The Paris climate agreement has come into force. Why Russia needs the Paris Agreement The Paris Agreement on Ecology

ALL PHOTOS

Russia has not yet ratified the Paris climate agreement due to the need to adopt national documents on the transition to energy-saving technologies and introduce appropriate amendments to the current legislation
Moscow-Live.ru

The Paris Climate Agreement came into force on Friday, November 4th. This happened 30 days after the document was ratified by 55 countries that account for at least 55% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

The date of entry into force of the agreement was announced a month ago by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, the organization's website reported. UN Climate Secretary Patricia Espinosa called the adopted document historic. According to her, he "lays the foundation for another world," reports.

The global agreement on climate change was adopted in December 2015 in Paris. Representatives of 195 countries have agreed to reduce emissions into the atmosphere in order to keep the increase in air temperature on the planet until the end of this century within two degrees Celsius of pre-industrial levels.

Ideally, the increase in average temperature should not exceed one and a half degrees. According to scientists, this will avoid climate change, which is likely to become catastrophic and irreversible, writes The Guardian.

The Paris Agreement should replace the Kyoto Protocol, which will expire in 2020. Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement stipulates that all states assume obligations to reduce harmful emissions into the atmosphere, regardless of their degree of economic development. The document does not provide for quantitative commitments to reduce or limit CO2 emissions, so each country will independently determine its policy in this area.

Stéphane Dujarric, spokesman for the UN Secretary General, told reporters that 96 states have ratified the agreement so far, TASS reports. According to him, over the past few days, the necessary documents have been submitted by Denmark, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Saudi Arabia and South Africa. An important step towards overcoming the second threshold was the simultaneous ratification of the agreement by China and the United States.

Russia signed the Paris Agreement, but has not yet ratified it due to the need to adopt national documents on the transition to energy-saving technologies and introduce appropriate amendments to the current legislation.

Earlier, the head of the Ministry of Natural Resources, Sergei Donskoy, noted that the signing of the Paris Agreement on Greenhouse Gases would encourage Russian enterprises to modernize production and use more environmentally friendly equipment. He also stated that, despite the absence of quantitative obligations in the agreement, Russia has pledged to reduce emissions by 30% by 2030 from the level of 1990, Rossiyskaya Gazeta writes. In June, Russian presidential adviser Alexander Bedritsky said in an interview with TASS that Russia would join the Paris Agreement no earlier than 2019-2020.

On the eve of the entry into force of the Paris Agreement, the UN announced the need to tighten its rules. In order to fulfill their obligations, the parties to the agreement must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by another quarter more than promised, according to a report published on Thursday by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).

"In 2030, emissions are expected to reach 54-56 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent, well above the 42 Gt needed to create the ability to limit global warming to two degrees this century," the organization said in a press release. According to UNEP calculations, even if all the requirements of the Paris Agreement are met and the forecasts for the level of emissions to be achieved by 2030 are confirmed, at the end of the century the overall temperature will increase by 2.9-3.4 degrees Celsius.

Today, at 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. The 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 experts 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?

The common goal 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 of Russia today is low energy efficiency: the energy saving potential 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 households and large industrial consumers, by 11– 14% for small and medium businesses.

“The feasibility of a tax path to a carbon-free future is far from unequivocal,” agrees Fedor Veselov, a leading researcher at the Institute of Energy at the Higher School of Economics. – 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 become 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 a revival of the energy efficiency program, and many expect more public money to come into this area.

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, she has been an observer at the working group on climate issues at the UN, has been actively involved in educational activities in this area, collaborated with the publications Kommersant, Ecology and Law, The St. Petersburg Times, The Village and others.

On November 4, the Paris Climate Agreement comes into force. Its initiators expect it to be more successful than the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. But to achieve the goals of the agreement, investments in the environment will have to triple.

UN Headquarters (Photo: Reuters/Pixstream)

What is the essence of the Paris Agreement?

The Paris Climate Agreement was adopted during the climate conference in Paris in December 2015 and signed by most of the world's states in April 2016. It (.pdf) will replace the previous document that regulated global emissions of harmful substances, the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Starting from 2020, the new document will regulate greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides).

At the same time, the text of the agreement does not contain either absolute or relative data on the volume of emissions that a particular country will have to reduce: everything will be voluntary, but all countries that signed the agreement will have to do this, regardless of the level of economic development. The document only sets a common global goal - to keep the increase in global average temperature below two degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels by the end of the 21st century, and also to make efforts to limit the increase in temperature to one and a half degrees.

As part of the agreement, developed countries agreed to annually allocate $ 100 billion to developing economies for the implementation of environmental policy. To date, the document has been ratified by 92 of the 197 countries that have signed the agreement, including China, the United States, France, Germany and others.

