical weather, and breathe nightmarish air, and drink dirty water. We have to live with this and hope that the will of politicians will be enough for serious accomplishments. The Paris climate agreement could be one of them, because it is based on the voluntary consent of those in power to save our planet for posterity.

Ways to solve the problem

Perhaps the most serious problem for cleansing the atmosphere is the release of carbon dioxide. Its sources are the people themselves, and cars, and enterprises. The Paris Agreement on climate change is aimed at supporting the convention signed earlier in the UN on a similar theme.

The difficulty with CO 2 condensation is that it hardly dissipates on its own. This gas does not break down, it cannot be released artificially, and, according to scientists, its amount that is already in the atmosphere will reach a normal level that does not affect the climate of the planet if a person completely stops producing it. That is, factories, factories, cars and trains must stop running, and only then will the process of negative emission of CO 2 budget begin. It is unrealistic to fulfill such a scenario, which is why the Paris Agreement was adopted at the forum in Paris, according to which the participating countries undertake to reach such a level of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere, at which its amount would gradually decline.

This can be achieved in the case of creating high-quality barrier systems that clean up CO 2 emissions from enterprises, replacing fossil fuels (gas, oil) with more environmentally friendly ones (wind, air, solar energy).

Conditionally significant event

The Paris Agreement was adopted in 2015, in December. Six months later, in April 2016, it was signed by the countries participating in the consensus. The agreement entered into force at the time of its signing, but it will enter into force a little later, although not in such a distant future - in 2020, until then the world community has time to ratify the agreement at the state level.

According to the agreement, the powers participating in this project should strive to keep the growth of global warming at the level of 2 degrees at the local level, and this value should not become the limiting threshold for reduction. According to Laurent Fabius, who moderated the meeting, their deal is quite an ambitious plan, ideally to reduce the rate of global warming to 1.5 degrees, which is the main goal promoted by the Paris climate agreement. The USA, France, Russia, Great Britain, China are the countries that at first take the most active part in the project.

Essence of the Paris Conclusion

In fact, everyone understands that it is almost impossible to achieve outstanding results in reducing carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. Nevertheless, the Paris Agreement was accepted both by the politicians themselves and by some scientists with a bang, because it should push the world community to stabilize the environmental situation, as well as suspend the process of climate change.

In this document we are talking not about reducing the concentration of CO 2 , but at least peaking its emission and preventing further accumulation of carbon dioxide. 2020 is the starting point when countries will need to demonstrate real results in improving the environmental situation in their territories.

The governments of the participating countries must report on the work done every five years. In addition, each state voluntary can make suggestions and financial support to the project. However, the contract does not have a declarative nature (compulsory and mandatory for execution). Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement before 2020 is considered impossible, however, in practice, this clause turned out to be ineffective, which was proved by US President Donald Trump.

Goals and perspectives

As we have already said, the main purpose of this agreement is to put into effect the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, adopted back in 1992. The problem with this convention was the reluctance of the parties to accept real and effective measures to prevent global warming. The words once declared on the stands were only loud rhetoric, but in fact, until the moment the Paris Agreement was approved, the countries that have the greatest economic activity, in every possible way hampered the processes of reducing their carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere by their enterprises.

Still, the climate problem cannot be denied anywhere in the world, and therefore a new agreement was signed. Its fate, however, remains as vague as that of the previous treaty. The main confirmation of this point of view is the assertion of environmental critics that the new convention will not be effective, because it does not prescribe absolutely no sanctions against those who violate the recommendations adopted under the Paris Agreement.

Participating countries

The initiators of convening a conference on climate change were several countries. The event took place in France. It was hosted by Laurent Fabius, who at that time served as prime minister in the host country of the conference. The direct signing of the convention took place in New York. The text of the original document is kept at the secretariat; it has been translated into several languages, including Russian.

The main activists were representatives of such countries as France, Great Britain, China, USA, Japan and Russia. In total, 100 parties officially took part in the discussion of this convention.

Treaty ratification

In order for the Paris Agreement to fully enter into force, it had to be signed by at least 55 countries, but there was one reservation. Signatures were needed from states that emitted at least 55% of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in total. This point is fundamental, because, according to the UN, only 15 countries constitute the greatest environmental danger, and the Russian Federation is in third place in this list.

