Report - UNDP Russia

More documents

Recommendations

Info

where the level of pollution was already too high.Pollution growth exceeded growth of production atthe oldest fields (those in development for over 35years accounted for over 80% of all emissions) and atnewly commissioned sites due to flaring ofsecondary and natural oil gas. Specific emissions atboth the oldest fields (Frolovo in Volgograd Region,Pokhvistnevo in Samara Region) and the newest(sites in Khanty-Mansi and near the town ofStrezhevoy in Tomsk Region) exceeded 100 kg/1000roubles. The lowest rate of pollution growth was at20-30 year-old extraction sites around Surgut,Kogalym and Langepas. These areas have a relativelylower level of pollution due to specifics of gascontent in the oil-bearing strata, oil field area andwell numbers, and Soviet-vintage infrastructure forutilization of waste. High rates of specific pollutionare also characteristic of gas production centers(both extraction areas and locations of compressorstation).The situation is different in the oil refiningindustry, where there have been a number of positivetrends since the mid–1990s. The growing number ofcars on Russia’s roads and creation of verticallyintegrated oil companies helped refineries to operateat full capacity, and investments were made tomodernize facilities and increase the share of moreexpensive products in overall output. As a result,emissions per 1000 roubles of industrial outputdeclined by nearly 10 times (from 40-54 to 4.8-16 kg)in cities where oil refineries were the only source ofpollution (Kirishi, Kstovo, Novokuibyshevsk, Syzran,Tuapse). Reduction of pollution, though to a smallerextent (from 3-9 to 2.3-6.9 kg/1000 roubles ofproduction), was also recorded in cities where oilrefineries were not the only, but the major source ofpollution (Yaroslavl, Ufa, Perm, Saratov, Volgograd,Omsk, Khabarovsk). However, specific emissions permillion tonnes of primary refining output have onlyhalved, and this is true both for towns and cities whichpreviously had low pollution levels, such as Tuapse(5.5 kg/m.t. of oil) and for towns and cities withaverage levels, such as Komsomolsk-on-Amur (10.2kg/m.t.) or high levels, such as Ukhta (41 kg/m.t.).Rates of pollution reduction slowed down as early as2002, because further progress would require muchgreater investment.The first stage of Russia’s economic growthdid not lead to large-scale negative environmentalimpacts. However, the mechanism ofcompensational growth, based mostly on recommissioningof idle facilities and commissioningof low-efficiency hydrocarbon fields, has led to anincrease in specific and gross environmentalpressure in towns where pollution levels werealready high. Operation of obsolete assets led toincrease in pollution levels, mostly in small citiesand towns, which account for nine of out of tenurban settlements where specific pollution figuresgrew in 1998–2002.Rates of growth in the oil & gas industry andof investments by large companies have sloweddown since summer 2004, and positive effects fromsector restructuring and investments have beenmainly exhausted. Rate of growth of investments inenvironmental protection equipment declined from2004 (in comparable prices) and there was a declineof environmental investments in 2007, withemission control being the hardest hit (84%reduction of investments compared with theprevious year).Even though specific emissions continueto decline nationwide, the share of towns and citieswhere they are growing has returned to levels ofthe 1990s (47% of towns and cities, with 35.4% ofthe population). Several large regional centers(over 50,000 inhabitants) with heavy industry orcoal-fired power stations were among the 495towns and cities where environmental parametersworsened in 2007 (the large centers in questionwere Izhevsk, Vladivostok, Chelyabinsk,Novosibirsk, Krasnoyarsk and Volgograd (Figure7.2.4)). The pollution gap between large and smallurban settlements started to narrow in 2007, butonly due to this worsening of the situation in largecities.Energy and fuel intensity in the economymay well increase in the context of the latest crisis.Electricity generation declined in the transition crisisof 1990–1998, but specific emissions grew in 89% ofRussian towns and cities, reflecting environmentalinefficiency of many Russian power stations. Whenin 2006 power consumption rose by 4.2% andproduction of thermal power plants by 5.2%140 National Human Development Report in the Russian Federation 2009
Figure 7.2.4Trends in specific atmospheric emissions in cities and regions of the Russian Federation (kg/1000 roubles of production in comparable prices, 1995-2007)Index of specific atmospheric emissionsfrom stationary sources, 2007/1995, %AbbreviationsMoscow Region Kemerovo RegionCities RegionsMore than 150100 – 15070 – 10050 – 70Less than 50No dataPopulation, thousandsMore than 1000Less than 50141
