sign in sign up
<<
Home , Akhmeta, Alazani, Armavir (ancient city), Batumi, Bolnisi, Chazhashi

Climate Change in the South A Visual Synthesis Climate Change in the South Caucasus

Based on official country information from the communications to the UNFCCC, scientific papers and news reports.

This is a Zoï Environment Network publication produced in close cooperation with the ENVSEC Initiative and the Governments of , and .­ Valuable inputs were received from the Regional Climate Change Impact Study for the Caucasus facilitated by the UNDP. OSCE has provided support­ for printing and dissemination. Additional financial support was received from UNEP — Environmental Reference Centre of the Partnership.

Printed on 100% recycled paper.

© Zoï Environment Network 2011

The Environment and Security Initiative (ENVSEC) transforms environment Concept and security risks into regional cooperation. The Initiative provides multi- Zurab Jincharadze, Otto Simonett stakeholder environment and security assessments and facilitates joint action to reduce tensions and increase cooperation between groups and countries. Collages ENVSEC comprises the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Eu- Nina Joerchjan rope (OSCE), Regional Environmental Centre for Central and Eastern (REC), Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Maps and Graphics Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), United Nations Environment Manana Kurtubadze Programme (UNEP), and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as an associated partner. The ENVSEC partners address environment and security Text and interviews risks in four : Eastern Europe, South Eastern Europe, Southern Cau- Zurab Jincharadze casus and Central . Design and Layout This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part in any form for edu- Manana Kurtubadze, Maria Libert cational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holders, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. Zoï Environment Contributors and Interviewees Network would appreciate receiving a copy of any material that uses this Ramaz Chitanava, Nickolai Denisov, Harald Egerer, Farda Imanov, publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or ­Medea Inashvili, Alex Kirby, Nato Kutaladze, Hamlet Melkonyan, for any commercial purpose what so ever without prior permission in written ­Maharram Mehtiyev, Lesya Nikolayeva, Viktor Novikov, Marina Pandoeva, form from the copyright holders. The use of information from this publication Marina Shvangiradze, Vahagn Tonoyan, Emil Tsereteli, Asif Verdiyev, Benjamin­ concerning proprietary products for advertising is not permitted. Zakaryan. The views expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect views of the ENVSEC partner organizations and governments.­ The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever concern- ing the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Mention of a com- mercial company or product does not imply endorsement by the cooperat- ing partners. We regret any errors or omissions that may unwittingly have been made.

2 Contents

The South Caucasus Climate Change Trends and 6 at a Glance 18 Scenarious in the Region

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts of Climate Change 30 and Climate Change Mitigation 40 and Adaptation Measures

3 Foreword Climate Change in the Caucasus — A myth no longer In Greek mythology the Caucasus is known as the place where Prometheus was chained to the mountain as punish- ment for stealing fire from and giving it to mortals. His liver is eaten by an eagle during the day, only to regenerate at night, until he is freed by Heracles who kills the eagle. In the , and the Koran, — close to the Caucasus — is the place where ’s ark is stranded, saving Noah himself, his family and the world’s animals from the great . So much for mythology and religion, but strangely enough, both narratives can be linked to climate change: on the one hand Prometheus bringing fire to mankind, starting a long chain of burning and releasing CO₂ to the atmosphere, eventually contributing to climate change; on the other hand Noah escaping the floods — one of the po- tential impacts of climate change. As a stark contrast to its rich cultural diversity and beau- tiful environment, in the modern day Caucasus there are several unresolved — frozen — conflicts hampering the “normal” economic development of the region since the Atlas and Prometheus. Laconian Kylix, 6th c. BCE. Vatican Museums breakup of the Union in 1991. Predicted impacts of climate change will not make the region more secure. With this publication, Zoï Environment Network aims to communicate the known facts of climate change in a well illustrated, easily understandable manner, accessible to everyone. For this we could rely on the rich Caucasian tra- dition of geographic analysis, map making and visual arts. Unfortunately, the format did not allow the use of other Cau- casian specialities, such as music, film, cuisine or toasts, it will be up to the reader to accompany his or her lecture with some of this. We do however want to make the point that also in the Caucasus, climate change is no more myth.

Otto Simonett Director, Zoï Environment Network , January 2012

4 Climate Change in the South Caucasus: key findings, trends and projections

INDICATORS Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia

Air temperature (last half century)

Precipitation and (last half century)

Desertification

Extreme weather events and climate-related hazards (1990–2009)

Melting ice (last half century)

Water resources availability in the future (2050–2100)

Health Infectious and vector-borne diseases

Greenhouse gas emissions 1990–2005

Greenhouse gas emissions 2000–2005

Policy instruments, actions and awareness

Climate observation and weather services (1990–2009)

increase, enchancement decrease, reduction increase in some areas Sources: Second National Communications of Armenia, 2010; Azerbaijan, 2010; Georgia, 2009. 5 valley from Sighnaghi, GEORGIA The South Caucasus at a Glance G Caspian r Depression e Elbrus a 5 642 t

i

r 5 068 u

g I n CASPIAN 5 033 Kazbek C RUSSIAN SEA a FEDERATION BLACK Plain SEA Rioni u Alazani c GEORGIA L Gori e a s s s e Kura u r Kura s Sheki s n Alaverdi i t a Mingechevir n i) o u h reserv. M ok Ganja Sumgayit i c or Mingechevir P o n t Ch ARMENIA uh ( C Çor 4 090 Absheron n Aragats a d a z Lake AZERBAIJAN a Armenian r Sevan H u metres c Kura 4,000 Nagorno 3,000 a Kura- Ararat 2,000 Aras 5 165 s Khankendi Depression 1,500 Goris () 1,000 Highland AZ u 500 Neftchala s Kapan 200 Aras 0 Nakhchivan Depression 0 Meghri -500 Talysh -1,000 -1,500 Lake Van Van 0 100 km

