Focused Series »

Indo-European Origins
Siberia
Northern California
The Caucasus
Imaginary Geography
Home » Environmental Geography, Russia, Ukraine, and Caucasus, Siberia

Global Warming and Siberia: Blessing or Curse?

Submitted by on May 22, 2012 – 3:20 pm 15 Comments |  
GeoCurrents has recently emphasized the forbidding cold of the Siberian winter, stressing the obstacles that such a climate presents for the development of the region. Unmentioned in these posts is the possibility that Siberia’s climate will significantly change over the coming decades due to global warming. If the predicted warming occurs, could the change prove beneficial for Siberia, and Russia more generally? Many Russians think so. Such optimism, however, might prove unwarranted, as climate change could also generate significant problems for the region.

Regardless of Russia’s potential gains from global warming, the country has incentives for downplaying the severity of the crisis. The Russian economy rests heavily on the export of fossil fuels, and if climate-change concerns result in a wholesale switch to renewable forms of energy—as unlikely as that might be—Russia would suffer a major blow. Any major restrictions of carbon dioxide output would also hamper the Russian economy. Although Russia’s carbon emissions are surpassed by those of China and the United States, they are growing rapidly, and some analysts suspect that Russia could be the top emitter by 2030. Not surprisingly, skeptical reports about climate change often receive prominent coverage in the Russian press. In 2010, Time Magazine quoted a Russian environmentalists who argued that, “Broadly speaking, the Russian position has always been that climate change is an invention of the West to try to bring Russia to its knees”. Such paranoid views of climatic change as hostile machinations of the West are not uncommonly held by the Russian public. More recently, a Voice of Russia article showcased the position of Nikolay Dobretsov, Chairman of the Earth Science United Academic Council, who contends that a 40-year cycle of cool and warm periods is currently driving the global climatic regime, and that a change to cooler times is imminent. As a result, Dobretsov argues, global warming is a non-issue.

Russian experts who accept the reality of global warming, moreover, often welcome it for the advantages that it could bring the country. In September 2003, Vladimir Putin noted that global warming would help Russians, “save on fur coats and other warm things.” Other Russian politicians have focused more on the damage that climate change could do to Russia’s geopolitical rivals. The ultranationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, for example, is reported to have “publicly pined for the day when global warming takes its toll on the West, gloating that London will be submerged by the Thames and “Britain will have to give freedom to Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland.”

Possible economic benefits of a warmer world for Russia are spelled out in recent article by Serge Korepin. The displacement of the Siberian permafrost zone, which could retreat by more than 100 miles (161 km) by 2050, would facilitate the extraction of mineral resources. The reduction of the Arctic ice pack, moreover, would promote mining and drilling in offshore areas. By the same token, the retreat of the pack ice will ease maritime transportation in the far north, allowing the full realization of the long-envisaged Northeastern Passage, shortening shipping routes between the north Atlantic and the north Pacific. Actually, such changes are already occurring. As reported last year by the New York Times:

The Russians, by traveling near the coast, have been sailing the Northeast Passage for a century. They opened it to international shipping in 1991, after the breakup of the Soviet Union. But only recently have companies begun to find the route profitable, as the receding polar ice cap has opened paths farther offshore — allowing larger, modern ships with deeper drafts to make the trip, trimming days off the voyage and saving fuel.

Most importantly, warming could also enhance Russian agriculture, says economist Svetlana Soboleva. Although drier conditions might damage farming in southern European Russia, warmer temperatures and longer growing seasons would be beneficial in the north and east, especially in Siberia. Governmental reports have already noted enhanced agricultural production in some parts of Russia due to warmer conditions. The general consensus of climate-change specialists is that farming will be enhanced in high-latitude belts—of which, Russia holds the lion’s share. Indeed, worst-case scenario maps, such as that posted to the left, show the world’s main food-production zones moving to Canada, Siberia, and northern European Russia. In such an eventuality, Siberia would actually have a large advantage over North America, as most of the soil of northern and central Canada was scrapped off by the continental glaciers during the Pleistocene “ice age” and then re-deposited in the fertile plains of the American Midwest. Siberia, in contrast, was spared extensive glaciation during the same period, and in some areas saw the development of fertile, wind-deposited loess soils.

