3 ms·

The same article says Russia is on 2nd place in reforestation. They do export timber and can export more, while increasing the share of sustainably managed fore

The same article says Russia is on 2nd place in reforestation. They do export timber and can export more, while increasing the share of sustainably managed forests. But export of Baikal fresh water? That’s fake news. Didn’t happen and won’t happen, unless you mean just some bottled water.

trhway 1y ago
>The same article says Russia is on 2nd place in reforestation. Reforestation alone doesn't matter. What matters is total result of deforestation and reforestation. Russia reforests only about 1Mha/year : https://www.statista.com/statistics/1059300/russia-reforested-area/?srsltid=AfmBOoq1WvFe2cNIf_vdbNNSAL-3Cqpdy9eOC2y1dLpN06HdOfu7Lvny https://www.statista.com/statistics/1059300/russia-reforeste... while the total resulting loss is https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/RUS/?category=forest-change https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/RUS/?ca... "In 2020, Russia had 748 Mha of natural forest, extending over 44% of its land area. In 2024, it lost 5.59 Mha of natural forest, equivalent to 816 Mt of CO₂ emissions." >But export of Baikal fresh water? That’s fake news. Didn’t happen and won’t happen https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/07/parched-chinese-city-plans-to-pump-water-from-russian-lake-via-1000km-pipeline https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/07/parched-chines... in Russian, that another waterpipeline - from river Ob' was approved at some Russian Parliament "roundtable on strategic projects with China and Kazakhstan". https://topwar.ru/159671-bajkal-xxi-veka-druzhba-druzhboj-a-voda-vroz.html https://topwar.ru/159671-bajkal-xxi-veka-druzhba-druzhboj-a-... and there were strong leaks, not officially dispelled, that Baikal water was raised during the most recent Putin/Xi meeting.
- cpursley 1y ago
  Kind reminder - this is not reddit.
  - trhway 1y ago
    >Are you from country 404 by any chance? Because that's how these posts read. You may read it whatever way you like. If we look at the facts - statista and globalwatch is some Western sites/orgs, topwar is straight Russian and Guardian is Great Britain. >Kind reminder - this is not reddit. This is why you're using that offensive "404" notation (an expression of the Russian propaganda point that Ukraine isn't a sovereign independent state) when referring to Ukraine?
    - cpursley 1y ago
      Well, they aren’t. Never have been and never will be. Geopolitics is a ruthless game and those in the middle sometimes get crushed. Which is why you generally want natural borders (mountains, coast, etc).
      - trhway 1y ago
        >Well, they aren’t. Never have been Like Ukranians a number of nations - for example Hungarians, Chezh, Finnish, Latvians, Estonians, etc. - for centuries didn't have their own state and were parts of larger empires and got their own states only relatively recently. Like any other, the Russian propaganda thrives on people's ignorance. In this case "Ukranian people and Ukraine don't exist and never have existed, it is just an inferior kind of Russians on historically Russian territory". That is why nor Russian textbooks nor wide Russian info space never mention the 1651 book by French engineer D'Beauplan "Description of Ukraine, a Province of the Kingdom of Poland situated between Moskovia and Transilvania" where he clearly describes in detail a separate Ukrainian ethnicity living on their own separate territory (which is pretty close to the territory of modern Ukraine. Also note that Russia din't even exist back then, it was just a "Moscovia" duchy). >and never will be. Geopolitics is a ruthless game and those in the middle sometimes get crushed. Which is why you generally want natural borders (mountains, coast, etc). The same applies to all the above mentioned nations, and this is why they joined NATO, and why Ukraine is trying to.
- ivan_gammel 1y ago
  Regarding your Global Forest Watch source I recommend to look below the tagline. The numbers that you picked have very specific meaning and the same page says that most of the loss (ca.75%) was due to wildfires and it grew more forest than it was lost due to logging. When including the loss for wildfires, the total balance is negligibly negative. Regarding you Guardian and Topwar links, you are citing the sources that speculate about rumors about some science fiction projects. Russia does not export water from Baikal or Ob River and won’t export it.
  - trhway 1y ago
    >Regarding you Guardian and Topwar links, you are citing the sources that speculate about rumors about some science fiction projects. Russia does not export water from Baikal or Ob River and won’t export it. Official state news https://ria.ru/20160503/1425318933.html https://ria.ru/20160503/1425318933.html "Moscow invited Bejing to discuss fresh water transfer project from Russia to China - stated the Russian Minister of Agriculture" and the further description of the proposed project is exactly the second project described in the topwar link.
    - ivan_gammel 1y ago
      One article in propaganda outlet from 2016 doesn’t count as fact. The fact is, nothing did happen, there’s no export of fresh water and there’s no such plans.
      - trhway 1y ago
        >One article in propaganda outlet from 2016 doesn’t count as fact. It isn't article itself that counts here. The official statement of the Russian Minister of Agriculture is the fact here. Whereis you so far stated only your personal opinion. >there’s no such plans You contradict the above mentioned official statement of the Russian Minister of Agriculture.
        ivan_gammel 1y ago

