1
$\begingroup$

There are clear ways climate change can and does harm Russia: more frequent forest fires, floods, thawing permafrost. On the other hand, winter, says the latest IPCC report, is going to warm at a higher rate than summer, potentially making living in the country more, not less bearable.

Besides, there is at least one obvious economic advantage called the Northern Sea Route (if not for the Russian people, then at least for Putin's mafioso buddy Ilya Traber wanted by the Spanish police for a range of crimes and who co-owns the ports along the route).

Furthermore, a relatively recent study published in Nature corroborates the suggestion that the benefits of climate change are going to outweigh the disadvantages for Russia.

Is Russia going to benefit from climate change? If so, is there any particular reason the Russian government should lift a finger about it (it's clear they don't care about the Maldives going underwater)?

I'm asking this in part because Putin's rhetoric in the recent year or so kind of changed: if at first, he was more worried about worms being driven out of soil by wind turbines, later on he suddenly started to underscore the dangers that climate change poses for Russia.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I was going to point you to the Ricke paper, but I see that's what you posted. You may want to focus your question and perhaps strip out the commentary. $\endgroup$ Nov 17 '21 at 23:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ it looks to me like this is more politics than a question about earth science.if you remove the politics part this question can be re opened,as it is now it will be closed. $\endgroup$ Nov 18 '21 at 6:21
  • $\begingroup$ Related. I voted to close becaue this is not Earth Science. It is politics as trond hanses mention, touching engineering. $\endgroup$ Nov 18 '21 at 8:30

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.