Russian Official is Optimistic about Global Warming

Guest Post by Bob Tisdale

Yesterday, November 24th, the Russian News Agency TASS published the article Russia to take advantage of global warming — chief of Russian weather service.

Isn’t that refreshing?  Optimism about a warming world.

The article begins:

MOSCOW, November 24. /TASS/ The phenomenon of global warming will have its effect on Russia 2.5 times sooner than in the rest of the planet, Alexander Frolov, Chief of the Russian Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring (Rosgydromet) told a TASS-hosted briefing on Monday.

“Global warming might give certain advantages to Russia — a longer navigation period and a shorter heat supply season, which are very important for Russia because it is the coldest country. Areas where grain and bean crops might be harvested will be considerably enlarged, mostly in western Siberia and in the Urals, and a life comfort zone will be broadened, moving it up to the north,” Frolov told the briefing.

Frolov was also realistic, inasmuch as he discussed the downsides as well:

“The negative effects of global warming are a growing threat of forest and peat bog fires, and possible breaking of a traditional way of life of the indigenous population of the North. Russia must be prepared to survive under conditions both of water shortages and floods,” he said.

But water shortages and floods have existed in the past.  And computer-model-based outlooks are debatable (simply speculation at this point) because climate models do not properly simulate precipitation and they cannot simulate the coupled ocean-atmosphere processes that impact precipitation around the globe. Additionally, climate models do not properly simulate polar amplification, which has a strong impact on Russia surface temperatures. Here’s a link to the Climate Model Failings category at my blog, for those who wish to confirm my statements in this paragraph.

The closing paragraph sounds odd, and I don’t have the time today to verify it.

Climate on earth has become warmer by 0.7 degrees on the average over a period of ten years, while climate in Russia has warmed by 0.43 degrees in the same period, the expert said.

Is there a typo in there?  Here’s a link to the Russia surface temperature data from BEST.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Bob Tisdale
November 25, 2014 4:59 am

Otherwise known as Wishful Thinking.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 25, 2014 6:44 am

Yeah, because things are always worse than we thought.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 25, 2014 7:08 am

To be clear, it’s the warming part which is wishful thinking, not the benefits of warming.

Robert W Turner
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
November 25, 2014 1:35 pm

Exactly, I wish I were as optimistic that future generations will be lucky enough to enjoy warm interglacial conditions indefinitely but I’m afraid nature is still fully in control of climate.

Reply to  Bob Tisdale
November 25, 2014 5:09 am

I have another optimist for your new category :
Matt Ridley on How Fossil Fuels are Greening the Planet

Reply to  upcountrywater
November 25, 2014 12:24 pm

that does raise the question of why the climate obsessed are so fixated on their CO2 obsession.

R. Shearer
Reply to  upcountrywater
November 25, 2014 6:43 pm

Nice vid.

Wondering Aloud
Reply to  Bob Tisdale
November 25, 2014 5:17 am

I’ve been hoping for some warming my whole life. The second largest country is Canada. It has always been hard for me to understand the fear of warming. Can these people read a map? Find a place on the earth that is largely unpopulated because of being too warm. Tough to do isn’t it? Now find a place largely unpopulated because it’s too cold. Easy! Catastrophic climate change fans act like the possibility of maybe some people needing to move in a century or two is something to fear but gaining millions of square miles of more habitable land is nothing. That takes a very special kind of irrational.

Reply to  Wondering Aloud
November 25, 2014 7:06 am

there is no place on earth that is too warm for humans if there is a supply of fresh water. there are however many places that are too cold.
the reason for this is quite simple. it takes almost no energy to cool warm objects using the evaporation of water. however, it takes tremendous amounts of energy to warm cool objects. thus, a sweaty human can survive heat for days on end, but a shivering human cannot long survive cold.

Reply to  Wondering Aloud
November 25, 2014 7:31 am

Coincidentally, there was a nice rant by somebody freezing off his behind in Saskatchewan on the news today …

Reply to  Wondering Aloud
November 27, 2014 5:58 am

Canada, N USA, N Europe, Russia, Siberia and Alaska probably make up the majority of the world’s land.
[Rather than make that statement – although with a “probably” included – actually do your homework and do the calculation. Do NOT just look at a northern hemisphere Mercator projected classroom map. What is the weighted latitude area of the world’s land areas? .mod]

Reply to  Bob Tisdale
November 25, 2014 6:09 am

Nah, they are just having some fun sticking it to little “o”

Reply to  Bob Tisdale
November 26, 2014 6:28 am

There will be places on earth that will benefit from global cooling too. Reduce peak temperatures by 2 or 3 degrees, make more crop growth successful at those elevated temperatures and certain places could become much, much better places to live.

