A drive toward decarbonization that disregards the real conditions of the economy and the results of thorough calculations can pose a serious threat. The development of emission reduction targets must be based on a thoughtful approach that involves selecting the most effective and economically viable solutions. For example, reducing emissions through the transition to renewable energy sources (RES) costs approximately 20,000 rubles per ton of CO₂. In contrast, improving energy efficiency and implementing climate projects in natural ecosystems—such as agroforestry, wildfire suppression, pest control in forests, and peatland restoration—can achieve emission reductions at a much lower cost, around 1,000–2,000 rubles per ton of CO₂. Thanks to the vast scale of its natural ecosystems, Russia can make a significant contribution to global climate policy, with the potential to reduce emissions by billions of tons of CO₂ annually.

 

Since 2017, we have been working to update the national emissions inventory. Our efforts have convinced the government, and in 2022, Russia launched a comprehensive research initiative to improve the accuracy of its national emissions inventory. As part of the first phase of this project, known as the “Unified National System for Monitoring Climate-Active Substances,” an important state-level innovation project, scientific data is expected to show an increase of more than 500 million tons of CO₂ equivalent in absorption estimates for the land use and forestry sector. This accounts for approximately one-third of Russia’s net emissions, significantly altering its position among the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitters and highlighting the role of Russia’s ecosystems in the global climate balance.

 

We are actively contributing to the development of infrastructure for climate projects to fully realize this potential. We believe that an export-oriented climate project industry can contribute to Russia’s spatial and economic development. Exporting carbon credits could bring the country $3–5 billion annually, and by 2035, this figure could increase three- to fivefold. We firmly believe that the principle of technological neutrality, where natural and anthropogenic projects are evaluated equally, must remain central.

 

We continue to advocate for a critical assessment of increasing Russia’s emission reduction commitments and the appropriateness of introducing a carbon tax to support the competitiveness of our exports in light of other countries’ cross-border carbon taxes. Attempting to raise Russia’s emission reduction commitments solely for the sake of improving its image—at the expense of significant costs—and protecting specific export categories by imposing a tax burden on the entire economy appears economically unjustified and questionable in terms of the country’s long-term benefits.

 

It is crucial to proceed with the second phase of the state-level innovation project. This phase aims to refine more than a hundred emission factor coefficients across various industries, objectively account for carbon stocks in different soil types, and analyze data on overgrown agricultural lands. If the project continues, it could lead to an additional reduction in net emissions estimates by another 500 million tons of CO₂, further enhancing the contribution of Russian ecosystems to combating global warming. Achieving carbon neutrality would then become not only feasible but also economically advantageous.

 

Our goal is to ensure unhindered access for Russian climate projects to the global market, despite sanctions. If sanctions prevent Russia from reaping the benefits of the Paris Agreement while bearing all the associated costs, the question of continued participation must be raised. Without clear answers from relevant partners, the possibility of suspending or even exiting the agreement could be considered.

 

Should Russia remain a party to the Paris Agreement, updated goals must take into account the need for accelerated economic growth, allow for international trade in additional emission reductions, and recognize the reductions already achieved since 1990. Setting a goal as a cumulative volume of net emissions for a period, such as from 1990 to 2035, would be a reasonable and objective metric, enabling a fair comparison of different countries’ actual contributions to global objectives.

 

It is fundamentally important to uphold equal emission rights for residents of all countries and work toward the planet’s carbon neutrality by accounting for cumulative emissions per capita. Greater efforts should be required from those who have used a larger share of the carbon budget. It is essential to prevent climate regulation from being exploited as a tool to stimulate some countries’ economies at the expense of others.

 

Framing goals in this manner within the Paris Agreement is legally permissible.