At the moment, more than 190 countries have already done this (the total number is 196), including the United States. The Paris Agreement, which no one had previously allowed themselves to withdraw from, was announced by the Americans after the inauguration of the new president, making a lot of noise in the world political beau monde. In addition, Syria did not sign the treaty, and Nicaragua was one of the last countries to ratify it. The President of this state, located in Central America, previously did not want to sign the agreement, citing the fact that his government would not be able to fulfill the requirements set before him.

harsh reality

Alas, no matter how many signatures there are on the form of the agreement, they alone will not be able to rectify the catastrophic situation in ecological system our planet. The implementation of the Paris Agreement depends entirely on the political will of the officials responsible for monitoring compliance with legal standards by enterprises. In addition, as long as the development of oil and gas will be lobbied at the state level, it is impossible to hope that climate change will decline or even decrease.

Russian opinion

Russia did not ratify the Paris Agreement immediately, although it agreed with it immediately. The snag was largely due to the fact that entrepreneurs had a strong influence on the president of the country. In their opinion, our state has already reduced the volume of harmful substances emitted into the atmosphere, but the signing of the agreement itself will entail a serious economic downturn, because for many enterprises the implementation of new standards would be an unbearable burden. However, the minister natural resources and ecology holds a different opinion on this matter, believing that, by ratifying the agreement, the state will push enterprises to modernize.

US exit

In 2017, Donald Trump became the new president of America. He considered the Paris Agreement a threat to his country and its stability, stressing that it was his direct duty to protect it. Such an act caused a storm of indignation in the world, but did not make other world leaders stumble from the goals proclaimed in the document. Thus, French President E. Macron convinced both his electorate and the entire world community that the treaty would not be amended, and the doors would always be open for countries that wished to withdraw from the agreement.

Today in the TASS press center representatives of the authorities, the business community and environmental organizations discussed the opportunities and threats that the ratification of the Paris climate agreement could bring to Russia. The round table "Greenhouse effect for the economy: the first year of the Paris Agreement", held in the office of the news agency, helped to understand what changes await the country's energy balance after the entry into force of the document. The plan for ratification of the Paris climate agreement, we recall, was approved by the Government of the Russian Federation in early November, thus putting an end to the discussion about whether Russia should take on obligations to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

The document assumes that by 2020 a long-term strategy for low-carbon development of the country will be adopted and targets for reducing emissions by 2030 will be determined. However, with the advent of the plan, doubts did not disappear, the main of which is why does the oil and gas power need “clean” energy?

01.

Why is it necessary to negotiate?

Mankind uses today the resources of one and a half planets Earth. World economy is developing very extensively, and many resources do not have time to recover. It is not only about fossil fuels, but also about marine systems, fish stocks, forests. If this economic model is not changed, sooner or later we will lose the resources for life.

02.

Can the working group at the UN be trusted?

The scientific body, called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has more than 10,000 members from a wide range of countries, including about 700 from Russia. The work of the group is based on scientific research in the field of climate conducted by UN member countries and annual reports of experts on climate change on the planet. (In Russia, such studies are carried out, in particular, by Roshydromet, the Institute of Global Climate and Ecology of Roshydromet and the Russian Academy of Sciences, the oldest climate institute in the country, the Main Geophysical Observatory named after A.I. Voeikov.)

03.

What happened before the Paris Agreement?

Since 1997, the Kyoto Protocol has been in force, which has linked the economy and the environment, allowing countries to trade carbon emissions allowances and invest in projects to reduce emissions in other countries. The protocol divided countries into two groups: developed countries with fixed emission reduction obligations, and developing countries without strict obligations. Much has changed since the 1990s: the Soviet Union collapsed, the economies of the BRICS countries and the Persian Gulf rose sharply. And while countries that have committed to reducing emissions (including Russia) have done so, globally, emissions have continued to rise as other countries have become more important. Therefore, it became necessary to conclude a new climate agreement.

Reference:

The Paris Agreement was adopted during the Climate Conference in Paris on December 12, 2015 in addition to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The document regulates measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and should replace the Kyoto Protocol, the obligations under which expire in 2020. The agreement provides for the obligations of the parties to reduce emissions, the amount of which is determined by each country independently. To date, the document has been ratified by 96 countries. Russia signed the agreement in April 2016, but the political and business communities were hesitant to ratify it due to fears that the transition to a low-carbon development strategy would negatively affect economic growth.

04.

How is the Paris Agreement different from the Kyoto Protocol?

