Перспективы реализации лесоклиматических проектов в Российской Федерации в современных условиях

Shelter is key to delivering on COP27 commitments

Climate change has emerged as a defining challenge of our times. It is truly global in dimension and is not amenable to national or regional solutions. Unless a global and coordinated response emerges at the Copenhagen meeting of the Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in December 2009, we may soon be confronting an escalating crisis. Its success or failure will also determine the prospects for effective global governance because, in a globalized world, there already are and will be many more, cross-cutting issues that will require similar global action. What will be the architecture required to mobilize, sustain, and make effective a coordinated and collaborative response to climate change? Fortunately, in this case, we do not start from scratch. We have the legal basis, approved by international consensus for such an architecture, in the UNFCCC, which emerged from the historic Rio conference of 1992. The UNFCCC has identified the nature of the challenge we face as humanity, its various dimensions such as mitigation and adaptation, and the balance of responsibilities and obligations of parties to the convention. The fundamental principle underlying global action on climate change is common, but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. It is based on the acknowledgment of historical responsibility; that is, climate change is taking place as a result of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that have been accumulating in the earth's atmosphere as a result of over two centuries of fossil fuel-based industrial activity in developed countries. This implies that the lead with respect to climate change action must be taken by developed countries. In addition, the principle recognizes common responsibilities, namely, that developing countries also have an obligation, and that is to pursue a path of ecologically sustainable development consistent with their goals of economic and social development and poverty eradication. And finally, there is the concept of respective capabilities; that is, a recognition of the diverse levels of economic development and incomes among the parties, and, hence, a differentiated contribution to the global effort. The above elements can be summed up in one word: equity. The architecture that we build to tackle climate change must be equitable. Climate change manifests itself in two distinct, though interrelated phenomena: (1) adaptation and (2) mitigation. We need different tools to deal with them. Adaptation is recognition of the fact that countries already have to cope with the consequences of climate change. Extreme climatic events are causing immense disruptions. Agriculture is being impacted in several parts of the world as a result of shorter, but warmer, growing seasons. Sea-level rise in some areas is causing coastal erosion as well as increased salinity in coastal plains. There is evidence of the melting of glaciers in several parts of the world, with severe consequences for water security. In India alone, it is estimated that as much as 2 percent to 2.5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) is currently being spent on adaptation programs. This figure is bound to rise because climate change will continue to take place even if, by some miracle, GHG emissions could be reduced to zero tomorrow. The impact is much more severe in the world's tropical zones--the Least Developed Countries and the Small Island Developing States. Therefore, what we need is a mechanism through which we can build up the coping capacities of developing countries, particularly those that are most vulnerable. This will require both financial resources and technology transfer. An Adaptation Fund has already been created under the UNFCCC. It is currently receiving funds from a percentage (2 percent) of the proceeds of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). However, this is barely enough to finance a small number of adaptation projects in developing countries. …

Since the 70s of the last century, the increasing attention of the international community has been paid to global climate change, but all the international obligations assumed by the countries were exclusively declarative. Only since the 90s of the last century, countries and international communities began to take concrete quantitative commitments to reduce emissions that directly affect climate change. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), adopted in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 [1], was ratified by the Russian Federation in 1994. To achieve the final goal of the said framework convention, a protocol was adopted in 1997 in Kyoto [2], signed by Russia in 1999 and ratified by it in 2004. According to Stage I of the Kyoto Protocol, the total average annual emissions of the Russian Federation must not exceed the average annual level of greenhouse gas emissions achieved in 1990. Penalties for withdrawal from the agreement and noncompliance were not provided. To achieve the final goal of the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in connection with the end of the Kyoto Protocol in 2015, a climate agreement was adopted in Paris [3], signed by Russia in 2016 and ratified by it in 2019. According to the Paris Agreement, the volume of total average annual greenhouse gas emissions in the Russian Federation by 2030 should not exceed 75% of the 1990 baseline emissions. The so-called "carbon tax", which was repeatedly mentioned in the documents of the Paris Climate Conference, was not included in the decisions of the Paris Agreement on climate change, but at present, the WTO rules do not directly prohibit the introduction of such taxes. In this regard, the methodology for choosing the type of an isolated power supply system taking into account the "carbon footprint" becomes especially important. The article analyzes methodological approaches to the choice of the type of an isolated medium-power power system, taking into account greenhouse gas emissions.