How realistic are the goals of the agreement?

The goals to limit global warming, stated in the Paris Agreement, look very ambitious and even difficult to realize. Now the readiness of states for one or another amount of reductions in harmful emissions is reflected in the so-called Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC) - documents that almost all countries of the world submit to the UN. They are not legally binding. According to a study (.pdf) by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, there is a 95 percent chance that temperatures will increase by 3.7 degrees Celsius by the end of the century if current emission reduction commitments are met and met. According to the most optimistic estimates (IEA, Climate Action Tracker), the temperature increase will be 2.7 degrees. A report by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) notes that an additional 12 to 14 gigatonnes of CO2 equivalent will need to be cut in greenhouse gas emissions to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement.

To turn the tide, the Paris Agreement provides for a five-year review of national emissions reduction contributions starting in 2020. At the same time, the document does not clearly define the mechanisms for monitoring emission reductions (it only notes that the implementation of the provisions of the agreement should be carried out with respect for national sovereignty and not be punitive).

Achieving the targets of the Paris Agreement will also require a significant increase in investment in clean technologies. Bank of America Merrill Lynch has calculated that to meet the temperature rise targets, investment in renewable energy will need to more than triple by 2030 (from the current $270 billion to $900 billion a year).

What did the previous agreement give?

The main difference between the previous global document on climate regulation, the Kyoto Protocol, and the Paris Agreement is that developed economies assumed clear legal obligations to reduce emissions of harmful substances. The legally binding nature of the agreement eventually led to the fact that the US Senate (the second country in the world in terms of harmful emissions) simply refused to ratify it. At the same time, countries such as India and China were not legally bound by the Kyoto Protocol.

The fact that China and the United States, the largest countries in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, were actually outside the scope of the agreement, in 2011, to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol of Canada (at the same time, this did not result in any penalties for Ottawa). Calculations by the Global Carbon Project organization show that the protocol did not bring any positive consequences in terms of reducing harmful emissions. Against this background, the achievements of Russia, on which he imposed legal obligations, look significant: Russia by 2012 reduced the amount of harmful emissions by 31.8% from the level of 1990, with obligations only not to exceed this level.

Unlike the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement provides for the reduction of emissions by all its participants, regardless of the level of economic development.

How serious is global warming?

In November 2015, the UK Meteorological Service reported that pre-industrial levels of mean annual temperature were approaching a record high of one degree Celsius. According to NASA, the increase was 0.8 degrees. The average temperature in 1850-1900 is taken as the pre-industrial level.

In 2013, following a meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (under the auspices of the UN), a report was released in which the confidence that anthropogenic factors were the main causes of temperature increase since 1951 was estimated at 95%.

An increase in mean annual temperature of more than two degrees above pre-industrial levels could lead to drought, among other things, and could have a detrimental effect on cereal crops. Other negative effects associated with global warming are rising sea levels, longer wildfire seasons, more destructive hurricanes, melting ice, and more.

If in the scientific community the confidence that human activity is the cause of global climate change is close to absolute, this cannot be said about politicians. In particular, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is an opponent of the theory of the anthropogenic nature of global warming. In May, he announced that he would "cancel" US participation in the Paris Agreement if he won the election.

What will Russia do?

Russia, which as of 2014 was the fourth in terms of emissions of harmful substances, is not yet among the states that have ratified the agreement. The document was signed by Moscow six months ago, in April 2016, by Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Khloponin. At the same time, he said that Russia's contribution to the Paris Agreement would be to limit greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 to 70% of 1990 levels.

As Alexander Bedritsky, adviser to the President of Russia, told TASS in June, ratification by the Russian side may not occur until 2019-2020. He also noted that the Russian authorities have not yet begun to develop a national strategy for low-carbon development, pointing out that it will take at least two years to work on the document. “Our business, especially those who supply products for export, understands that it will not be long before it will be impossible to compete in the market with products that have a higher carbon footprint than others,” the presidential adviser said.

However, the attitude of Russian business towards the Paris Agreement turned out to be ambiguous. Back in December 2015, the main owner of Rusal, Oleg Deripaska, in an interview with the Financial Times, called the Paris Agreement "nonsense" and proposed introducing a global tax on hydrocarbons - from $15 per tonne of CO2 equivalent.

In June 2016, the head of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, Alexander Shokhin, pointed out the possible negative consequences of such measures. In his letter to Vladimir Putin, he noted that the Paris Agreement in Russia would create "significant risks for the fuel and energy complex of the Russian Federation, which is of systemic importance for the economy." Shokhin, in particular, noted that the implementation of the proposal for a "tax on hydrocarbons" at a rate of $15 per tonne of CO2 equivalent would cost the Russian economy up to $100 billion a year, while the damage from climate change would amount to 60 billion rubles. in year. According to the head of the RSPP, the obligations under the Paris Agreement can be fulfilled using existing instruments (nuclear and renewable energy) and without resorting to additional regulation of the fuel and energy sector.

