Profits russia from eu sanctions?

Does Russia benefit from EU sanctions?

The graph shows the emphasis effect of different gases from human activities, as well as various scenarios for the future development. The top curves make the sums over all the gases. An 80 percent decline in emissions was thus reduced the effect of all greenhouse gases so far that it corresponds to a CO2 content of slightly more than 450 ppm. In love, the increase in the global medium temperature with a 60% probability of two degrees celsius are roughly restricting the pre-industrial level. Image: wmo

The energy and climate week show: from raw material contaminations, russian and german mining battles, swedish corporations, thirsty megacities and the increasing number of methusal reactors

Are the sanctions of the EU and the USA (also norway involved) against russia may be a blessing for the country? The russian marxist and putin opponents boris kagarlitzki had already pointed out in a reading value with the publicist kai ehlers that the industry of the country only benefit.

Similar considerations are obviously russian environmental protectioners around or at least the group green russia, which complains on the left US platform open democracy the corruption in russia in general and lack of jerking on the environment and residents in the nickel degradation in particular.

Although the opinion is a little evaluating that certainly no monopoly has a corrupt manager.

But the environmental protectioners nevertheless have a fact that should be taken seriously: russia has developed after the decay of the soviet union – and perhaps already in the previous times their decline – to a raw material concomion back. That’s poor for the economy, because the sale of finite resources, of course, no long-term perspective can offer and also hinder the development of the domestic industry in many cases. The latter happens especially if the revenue from the raw material trade the course of the state preservation is printed upwards, which enlarges imports.

And it is also bad for the environment, since mining often associated with significant burdens due to wastewater, release of toxic substances over the favourhals and with damage to buildings and infrastructure in the neighborhood by lowering. Often the basics for fishing and agriculture are destroyed, as it seems to be in the case of the nickel project criticized by green russia. So if the mining company hindered by western sanctions or the west was no longer removing the products, the for the country would be more beneficial.


Whether it comes to the latter, however, allowed to be questionable. If the russian nickel is needed in the west, it will be bought there too. If it must be just about slaughter trails that had the advantage that the potential customers could print the price. The NATO states do not seem to have no problems with that the terror group is financed from the sale syrian and iraqi OLS. The lebanese newspaper daily star reported at the end of august of corresponding warnings of the iraqi government.

There were also similar reports at the beginning of july, with the note that the black market of the terrorists of the olpreis could fall on the world market. Troubles of various crises, the customers to leave the security of supply is the european standard sorts brent with little over 100 US dollars currently available to be favorable. Anyway, compared to the prices of recent years.

More greenhouse gases

Especially very little economic incentives for climate protection. OL is consumed until it with karacho the side of the peak "oil" go down and meanwhile, the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere continues to increase. This is expectant from the greenhouse gas bulletin published on tuesday in the world meteorology organization WMO.

Thus, the concentration of the most important greenhouse gases continues to increase. The carbon dioxide (CO2), which currently accounts for around 65 percent of the added greenhouse effect caused by human activities, reached 396 ± 0.1 ppm in 2013 (parts per million, millionths of volume levels on dry air). The CO2 content of the atmosphere is now 142 percent of pre-industrial levels and its relative importance continues to increase: around 83 percent of the emphasis on the gases emitted in the last five years is caused by CO2. Therefore, it has certainly its entitlement that the public debate is mostly focused on this gas and its sources, namely the burning of fossil energy carrier and – in a significantly lower mabe – the deforestation and conversion of prarie in farmland.


Only about half of these additional CO2 quantities remain in the long term in the atmosphere. Ocean and biosphare take the rest, without it became the concentration in the air hull and thus the emphasis much more rapidly. A quarter of the emitted CO2 is currently in the oceans. These are four kilograms of CO2 per day and earth residents, a whole lot so whose recording in the water is not without consequences.

On the one hand, the additional CO2 reduces the recording ability of the surface water for further emissions. Currently, the WMO bulletin, she only lies at 70 percent of the pre-industrial value and it will be very comfortable that it is reduced to only 20 percent until the end of the century. The sequence of goods with otherwise consistent conditions that more greenhouse gas remains in the atmosphere and the greenhouse effect is further enhanced.

On the other hand, the CO2 carbonane-losed co2 forms and thus leads to acidification of the oceans. This is already measurable and is in the previous out of the outset once for the last 300 million years of earth history. Operation means a tremendous stress for most maritime okosystems. All living beings with lime bowls or skelets will get difficulties to survive and apply themselves. Many details and also the exact guidance of the problem are still the subject of research. However, that there is a significant risk for the fish farm and thus the world food by the possible failure of a substantial part of the plankton is considered safe.

Durstende megacity

But these are long-term problems. In brazil’s most important economic metropolis, in sao paulo, people have a very acute problem: there are hardly any drinking water. The british newspaper guardian reported from the worst DURRE since the beginning of the records 84 years ago. The water must be rationed in the meantime, because the reservoirs of the megametropolis are only at ten percent.

Meanwhile, there is also a tangible quarrel with the federal government in brasilia and the neighboring rio de janeiro, depending on the waters of the same river, the rio jaguari, depending on the. Among other things, the removal in sao paulo is no longer enough water for the hydropower plants. According to wikipedia, in 2010 in the city of 11 million people lived in the city of sao paulo even 20.5 million people, which makes them the big metropolis of the sud half ball.