The paper explores the history of the emergence and development of climate legislation in the European Union. It demonstrates that until the 1990s, the issue of global warming was primarily studied by scientists, whose alarming predictions were largely ignored by governments in most countries, despite long-standing knowledge of the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on global warming. The article highlights the earliest documented references to potential threats of climate change caused by the greenhouse effect, dating back to the first half or mid-19th century, and involving prominent scientists such as the French mathematician and physicist Joseph Fourier, the American physicist Eunice Foote, the Swedish physical chemist Svante August Arrhenius, and the Irish physicist John Tyndall. The main international conventions and other agreements related to climate regulation are identified, their order of adoption is traced, and their significance and influence on the development of European climate legislation aimed at combating global warming through reducing greenhouse gas emissions are assessed. Among the key events that initiated the development of EU climate policy, the UN conference in Stockholm in 1972 is emphasised, as it was the first platform to discuss this issue. As a result, the Stockholm Declaration, which includes 26 principles and 109 points of the environmental action plan, was adopted. Additionally, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was adopted in 1992, and was joined by 198 countries, including Ukraine, which ratified the document in 1996. A major international development, actively supported by the EU, was the introduction of the Emissions Trading System, which has been evolving rapidly, especially since the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. This marked the first time that almost all countries committed to legal obligations to reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. Another important document that contributed to the development of European climate legislation was the Paris Agreement of 2015. The key difference between this agreement and the Kyoto Protocol was that the agreement did not impose strict obligations on any party to restrict greenhouse gas emissions. Instead, it suggested that each country independently establish such obligations and report on them, considering their nationally determined contributions, or NDCs. The compatibility of modern Ukrainian legislation with the European legal framework in the climate sector is examined. A conclusion is reached regarding the shortcomings of Ukraine's current climate policy. Specifically, there is currently no precise regulatory and legal framework for anthropogenic methane emissions, particularly in the agricultural sector; nor is there a legally established concept of «climate security», which is presently not distinguished within domestic legislation from the term environmental security. Meanwhile, in the European Union, «climate security» has long been an entirely independent branch of climate law development. In Ukraine's Law «On the Basic Principles of State Climate Policy», the term «climate security» is only mentioned once in Article 3 of the law, without any definition. It is also highlighted that there is a need to enhance domestic legislation in the climate domain by aligning it with European standards, which primarily involves the development and enactment of a comprehensive «Climate Law».

Recibido: 11/09/2014 Aceptado: 30/06/2016La investigación de los efectos del cambio climático es uno de los mayores desafíos para la humanidad. En la actualidad, se debate la cantidad y los flujos de las reservas de carbono en los bosques. En cuanto a estos flujos reducen las concentraciones de CO2 en la atmósfera. En este contexto, la Convención Marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Cambio Climático (CMNUCC) se ocupa de las medidas concertadas a nivel internacional para reducir las emisiones de CO2 y aumentar el secuestro de carbono (C) a través de la intervención humana, incluyendo todas aquellas actividades relacionadas con el manejo y gestión forestal. Sin embargo, la silvicultura y el manejo de bosques han sido reconocidas como actividades donde es extremadamente difícil establecer un control cuantitativo de los aportes inducidos por las actividades del ser humano relativas a la emisión o secuestro de C a la atmósfera. En las diferentes convenciones y acuerdos, por ejemplo, los acuerdos de Marrakech (2001), solo la re-forestación se incluyó como acciones subvencionables en el contexto del mecanismo de desarrollo limpio (MDL). Luego de arduas negociaciones y con el transcurrir del tiempo, se fueron incorporando una amplia gama de actividades forestales, que culminaron con los procesos de REDD y REDD+. Dentro de REDD+, por ejemplo, se logró la compensación financiera para las medidas nacionales exitosas que reducen la deforestación y la degradación forestal. Se pensó, entonces, en la necesidad de contar con sistemas eficaces y fiables de seguimiento. Mediante los informes de medición-reporte y verificación (MRV) se ha establecido y aceptado como un marco estándar para procesos de monitoreo, que consiste en un inventarios de recursos (tradicionalmente inventarios forestales) como un componente clave. En este trabajo se aborda y analizan los retos del sensoramiento remoto en el contexto de los proyectos relacionados con los bosques y el MRV. Se hace, además, un abordaje de la necesidad de estudiar los cambios estacionales de la vegetación en Costa Rica y de cómo estas variaciones pueden afectar los resultados de los proyectos de mapeo de ecosistemas boscosos.