The Kyoto Protocol assumed a "directive" allocation of emission quotas, while the Paris Agreement works differently. It sets the trend, but does not introduce global regulatory measures in the form of quotas or other restrictions. Each country independently determines the figure by which it can reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and then a common goal is formed from these data. The Paris Agreement assumes that the participating countries will develop measures for internal carbon regulation - for example, a low-carbon strategy or a carbon tax (when each producer pays a certain amount for each ton of fuel burned).

05.

What is the purpose of the Paris Agreement?

common goal, which was agreed upon by the countries participating in the agreement, is to make every effort so that the global temperature in the world does not rise from the level of the pre-industrial era by more than 2 degrees.

06.

Two degrees - is it difficult?

All national programs presented in the Paris Agreement assume a global temperature rise of at least 3 degrees. No one has yet presented a set of measures that guarantees an increase in temperature on the planet by no more than 2 degrees.

07.

What is the danger of warming by 2-3 degrees?

With global warming of 2 degrees, by the middle of the 21st century, 500 million people will experience problems with water. If the world temperature rises by 3 degrees, this figure will reach 3 billion.

08.

Why should Russia participate in the Paris Agreement?

the main problem Russia today - low energy efficiency: the potential for energy saving in Russia is 40%. In other words, our country is losing as much energy as the whole of France consumes.

09.

What are the disadvantages of the Paris Agreement?

According to the Deputy Director of the Institute for Natural Monopoly Problems, the tax on greenhouse emissions, the introduction of which implies the Paris Agreement (the so-called carbon tax), will affect generating companies whose thermal power plants run on coal, as well as the owners of oil and gas stations - both from the collection itself and from rising natural gas prices. “The effect of the Paris Agreement will also be felt by consumers,” said Alexander Grigoriev. – Rising electricity prices will be the next inevitable consequence of the introduction of a carbon levy. IPEM calculations show that, while maintaining the current volume of generating capacities, the introduction of an emission tax will add 0.45–0.58 rubles / kWh to the cost of electricity, which corresponds to a price increase of 19–25% for the population and large industrial consumers, by 11– 14% for small and medium businesses.

“The expediency of a tax path to a carbon-free future is far from unambiguous,” agrees Fedor Veselov, a leading researcher at the Energy Institute of the National Research University “ graduate School economy". – Often, a carbon tax is seen as a way to increase the competitiveness of low- and non-carbon energy by increasing the cost of electricity from thermal plants. But under the conditions of objectively lower domestic prices for gas and coal, carbon tax rates will not be lower than $50-70 per ton of CO2. Another problem is the mechanism of using tax revenues. Can they be targeted to support technological restructuring in the power industry itself, forming a reverse mechanism for reducing the cost of low- and non-carbon projects, and will they not be a way to subsidize other industries or simply increase the budget? The additional tax burden will translate into the price of the final product, including the price of electricity and heat.”

10.

What is happening in Russia in terms of CO2 emissions?

Russia is now in fifth place in terms of carbon dioxide emissions. In the first place - China, in the second - the United States, in the third - India, in the fourth - the European Union. Such data are provided by the International Energy Agency in a report prepared in 2015 on the eve of the conclusion of the Paris Agreement. Under the Kyoto Protocol, Russia managed to reduce emissions, but not because of technological development, but mainly due to the closure of industrial production.
As part of the Paris Agreement, Russia announced a goal to reduce emissions by 25–30% by 2030 from 1990 levels.

11.

What should be done in Russia to curb harmful emissions?

The first measure is energy efficiency. Today, experts are talking about the revival of the energy efficiency program, and many expect more to come to this area. public money.

The second direction is the development of renewable energy.

The third is technology. Analysts talk about the danger of falling behind in the development of technologies that are somehow connected with renewable energy, with the issues of smart grids, smart cities, technologies that predict electricity consumption.

12.

What does the public discussion of climate-related issues give?

Understanding the danger and prospects. Ignorance breeds myths, which is why popularization and expert opinions are so important. Answers to some questions related to greenhouse emissions were received by Peretok from Angelina Davydova, director of the Russian-German Bureau for Environmental Information (RNEI), a recognized expert in climate issues. Angelina gave this lecture in October of this year in Irkutsk as part of the Energy of the Future project of the En + Group company.

Angelina Davydova - Director of the Russian-German Bureau of Environmental Information, science journalist. Since 2008, he has been an observer at working group Climate Action at the United Nations, is active educational activities in this area, collaborated with the publications Kommersant, Ecology and Law, The St. Petersburg Times, The Village and others.