8 Climate Change in the South Caucasus G Caspian Sochi r Depression Terek e Elbrus a Nalchik 5 642 t Abkhazia Grozny Magas GENERAL OVERVIEW Makhachkala Sukhumi Vladikavkaz The South Caucasus is located in the south-eastern part of Europe, Shkhara i

r 5 068 between the Black and Caspian Seas. The furthest western and east- u g Sulak ern boundaries of the region lie between 40°01’ and 50°25’ E, while I n CASPIAN Rioni 5 033 the northern and southern ones are between 43°35’ and 38°23’ N. The Kazbek C RUSSIAN SEA Colchis a FEDERATION region is bordered by Turkey and the Islamic Republic of Iran in the BLACK Plain South and by the Russian Federation in the North. The three South Kutaisi SEA Poti Rioni Tskhinvali u Caucasian republics — Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia — gained Alazani c independence after the fall of the former in 1991. Shortly GEORGIA Kura L Gori after independence the region underwent devastating ethnic and civil e Telavi a Batumi wars, the consequences of which are still to be overcome. Adjara s Akhaltsikhe Tbilisi Iori s s Rustavi e Samur Kura u r Kura s Sheki s n Alaverdi i Debed AZOV t a Gyumri Mingechevir SEA n i) RUSSIAN FEDERATION o u h Vanadzor reserv. M ok Ganja Sumgayit i c or Mingechevir P o n t Ch Kars ARMENIA uh ( C Çor 4 090 Absheron n Aragats a d a z Lake AZERBAIJAN BLACK a Baku Armenian r Sevan SEA CASPIAN Armavir H u SEA Yerevan metres c Kura GEORGIA 4,000 Nagorno SOUTH 3,000 TURKEY a Karabakh Kura-Aras CAUCASUS Ararat 2,000 Aras ARMENIA AZERBAIJAN 5 165 s Lachin Khankendi Depression 1,500 (Stepanakert) Goris TURKEY AZ 1,000 Highland AZ u 500 Neftchala Nakhchivan s Kapan 200 Aras 0 Nakhchivan Depression 0 Meghri -500 Talysh IRAN -1,000 Lankaran -1,500 Lake Van SYRIA IRAQ Van IRAN LEBANON Glaciers 0 100 km 0 150 km

The South Caucasus at a Glance 9 Average Annual Temperatures in the South Caucasus

Nalchik Abkhazia Terek Magas Grozny Makhachkala

Sukhumi i

r Vladikavkaz u g Sulak I n Rioni RUSSIAN BLACK CASPIAN Kutaisi Tskhinvali FEDERATION SEA Poti Rioni SEA Alazani GEORGIA Gori Kura Batumi Telavi Adjara Tbilisi Akhaltsikhe Rustavi Iori Samur Kura Sheki

Kura Alaverdi Debed i) Mingechevir kh Gyumri Vanadzor ro reserv. ho Ganja Sumgayit (C Çoruh TURKEY ARMENIA Mingechevir Kars an d z a Lake AZERBAIJAN r Sevan Baku Armavir H Aras Yerevan Nagorno- Kura Temperature (°C) Karabakh 16.0° Lachin Khankendi 13.0° Goris (Stepanakert) 10.0° AZ Neftchala Nakhchivan Kapan 7.0° Aras 5.0° Lake Nakhchivan Van Meghri 1.5° -1.0° Source: State Hydro-meteorological Services of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia; IRAN 0 100 km World Trade Press, 2007.

Geography and Climate Almost every climatic zone is represented in the South absolute maximum annual rainfall is 4,100 mm in south- Caucasus except for savannas and tropical forests. To the west Georgia (Adjara), whilst the rainfall in southern Geor- North, the Great Caucasus range protects the region from gia, Armenia and western Azerbaijan varies between 300 the direct penetration of cold air. The circulation of these and 800 mm per year. Temperature generally decreases air masses has mainly determined the regime as elevation rises. The highlands of the all over the region. in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia are marked Precipitation decreases from west to east and mountains by sharp temperature contrasts between summer and win- generally receive higher amounts than low-lying areas. The ter months due to a more .

10 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Average Annual Precipitation in the South Caucasus Nalchik Abkhazia Terek Magas Grozny Makhachkala

Sukhumi i

r Vladikavkaz u g Sulak I n Rioni RUSSIAN BLACK CASPIAN Kutaisi Tskhinvali FEDERATION SEA Poti Rioni SEA Alazani GEORGIA Gori Kura Batumi Telavi Adjara Tbilisi Akhaltsikhe Rustavi Iori Samur Kura Sheki Kura Alaverdi Debed i) Mingechevir kh Gyumri ro Vanadzor reserv. ho Ganja Sumgayit (C Çoruh TURKEY ARMENIA Mingechevir Kars an d z a Lake AZERBAIJAN r Sevan Baku Armavir H Aras Yerevan Nagorno- Kura Precipitation Karabakh 2,000 mm Lachin Khankendi 1,600 mm Goris (Stepanakert) 800 mm AZ Neftchala Nakhchivan Kapan 600 mm Aras 400 mm Lake Nakhchivan Van Meghri 200 mm less than 200 mm Source: State Hydro-meteorological Services of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia; IRAN 0 100 km Geopolitical Atlas of the Caucasus, 2010.

The average annual temperature in Armenia is 5.5°C. The The climate in the plains of East Georgia and most of Azer- highest annual average temperature is 12–14°C. At alti- baijan is dry : in the lowlands, it is dry subtropical, and in tudes above 2,500 m the average annual temperatures are mountainous areas alpine. The average annual tempera- below zero. The summer is temperate; in July the average ture varies from 11 to 13°C in the plains, from 2 to 7°C in the temperature is about 16.7°C, and in Ararat valley it varies mountains, and around 0°C in alpine zones. Depending on between 24–26°C. the altitude and remoteness from the , climatic The average annual temperature at the shore types in Azerbaijan vary from arid subtropical in the low- is 14–15°C, with extremes ranging from +45°C to -15°C. lands to temperate and cold in the high mountains.

The South Caucasus at a Glance 11 Ter Ecosystems ek Sochi

Nalchik Grozny Abkhazia Magas

Sukhumi Vladikavkaz Makhachkala

i

r

u Sulak g I n Rioni k Te r e BLACK RUSSIAN CASPIAN SEA Rioni Kutaisi Tskhinvali SEA Poti FEDERATION Alazani GEORGIA Kura Gori Telavi Batumi Adjara Tbilisi Akhaltsikhe Iori Rustavi Samur

Kura Sheki TURKEY Alaverdi Kura Debed Gyumri Mingechevir Ganja reserv. Sumgayit Vanadzor Mingechevir Floodplains and ARMENIA AZERBAIJAN n a d Lake Subtropical forests z Baku a Sevan Armavir r Temperate forests H Yerevan Kura Nagorno- Coniferous forests Karabakh

Steppes Lachin Khankendi (Stepanakert) Arid and semi-deserts AZ Goris Nakhchivan Nakhchivan Kapan Neftchala Sub-alpine and alpine Aras

Glaciers Meghri

Sources: Caucasus ecoregion — environment and human development issues, UNEP/GRID-Arendal, 2008; IRAN CEO-Caucasus-2002; 0 100 km Geopolitical Atlas of the Caucasus, 2010.