Page 1 and 2:
National Human Development Reportin
Page 3 and 4:
National Human Development Reportin
Page 5 and 6:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe authors express
Page 7 and 8:
Dear Reader,You have before you the
Page 9 and 10:
PREFACEThis is the 13 th National H
Page 11 and 12:
country’s fuel & energy regions r
Page 13 and 14:
environmental degradation and enhan
Page 15 and 16:
Chapter 1The Energy Sector,the Econ
Page 17 and 18:
By 2008 Russia had increased its sh
Page 19 and 20:
the share of energy in the national
Page 21 and 22:
exported, increased. However, this
Page 23 and 24:
elimination of structural and terri
Page 25 and 26:
• Establishment of competitive me
Page 27 and 28:
number of developed countries, incl
Page 29 and 30:
Although the United Nations Climate
Page 31 and 32:
industrial region of the Urals - Sv
Page 33 and 34:
2.2. Budget capacityand structure o
Page 35 and 36:
(the Federal State Statistics Servi
Page 37 and 38:
Immigration by young and highly ski
Page 39 and 40:
energy regions exacerbate the incom
Page 41 and 42:
Khanty-Mansi and Yamal-Nenets Auton
Page 43 and 44:
the Ministry for Regional Developme
Page 45 and 46:
various other long-term problems in
Page 47 and 48:
is also associated with the fuel an
Page 49 and 50:
Republic of Mordovia 8051 0.732 68.
Page 51 and 52:
Legislative control of impact audit
Page 53 and 54:
Chapter 3Personal Incomes, the Ener
Page 55 and 56:
than any other sources of income -
Page 57 and 58:
Are wages now the main instrument f
Page 59 and 60:
comparison of month-on-month develo
Page 61 and 62:
• The unemployed, people who aree
Page 63 and 64:
Employment in the energy sector acc
Page 65 and 66:
The share of household expenditures
Page 67 and 68:
subsidization practices in the regi
Page 69 and 70:
in power use between regions now de
Page 71 and 72:
Electricity prices for households h
Page 73 and 74:
• Steady decrease in the percenta
Page 75 and 76:
1. The number of graduates with eng
Page 77 and 78:
As well as requiring better fuelcom
Page 79 and 80:
Box 4.1. The village of Kolvain Uss
Page 81 and 82:
continue to use solid fuel for a lo
Page 83 and 84:
Box 4.3. Ambient air pollution andp
Page 85 and 86:
either by large power generating fa
Page 87 and 88:
Box 4.6. A city at riskNovocherkass
Page 89 and 90:
In order to assess impact of thesee
Page 91 and 92: generation facilities through safer
Page 93 and 94: achieved in developed countries. So
Page 95 and 96: equires 2-6 times more capital inve
Page 97 and 98: government) should set targets and
Page 99 and 100: networks. In 2007 government budget
Page 101 and 102: enhancement is also important. Ener
Page 103 and 104: energy efficiency of the transport
Page 105 and 106: Box 5.1. Programme of the Ministry
Page 107 and 108: educational and informational suppo
Page 109 and 110: mechanism for using national quota
Page 111 and 112: Figure 6.2Share of electricity gene
Page 113 and 114: One of the major benefits of renewa
Page 115 and 116: odies; outdoor air; rocks and soil;
Page 117 and 118: Design and construction of geotherm
Page 119 and 120: Box 6.3. Prospects for nuclear powe
Page 121 and 122: consists of out-dated equipment at
Page 123 and 124: ConclusionThe world’s nuclear pow
Page 125 and 126: 7.1. Impact of the fuel& energy sec
Page 127 and 128: Table 7.5Solid waste from productio
Page 129 and 130: Table 7.7Areas of disturbed and rec
Page 131 and 132: nature of the impact (atmospheric e
Page 133 and 134: Further, the economic cost ofenviro
Page 135 and 136: trends continued the damage would a
Page 137 and 138: What the government needs to do ino
Page 139 and 140: Figure 7.2.1Specific atmospheric em
Page 141: money value of industrial output) c
Page 145 and 146: Chapter 8The Energy Industry and Su
Page 147 and 148: eing equal) it only reflects that p
Page 149 and 150: (MDGs), issued by the UN in 2000. T
Page 151 and 152: 8.4. The energy factorin integral i
Page 153 and 154: Canada, the USA and Great Britain h
Page 155 and 156: Box 8.2. Energy efficiencyindicator
Page 157 and 158: Box 8.4. Energy efficiency rating o
Page 159 and 160: 41 Penza Region 116.0 -35.2 -4.542
Page 161 and 162: Appendix to Chapter 1Table 1.1. GDP
Page 163 and 164: Attachment to Chapter 4Table 4.1Rus
Page 165 and 166: Attachment to Chapter 4Volga Federa
Page 167 and 168: Attachment to Chapter 4Belovo Belov
Page 169 and 170: The previous National Human Develop
show all

Report - UNDP Russia

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?