June 1st US President Donald Trump announced that. According to the president, the withdrawal from the agreement will be carried out in accordance with UN procedures and will take up to four years. The president described his decision as "the fulfillment of a sacred duty to America and its citizens."

The withdrawal of the US from the agreement means a quarter of the UN climate funds allocated to the least developed countries, and also that the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the US itself will be slower. If the United States withdraws from the agreement, it will be difficult for the global community to achieve its goals, since the United States is the largest source of funding and technology for developing countries in their fight against the effects of climate change.

Why is the US withdrawing from the agreement?

Trump promised to make this decision during his election campaign last year. He has repeatedly stated that the Paris Agreement harms the American economy and reduces the number of jobs. According to Trump, US participation in the treaty threatened to lose 2.7 million jobs by 2025. According to Trump, the agreement could harm the economic interests of the United States, which he puts in the first place, and would enrich other countries such as India and China.

“This agreement is not so much about the climate, but about giving other countries a financial advantage over the United States,” Trump said. “Other countries applauded when we signed the Paris Agreement. They were crazy with happiness. Because doing so would put the United States we love so much at an economic disadvantage.”

Trump has said he wants a new deal that he says will be fairer to the world's first economy.

What does the Paris Agreement provide?

The Paris Agreement, which replaced the Kyoto Protocol, provides for a commitment to reduce carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. The document also provides for the allocation of $ 100 billion to developing countries by 2020 to solve environmental problems.

The purpose of the agreement is to prevent a rise in the average temperature on the planet by 2 degrees by 2100. Scientists believe that a more significant increase in temperature caused by the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere can lead to irreversible consequences for the environment. Each of the parties to the agreement determines its contributions to the achievement of the declared goal on an individual basis.

The agreement was adopted at the Climate Conference in Paris in 2015 and 2016. The agreement was signed by more than one hundred and ninety countries. Of these, 147 have ratified it. Russia has signed the Paris Agreement, but has not yet ratified it.

How did you react to the US withdrawal from the agreement?

Former owner of the White House Barack Obama believes his successor Donald Trump's administration is "giving up on the future" by pulling out of the Paris Agreement.

“I believe the US should be at the forefront of this group,” Obama said. “But even in the absence of American leadership, even as this administration joins the pathetic handful of countries that are abandoning the future, I am confident that our states, cities, and our businesses will do even more to lead and preserve for future generations our common a planet that is one for all of us.

The governors of the states of California, Washington and New York, which account for a fifth of the US economy, Jerry Brown, Jay Inslee and Andrew Cuomo announced the creation of a climate union. They promised to prove to the world community that the US could continue its efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including limiting the use of coal in the electricity industry and adjusting its emission quota systems.

Elon Musk- founder of Tesla and SpaceX - left the White House council in protest. He will no longer be a consultant to the US administration.

President Trump's rejection of the deal has sparked frustration among G7 leaders. German Chancellor Angela Merkel in a telephone conversation with Trump expressed her regret. French President Emmanuel Macron in a conversation with Trump said that the US and France will continue to cooperate, but not on climate change.

The Kremlin said that there is currently no alternative to the Paris climate agreement. According to Press Secretary of the President Dmitry Peskov, "effectiveness in the implementation of this convention without key participants will be difficult."

Premier of the State Council of the People's Republic of China Li Keqiang stated that China will fulfill the obligations stipulated in the Paris Agreement. China's state news agency Xinhua called the US decision a "global step backwards."

And about the economic war with traditional energy sources supplied by the Russian Federation to international markets - oil, gas, coal. However, the obvious threat to the energy and economic security of Russia does not stop the supporters of the Paris Agreement.

Last week, Mikhail Yulkin, head of the working group on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions management of the Committee on Ecology and Nature Management of the RSPP, told Nezavisimaya Gazeta about what the Paris climate agreement really is. In the article “The Paris Agreement: Difficulties in Translation,” Mikhail Yulkin directly says that “this document draws a line under the hydrocarbon era and opens the era of a green economy on a global scale.”

Mikhail Yulkin argues that due to the illiterate and inaccurate translation into Russian, some provisions of the Agreement are interpreted incorrectly - but in fact the document quite fully describes the decarbonization measures. At the same time, the author frankly replaces the terms of the international agreement approved by 193 countries with the wording that he himself would like to see there. Central to his concept is "low-carbon development", which, by the way, is never mentioned in the 29 articles of the Paris Agreement.