12 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Ter Ecosystems ek Sochi

Nalchik Grozny Abkhazia Magas

Sukhumi Vladikavkaz Makhachkala

i

r u Sulak g I n Rioni k Te r e BLACK RUSSIAN CASPIAN SEA Rioni Kutaisi Tskhinvali SEA Poti FEDERATION Alazani GEORGIA Kura Gori Telavi Alazani River in the border of Georgia and Azerbaijan Batumi Adjara Tbilisi Ecosystems Akhaltsikhe Iori Rustavi The complex topography and diverse vegetation cover of the Cauca- Samur sus is a main reason for an unusually large number of climatic zones and natural ecosystems on a relatively small piece of land like South Kura Sheki Caucasus. The region ranges from the subtropical rainy type of forest TURKEY Alaverdi Kura Debed of the south-east Black Sea coast to the high peaks of the Greater Gyumri Mingechevir Caucasus, with their glaciers and snow caps, to the and Ganja reserv. Sumgayit Vanadzor Mingechevir semi-deserts of the lowland east. Floodplains and wetlands ARMENIA AZERBAIJAN n a d Lake Subtropical forests z Baku a Sevan Armavir r Temperate forests H Yerevan Kura Nagorno- Coniferous forests Karabakh

Steppes Lachin Khankendi (Stepanakert) Arid deserts and semi-deserts AZ Goris Nakhchivan Nakhchivan Kapan Neftchala Sub-alpine and alpine meadows Aras

Glaciers Meghri

Sources: Caucasus ecoregion — environment and human development issues, UNEP/GRID-Arendal, 2008; IRAN CEO-Caucasus-2002; 0 100 km Geopolitical Atlas of the Caucasus, 2010. Debed river at Northern Armenia

The South Caucasus at a Glance 13 M ain fIGures Population dynamics in 1989–2010 Armenia: Total Population 3.249 millions (2010). Million Total­ area 29,743 km². Population density 108.4 10 per km². Life expectancy 74 years. Net population Azerbaijan 9 ­migration -1.7 per 1,000 population. 8 7 Azerbaijan: Total Population 8.997 millions (2010). 6 Total area 86,600 km². Population density 105.8 5 Georgia per km². Life expectancy 70 years. Net population 4 3 migration -1.4 per 1,000 population. Armenia 2 1 Georgia: Total Population 4.436 millions (2010). 0 Total area 69,700 km². Population density 68.1 per 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 km². Life expectancy 72 years. Net population mi- gration -18.1 per 1,000 population. Sources: Statistical Year Books of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, 2010; World Bank statistics.

Population by age groups in 2010 Urban and rural population in 2010

10% 7% 14% 65 and over 10%

36% 46% 47% Rural 43%

72% 71% 69% 15–64 70%

64% 54% 53% Urban 57%

18% 23% 17% 0–14 19%

Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Total Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Total

Sources: Statistical Year Books of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, 2010.

14 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Terek Population in the South Caucasus

Abkhazia

Sukhumi i

r u g Sulak I n Rioni RUSSIAN BLACK Tskhinvali CASPIAN SEA Poti Rioni Kutaisi FEDERATION SEA Alazani GEORGIA Gori Batumi Telavi Adjara Kura Tbilisi Akhaltsikhe Rustavi Iori Samur Kura Alaverdi i) Kura Debed Sheki kh ro Gyumri Mingechevir ho Vanadzor (C reserv. ruh Ganja Sumgayit Ço ARMENIA Mingechevir an d Rural population, 2002 z Lake AZERBAIJAN a r Sevan Baku 1 dot = 500 inhabitants Aras H Yerevan Nagorno Karabakh Kura Urban population, 2009 Lachin Khankendi (Stepanakert) 2 millions AZ Goris TURKEY Neftchala Nakhchivan Kapan Aras 1 million Nakhchivan 300,000 Meghri 100,000–200,000 50,000–100,000 Lake Van IRAN 0 100 km Sources: CEO-Caucasus 2002; Statistical Year Books of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, 2010.

Little Cavemen from , AZERBAIJAN The South Caucasus at a Glance 15 GDP in 1990–2010 GDP per capita in 1990–2010 Million USD USD

50 Azerbaijan Azerbaijan 6,000

40 5,000 Armenia 30 4,000 3,000 20 Georgia 2,000 Georgia 10 1,000 Armenia GDP by sectors in 2010 0 0 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006Armenia 2008 2010 Source: World Bank statistics. Source: UN statistics.

GDP by sectors in 2010 Services Economic Overview 31% Industry Armenia Following the disintegration of the former Soviet Union meant the economies started to revive47% and then grow the economies of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia ex- rapidly. In Armenia and Azerbaijan, they grew at nearly­ 9% perienced dramaticServices economic declines at the start of the a year from 1997 to 2002. In these22% countries growth rates 31% Industry GDP by sectors in 2010 1990s. For example in Armenia,47% between 1990 and 1993, were even higher in 2003 and 2004 (see table 16). In Geor- the average annual decrease in GDP was about 18%; In gia economicArmenia growth has been unstable inAzerbaijan recent years, Azerbaijan GDPAgriculture fell by an annual average of about 13%, varying between about 1.8% in 2000, 10.6% in 1997, and 22% while in Georgia, it declined by 70–75% from 1991 to 1994. 6.2% in 2004. The real growth of GDP of Georgia in 2010 However, the launching of economic reforms and the amounted to 6.4%. Azerbaijan Services Services achievement of political stability by the second half of31% the Industry 33% Industry 47% 61% Services 33% Industry Agriculture 61% GDP by 22%sectors in 2010 Agriculture GDP by sectors in 2010 6% Agriculture Armenia Georgia 6% Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia Services Industry Services Services31% Industry Industry 47%Industry 27% 31% Industry 33% 61% 47%27% Services Agriculture 62% Agriculture Services 22% Agriculture 11% 62% Agriculture Agriculture 22% 11% 6% Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Georgia Source: www.indexmundi.com Source: www.indexmundi.com Services 33% Industry 61%Industry Services 27% 16 Climate Change33% in theIndustry South Caucasus 61% AgricultureServices 6% 62% Agriculture 11% Agriculture Georgia 6% Industry Georgia Source: www.indexmundi.com27% Services 62% Agriculture Industry 11% 27% Services 62% Agriculture Source: www.indexmundi.com 11%

Source: www.indexmundi.com Land use in 2009 Armenia Azerbaijan Georgia

3% 12% 13% 4% Agricultural land 32% 13% 55% 43% Forest Water 71% 1% Other 12% 41%

Sources: Statistical Year Books of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, 2010.