November 25, 2014 4:54 am

Parts of this are comedy gold…

The phenomenon of global warming will have its effect on Russia 2.5 times sooner than in the rest of the planet

2.5 times sooner! Really! So, 10 years ago? But wait, this is in the future… will. So, next Wednesday? It really better hurry up, because

0.7 degrees on the average over a period of ten years, while climate in Russia has warmed by 0.43 degrees in the same period

They’re behind! And yet, there’s still that pesky 2.5 times sooner claim! Better stay away from Russia, the whiplash as they catch up could have devastating consequences!
For those of us who are aware that this is all a load of crap, the amateurish nature of this is painful, and also entertaining.

Reply to  CodeTech
November 25, 2014 6:31 am

There is a warming gap with Russia!

Bloke down the pub
November 25, 2014 4:58 am

Just as they start to get optimistic about global warming, global temps will turn towards a mini ice-age and they’ll be pessimistic again. It’s being so miserable that keeps them happy.

Reply to  Bloke down the pub
November 25, 2014 8:22 am

Sells more vodka especially when most containers can’t be resealed.

Bob B.
Reply to  Bloke down the pub
November 25, 2014 9:11 am

I have not met too many optimistic Russians

Reply to  Bloke down the pub
November 25, 2014 3:03 pm

Bob B.
Goodness me. I worked for a Russian shipping company for about seven years,
I n e v e r [that is – Never ever ] met an optimistic Russian . . . .

November 25, 2014 5:00 am

“Climate on earth has become warmer by 0.7 degrees on the average over a period of ten years”
Over which period of ten years? This would be rather scary speed, 7 degrees a century.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Hugh
November 25, 2014 9:24 am

Well, you know, net of multiple unexplained IPCC temperature “adjustments” and stuff like that.
If that’s how the game is played, you can almost pick any number you want.

Pamela Gray
November 25, 2014 5:05 am

Since hurricanes, storms, and extreme climate periods (LIA, MWP, etc) are given pet names, we should be coming up with a good name for this pleasant interglacial warm period. How about the Green Warm Period? In honor of the greening of the Earth? Or the PBTIS? The Pause Before The Ice Storm? I like that one. Fun to say. Sounds like biptis. We know it will get friggin cold soon enough. The cold is locked in. We just don’t know the exact timing.

Reply to  Pamela Gray
November 25, 2014 5:26 am

It is going to be called … the Little Nice Age

Reply to  Khwarizmi
November 25, 2014 7:35 am

Love it! That is my new description of the modern warm era!

Billy Liar
Reply to  Khwarizmi
November 25, 2014 10:40 am

Mediaeval Warm Period, Little Ice Age, Really Little Warm Period …

Reply to  Pamela Gray
November 25, 2014 5:26 am

I like PBTIS.
PMWLLF? Period Making Warmists Look Like Fools?

Reply to  Pamela Gray
November 25, 2014 8:15 am

P’raps PaBTIS, it’s easier to see the pronunciation. Also sounds a lot like “bupkis” an
Americanism as in “you don’t know bupkis” meaning you don’t know anything or more likely you don’t know sh$t or you don’t know as much as a country bumpkin.

November 25, 2014 5:25 am

I know in my older years my memory is supposed to get a bit “foggy”…but.
Aren’t these the same people that about 5yrs ago said that the world would continue to cool for at least the next 20-30yrs?
And this is the first time I’ve heard of peat-bog fires being linked to AGW. So an increase if a few deg over 10-20yrs is going to cause more peat-bog fires? HTH does THAT happen?

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  jimmaine
November 25, 2014 5:38 am

Apparently they believe there will be more droughts, which would tend to make peat bogs more susceptible to burning – the drier it is, the deeper the fires can go, and the longer they can burn. Total nonsense, of course.

