Example research essay topic: Russian Federation Environmental Problems - 2,740 words

NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote

Final Project Introduction The paper dwells on environmental problems of Russia, and explores what seems to be the root of the problem. The strategies that local governments, businesses, or individual citizens can implement to lessen the negative impact on the environment in the given region are determined. The present study offers changes that can help prepare it for a more sustainable future. It researchers, whether there are practical solutions to these problems that can be funded, developed, and implemented locally, or will long-term solutions require assistance from outside sources. The other regions of the world that have attempted to overcome the similar problems are identified. The methods that these countries have attempted to use to solve these environmental problems are described correspondingly, along with the environmental or social factors that aided or hindered the implementation of those plans.

Environmental problems Environmental issues in Russia are the issues of the day. The illusion of improved ecological situation in CIS in generally and in Russia in particular occurred mainly due to a cutback in annual volume of pollution because of continued output decline in 1990 s (State Report, 2004). In case in 1990 aquatic run-off water disposal made up about 27. 8 billion m 3, in 2003 it was 19. 0 billion m 3 only. Atmospheric emission made up 34 and 19. 8 billion tons accordingly (see datasheet 1) (State Report, 2004) Datasheet 1 Dynamics of run-off water disposal (in mln cub.

meters) and atmospheric emissions (kg per head) in 1990 - 2003 Federal District Water, m 3 Air, kg 1990 2003 1990 2003 Russian Federation 188. 3 131. 5 230. 8 137. 5 Central 153. 5 118. 7 115. 8 40. 0 Northwestern 237. 3 235. 0 291. 0 156. 8 Southern 212. 7 106. 7 101. 6 35. 6 Privolzhsky 169. 7 109. 7 197. 2 101. 7 Ural 150. 0 182. 5 515. 5 248. 5 Western Siberian 106. 9 82. 7 378. 4 385. 0 Eastern Siberian 387. 2 189. 8 487. 9 397. 0 Far Eastern 171. 8 140. 3 215. 5 139. 0 Note: Tyumen district (datasheets 1 - 2) belongs to Western Siberian district Water pollution (both in general and per head) occurred virtually in all federal areas, except of Ural (See datasheet 1). As a consequence the share of the given region in water pollution increased from 5. 2 percent (in 1990) to 8. 7 % in 2003 (see datasheet 2) (State Report, 2004). Datasheet 2 Regional structure of run-off water disposal and atmospheric emissions in 1990 - 2003, % Federal District Water, % Air, % 1990 2003 1990 2003 Russian Federation Central 21. 0 23. 6 12. 8 7. 6 Northwestern 15. 0 17. 1 13. 1 10. 9 Southern 15. 8 12. 9 6. 2 4. 1 Privolzhsky 19. 4 17. 9 18. 4 15. 9 Ural 5. 2 8. 7 14. 5 11. 3 Western Siberian 5. 8 6. 4 16. 7 28. 6 Eastern Siberian 12. 8 8. 5 13. 2 17. 0 Far Eastern 5. 0 4. 9 5. 1 4. 6 Annual equi distributed estimates in Russia for water pollution per head also considerably higher (especially in northwestern federal district, Ural, and Western Siberia). Of all Russian districts which have been examined, Central Federal District seems to hold the lead by water pollution rate (23. 6 percent). Chemical and petrochemical industries make the greatest load on Russian water resources (6. 6 percent of annual aquatic run-off water disposal in 2003); timber, woodworking, and pulp-and-paper industries make up 7. 2 percent; agriculture 7. 2 percent, and immaterial production 61. 0 % correspondingly (See datasheet 3) (State Report, 2004).

Datasheet 3 Industrial structure of run-off water disposal and atmospheric emissions in 1990 - 2003, % Industry Water, % Air, % 1990 2003 1990 2003 Power industry 7. 3 4. 2 23. 0 17. 2 Metallurgy 5. 0 5. 5 29. 7 27. 8 Fuel-Energy 3. 7 2. 7 19. 7 26. 3 Chemical 9. 7 6. 6 9. 0 2. 0 Engineering industry 5. 0 2. 4 3. 5 2. 0 Timber and woodworking 9. 6 7. 2 2. 5 1. 5 Other productive industries 6. 6 2. 3 6. 1 3. 3 Agriculture 10. 3 7. 2 0. 5 0. 5 Other material industries 1. 0 0. 9 3. 1 14. 0 Immaterial 41. 8 61. 0 2. 9 5. 4 In case run-off water disposal virtually stopped during the so-called transition period in Russia, air pollution issue still remains one of the most important in Russian ecology. Moreover, due to increase in production (in late 1990 s), increase in atmospheric emissions was observed. What concerns air pollution and atmospheric emissions, power industry has the most negative impact, as it accounts for 17. 2 percent of all atmospheric emissions in 2003. Metallurgy makes up 27. 8 percent, fuel industry 26. 3 percent, and transport (non registering automotive industry) 11 percent correspondingly (See datasheet 3) (State Report, 2004). Siberian air is the most polluted.