Prediction of the complete transformation of global agricultural and settlement patterns due to climate change are highly speculative, as specific changes of both temperature and precipitation are impossible to forecast with any accuracy. In actuality, the map posted above (“The World, 4 C Warmer”) is an alarmist fantasy, depicting as it does the vast expansion of “uninhabitable deserts” across most of the tropics and subtropics, even though a warmer world would almost certainly be a wetter world, as higher temperatures enhance evaporation over the oceans. (Note as well that the densely populated western Antarctica portrayed on the map would only be possible after catastrophic Antarctic deglaciation, which would result in a sea-level rise much greater than what the map depicts.)

Even in the short-term, the local effects of global climate change defy prediction, thwarting the development of reliable scenarios for agricultural adjustment. If the main consequence for Russia is the lengthening of the growing season in Siberia, the agrarian ramifications for the country could well be positive. But many experts foresee major climate fluctuations, marked by extreme weather events, as the Earth warms, which could result in marked increases in droughts, heat waves, and even cold-snaps. For some, the brutal heat experienced in European Russia in the summer of 2010, which caused an estimated $15 billion in economic losses, seems a harbinger of things to come. Global-warming skeptics, not surprisingly, regard the heat wave of 2010 as merely an outlying natural event, unconnected with human-induced climate change. A recent scientific study argues for a middle position, suggesting that, “global warming set the stage for, but did not directly cause, the deadly heat wave.” But it is noteworthy that that the 2010 heat wave was not felt across Russia. While European Russia was baking, most of northwestern Siberia was cooler than usual.

Even if global warming was not the direct cause the 2010 drought and heat wave, it may still be influencing Russia’s climate. A recent report claims that Russia has experienced a more warming over the past 35 years than any other country: “In the last 35 years, the average temperature in Russia went up by 1.5 degrees, while the average figure across the world is 0.8 degrees.” Such warming is not evenly distributed. The most significant temperature changes have been registered in eastern Siberia, with south Chukotka and the Kamchatka region seeing increases, “1.5 to two times more than in the rest of the country.”

Many experts expect global warming to accelerate, in part due to processes underway in Siberia itself. The permafrost is melting over a vast territory of Western Siberia—the size of France and Germany combined—which could soon turn some 360,000 square miles of peat bogs into a watery landscape of shallow lakes, releasing billions of tons of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Scientists are also concerned about the potential thawing of yedoma, or frozen loess deposits, in eastern Siberia. As the Wikipedia explains, “the amount of carbon trapped in this type of permafrost is much more prevalent than originally thought and may be about 500 Gt, that is almost 100 times the amount of carbon released into the air each year by the burning of fossil fuels.”

Concerns about permafrost melting are heightened by most global climate change models, which predict larger than average temperature increases in high-latitude areas. Different climate-change models, however, produce different results. Such differences are apparent in the two maps of predicted precipitation change posted here. Note that the first map forecasts reduced precipitation over most of western and southern Siberia, whereas the second shows enhanced precipitation over virtually the entire region. If the former predictions were to come to pass, agricultural gains that would seemingly be realized from warmer temperatures and a longer growing season could be cancelled by moisture deficiencies.

Another problem with the predicted positive consequences for Siberia’s agriculture concerns seasonal distribution of the overall warming. In many areas, warming has affected only winter temperatures, with temperatures during the growing season remaining stable or even declining. Russian scientists who examined trends in the “degree of continentality”—that is, the difference between average summer and average winter temperatures—showed that the Siberian climate in general has become less continental. Winters, in other words, have been growing milder more rapidly than summers have been growing warmer. For instance, the average summer temperature in Krasnoyarsk actually fell by 0.4 degrees between 1940 and 1990. In the far northeast, however, the opposite trend is observed: a widening of the seasonal gap over the period between 1950 and 2000.