But the author is silent about the issues of adaptation to the adverse effects of climate change, the importance of which is repeatedly emphasized in the Paris Agreement. Why? Because Mikhail Yulkin heads the Center for Environmental Investments - and, from his point of view, investors should go where they do not want to go and do not aspire to go.

It is proposed to solve this problem by primitive methods in the style of "take away and divide". According to Mikhail Yulkin, it follows from the Paris Agreement that “revenues generated by carbon-intensive industries should be redistributed in favor of low-carbon industries and activities.” That is, for example, the income received by oil and gas companies should not be spent on the military-industrial complex, not on the construction of kindergartens, not on the training of doctors, and not even on the World Cup. No, it is necessary to “ensure the flow of financial and other resources”, for example, in favor of manufacturers of solar panels.

A similar point of view, by the way, was recently held in Germany - but it quickly became clear that the Chinese produce solar panels much cheaper, and the recipients of "redistributed" resources, unfortunately, cannot withstand the competition. It is to such a deplorable result that attempts to artificially stimulate initially weak industries or even create demand for services that are not in demand by consumers lead. It is significant that the Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia is now actively promoting the need for a bill that should oblige all domestic enterprises and organizations to report on greenhouse gas emissions. Those who will - not for free, of course - will support this process are already ready: the Environmental Investment Center headed by Mikhail Yulkin provides services in the field of inventorying greenhouse gas emissions.

Mr. Yulkin also speaks of the need to gradually stop investments in the production of hydrocarbon fuels (oil and gas), as well as in energy and transport, which use this fuel. But, if you follow his theses, you need to ensure the growth of investments in

“carbon-free energy and transport”. Obviously, what escapes his attention is the fact that "carbon-intensive" energy companies form the basis of the Russian economy - from orders for mechanical engineering and shipbuilding to financing the training of representatives of highly skilled blue-collar workers.

In fact, the lobbyist for the Paris Agreement and the author of Nezavisimaya Gazeta in his article suggests that the main strategic documents of the Russian fuel and energy complex and projects for their renewal are considered nothing more than a threat to the energy and economic security of the country. In particular, a new version of the Energy Security Doctrine of the Russian Federation, which is being prepared by the Russian Security Council, calls “the establishment of excessive requirements in the field of environmental safety” one of the main threats “in terms of the sustainability of production and the provision of services by fuel and energy companies.” “Requirements for the subjects of the fuel and energy complex in terms of ensuring environmental safety are in some cases excessive, economically and technologically not always justified, which leads to an increase in the costs of ensuring environmental standards for production and consumption,” the draft Doctrine until 2035 says.

In addition, the Doctrine classifies “tightening of climate policy measures in the world”, as well as “changes in the structure of world demand for energy resources and the structure of their consumption” as the main threats in terms of “competitiveness and sustainability of exports of Russian fuel and energy resources”. The draft Energy Security Doctrine also talks about the risks of these threats being realized. For the state, these risks will result in a reduction in tax, customs and other revenues to the budget, for society - a further reduction in funding for the social sphere, for Russian fuel and energy companies - a decrease in financial stability and investment attractiveness, for ordinary citizens - an increase in energy prices, an increase in electricity bills and heat supply.

Thus, it becomes quite obvious that the main goal of the Paris Agreement is not to care about the climate, but to change financial flows, to completely redistribute the entire world energy market. This is what various experts have already paid attention to. Thus, in the report of the National Energy Security Fund, published in June 2017, it was said that the "Low-Carbon Rate" is detrimental to the enterprises of the domestic fuel and energy complex, which is the main source of revenue for the state budget. At the same time, the report was skeptical about the prospects for a positive effect on the Russian economy from investments in low-carbon technologies: “The bulk of low-carbon technologies will have to be imported. Thus, the main profit from Russia's transition to a "low-carbon economy" will be received by foreign manufacturers, in particular, China and Taiwan, which account for the lion's share of solar panels produced in the world. In return, Russian manufacturers will get only an increase in costs and a drop in the competitiveness of their products.

In turn, the Institute for Natural Monopoly Problems (IPEM), in its report on the risks of implementing the Paris Agreement, noted that “a significant proportion of measures currently being discussed in Russia to combat greenhouse gas emissions, unfortunately, are characterized by significant risks for the national economy, social stability, energy and food security”. Among these risks were mentioned: a threat to socio-economic stability, especially for regions where there will be a need to carry out professional reorientation of the population and create new jobs; limiting the pace of Russia's economic development, caused by an additional increase in prices for electricity and heat; decrease in the competitiveness of Russian goods and the loss of sales markets; strengthening of territorial disproportions in the socio-economic development of the country's regions; rising inflation as a result of rising prices for electricity, gasoline, food and other goods.