It should be also taken into consideration that the share of atmospheric emissions seems to increase (compared to 1990). North Western and Privolzhsky districts are also among the most polluted districts in Russian Federation. Ural region reports atmospheric emissions per head to be twice as large as those of average rates in Russian Federation, while Siberian rates are three times as large as the average rates (see datasheet 1). In the last decade the average carbon dioxide concentration in atmospheric air in Russian districts increased by 11 percent (in the last 5 years by 9 percent accordingly).

At the present time 20 million citizens live in 40 Russian cities, with maximal air pollutant concentrations more than ten times as large as maximum permissible concentration (MPC). For example, in 2000 in Krasnoyarsk hydrogen sulfide concentration exceeded 52 MPC; Kemerovo district rates exceeded 250 MPC by six hazardous pollutants (State Report, 2004). It should be also taken into account that previously plants and factories (so-called stationary sources of pollution) were the main sources of pollution, while nowadays vehicles are the main source of pollution. The crisis in industry and agriculture also affected Russian ecological situation. It especially concerns Volga and Don rivers, Baikal Lake, Sea of Azov, Caspian Sea, and other aquatic life zones. According to Russian researchers, only 1 percent of surface waters can be classified as drinking water.

Some Russian aquatic areas report phenol rate to be 7 - 8 times as large as maximum permissible concentration, while chlorine-organic pesticide and nitrogen rates exceeds 10 - 16 MPC (State Report, 2004). Zink, copper, and lead concentrations exceed dozens MPC, while petroleum derivatives concentration can exceed hundreds and thousands MPC. Due to obsolete equipment, ineffective technologies of water treating, and emergency condition of water-supply pipeline networks the consumer gets water, which contains hazardous to health carcinogenic chlorine organic substances. Specific indexes of run-off water disposal and atmospheric emissions witness of inefficient purification and industrial technologies. For example, index of run-off water disposal per gross unit made up 1. 2 (1990), 2. 3 in 1997, and 1. 4 cubic meter per 1 thousand rubles in gross figures. The index of atmospheric emissions is 6. 6, 8. 4, and 6. 2 per 1 thousand rubles in gross figures, accordingly (see datasheet 4) (State Report, 2004).

It is believed that as the resulting values are reasonable, the ecologic situation is expected to become even worse within the next few years. Datasheet 4 Dynamics of specific indexes of run-off water disposal (m 3 per 1 thousand rubles, by 1998 for 1 mln rubles), and atmospheric emissions (t per 1 billion rubles) in 1990 - 2003 (State Report, 2004) Indexes 1990 1993 1997 2000 2003 Run-off water disposal per gross unit 1. 19 1. 82 2. 26 1. 82 1. 43 Run-off water disposal per GNP unit 2. 52 3. 33 3. 45 2. 78 2. 21 Atmospheric emissions per gross unit (including vehicles) 6. 60 7. 85 8. 43 7. 92 6. 2 Atmospheric emissions per GNP unit (including vehicles) 4. 99 5. 66 4. 77 4. 92 4. 03 Water treatment works technologies and reverse water supply systems face virtually no changes. In case in 1990 effluents treated to standard quality made up about 12. 4 percent by industry (not specified by kind), in 2003 there were 10. 8 percent effluents treated to standard quality only (State Report, 2004). Moreover, some Russian industries reports decrease in share of sewage treatment. For example, in 1990 the industries reported 12. 4 percent of sewage treatment in whole, while in 2003 the rate declined by 12. 1 % (agriculture 0. 9 % and 0. 4 % correspondingly).

We are also reminded that in 1984 - 1986 Russian national economy reported over 50 % sewage treatment. Finally, in 1990 effluents treated to standard quality made up 3. 2 billion m 3, while in 2003 effluents treated to standard quality made up 2. 3 billion m 3 only (State Report, 2004). Due to inefficient operation of air pollution control equipment, gas recovery and fume hood devices, the rate of pollutant recovery also decreases 116. 9 million tons in 1990 compared to 57. 5 mln tons in 2003, accordingly. The pollutant recovery rate accounts for 74. 4 percent of all atmospheric emissions (2003), being lesser by 77. 4 percent than those of 1990 (State Report, 2004). The recovery rate in metallurgy was also decreased (from 80. 7 percent in 1990 to 76. 4 percent in 2003, correspondingly); fuel industry (from 26. 1 percent to 16. 1 percent accordingly), machinery construction (from 47. 4 percent to 43. 1 percent), immaterial-goods production (from 17 percent to 15. 7 percent, correspondingly).