The Peace Bridge, Tbilisi, GEORGIA

The South Caucasus at a Glance 17 Ararat Valley, ARMENIA Climate Change Trends and Scenarios in the Region Regional Climate Change Trends Changes of air temperature in the South Caucasus To study global warming scenarios and risks associ- 1935–2008 for Armenia, 1936–2005 , 1960–2005 for Azerbaijan ated with climate change trends on a regional level in the South Caucasus, the Environment and Secu- Changes of annual air temperature rity (ENVSEC) Initiative launched a project on Climate Change Impact for the South Caucasus implemented RUSSIAN BLACK FEDERATION by UNDP. The project brought together leading na- SEA GEORGIA CASPIAN SEA tional experts engaged in the preparation of the sec- (C°) ond national communications of Armenia, Azerbaijan

ARMENIA and Georgia under the UNFCCC. TURKEY AZERBAIJAN 1 Precipitation and temperature data from the key meteorological stations of the three South Caucasus 0.5 AZ countries were examined in the following sequence : 0 Armenia — 32 stations for 1935–2008; Georgia — 21 IRAN stations for 1936–2005; Azerbaijan — 14 stations for 1960–2005. Temperature changes were assessed for Changes of summer air temperature the summer, winter and the whole year. During the period from 1935 to 2009 in Armenia the

RUSSIAN annual average temperature increased by 0.85ºC, and BLACK FEDERATION (C°) SEA GEORGIA CASPIAN in Azerbaijan by 0.5 to 0.6ºC since the 1880s, with the SEA highest registered temperatures during the last 10 1.5 years. In Georgia from 1906 to 1995 the mean annual ARMENIA TURKEY air temperature has increased by 0.1 to 0.5ºC in the AZERBAIJAN 1 eastern part of the country, whilst it has decreased 0.5 by 0.1 to 0.3ºC in the west (Georgia’s Initial National AZ Communication, 1999). However, if calculating for the 0 IRAN last 50 years the data shows a different trend: dur- ing the 1957 to 2006 the mean annual temperatures increased by 0.2ºC in the western part and by 0.3ºC in Changes of winter air temperature the eastern Georgia (Georgia’s Second National Com- munication, 2009). RUSSIAN BLACK Regional differences are also reported from Azer- FEDERATION (C°) SEA GEORGIA CASPIAN SEA baijan, with the highest temperature increase in the and Kura‐Aras lowlands, and from 1 Armenia, with the warmest regions in the Ararat low- ARMENIA TURKEY AZERBAIJAN 0.5 lands and in the zone from the border of Georgia to . 0 AZ -0.5 IRAN

Sources: UNDP/ENVSEC Study on Climate Change Impact for the South Caucasus, 2011.

20 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Values of heat Index (human thermal comfort) Relative Temperature (C°) humidity 26° 27° 28° 29° 30° 31° 32° 33° 34° 35° 36° 37° 38° 39° 40° 41° 90% 28.0 30.7 33.8 37.1 40.7 44.7 48.9 53.5 58.5 63.7 63.7 75.1 81.2 87.7 94.5 101.6 85% 27.9 30.2 32.9 35.9 39.1 42.7 46.6 50.8 55.2 60.0 65.1 70.4 76.1 82.1 88.3 94.9 80% 27.7 29.7 32.1 34.7 37.7 40.9 44.4 48.1 52.2 56.5 61.2 66.1 71.3 76.8 82.5 88.6 75% 27.5 29.3 31.4 33.7 36.3 39.2 42.3 45.7 49.4 53.3 57.5 62.0 66.8 71.8 77.0 82.6 70% 27.3 28.9 30.7 32.7 35.0 37.6 40.4 43.5 46.8 50.3 54.2 58.2 62.5 67.1 71.9 77.0 65% 27.1 28.5 30.0 31.8 33.8 38.7 38.7 41.4 44.4 47.6 51.0 54.7 58.6 62.7 67.1 71.7 60% 26.9 28.1 29.5 31.0 32.8 34.9 37.1 39.5 42.2 45.1 48.1 51.4 55.0 58.7 62.6 66.8 55% 26.7 27.7 28.9 30.3 31.9 33.7 35.6 37.8 40.2 42.8 45.5 48.5 51.6 55.0 58.5 62.3 50% 26.6 27.4 28.5 29.7 31.1 32.6 34.4 36.3 38.4 40.7 43.1 45.8 48.6 51.6 54.8 58.1 45% 26.4 27.1 28.0 29.1 30.3 31.7 33.3 34.9 36.8 38.8 41.0 43.4 45.9 48.5 51.3 54.3 40% 26.3 26.9 27.7 28.6 29.7 30.9 32.3 33.8 35.4 37.2 39.1 41.2 43.4 45.8 48.3 20.9 35% 26.0 26.6 27.4 28.2 29.2 30.3 31.5 32.8 34.3 35.8 37.5 39.3 41.3 43.3 45.5 47.8 30% 25.8 26.4 27.1 27.9 28.8 29.7 30.8 32.0 33.3 34.7 36.2 37.8 39.4 41.2 43.1 45.1 Note: Exposure to full sunchine can increase heat index values by up to 10°C Source: UNDP/ENVSEC Study on Climate Change Impact for the South Caucasus, 2011.

Heat Waves The UNDP/ENVSEC regional climate (%). The team explored daily meteorological data for warm study group constructed a regional model on the urban periods (May to September) of the 1955–1970 and 1990– heat wave trends for some South Caucasian cities, includ- 2007­ time sequences, using PRECIS statistical analysis, ing Tbilisi, Baku and Vanadzor. The study assessed one of and generated a forecast for 2020–2049. The calculation the important indicators of climate change — the Heat Index was based on the Global Climate Model — ECHAM. Analy- that is a combination of air temperature and relative humid- of the calculation and forecast models show that four ity during the warm periods of a year. out of six classes of Heat Indexes have risen during the last The table above demonstrates how Heat Indexes are 15–20 years (1990–2007) and are expected to increase dra- “translated” to an actual feeling of human comfort when the matically for one of three critical classes (orange/hot class temperatures (C°) are combined with the relative humidity with extreme warning of risk) during the coming decades.­

Comparison of “dangerous” days in Vanadzor, Tbilisi and Baku in the past and future Vanadzor Tbilisi Baku 1955–1970 1990–2007 2020–2049 1955–1970 1990–2007 2020–2049 1955–1970 1990–2007 2020–2049 Normal 1,283 773 868 1,338 1,349 1,525 508 872 1,037 Warm 682 1,551 2,558 796 843 1,161 463 607 1,063 Very warm 482 736 745 310 545 1,527 331 749 1,858 Hot 1 0 305 4 17 287 13 63 539 Very hot 0 0 113 0 0 0 0 0 3 Extremly hot 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Number of dangerous days 483 736 1,164 314 562 1,814 344 812 2,400

Source: UNDP/ENVSEC Study on Climate Change Impact for the South Caucasus, 2011.

Climate Change Trends and Scenarios in the Region 21 Forecasted changes of annual air temperature GCM PRECIS Models in the South Caucasus The analysis of climate change scenarios developed for all three South Caucasus countries using PRECIS (by HadCM3 modeling of MAGICC/SCENGEN) outputs and the MAGICC/SCENGEN modelling tool re- Changes in 2011–2040 vealed that changes of temperature by the end of the century will vary in the range of 3–6°C.