Russia’s other potential gains from global warming could also be matched by losses. The thawing of permafrost, for example, could cause havoc with oil and gas pipelines, as well as with other industrial and residential structures. In cities such as Norilsk and Irkutsk, such gradual destruction of building foundations is already happening. The retreat of the Arctic pack ice also presents problems as well as opportunities. As the ocean becomes more accessible, it could also become more insecure. As a result, Russia is contemplating stationing more troops into the far north. A 2011 article quotes Anton Vasilev, special ambassador for Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as arguing that “Our northern border used to be closed because of ice and a severe climate. But the ice is going away we cannot leave 20,000 kilometres unwatched. We can’t leave ourselves in a position where we are undefended.”

The warming of Siberia’s climate may even harm the health of Siberia’s residents. The expected increase in weather variability, marked by more frequent anomalies and extreme events, could compromise the human immune response, especially among Siberian indigenous peoples. While it may not appear dangerous to inhabitants of warmer climes, studies show that a rise of summer temperature to 29° C and above causes increased mortality among peoples of the Far North. In addition to autoimmune disorders, other health consequences of global warming in Siberia would include a rise in enterovirus-caused infections, gastroenteritis, parasitical diseases, botulism, and rabies.  Already in the last five years reports have been appearing of infection-spreading ticks and mites emerging earlier in the season in south Siberian regions of Omsk and Novosibirsk.

Such health concerns, however, are unlikely to sway public opinion in Russia. In all likelihood, the Russian government will continue to simultaneously deny and welcome global warming.

 

Previous Post
«
Next Post
»

Subscribe For Updates

It would be a pleasure to have you back on GeoCurrents in the future. You can sign up for email updates or follow our RSS Feed, Facebook, or Twitter for notifications of each new post:
        

Commenting Guidelines: GeoCurrents is a forum for the respectful exchange of ideas, and loaded political commentary can detract from that. We ask that you as a reader keep this in mind when sharing your thoughts in the comments below.

  • Gearaltuafathaigh

    I would regard Anthropogenic Global Warming as an unproven theory currently – and the debate around it as extremely ideological. The fact is that the earth’s climate isn’t fully understood and is very complex – with lots of poorly understood processes. The best thing we can do is not waste so much (undervalued) hydrocarbon resources through inefficiencies etc.

  • Gearaltuafathaigh

    By ideological I mean that both sides start from positions of faith and are oblivious to reasoned argument. Reliable data is also not available much of the time – hence models are used to fill in the gaps. The decision on which data are reliable and included/excluded is also vital. 

    • Thank you for both comments. You make a good point that the changes in the earth’s climate are very complex and poorly understood. As you will notice, we did not talk about the causes for those changes (whether they are anthropogenic or not). Also, we’ve pointed out that whatever predictions have been made are “highly speculative” and “impossible to
      forecast with any accuracy”. So our goal has indeed been to consider the issue from different angles and to make a reasoned argument, rather than to make an ideological point. Whether we’ve been successful at that, is for you to decide.

  • Gearaltuafathaigh

    I accept your points – I used to be unquestioning about the mainstream consensus that man-made global warming was with us, but then I started to read the Watts Up With That blog and now possess much scepticism about both sides of this heated debate… I also live in Euroland, and the shenanigans of the last few years have made me very cynical and question everybody’s motivations and real intentions in public life. Geocurrents is a fine blog highlighting important trends and issues…

    • Thank you for your praise!

      The controversy is certainly there and many blogs express ideological positions one way or the other. We try to avoid that.

    • You are right to highlight shenanigans (a great word!) on both sides of the controversy.  “Climategate,” or the Climatic Research Unit email controversy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy)) certainly qualifies on the environmentalist side. It also seems to me that there is an unwritten rule among environmental journalists that any possible positive aspects of climate change are to be ignored at all costs. But that said, I do think that there are many reasons to be concerned, especially when one factors in the potential melting of the permafrost and subsequent release of massive quantities of methane into the atmosphere. But at the same time, I also think that we also fool ourselves if we think that climate modeling can provide accurate predictions of future climate patterns.  That is, I realize, a squishy response!