November 25, 2014 5:36 am

Unfortunately its not warming

November 25, 2014 5:46 am

“Climate on earth has become warmer by 0.7 degrees on the average over a period of ten years”
By which temp. resource?
(all temps. starting in 2003)
GISTEMP: 0.012 ±0.271 °C/decade (2σ)
NOAA: -0.019 ±0.250 °C/decade (2σ)
HADCRUT4: -0.027 ±0.222 °C/decade (2σ)
RSS: -0.060 ±0.325 °C/decade (2σ)
UAH: 0.056 ±0.327 °C/decade (2σ)
(trends calculated on SkS Trend Calculator)

Werner Brozek
Reply to  BruceC
November 25, 2014 7:56 am

This does not change the thrust of your argument, but SkS has not been updated since January. The following is up to date, but it gives slightly different numbers:

Reply to  Werner Brozek
November 25, 2014 2:25 pm

Thank you for the heads-up Werner, I will be using this trend calculator from know on.
Wonder why the kidz @ SkS haven’t kept it up to date?

November 25, 2014 5:54 am

in 2006 somebody at the Russian academy was writing about a mini ice age beginning around 2013-2015 … they should rather bet on that, the last three years were colder around here, and we’re not very far from Russia

M Courtney
November 25, 2014 6:31 am

It is a valid point that Russia (and Canada) will benefit from Global Warming, if it resumes.
Presumably there will have to be some form of compensation agreed at Paris if any climate agreement is to be made.
Obviously money should be transferred from countries like Brazil and India to Canada and Russia for the lost benefits that the treaty will cause.

Reply to  M Courtney
November 25, 2014 7:13 am

it would appear that the human race in general has benefited greatly from the warming. we are today feeding 7 billion people, while 50 years ago we struggled to feed 3 billion.
we don’t have more land surface. we don’t have more sunlight. so what else can account for the failed predictions of those that claimed that population increase would lead to mass starvation? exactly the opposite of what happened.
how is it that the experts that predict the future are so good at getting it wrong?

Reply to  ferdberple
November 25, 2014 8:22 am

“it’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future” Yogi Berra
Has literally a hundred variations by others but this one sounds most like Yogi’s variation.

November 25, 2014 6:58 am

I have for years heard all the hubbub about a warmer world. This past two weeks has been like January, here in mid November. Where is the warming?
CO2 has fallen down on the job.

Reply to  mpainter
November 25, 2014 7:11 am

“CO2 has fallen down on the job.”
How can you say that? Hasn’t this been the warmest November in history?

Reply to  Paul
November 25, 2014 7:30 am

human history extends back at least a couple of thousand years. what was the average temperature of the earth in November 1032 AD, or in November 34 BC? How about in 2346 BC, or 4822 BC?

Reply to  Paul
November 25, 2014 7:39 am

Depends on the data set. Satellite data show ordinary temps. The instrument land data has been fiddled with and cooked. You can believe the fudged temps if you wish, but get me my fair share of the warming, please and thank you.

Reply to  Paul
November 25, 2014 9:23 am

okay, okay, maybe I DID need to include it…

November 25, 2014 7:19 am

I thought the Russians did not believe in Global Warming? They do not have the luxury of being extravagant when it comes to their power grid.

November 25, 2014 7:29 am

What exactly have climate models predicted with any accuracy? U could probably do better with chicken entrails or the grounds at the bottom of my Turkish coffee.

November 25, 2014 7:38 am

Dr Abdussamatov should talk to this guy.

November 25, 2014 8:11 am

Thanks, Bob. The closing paragraph is not supported by any temperature data set that I know of.
And yes, at least for the coldest countries global warming would be good. It is a real pity it stopped after the ’98 El Niño.

Claude Harvey
November 25, 2014 8:11 am

I’d gotten the impression the Russian climate community generally took issue with AGW theory and its projections. Now they embrace the upside? Maybe it’s a Putin trick to encourage Obama in his effort to “green” us into third-world energy poverty.

Steve Keohane
Reply to  Claude Harvey
November 25, 2014 9:24 am

That was my take as well, this seems like an about-face from what I remember hearing in the past.

Pablo an ex Pat
Reply to  Steve Keohane
November 25, 2014 5:22 pm

Tend to agree, never argue with an enemy who’s on a self-inflicted course which will cause harm to them.
“See” say the Warmistas ” even the Russian’s, who were skeptics, now agree with us”

November 25, 2014 8:14 am

“The negative effects of global warming are a growing threat of forest and peat bog fires, and possible breaking of a traditional way of life of the indigenous population of the North…..