RUSSIAN According to the forecast made by the most appro- BLACK FEDERATION SEA GEORGIA CASPIAN priate models for the years 2070–2100 the highest in- SEA crement in temperature, 7.7°C, should be anticipated in West Georgia in the summer. The lowest increment, ARMENIA TURKEY for the same time period, 2.1°C, is expected in Armenia AZERBAIJAN during the winter. (C°) The expected increase in mean annual temperature AZ is similar for Armenia and Georgia and is likely to be 1.5 IRAN about 5°C. In Azerbaijan the expected increase is lower, around 3.6°C. Changes in 2041–2070

RUSSIAN BLACK FEDERATION SEA GEORGIA CASPIAN SEA

ARMENIA TURKEY AZERBAIJAN (C°)

AZ 3 2.5 IRAN

Changes in 2071–2100

RUSSIAN BLACK FEDERATION SEA GEORGIA CASPIAN SEA

(C°) ARMENIA TURKEY AZERBAIJAN 5

AZ 4

IRAN 3.5

Source: UNDP/ENVSEC Study on Climate Change Impact for the South Caucasus, 2011

22 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Forecasted changes of annual precipitation in the South Caucasus (by HadCM3 modeling of MAGICC/SCENGEN)

Changes in 2011–2040

RUSSIAN BLACK FEDERATION SEA GEORGIA CASPIAN SEA

ARMENIA TURKEY AZERBAIJAN 5%

AZ 0%

IRAN -5%

Changes in 2041–2070

RUSSIAN BLACK FEDERATION SEA GEORGIA CASPIAN SEA

ARMENIA TURKEY AZERBAIJAN 0%

AZ -5%

IRAN -10%

Changes in 2071–2100

RUSSIAN BLACK According to the results shown by the HadCM3 climate FEDERATION SEA GEORGIA CASPIAN modelling tool (which is a modification of HAD300 and SEA is considered as best suited model to the Caucasus re- gion) the decrease in annual precipitation in the period ARMENIA TURKEY 2070–2100 will be around 15% for Azerbaijan and Geor- AZERBAIJAN -5% gia, rising to 24% for Armenia. -10% The highest decrease in precipitation is forecast for AZ -15% Georgia — 80.8% in summer and 68% in spring. The IRAN -20% lowest decrease is expected in Azerbaijan, 11% in sum- mer. The highest increase ( 22%) is likely also to be in Source: UNDP/ENVSEC Study on Climate Change Impact for the South Caucasus, 2011 Azerbaijan in the winter.

Climate Change Trends and Scenarios in the Region 23 Changes in average annual Temperature and Climate Change Trends in Armenia Precipitation in Armenia, 1940–2008 compared As a mountainous country with an arid climate, Armenia to 1961–1990 is highly vulnerable to global climate change. It’s Second National Communication to the UNFCCC estimated devia- Temperature change (C°) tions of annual air temperature and precipitation recorded 1.0 in 1940–2008 from the average of the period of 1961–1990. According to the study average annual temperatures have 0.5 increased by 0.85°C, while annual precipitation decreased by 6% during the last 80 years. 0 However, the changes show different trends by regions and seasons. In general, the average air temperature has -0.5 increased by 10°C in summer months, while it stayed sta- ble in winter months. During the last 15 years summers -1.0 were extremely hot, especially in 1998, 2000 and 2006. 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 The 2006 is considered the hottest recorded in Armenia between 1929 and 2008. Precipitation change (mm) The spatial distribution of annual precipitation changes in 100 Armenia is quite irregular; north‐eastern and central (­Ararat valley) regions of the country have become more arid, while 50 the southern and north‐western parts and the Lake Sevan basin have had a significant increase in precipitation in the 0 last 70 years.

-50

-100 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Source: Armenia’s Second National Communication, 2010.

Changes in seasonal and annual Temperature and Precipitation in Armenia, compared to 1961–1990 (C°) Temperature change Precipitation change (%)

Winter Spring Summer Autumn Annual Winter Spring Summer Autumn Annual

2030 1 1 1 1 1 2030 -3 -3 -7 1 -3

2070 3 3 3 3 3 2070 -5 -5 -14 3 -6

2100 4 5 4 4 4 2100 -7 -8 -19 3 -9

Sources: Armenia’s Second National Communication, 2010.

24 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Changes in average annual Temperature in Climate Change Trends Azerbaijan, 1991–2000 compared to 1961–1990 in azerbaijan Climate change trends have been visible in Azerbaijan ­ C° Ganja for some decades too. The data from the National 2 ­Hydrometeorology Department for 1991–2000 show an 1 increase in temperature by an average 0.41°C, which is 0 three times larger than the increase from 1961 to 1990. As part of the National Communication study, the -1 average annual temperature and precipitation anoma- -2 lies have been analysed in 7 regions of Azerbaijan for 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 the period 1991 to 2000. Compared to the 1961–90 level, temperature anomalies were particularly visible C° Nakhchivan in the Kura-Aras Lowland and ranged from -1.12°C to 2 +1.91°C. 1 The average annual precipitation was below the norm 0 in almost all regions. However, differences seemed more significant in the Kura-Aras Lowland, where they -1 were 14.3% lower, in Ganja-Gazakh (17.7%), and in -2 ­Nakhchivan (17.1%). -3 In summary, over the past 10 years the rainfall level in 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Azerbaijan has fallen by 9.9%.

C° Absheron (Mashtaga) 2

1

0

-1

-2 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

C° Lankaran 2

1

0

-1

-2 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Sources: Azerbaijan’s Second National Communication, 2010.

Climate Change Trends and Scenarios in the Region 25 Changes in annual Temperature and Precipitation in Georgia (C°) Temperature change 1951–2002 Precipitation change (%) 7.5 120

7 110 6.5 100 6 90 5.5

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Source: www.climatewizard.org

Changes in Temperature and Precipitation in Dedoplistskaro and (C°) Temperature change 1990–2005 compared to 1955–1970 Precipitation change (%) 2 80

1.5 60 40 1 20 0.5 0 0 -20 -0.5 -40 -1 -60 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Dedoplistskaro Lentekhi Source: Georgia’s Second National Communication, 2009.

Climate Change Trends in Georgia The latest studies of climate patterns in Georgia show zone, Lower (Lentekhi district) and Dedoplistskaro changes of major parameters — mean and extreme air district of the Alazani river basin. temperatures, relative humidity, moisture regimes, average To investigate the climate change process in Georgia, annual precipitation, etc. — which clearly indicate an over- a survey of climate parameter trends was undertaken for all trend of changing climate in the region. The UNFCCC the whole territory and for the priority regions in particu- Second National Communication from Georgia identifies lar. The trends of change in mean annual air temperatures, three areas as most sensitive to climate change and there- mean annual precipitation totals and in the moistening re- fore vulnerable to future extremes: the Black Sea coastal gime were estimated between 1955–1970 and 1990–2005.