      • One additional consequence of the warming climate in northern Siberia that we haven’t mentioned is the disruption it causes to the migratory reindeer herding by the indigenous peoples such as the Nenets. So a warming does seem to be a kind of situation where the positive and the negative consequences are to be weighed against each other: yes, agriculture in southern Siberia could benefit from a warmer climate, but agriculture in northern Siberia, which is mostly reindeer herding, would suffer…

  • Gearaltuafathaigh

    Btw – shenanigans was first used in print in San Francisco sometime after 1850 or so (must check that again), and dictionaries think it comes from Gaelic speakers in the area – I once worked as an intern in Dublin, Ireland in the school textbook translation agency where they liked discussing etymology and the like; and this happened to come up. Webster’s dictionary thought it might come from ‘sionnacha ‘s géanna’ (foxes and geese) a child’s game, but the two guys thought it more likely to  come from ‘seanaithne againn (ar a chéile’) which is old-recognition to-us (each other) or ‘we know (each other) from old’; in other words we can get away with playing risky practical jokes on each other and not cause offence because we are old acquaintances and know the other means no (serious) harm!

  • Gearaltuafathaigh

    I agree that the release of massive quantities of methane from permafrost would be very scary – the recent increases in oil/gas prices seem to be a double edged sword; on one hand individuals and institutions are forced to be more efficient/less profligate in their use of these resources (imagine if they paid the same gas price in the U.S. as is paid in many European countries!), on the other hand it becomes more attractive to search out for and extract hydrocarbons from riskier environments – tar sands, deep-sea drilling, alaskan wilderness etc. Could I request an area you might cover? I’m very concerned about the Fukushima disaster in Japan, and can’t believe how little attention it receives in the mainstream media. Considering how the Soviets dealt with containg the Chernobyl problem, Japan’s reponse is frightening head-in-the-sand stuff…

    • Thank you for suggesting a great topic! We’ll definitely consider it in the near future.

    • Thank you for suggesting a great topic! We’ll definitely consider it in the near future.

  • Pingback: Siberian Genetics, Native Americans, and the Altai Connection « Cultural Geography « GeoCurrents()

  • JT

    Funny how the passage of time exposes global warming for the major fraud that it is. This article was written in May of 2012. Now here we are in December of 2012 and Siberia is experiencing RECORD COLD TEMPERATURES ! So much for the worldwide, money-grabbing fraud, A.K.A. global warming. I wish I could make millions off this scam, just like our beloved hero, the great fraud himself, Al Gore. He invented the internet and then skipped town to scam governments worldwide, based on his collection of dishonest, bogus, insanity laden lies, which he now calls climate change. How convenient.

    • wakeup world!

      hmm. i don’t think you can count a change that has happened in 7 months. we have to look at general trends — not one-offs!

      • wakeup world!

        oh, and also world averages (obviously there will be extremes in various places… going in both directions)! i can definitely notice the difference in climate over my lifetime. go to the himalayas, the alps or any other mountain range in the world and take note of the massive glacial recession happening there if nothing else will convince you that the climate (over-all) is warming… (also, ice separating and tumbling into the sea at lower altitudes). It is happening without a doubt… and in all parts of the earth! We have to stop being in denial — the evidence is staring us in the face. It couldn’t be any more obvious!!!

  • Pingback: Michael T. Klare: Entering a Resource-Shock World: How Resource Scarcity and Climate Change Could Produce a Global Explosion « Random Ramblings of Rude Reality()

  • Pingback: Michael T. Klare: Entering a Resource-Shock World: How Resource Scarcity and Climate Change Could Produce a Global Explosion « naked capitalism()

  • Pingback: Resource Shock: How Resource Scarcity and Climate Change Could Produce a Global Explosion | Alternet | Nature reads()

  • Pingback: How Resource Scarcity & Climate Change Could Produce Global Explosion | The Oldspeak Journal()

  • Pingback: Entering a resource-shocked world: How resource scarcity and climate change could produce a global explosion | Climate Connections()

  • Pingback: Will China Colonize and Incorporate Siberia?YES, according The Asia Times.do Y agree? - Page 2 (politics)()

  • Pingback: Entering a Resource-Shock World | The Global Realm()

  • Pingback: Μια διπλή θανάσιμη κληρονομιά | Κατάβασις()

  • Connect it up to a gas station and encourage people to drive.

  • Pingback: Russia’s “Bill of Health” and the Sochi Olympic Smokescreen - Languages Of The World | Languages Of The World()

  • Pingback: How climate is changing as we know it |()