Hold it right there sunshine! Russia has boreal forests.

Abstract – 1998
M.D. Flannigan et. al.
Future wildfire in circumboreal forests in relation to global warming
Despite increasing temperatures since the end of the Little Ice Age (ca. 1850), wildfire frequency has decreased as shown in many field studies from North America and Europe. We believe that global warming since 1850 may have triggered decreases in fire frequency in some regions and future warming may even lead to further decreases in fire frequency….
Paper – 2008
K.E Ruckstuhl et al
Introduction. The boreal forest and global change
……In this issue, Macias & Johnson (2008) show that the frequency of these blocking highs in the North American boreal forest is controlled by the dynamics of large-scale teleconnection patterns (the Pacific Decadal Oscillation/El Niño-Southern Oscillation and the Arctic Oscillation). They also note that warming itself is not a predictor of increased fires since, as shown in previous studies, fire frequency across the North American boreal forest decreased as the Little Ice Age came to an end in the late nineteenth century (Johnson 1992; Bergeron & Archambault 1993)…..

Reply to  Jimbo
November 26, 2014 12:46 am

Mr. Flannigan seems to have several different opinions:
Future wildfire in circumboreal forests in relation to global warming in Journal of Vegetation Science 9: 469-476, 1998
Impacts of climate change on fire activity and fire management in the circumboreal forest in Global Change Biology (2008) 14, 1–12

Reply to  feliksch
November 26, 2014 12:51 am
November 25, 2014 8:46 am

According to a sputniknews article,

ST. PETERSBURG, September 19 (RIA Novosti) – The world will soon witness a “mini-ice age” rather than global warming, as solar output has been declining in recent years, a Russian scientist told RIA Novosti Friday.
“During the past 17 years global temperatures have not been rising, temperatures have stabilized. There has been no warming since 1997. The power of solar irradiance has decreased consistently since 1990 and is still rapidly declining. Since 1990, the Sun has not been warming the Earth as in the past,” said Habibullo Abdussamatov, an astrophysicist and head of space research at St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory.
According to Abdussamatov, our planet may enter what he calls “a mini-ice age” at the beginning of next year.

See for the rest of the article.
BTW, IMHO, sputniknews appears to be Russia’s new propaganda voice, similar to USSR’s old “Radio Moscow”. Some of the articles are right on, and others — well — you need to take them with a grain of salt. But they do have some interesting reading.

November 25, 2014 9:08 am

Methinks the spokesman has been mis-translated or misspoke – 0.7C in a CENTURY is about right.
As a Canadian resident, about the only thing I can think of as a downside to a warmer Canada would be a shorter period for transporting materials by ice road to some northern communities. Even that would be tempered by a reduced requirement for heating fuel and so might come out as even. Not sure if I can find a map, but the frost line has certainly moved northwards in the agricultural areas (increasing the acreage available for planting) and I have some anecdotal reports of altered corn growing zones, although the there is a lot of variability on this so probably nothing significant.

Jeff in Calgary
Reply to  Rob
November 25, 2014 9:58 am

Another downside, warmer winters equals bigger nastier bugs. The bugs found in warmer climates are freaks

Richard of NZ
Reply to  Jeff in Calgary
November 25, 2014 11:57 am

As the song says, it ain’t necessarily so. Look up the New Zealand weta and you’ll find some very large insects. One type is larger and heavier than a sparrow.

November 25, 2014 9:23 am

I still say ten years of weather cycles doth not a climate make.
Won’t they be surprised if solar cycle 25 brings another Dalton occurrence (or worse).
The term ‘global climate’ is still a misnomer anyway, an impossible value to calculate precisely, as there is insufficient quantities of simultaneous global data collected over a long enough time. Satellites will hopefully make it a valid concept after half-a-century or so of real time observation.
Technology has given us the perception that the world is getting “smaller” and folks assume they can understand things on a global scale because of their increased access to information.

Catherine Ronconi
Reply to  Dawtgtomis
November 25, 2014 11:01 am

In the satellite era, ie since 1979, there have been about 17 years of a warming trend and 18 years of sideways trend. Like many here, I expect the next move to be toward cooler temperatures rather than warmer, at least in satellite observations, if not in the cooked to a crisp adjusted surface books.
The cutoff between weather and climate is typically set at 30 years, which may be too short a time, but does have the advantage of representing about half of a PDO cycle.