26 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Precipitation at different altitudes of the The statistical analysis revealed increasing trends in both Precipitation, mm Alazani River catchment mean annual air temperature and annual precipitation total 2,500 from the first to the second period in all three priority re- gions, accompanied by a decrease in hydrothermal coeffi- 2,000 cient (HTC) in the Dedoplistskaro region, and its increase in the other two priority regions. At the same time, the rates of East part 1,500 air temperature and precipitation change in priority regions were assessed for four time intervals of different duration 1,000 (1906–2005; 1966–2005; 1985–2005 and 1995–2005). This survey demonstrated an exceptionally steep rise in annual West part 500 air temperature in all three priority regions over the last 20 years. 0 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 Altitude, m Source: Calibration of hydrological model for the Alazani River in WEAP, UNDP/ENVSEC Study on Climate Change Impact for the South Caucasus, 2011.

Alazani River

Climate Change Trends and Scenarios in the Region 27 Expected annual changes in air temperatures and precipitation in the -Debed and Alazani river basins 2071–2100 compared with 1961–1990

Kura The Khrami-Debed River Basin CASPIAN Khrami 5° SEA Tbilisi Kura Iori 13% BLACK Alazani river basin SEA GEORGIA Eddikilisa GEORGIA Khrami 5° Khrami ra 5° 15% e v a Khrami-Debed Mas h 16% AZERBAIJAN Red Bridge river basin ARMENIA

T a s 5° h Debed AZ ir 17% Increase Stepanavan 5° 4,8° Gargar 16% Temperature Precipitation Tumanian C° % Changes in hydrological 11% Pa mbak balance in the Khrami-Debed Decrease Vanadzor and Alazani river basins 0 10 km ARMENIA The Khrami-Debed and Alazani river basins are two important trans-boundary watersheds and major sub-basins of the greater Kura river, sharing scarce The Alazani River Basin water resources between Armenia and Georgia GEORGIA (Khrami-Debed) and Azerbaijan and Georgia (Ala-

5.4° zani). 5.8° This area is prone to land degradation and de- 4.9° sertification from the forecast extremes of climate 5.3° 7% change, translating to economic losses and in- 5% 8% creased poverty for local population Telavi 5.2° 5.3° 12% 4.8° RUSSIAN The UNDP/ENVSEC Study on Climate Change FEDERATION Impact for the South Caucasus evaluated the vul- Tbilisi 11% 4% 8% nerability of these river basins to climate change us- Kura Zakatala ing PRECIS and WEAP (Water Evaluation and Plan- ning Model) tools to assess the changes expected Alazani Increase in mean annual temperatures, precipitation and an- Iori 4.8° nual stream flows compared with the baseline years Temperature Precipitation Sheki C° % of 1961–1990. 11% The results of the study showed that immediate Decrease adaptation measures have to be taken by all ripar- 0 50 km Mingechevir ian countries to overcome the expected losses to AZERBAIJAN reserv. the economy of the region.

28 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Changes in average annual stream flows at different points of the Khrami-Debed and Alazani rivers, baseline 1961–1990

The Khrami-Debed River Basin Average annual stream flow in the Kura 50% Khrami-Debed River (mln m³) in 1966–1990 Khrami29% Kura Tsalka 1,593 51% Yeddikilisa GEORGIA 60% 29% 40% 924 Khrami Bolnisi Khrami 480 ra 336 Akhalkalaki e 267 Dmanisi v a Mas h Red Bridge Yeddikilisa Tumanyan Gargar Sadakhlo Red Bridge 54% Sadakhlo

T 29% Tashir a s h Debed AZ ir 54% Difference with 31% 2041–2070 (%) Stepanavan Gargar Difference with Tumanyan 2071–2100 (%) Ijevan Pa mbak Dilijan Section Vanadzor

0 10 km ARMENIA

Average annual stream flow in the The Alazani River Basin Alazani River (mln m³) in 1966–1990 GEORGIA

3,502 A

l a

z

3,118 a

n i Akhmeta Shakriani

Telavi 27% Kvareli 1,874 38% Lagodekhi RUSSIAN 1,336 Tbilisi Chiauri FEDERATION Gurjaani Zakatala Kura Tsnori 26% Confluence 44% 28% Difference with Zemo Shakriani Chiauri Zemo Kedi Agrichay 2020–2050 (%) Iori Kedi 46% 35% Difference with Sheki 2070–2100 (%) Agrichai Alazani 59% Section

Sources: Assessment of vulnerability of water resources to climate 0 50 km Mingechevir change, 2011; Georgia’s Second National Communication, 2009. AZERBAIJAN reserv.

Climate Change Trends and Scenarios in the Region 29 Neft Dashlari (Oily Rocks), AZERBAIJAN Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Mitigation Greenhouse gas emissions in Armenia, 1990–2006*

Million tonnes of CO2 equivalent By gases Million tonnes of CO2 equivalent By sectors 25 25 24 N2O 24 Waste 23 CH4 23 Agriculture CO2 Induatrial Processes 22 22 Energy 21 21 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 1990 1995 2000 2005

* Without LULUCF Source: Armenia’s Second National Communication, 2010.

Greenhouse gas emissions change from 1990 to 2006 in Armenia

1990 level

Waste

Agriculture

Induatrial Processes

Energy

-100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0 +20% +40% Source: Armenia’s Second National Communication, 2010.

32 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Kura

NS Iori GEORGIA ebed D Economic map of Armenia

Kura Alaverdi Iron Cooper Mingechevir Copper-molybdenum reserv. Vanadzor Lead and zinc Chromite Gyumri Aluminium Coal Artik BTC, BS Hrazdan Metallurgy BTE ARMENIA Chemical industry AZERBAIJAN Engineering and metal-working Lake Production of building materials Sevan Echmiadzin Fruit-growering Nagorno Aras Yerevan Karabakh Vineyard NS Garden Armavir Ararat Arable land Khankendi (Stepanakert) Railway Roads Sisian Goris Oil pipeline Gas pipeline TURKEY BTC — Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Nakhchivan BS — Baku- (Azerbaijan) BTE — Baku-Tbilisi- Kapan NS — North-South

Aras hydroscheme IRAN reserv. Meghri Sources: SoE-Armenia, 2002, GRID-Arendal; 0 50 km A ras Armenia’s Second National Communication, 2010; Geopolitical Atlas of the Caucasus, 2010; GENI.

