Countdown to Copenhagen: Russia disappoints environmentalists
Monday 13 July 2009By EU Reporter Correspondents
Shortly after taking office, at a meeting in the Kremlin in June 2008, Russian President Medvedev called for higher standards of environmental protection and for the state to finance renewable energy projects. In a rare comment on ecological concerns in Russia’s rapid-growth economy, he was quoted by news agency Interfax as saying “If we think only of the energy wasted in our heating networks, our country is first in the world: It is a bad record...with respect to energy efficiency, the majority of manufacturers lag behind modern times.” After decades of Soviet neglect, Russia has more than its share of environmental degradation and recent economic growth has exacerbated the situation considerably. Medvedev referred to the fact that one million Russians live in environments that have “dangerous levels of pollution,” while experts say two-thirds of Russia’s 142 million citizens have access to drinking water that is below international standards for pollution levels. He also made reference to the draft of a proposed bill on permissible levels of industrial emissions, scheduled be tabled in the State Duma later that year.
Russia ratified the Kyoto Treaty in November 2004, partly as a move to gain EU support for Russian entry into the WTO.
In June 2009 Medvedev set much awaited greenhouse gas emission goals, saying Russia, the world's third largest emitter of greenhouse gases, would aim to cut its emissions by 30 billion tonnes between 1990 and 2020. This target has, however, as its base line, the 1990 figures for the Soviet Union as a whole and not just Russia. In reality, this means that Medvedev's "cuts" will actually allow for a 30% increase in emissions. The targets mean cumulative cuts of 30 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases from 1990 (Soviet Union) levels, which implies that Russia will emit about 3 billion tonnes of greenhouse gas in 2020 compared with 2.2 billion tonnes in 2007.
Whilst this angered environmentalists, and will have disheartened other nations genuinely seeking to cut emissions, Russia should be seen in the context of a developing economy. We should remember, despite its vast size, Russia has a small economy, roughly comparable in size to that of the Benelux countries. There is a valid argument put forward by developing nations concerning environmental responsibility: they will point out that the west has achieved much of its growth at a time when such concerns were not to the fore, and that we have devastated vast swathes of the planet, pumped carbon into the atmosphere for decades, and left our own oceans virtually sterile. Emerging nations might ask why they should be subject to stringent environmental checks that will hamper their own development while the west enriched itself with scarcely a thought for the well-being of the planet. In many cases, although this might not strictly apply to Russia with its highly developed technical capabilities, developing nations simply cannot afford the expensive technologies required to bring their industries up to western standards.
As an adjunct to the Montreal Protocol (1990), which successfully reduced the emission of CFCs and other ozone depleting substances, the Multilateral Fund for the Montreal Protocol was established, whereby developing economies received financial assistance in implementing the protocol. Without this fund, it is unlikely that China or India, for example, could have ratified. Whilst it may not be possible to repeat such a scheme in other areas, there needs to be an understanding of the different levels of development, and the problems that many nations will face in meeting the same standards as the west. It is also worth noting that despite the success of Montreal, Russia has stood out amongst the global community for its non-compliance. Not eligible for financial assistance from the Multilateral Fund, Russia turned to the Global Environment Facility (GEF), a joint venture of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Bank established to provide funds for developing countries to implement environmental projects. Total funding of $78.8 million was provided through the World Bank between 197 and 2001. Russia's acceptance of Montreal was of great importance, as it had traditionally been one of the world’s largest producers and consumers of ozone-depleting substances and the sole producer of ozone-depleting substances among the countries of the former Soviet Union. In 1990, when production peaked, the nation manufactured an estimated 198,000 metric tons, accounting for between 15 and 20 percent of world production.
In its decision XIII/17 of the United Nations Environmental Programme heavily criticised Russia for its performance up to 2000, although it did "note with appreciation the fact that the Russian Federation closed CFC production as from 20 December 2000 and stopped Annex A and B ODS import and export operations as from 1 March 2000, as was confirmed in the letter of the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation of 9 December 2000 and of the First Deputy Minister of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation of 9 October 2000;" In that same year, however, Russia was alleged to be the source of much of the illegal CFCs coming onto the international market. Again, Russia was demonstrating its total disregard for legal obligations it had voluntarily entered into. Medvedev's greenhouse gas emissions targets suggest that nothing has changed and cynics might wonder if ratification of Kyoto might have more to do with the opportunity to sell lucrative carbon credits. In fact, in 2007 Gazprom announced its intention to sell carbon dioxide emissions credits needed in order to burn all that gas it sells to Europe. In this venture, Gazprom will be competing with commodity traders and others, but its position as a state company will give it an edge over the competition.