trhway 1y ago

>The same article says Russia is on 2nd place in reforestation. Reforestation alone doesn't matter. What matters is total result of deforestation and reforestation. Russia reforests only about 1Mha/year : https://www.statista.com/statistics/1059300/russia-reforested-area/?srsltid=AfmBOoq1WvFe2cNIf_vdbNNSAL-3Cqpdy9eOC2y1dLpN06HdOfu7Lvny https://www.statista.com/statistics/1059300/russia-reforeste... while the total resulting loss is https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/RUS/?category=forest-change https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/RUS/?ca... "In 2020, Russia had 748 Mha of natural forest, extending over 44% of its land area. In 2024, it lost 5.59 Mha of natural forest, equivalent to 816 Mt of CO₂ emissions." >But export of Baikal fresh water? That’s fake news. Didn’t happen and won’t happen https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/07/parched-chinese-city-plans-to-pump-water-from-russian-lake-via-1000km-pipeline https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/07/parched-chines... in Russian, that another waterpipeline - from river Ob' was approved at some Russian Parliament "roundtable on strategic projects with China and Kazakhstan". https://topwar.ru/159671-bajkal-xxi-veka-druzhba-druzhboj-a-voda-vroz.html https://topwar.ru/159671-bajkal-xxi-veka-druzhba-druzhboj-a-... and there were strong leaks, not officially dispelled, that Baikal water was raised during the most recent Putin/Xi meeting.

cpursley 1y ago
Kind reminder - this is not reddit.
- trhway 1y ago
  >Are you from country 404 by any chance? Because that's how these posts read. You may read it whatever way you like. If we look at the facts - statista and globalwatch is some Western sites/orgs, topwar is straight Russian and Guardian is Great Britain. >Kind reminder - this is not reddit. This is why you're using that offensive "404" notation (an expression of the Russian propaganda point that Ukraine isn't a sovereign independent state) when referring to Ukraine?
  - cpursley 1y ago
    Well, they aren’t. Never have been and never will be. Geopolitics is a ruthless game and those in the middle sometimes get crushed. Which is why you generally want natural borders (mountains, coast, etc).
    - trhway 1y ago
      >Well, they aren’t. Never have been Like Ukranians a number of nations - for example Hungarians, Chezh, Finnish, Latvians, Estonians, etc. - for centuries didn't have their own state and were parts of larger empires and got their own states only relatively recently. Like any other, the Russian propaganda thrives on people's ignorance. In this case "Ukranian people and Ukraine don't exist and never have existed, it is just an inferior kind of Russians on historically Russian territory". That is why nor Russian textbooks nor wide Russian info space never mention the 1651 book by French engineer D'Beauplan "Description of Ukraine, a Province of the Kingdom of Poland situated between Moskovia and Transilvania" where he clearly describes in detail a separate Ukrainian ethnicity living on their own separate territory (which is pretty close to the territory of modern Ukraine. Also note that Russia din't even exist back then, it was just a "Moscovia" duchy). >and never will be. Geopolitics is a ruthless game and those in the middle sometimes get crushed. Which is why you generally want natural borders (mountains, coast, etc). The same applies to all the above mentioned nations, and this is why they joined NATO, and why Ukraine is trying to.
ivan_gammel 1y ago
Regarding your Global Forest Watch source I recommend to look below the tagline. The numbers that you picked have very specific meaning and the same page says that most of the loss (ca.75%) was due to wildfires and it grew more forest than it was lost due to logging. When including the loss for wildfires, the total balance is negligibly negative. Regarding you Guardian and Topwar links, you are citing the sources that speculate about rumors about some science fiction projects. Russia does not export water from Baikal or Ob River and won’t export it.
- trhway 1y ago
  >Regarding you Guardian and Topwar links, you are citing the sources that speculate about rumors about some science fiction projects. Russia does not export water from Baikal or Ob River and won’t export it. Official state news https://ria.ru/20160503/1425318933.html https://ria.ru/20160503/1425318933.html "Moscow invited Bejing to discuss fresh water transfer project from Russia to China - stated the Russian Minister of Agriculture" and the further description of the proposed project is exactly the second project described in the topwar link.
  - ivan_gammel 1y ago
    One article in propaganda outlet from 2016 doesn’t count as fact. The fact is, nothing did happen, there’s no export of fresh water and there’s no such plans.
    - trhway 1y ago
      >One article in propaganda outlet from 2016 doesn’t count as fact. It isn't article itself that counts here. The official statement of the Russian Minister of Agriculture is the fact here. Whereis you so far stated only your personal opinion. >there’s no such plans You contradict the above mentioned official statement of the Russian Minister of Agriculture.
      - ivan_gammel 1y ago