Armenia: GHG emissions by economic sectors After the sharp economic decline of 1991–1994, Armenia the 1990 level, methane by 38% and nitrous oxide by 42%. was able to achieve economic stability and growth. Eco- The energy sector accounted for the major part of the nomic growth in 1995–2000 amounted to an annual aver- total­ GHG emissions in 1990–2006. However, energy-­ age of 5.4%, and in 2001–2006 the average growth rate was related emissions fell in that period — from 91% in 1990 to 12.4%. These shifts have positively influenced the decline 64.7% in 2006 (Armenia’s Second National Communica- of Armenia’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Carbon di- tion, 2010). oxide emissions in 2006 declined by 81% compared with

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Mitigation 33 Greenhouse gas emissions in Azerbaijan, 1990–2005

Million tonnes of CO2 equivalent By gases Million tonnes of CO2 equivalent By sectors 80 80 N2O Waste 70 70 CH4 Agriculture CO2 60 60 Industrial processes Energy 50 50

40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0 1990 1995 2000 2005 1990 1995 2000 2005

Source: Azerbaijan’s Second National Communication, 2010.

Greenhouse gas emissions change from 1990 to 2006 in Azerbaijan

1990 level

Waste

Energy

-50% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0

Source: Azerbaijan’s Second National Communication, 2010.

Baku, AZERBAIJAN

34 Climate Change in the South Caucasus NS Iori Alazani RUSSIAN Economic map of Tbilisi FEDERATION Azerbaijan CASPIAN Metallurgy SEA Samur Chemical industry GEORGIA Engineering and metal-working Production of building materials

From Kazakhstan Refinery Fishery Mingechevir Tovuz reserv. Mingechevir Oil Ganja AZERBAIJAN Sumgayit Natural gas Dubendi BTC, BS Gypsum Cement BTE Chirag Iron

Lake Kura Neft NS Copper Sevan Baku Dashlari Molybdenum Sangachal Nagorno Aluminium ARMENIA Karabakh -Deniz Absheron Lead and zinc Ali-Bairamli Gold

Khankendi Railway (Stepanakert) Salyan Neftchala AZ Roads Nakhchivan Oil pipeline Gas pipeline Nakhchivan Aras Oil field Aras IRAN hydroscheme Gas field reserv. Vineyard Garden BTC — Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan BTE — Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum BS — Baku-Supsa NS — North-South Arable land

Transport by tanker Oil terminal Cotton growing

Sources: Geopolitical Atlas of the Caucasus, 2010; GRID-Arendal, Caucasus ecoregion, 2008; 0 50 km Azerbaijan international, 11.04.2003; European Tribune; StratOil; Londex Resources. Sheep breeding

Azerbaijan: GHG emissions by economic sectors The economic potential of Azerbaijan is mainly determined oil and oil products, electrical energy, cotton and silk fibres. by its oil and gas industry, the production of chemicals and The level of GHG emissions in Azerbaijan in 2005 petrochemicals, metallurgy, mechanical engineering, tex- amounted to 70.6% of the 1990 base year level. The main tiles and the food industry. sources of CO₂ emissions are the energy and industrial The agricultural sector consists mostly of wheat, cotton, sectors, especially from burning fuel for energy production, wine, fruit, tobacco, tea, vegetables and cattle breeding. oil and gas extraction, , and human settlements The predominant part of Azerbaijan’s exports comes from (Azerbaijan’s Second National Communication, 2010).

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Mitigation 35 Greenhouse gas emissions in Georgia, 1990–2006

Million tonnes of CO2 equivalent By gases Million tonnes of CO2 equivalent By sectors 50 50

45 N2O 45 Waste CH4 40 40 Agriculture CO2 Industrial processes 35 35 Energy 30 30

25 25

20 20

15 15

10 10

5 5

0 0 1990 2000 2006 1990 1995 2000 2005

Source: Georgia’s Second National Communication, 2009

Greenhouse gas emissions change from 1990 to 2006 in Georgia

1990 level

Waste

Agriculture

Industrial processes

Energy

-100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0

Source: Georgia’s Second National Communication, 2009

36 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Economic map of Georgia

NS Terek

Abkhazia Terek

Sukhumi RUSSIAN i r

u

g FEDERATION n

I Sulak Zugdidi Rioni BLACK SEA Kulevi Kutaisi Tskhinvali Poti Rioni Supsa BS Kura Gori Telavi Adjara Akhaltsikhe BTC 0 50 km Batumi BTE Tbilisi GEORGIA Iori Alazani (Chorokhi)Çoruh Rustavi Metallurgy BTC, BS Chemical industry Engineering and metal-working TURKEY Production of building materials Debed Kura BTE Oil Iron Gypsum Refinery ARMENIA AZERBAIJAN Natural gas Manganese Cement Fishery Bituminous coal Copper Wine-producing Vineyard Railway Oil terminal BTC — Baku-Tbilisi-Ceihan Brown coal Lead and zinc Roads Garden Transport BS — Baku-Supsa Peat Gold Oil pipeline BTE — Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum Arable land by tanker Source: Geopolitical Atlas of the Caucasus, 2010; GRID-Tbilisi data. Gas pipeline NS — North-South

Georgia: GHG emissions by economic sectors Georgia’s economic growth has become irreversible since tor in total emissions has been decreasing almost continu- 2004. Georgia’s industry consists of machinery, mining, ously. In 2006, its share comprised 45.6%, while in 1990 the chemical industry, ferroalloys, wood, wine and mineral it had been 76.3%. The share of emissions from industrial water.­ processes in 2006 was approximately the same as in 1987, Agriculture has been a leading sector since Soviet times. though the actual emissions decreased by about four Traditional crops include grapes, wheat, maize, fruit (in- times. Key sources of GHG emissions in 2000 and 2006 cluding citrus), and tea. did not change significantly compared with 1990. However, Total GHG emissions in Georgia began to sharply de- the relative importance of different sources has changed crease after 1990. Since 1991, the share of the energy sec- (Georgia’s Second National Communication, 2009).