November 25, 2014 10:03 am

The Russians will be disappointed when global warming doesn’t happen, but shouldn’t the GW doomsayers be relieved? No?

November 25, 2014 10:38 am

The father of the theory of the Green House Effect, Svante Arrhenius, said in part, ” By the influence of the increasing percentage of carbonic acid in the atmosphere, we may hope to enjoy ages with more equable and better climates, especially as regards the colder regions of the earth, ages when the earth will bring forth much more abundant crops than at present, for the benefit of rapidly propagating mankind”

sleepingbear dunes
November 25, 2014 10:40 am

In the BEST graphs for Mongolia it shows 1990 down by .75 C while all other regions
positive, some significantly. Anyone care to give it a shot? The difference seems too great to reconcile.

November 25, 2014 10:51 am

Tallahassee – Florida: Average temperature: 67.6°F
Minneapolis – Minnesota: Average temperature: 46.15°F
Average temperature difference: 21.45°F
If I lived my whole life in Minneapolis, Minnesota until retirement, and then moved to Tallahassee, Florida, should I expect to experience “catastrophic” consequences from a 21 degree increase in average temperatures? If not, why should I believe that an increase of a few degrees in average global temperature will be catastrophic? Perhaps the oceans will rise some over time, but can’t we adapt to that?

Reply to  Louis
November 25, 2014 11:25 am

You will be laid low by tropical fevers, plagued by invasive species, drowned by rising sea levels, blown away by hurricanes, and other than that you should be okay.

November 25, 2014 10:52 am

Does this mean that they are hoping for no more Russian winters with brides being thrown to the wolves from troikas?

November 25, 2014 11:15 am

His ‘optimism’ is based on several assumptions: (1) global warming will happen as predicted by the warmists, (2) the catastrophes predicted by the warmists will mainly befall the ‘west’, (3) warming Siberia will only improve the land, converting tundra into a breadbasket, and (4) the west’s loss will match Russia’s gain in terms of agricultural productivity.

November 25, 2014 1:12 pm

Why wouldn’t they be , after all they going to do nothing and if others want to shoot themselves in the foot their more than happy to sell them new shoes , just like China .

JJM Gommers
November 25, 2014 1:42 pm

I don’t know what the politburo thinks about this statement, maybe a single ticket Magadan.

Alan McIntire
November 25, 2014 2:45 pm

Loook at a world map during the last ice age. Desert areas were much wider than now, tropical jungle area much more restrictd than now. Based on past performance, my guess would be that there would be FEWER water shortages with global warming. Unfortunately, in the real world, I suspect we’re in for a period of cooling. That WOULD lead to more water shortages.

November 25, 2014 8:24 pm

Just a bit of desperate hope from a Russian. Given what the winter is like there, who can blame him?

John L.
November 25, 2014 10:49 pm

If I were a Muscovite I’d be praying like heck for the warmists to be right starting
In mid-September every year.

Gil Dewart
November 26, 2014 11:29 am

Note the tremendous role that terrible Russian winter has had in their history, against foreign invaders but also by the rulers against the masses.

November 26, 2014 3:54 pm

Russia has deep stakes in promoting global warming, since it tends to thwart oil production outside of their country. They are now one of the largest producing nations in the world. So promoting global warming means OTHER countries around the world will not invest in pipelines and domestic production.
I fail to see how this is any different then say the Japanese Auto industry funding greens here to shut down USA auto plants, but then turn around and import their cars!
When the wall came down, much of the socialist’s movement found a nice home in the global warming movement.
Here is a great video of such CAGW people at the Copenhagen IPCC conference:

So the connection of socialism + an anti west + anti industrial policy is rather clear. And the IPCC stated goals of redistributing the worlds wealth by taxing CO2 is also the prominent theme here.
Albert D. Kallal
Edmonton, Alberta Canada

Brian H
November 26, 2014 11:22 pm

I’ve been pointing out the irony of fear of a largely beneficent phenomenon for years. Unfortunately, it’s a fake from the ground up, so Russian hopes are in vain.

November 29, 2014 9:33 am

There are very few optimists in Russia, and almost all of them are Russian officials. For them optimism is mandatory.

Verified by MonsterInsights