BackgroundAt the 15th Conference of Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, Copenhagen, 2009, harvested wood products were identified as an additional carbon pool. This modification eliminates inconsistencies in greenhouse gas reporting by recognizing the role of the forest and timber sector in the global carbon cycle. Any additional CO2-effects related to wood usage are not considered by this modification. This results in a downward bias when the contribution of the forest and timber sector to climate change mitigation is assessed. The following article analyses the overall contribution to climate protection made by the forest management and wood utilization through CO2-emissions reduction using an example from the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia. Based on long term study periods (2011 to 2050 and 2100, respectively). Various alternative scenarios for forest management and wood usage are presented.ResultsIn the mid- to long-term (2050 and 2100, respectively) the net climate protection function of scenarios with varying levels of wood usage is higher than in scenarios without any wood usage. This is not observed for all scenarios on short and mid term evaluations.The advantages of wood usage are evident although the simulations resulted in high values for forest storage in the C pools. Even the carbon sink effect due to temporal accumulation of deadwood during the period from 2011 to 2100 is outbalanced by the potential of wood usage effects.ConclusionsA full assessment of the CO2-effects of the forest management requires an assessment of the forest supplemented with an assessment of the effects of wood usage. CO2-emission reductions through both fuel and material substitution as well as CO2 sink in wood products need to be considered.An integrated assessment of the climate protection function based on the analysis of the study’s scenarios provides decision parameters for a strategic approach to climate protection with regard to forest management and wood use at regional and national levels.The short-term evaluation of subsystems can be misleading, rendering long-term evaluations (until 2100, or even longer) more effective. This is also consistent with the inherently long-term perspective of forest management decisions and measures.

Ocean negative carbon emissions: A new UN Decade program

By the middle of the next century, the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere will be twice preindustrial values, if current trends continue. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has concluded that the balance of evidence is that Earth's climate will warm as a result, although much uncertainty remains, particularly about local and regional effects. The effects of climate change go well beyond increases in temperature. Floods and droughts could become more common and severe. Sea levels are expected to rise by around 50 centimeters (give or take a factor of 2) over the next century. In the longer term, climate change could interfere with the Gulf Stream, which greatly warms the climate of northern Europe. Because of the long residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere, it takes around 100 years for a reduction in emissions to have an effect. The oceans' high heat capacity provides additional inertia. As heat diffuses slowly to the deeper oceans, it will cause further expansion, so even if there were no further change in climate (which would require a 60 decrease in CO2 emissions below current levels), sea levels would continue to rise for hundreds of years. As when turning a large ship, there are long lags between actions aimed at leveling off CO2 concentrations and actual stabilization of those concentrations. This is a strong argument for early action. The economic debate about reducing greenhouse gases tends to be split into two groups. One concludes that strong and early action is essential lest we (in President Clinton's words) burden our children with our failure to act. The other group is concerned that such action will be expensive, costing jobs and adversely affecting economic competitiveness. The naysayers' arguments deserve attention. But experience with environmental action in other areas, such as reducing sulfur emissions, chlorofluorocarbons, and lead in gasoline, suggests that abatement costs will turn out to be lower than initially feared. Several recent studies, including one by the U.S. Department of Energy, have suggested that significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are technically possible and can be made economically feasible, in large part by increasing the use of energy-efficient technologies. Many of these actions will bring other benefits, including increased industrial efficiency and thence competitiveness, and environmental gains such as improved air quality. The task of reducing emissions falls very broadly on all sectors of society. For example, the United Kingdom's emissions result about evenly from road transport (22), domestic uses (27), and industry (28); a miscellany of other categories (including other transport and heating and other energy use in shops and offices) makes up the remaining 23. The United Kingdom will hold a national consultation on a climate change program next year. The main features are likely to include more efficient production and use of energy in the main sectors of the economy, further drives to develop combined heat and power schemes and generate more electricity from renewable sources, and measures to create a more sustainable transport system. The United Kingdom already has a policy to increase taxation on road transport fuel at 6 above the rate of inflation each year. Much of the difference between the negotiating positions of the United States and the European Union (EU) derives from the United States' feeling that it will be harder for it to reach ambitious targets. This is largely because the United States is so far behind in addressing the problem of climate change; its emissions are projected to be around 13 higher in 2000 than in 1990. Per capita carbon emissions in the United States are double the EU average. We also need to think long. Whatever emissions target for 2010 is agreed upon at the third Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Kyoto, Japan, on 1 through 10 December must only be a first step. Decisions that are effective in the short term must not hinder our options for meeting future reduction targets. The actions needed to address climate change will be impossible to accomplish unless the public is persuaded of the need for them. This is hard, because although the truly serious consequences lie decades in the future, the magnitude of tomorrow's problems depends crucially on today's actions. Our institutions are not well adapted to handling issues such as climate change, on which our long-term fate hinges.

