Global warming? Cool!, climatologist says
December 7th, 2010
01:05 PM ET

Global warming? Cool!, climatologist says

Global warming isn't such a bad thing, a leading Russian climatologist told a conference last week.

The effects of rising temperatures will save on heating, increase farm production and open northern sea channels, said Vladimir Klimenko of the Moscow Power Engineering Institute, according to a Moscow Times article.

On the downside, several Siberian and Far Eastern Russian cities will have to be rebuilt, Klimenko conceded in his report to Russian and German scholars at a conference sponsored by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, a German organization that supports scientific study.

Regardless, "the reduction of heating alone outweighs all the negative results [of global warming] by many times," Klimenko said, according to Moscow Times. If the savings are used wisely, "then something can be achieved," he said.

Shorter heating seasons will save Russia 3 billion tons of oil by 2050 and 17 billion tons by 2150, Klimenko said.

At the same time, the growing season will lengthen and more land will be available for farming as northern climates warm up, he said.

Russia's Arctic coast will be ice-free for 105 days by 2100, and the Barents and Pechora seas will be open to navigation year-round, he predicted.

Andrei Shmakin of the Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences told the Moscow Times that global warming will cause droughts in Russia's south, heavy snowfalls in Siberia and icebergs on the seas, negating any imagined benefits.

Post by:
Filed under: Climate change • Earth • Russia
soundoff (24 Responses)
  1. Arthur

    There is a silver lining in everything!

    December 7, 2010 at 1:20 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Russ

    Glad to hear something positive about global Warming for a change...

    December 7, 2010 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Ben M

    Well as long as the destruction of the Earth is economically beneficial, drill baby drill!

    December 7, 2010 at 1:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Papa T

      I have a solution for you. Kill all the people so the planet can be healthy. You can go first.

      December 8, 2010 at 7:16 am | Report abuse |
  4. Beam Me Up Scotty

    You've got to be kidding! Shame shame shame on CNN for this headline. Some kook talks about saving oil (when we're going to run out of the easy to get stuff anyway, and soon)... shrugging off all of Africa in doing so.
    Shame shame shame

    December 7, 2010 at 1:39 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Frank

    People of the United States;
    The Russians at least have two streams of thought on Gobal Warming.But,they never cease to amaze me.Russia,China,India and Mexico have to be in the Top 10 of the worst polluters contributing to Gobal Warming due to lack of standards.

    December 7, 2010 at 1:39 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Evan M

    This is absurd. "the reduction of heating alone outweighs all the negative results [of global warming] by many times" is absolutely false. This man is blatantly lying just to gain publicity. The acidification of the ocean ALONE will cause such devastating effects to civilization that we cannot afford to listen to this distracting crap. How about instead of trying to save on heating we find alternative ways to heat our facilities that doesn't require fossil fuels? The supply of oil will soon run out regardless of whether we hinder our use from longer warming seasons. Absolutely ridiculous that this makes the news, and even more so that people believe it! This world is hopeless.

    December 7, 2010 at 1:45 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Thomas

    Complete agreement, Ben. I think its hilarious how, from time to time, a country or scientific group will offer a claim like this with no regard whatsoever for already established facts. This story belongs on the cover of the enquirer.

    December 7, 2010 at 1:57 pm | Report abuse |
  8. USMC Ret.

    The article doesn't say near enough about the droughts in other parts of the world. There is lots of talk about lowering carbon emissions, but no one talks about water conservation. What are we supposed to do when the crops and cattle all die off?

    December 7, 2010 at 2:04 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Daniel

    While it wiil be good for Russia,it will be equally terrible for Australia. It will give the Russians a lot more arable land with longer growing seasons but at the same time,turn Australia into a desert.

    December 7, 2010 at 2:04 pm | Report abuse |
  10. AlaskFrog

    Yep, from even here in Alaska we see global warming marching down on top of this good 'ol Earth. Stop it? Nope. Can't. Too late. We'll just have to do what humans have done in the past, adapt and deal with it. If you live on the coast, plan on moving uphill. If it snows more, get a bigger shovel. My Eskimo friends up north, your surf season is going to be a lot longer. Do they have waves up there? Dunno, it has been a while since the water was fluid long enough. The anticipation is awesome though. Beach bunnies on the North Slope, there's a thought a frozen chum can contemplate.

    December 7, 2010 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
  11. southfork

    ...and when plate tectonics result in a fence to divide Russia and Alaska, we will adapt to that also.
    This whole topic is junk and a means to substantiate employment for those who are called "Climatologists" and "Climate Researchers".
    "Tell me where a man gets his corn pone, and I'll tell you what his opinion is." – Mark Twain
    I am still waiting for an actual Meteorologist claim that weather patterns are influenced by man-made carbons.

    December 7, 2010 at 2:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • KyleXR8

      Meteorology and climatology are no more than same thing than are geology and geography. Some meteos can forecast the weather, but they will not understand climatology.

      December 23, 2010 at 3:00 pm | Report abuse |
  12. MXD

    "Unfortunately, Manhattan will have to be moved north to the Bronx..."

    December 7, 2010 at 3:17 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Rocketship

    What a glorious occasion when we can see the glass as half full.
    The future is looking bright and happy days are here again.
    We have the great lakes and that's 2/3 of the fresh water in the world.
    Yeah!

    December 7, 2010 at 3:42 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Steve

    It seems like in the general public, people either think global warming is going to cause the destruction of the world, or that it's the invention of a scientific conspiracy. What you'll see if you actually read scientific studies is that some places in the world will have improved climates because of global warming, while other areas will suffer. Look up the "Green Sahara" period of higher rainfall in the Sahara that coincided with a period when the earth was warmer than it is today. The net effect of warmer temperatures and lower oceanic salinity will be increased rainfall - so, flooding will be more of a concern than places turning into deserts, in general.

    December 7, 2010 at 3:45 pm | Report abuse |
  15. MXD

    Yes, some areas will benefit from the ongoing climate change (especially when it accelerates in the next 50 years).
    The problem is that the areas that will be negatively effected by climate change tend to be those that humanity has spent the last hundreds of years developing (NYC, Hong Kong, and countless other cities and developed coastal areas) or are dependent on for farmland and fresh water (goodbye, Souther California!). So you're talking about an extended period of economic upheaval, drought, food shortages and social unrest, none of which the world can afford, possibly (or probably) leading to wars, ending with mass migrations of billions of people to more hospitable climes. But, hey, at least we'll be able to drive our over-sized SUV's for another 20 years and save money on those expensive ice-breaking ships. Sounds like a good deal!

    December 7, 2010 at 4:04 pm | Report abuse |
1 2