In such a way, the issue of atmospheric emissions and water resources remains the issue of primary importance in Russian Federation. Analysis and Recommendations Reasoning from the first part of the present study, environmental situation in Russian Federation leaves something to be desired. Low level of environmental and legal culture, backwardness of environmental consciousness, low level of self-consciousness and self-organization is conductive to formation of negative public opinion concerning environmental projects and initiatives aimed to enhance environmental situation in Russia. Public environmental organizations face the necessity to develop effective environmental policies, preventive measures in relation to creation or reconstruction of polluted industrial facilities (Feshbach, 1992). Nature management control should be distinguished from nature management.

It is recommended to create an independent federal department of environmental control, to brisk up the work on nature conservation initiatives on regional and municipal levels. Russian Federation should develop theoretically substantiated environmental policy closely allied to health protection policy and social protection of Russian population from the consequences of ecological catastrophes, negative social, economic and anthropologic outcomes of nuclear plant dismantling, conversion, and deactivation. Environmental policy should be based on the state-of-the-art technological discoveries and technologies ensuring environmental safety. Special attention should be given to technological retrofitting of military-industrial complex. The efficiency of environmental policy should be determined by the orientation of macroeconomic strategy (Informatics, 2001). It should be taken into account that environmental policy should make it its first business to protect human rights.

At the same time, the process of development and implementation of environmental policy is complex multilevel process, and, taking into consideration a tendency to globalization that affects social and economic processes in Russia, we can come to conclusion that environmental policy is some sort of novelty for both legislative and executive authorities, and public structures. The root of the problem is closely associated with human economical activity (Nature and natural resources, 2002). Similar to other world countries, Russian Federation faces globalization, industrial and economic growth and development of new technologies. Historically, change for the worse related to environmental situation in result of economic activity accompanies the progress of society over thousands of years. However, nowadays Russian Federation honestly confesses of the global character of its environmental problems (Sapozhnikova, 2005). Such situation gives grounds to speak about Russian environmental crisis, and its genetic connection with anthropogenic civilization, and anthropogenic impact on the environment.

At the same time, environmental crisis occurred in result of industrial crisis due to rapid economic growth and extensive (even devastating) use of natural resources. In its turn, it resulted not only in the exhaustion of Russian natural resources, but also in high rates of air emissions, sanitary waste, and run-off water disposal (Wolfson, 1994). Among other recommendations, Russia can examine the environmental practices of other world countries, as there are other regions of the world that have attempted to overcome the same problems. Similar to Russia, Western European countries, the United States, and Japan faced the same problems. However, in result of implementation of the efficient environmental policies, these countries managed to reduce air and aquatic pollution.

For example, the countries of European Union made an attempt to ecologic economy through the market mechanism of supply and demand. Environmental requirements the countries present for quality of goods and mode of production is growing year after year. Besides, these countries has brought into fashion ecologically clean production. However, Russian Federation should take into account that environmental risk management (videlicet, these risks determine modern environmental policy) requires more funds than Russian government spends on these purposes. The EU countries make an emphasis on usage of market mechanism of environmental regulation, while Russian Federation continues to use predominantly administrative tools. EU practice is more effective, as it conductive not only to budgetary funds economy, but also pushes business structures to search for new technical means of environmental safety.

According to the recent researches, state-of-the-art technology increases the effectiveness of the use of natural resources by a factor of four. However, the adoption of new environmental strategy is possible only when the government and business structure come to consensus based on acknowledgement of economic sustainability of investment into environmental projects. Japan was among the first countries in postindustrial world to understand the importance of state support of business environmental initiatives through preferential tax treatment, subsidies, etc. At the same time, prevailing administrative environmental regulation with no financial support from the side of the government (as it was in the United States in 1980 s), on contrary, impedes search for new technologies and solutions to environmental problems, and, consequently, leads to loss of competitive position. For example, while the U. S.

automakers were trying to adapt their activity to strict environmental regulation of the U. S. environmental policy (1970), energy-saving Japanese vehicles entered the U. S. market and managed to win customer loyalty. However, business structures more and more often interpret nature-conservative requirements from the viewpoint of economic and environmental competitiveness of their specific goods, specific industries, and economy in general.

Evidently, business environmental interests are secondary by its nature in relation to the industrial ones. At the same time, such world leaders like America proudly confirm their environmental obligations and promises to preserve environment and natural balance of the Earth. Probably, Russian Federation should follow the example of the United States to overcome environmental problems. References Feshbach, M. (1992).

Ecocide in the USSR: Health and Nature under Siege. New York: Basic Books. Informatics. Education. Ecology and man's health, Collection of scientific transactions. (2001). Astrahan: Moscow Press.

Nature and natural resources of Siberia and Far East, their control and rational use. (2002). Novosibirsk. Report, S. (2004). About the Environmental Condition and Environmental Protection in Russia at 2003 year.

Moscow. Sapozhnikova, V. (2005). State system for waste management regulation in Russia. J. Industrial Ecology, 2005, 1, 30 - 36. Wolfson, Z. (1994).

The Geography of Survival: Ecology in the Post-Soviet Era. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

Research essay sample on Russian Federation Environmental Problems