Announcements at Johannesburg earth summit appear to guarantee the agreement will take force at the end of this year. The Kyoto protocol, which requires industrial countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and offers developing countries incentives to do the same, was adopted in 1997 as an implementation amendment to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. That treaty was adopted at the last earth summit dedicated to sustainable development, in Rio in 1992. The Kyoto Protocol takes force only if ratified by countries contributing 55 percent of the worlds unwanted gas emissions. Russia's statement of intent, together with a similar statement from Canada, seems to guarantee that this criterion will be satisfied. Russia's decision to join the Kyoto regime was hardly a surprise. Because of the economic depression the country suffered after the collapse of Soviet communism, its greenhouse gas emissions have dropped drastically, so that the country already in effect has met Kyoto targets. More significant, perhaps, was Canada's decision to also seek ratification of the agreement. The Kyoto Protocol still faces opposition from some of Canada's provincial governments, but given the country's parliamentary system, in which the will of the governing majority normally holds sway, ratification seems very nearly assured.

<p>Canada has a long record of failing to achieve its international climate commitments. These include the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) collective goal of returning to 1990 levels of greenhouse gas emissions by 2000, Canada’s legally binding Kyoto Protocol target of 6% under 1990 levels by 2012, and its political target announced at the Copenhagen conference of achieving a 17% reduction in emissions from 2005 levels by 2020. Rather, national emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) rose 21% between 1990 and 2020, from 602 to 730 megatons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) per year.1 </p> <p>The ongoing public engagement on the 2035 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target offers a momentous opportunity to that Canadian society cannot afford to ignore if it is ever going to close the gap between its international commitments and its actions. Building on my research at Toronto Metropolitan University as member of the International Law & Global Justice Initiative (ILGJ), my previous post-doctoral research at the Cambridge Centre for Environment, Energy and Natural Resource Governance (C-EENRG) and a recent piece that I published in The Conversation, I would like to provide the following three submissions to your consultation. </p> <p><em><strong>March 27th, 2024</strong></em></p>

The 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change commits signatories to preventing 'dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system', leaving unspecified the level of global warming that is dangerous. In the late 1990s, a limit of 2°C global warming above preindustrial temperature was proposed as a 'guard rail' below which most of the dangerous climate impacts could be avoided. The 2009 Copenhagen Accord recognized the scientific view 'that the increase in global temperature should be below 2 degrees Celsius' despite growing views that this might be too high. At the same time, the continued rise in greenhouse gas emissions in the past decade and the delays in a comprehensive global emissions reduction agreement have made achieving this target extremely difficult, arguably impossible, raising the likelihood of global temperature rises of 3°C or 4°C within this century. Yet, there are few studies that assess the potential impacts and consequences of a warming of 4°C or greater in a systematic manner. Papers in this themed issue provide an initial picture of the challenges facing a world that warms by 4°C or more, and the difficulties ahead if warming is to be limited to 2°C with any reasonable certainty. Across many sectors--coastal cities, agriculture, water stress, ecosystems, migration--the impacts and adaptation challenges at 4°C will be larger than at 2°C. In some cases, such as farming in sub-Saharan Africa, a +4°C warming could result in the collapse of systems or require transformational adaptation out of systems, as we understand them today. The potential severity of impacts and the behavioural, institutional, societal and economic challenges involved in coping with these impacts argue for renewed efforts to reduce emissions, using all available mechanisms, to minimize the chances of high-end climate change. Yet at the same time, there is a need for accelerated and focused research that improves understanding of how the climate system might behave under a +4°C warming, what the impacts of such changes might be and how best to adapt to what would be unprecedented changes in the world we live in.

Avoiding dangerous climate change, conserving biodiversity, and sustaining water resources are three of the greatest environmental challenges facing humanity: their expression and management are inextricably linked. National governments have adopted multilateral environmental agreements to respond to these issues by providing mandates for action, setting higher environmental standards, mobilizing resources, and sharing knowledge. This article examines whether three relevant, global conventions—the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands—are being implemented as effectively and efficiently as possible by managing conflicts and enhancing positive synergies among them through integrative mechanisms. Systematic analysis of the conventions identifies many conflicts between measures adopted under the UNFCCC and the two biodiversity-related conventions, as well as unrealized positive synergies. Detailed assessment of integrative mechanisms reveals isolated examples of good practice. More commonly, integrative measures were not being used, particularly by the UNFCCC. After more than a decade of attempts to expand interconvention collaboration and harmonization, I conclude that voluntary efforts need to be replaced by financial incentives or governance reforms if perverse impacts are to be avoided and these agreements are to be better implemented.

The energy sector in South Africa is highly driven by coal, making the country one of the highest greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters in the world. As one of the signatories to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the country is determined to reduce its carbon footprint. In this paper, the role of green hydrogen produced from renewable energy sources to the South African energy sector is presented with the objective of increasing the share of renewable energy in the country's energy mix. First, an overview of the South African energy sector is presented with the aim of pointing out the energy inputs and the usage patterns. Thereafter, the potential of renewable energy resources that could support green hydrogen production is highlighted. Some of the key findings show that 67% of total primary energy sources in South Africa is coal. Industrial and residential sectors account for the bulk of energy usage with 53% and 19%, respectively. It is also revealed that industrial and transportation sectors account for 51% and 38%, respectively, of GHG emission with the residential sector contributing only 2%. The renewable energy resources in South Africa are encouraging for green hydrogen production. Solar has an average 2500 h of sunshine per year with daily total solar irradiation between 4 and 6.5 kWh/m2 day. The annual average wind speed ranges from 5.6 to 8.7 m/s with power density between 218 and 693 W/m2 at 10 m anemometer height in the coastal region of the country. The biomass potential is estimated as 83.91 Teragram per annum with hydropotential of 4.851 GW. This paper is important as it will serve as a firsthand scientific information for optimal development and investment in green hydrogen production in South Africa.

Deforestation and forest degradation due to land use, land cover change (LULCC) have become one of the prime contributors to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, after fossil fuel combustion. Greenhouse gas emission from forestry is occurring in the atmosphere as a result of forest biomass combustion, forest fires and decomposition of deadwood materials. This is how increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is adding to the global warming and climate change. Many worldwide recognized studies have measured that forest ecosystems have the capacity to absorb more than 1/3rd of total carbon dioxide from the atmosphere which is the minimum requirement for keeping the atmospheric temperature under 2 °C by 2030. One of the commonly accepted methods for reducing carbon is carbon sequestration through forests. India has committed to capture 2.5 to 3 billion tonnes of CO2 by enhancing forest and tree cover through 2030. To achieve this target, India has adopted REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) strategy which aims to mitigate climate change by enhancing forest carbon sequestration through incentivizing forest conservation. Furthermore, this strategy strives to address the drivers of forest degradation and deforestation and also provides a roadmap for forest carbon stocks enhancement and sustainable forest management through REDD+ actions. This study investigates REDD+ contribution against global warming and climate change in India through forest carbon sequestration.

The paper provides a brief analysis of well-known works containing evidence of carbon accumulation in old-growth forests. The analysis of the current state of the problem allows us to conclude that old-growth forests continue to accumulate carbon. A map of old-growth forests in Russia, identified on the basis of tree age higher than 200 years, using remote sensing data, is presented, and estimates of carbon pools in these forests are discussed. According to the estimates obtained, the area of old-growth forests in Russia was 163 mln ha as of 2021, and carbon stocks in phytomass reached 7.33 bln t, with the contribution of larch forests and larch woodlands of 86%. It is shown that the most important cause of uncertainties in the estimates of carbon cycles in old-growth forests is the uncertainty of the concept of “old-growth forests.” The mosaic structure of forests, that is, the high horizontal structural diversity, contributes to the accumulation of nitrogen and carbon in soils due to the creation of functioning conditions for various plant species, including light-loving ones, and, accordingly, due to the presence of litter of different quality, which is important for soil biota. Old-growth mosaic forests in Moskvoretsko-Oka Plain accumulated more nitrogen and carbon in soils than forests at an earlier stage of succession with a low mosaicity (in average 80 t/ha versus 60 t/ha in the 30-cm layer). The old-growth fir-beech dead-cover forests of the Northwestern Caucasus, whose tree stand is characterized by the highest productivity in Russia and Europe and high carbon reserves in the tree stand, are characterized by low carbon stock in soils compared to forests at an earlier stage of development (in average 58 t/ha versus 99 t/ha in 30-cm layer). This is due to the low quality of beech and fir litter and the absence of a pronounced window mosaic, which prevents the colonization of light-loving plant species, including with a high quality of litter. It is shown that, along with microorganisms, it is necessary to take into account such agents of decomposition, mineralization and humification as earthworms, which play a key role in carbon cycles. Carbon stock in the litter of northern taiga spruce forests is an order of magnitude higher than in coniferous-broad-leaved forests; in the litter and in the mineral layer of 0–30 cm, the carbon reserves under the crowns of spruce trees for about 200 years turned out to be significantly higher than in the spaces between the crowns, exceeding 80 t/ha.