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Mitigation 37 Power Generation and Transmission in the South Caucasus

Terek Nalchik Abkhazia Magas Grozny Sukhumi Tkvarcheli ri Makhachkala gu Vladikavkaz In Inguri Vardnili-1 Lajanuri Sulak Rioni

BLACK CASPIAN Tskhinvali RUSSIAN Poti Kutaisi Zestaponi SEA Rioni FEDERATION SEA Telavi GEORGIA Gori Batumi Adjara Tbilisi Rustavi Akhaltsikhe Alazani Tbilisi Khrami 1 Samur Iori Khrami 2 TURKEY Mtkvari

) Kura Alaverdi Mingechevir reserv. hi Debed ok or h Mingechevir (C Yenikend uh Gyumri or Vanadzor Sumgayit Sumgayit Ç Kars Hrazdan Azerbaijan Mingechevir Shimal ARMENIA n Ganja Hydro Power Plant Thermal Power Plant a d Absheron Baku z Argel Lake a substation r Baku Aras Sevan AZERBAIJAN 1,300 MW 2,400 MW H Kanaker Metsamor 330–500 MW 800–1,200 MW Nagorno- (440 MW) Yerevan Yerevan Karabakh 110–330 MW 300–550 MW Shirvan Kura 10–110 MW 110–220 MW Lachin Khankendi (Stepanakert) Goris Neftchala Nuclear Power Plant Gas PP Oil PP AZ Nakhchivan Shamb Transmission substations Transmission lines Tatev Kapan Aras Nakhchivan 500 kV 500 kV Lake Van Meghri 330 kV 330 kV 220 kV 220 kV IRAN 110 kV 110 kV Van 0 100 km Sources: Ministries of Energy and Natural Resources of Armenia and Georgia; GENI; APESA, Global Energy Observatory.

38 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Power Generation and Transmission in the South Caucasus tnhe E ergy sector in the South Caucasus The sources and means of energy generation, despite coexisting in the same region, differ greatly in the South Caucasus countries. In Terek Nalchik a country rich in fossil fuels, oil products and natural gas are com- Abkhazia monly consumed in Azerbaijan. Energy production there is based on Magas Grozny natural gas, fuel oil and hydropower. Thermal power plants account Sukhumi Tkvarcheli ri Makhachkala for 89% and hydro-power for 10% of total energy generation. gu Vladikavkaz In Inguri Armenia does not possess its own fuel resources and satisfies its Vardnili-1 Lajanuri Sulak demand for fuel through imports. Its own primary energy resources Rioni (hydro, nuclear) cover 31% of the country’s total energy consump- tion. The main type of fuel consumed is natural gas. In 2000–2006, BLACK CASPIAN Tskhinvali RUSSIAN the share of natural gas in total fuel consumption reached 70–79%. Poti Kutaisi Zestaponi SEA Rioni FEDERATION SEA Over 80% of Georgia’s electricity is produced by hydropower. The Zhinvali rest mainly comes from thermal power plants, using gas exported Ksani Telavi from Azerbaijan and Iran. There is an economically viable potential of GEORGIA Gori 32 TWh of hydropower production capacity, one of the largest in the Batumi Adjara Tbilisi Rustavi world, of which only 18% is currently being utilized. Georgia became Akhaltsikhe Alazani Tbilisi a net electricity exporter in 2007. With its massive unused capacity Khrami 1 Samur Gardabani Iori and its current per capita electricity consumption, one of the lowest Khrami 2 Mtkvari TURKEY in Europe, Georgia can easily increase its electricity exports while satisfying fast-growing domestic electricity consumption, which is ) Kura Alaverdi Mingechevir reserv. hi Debed rising by 8–9% annually (Second National Communications of Arme- ok or h Shamkir Mingechevir nia, Azerbaijan and Georgia). (C Yenikend uh Gyumri or Vanadzor Sumgayit Sumgayit Ç Kars Hrazdan Azerbaijan Mingechevir Shimal ARMENIA n Ganja Key sources of electricity in 2008 (in %) Hydro Power Plant Thermal Power Plant a d Absheron Baku z Argel Lake Armenia a substation r Baku Aras Sevan AZERBAIJAN Natural gas 1,300 MW 2,400 MW H Kanaker Metsamor 330–500 MW 800–1,200 MW Nagorno- Oil products (440 MW) Yerevan Yerevan Karabakh 110–330 MW 300–550 MW Shirvan Hydropower Kura Nuclear 10–110 MW 110–220 MW Lachin Khankendi Azerbaijan (Stepanakert) Goris Neftchala Nuclear Power Plant Gas PP Oil PP AZ Nakhchivan Shamb Transmission substations Transmission lines Tatev Kapan Aras Nakhchivan 500 kV 500 kV Lake Van Meghri Georgia 330 kV 330 kV 220 kV 220 kV IRAN 110 kV 110 kV Van 0 100 km Source: International Energy Agency. Sources: Ministries of Energy and Natural Resources of Armenia and Georgia; GENI; APESA, Global Energy Observatory.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Mitigation 39 Hatsvali with Ushba Mountain, Upper Svaneti, GEORGIA Impact of Climate Change and Adaptation Measures Black Sea Coast, Impacts of Climate Change: Sea level rise u Georgia The Black Sea Coast, Georgia o for the last s P zib century B The Georgian Black Sea coastal zone is considered the Gagra area most vulnerable to climate change in Georgia. Highly +0.4 m Storm surges developed coastal infrastructure, with a dense network of Sukhumi -0.6° GEORGIA for the last Coastal ori railways and highways stretched along the coast, the im- Kod The Rioni half century zone Sukhumi i portant transportation and industrial hubs of port cities ­ Abkhazia r

u

g n

i like Batumi, Poti and Sukhumi, and the great number of

I l Sea surface a k settlements all play a significant role in the regional econ- water +40% ts Zugdidi is temperature +40% en omy. Georgia’s Second National Communication to the kh since 1991 BLACK Ts Rioni Kulevi +1.6° Kutaisi UNFCCC­ defines several specific sensitive areas along +0.7 m +0.3 m SEA the coastal zone : Rioni river delta, Chorokhi river delta, the +60% Poti Rio i Sedimentation Lake n lower reaches of the Rioni river and the Sukhumi coastal Supsa Paliastomi The Chorokhi +0.45 m area. Some studies suggest the Rioni delta is the most River delta The Rioni River +0.2 m lower reaches vulnerable area, already experiencing sea level rise and Batumi Adjara Ch increased storm surges. This situation will trigger more

o +1.3°

r o

+60% k change in the future, with a predicted temperature rise and h i consequent negative impact on the environment (Georgia’s

Source: Georgia’s Second National Communication, 2009. Second National Communication, 2010).

RUSSIAN Caspian Sea Coast, Impacts of Climate Change: FEDERATION Azerbaijan The Caspian Sea Coast, Azerbaijan Sea level fluctuations are a major cause of concern for the Samur 72 Segment 1 CASPIAN Caspian Sea shoreline. As the largest naturally enclosed 2000 SEA 3000 42 water body on Earth, with no outflow to the oceans, the 500 1000 Caspian Sea is particularly vulnerable to global climate Inundated area (km²) 200 Sumgayit change processes. Starting from 1961 a level of -28.0 m at two differents levels AZERBAIJAN 60 Absheron by four segments: below sea level (BS) was conditionally taken as the zero 1118 38 Baku 60 -25.0 m BS point for the Caspian Sea for observation and planning Segment 2 32 -26.5 m BS purposes. Azerbaijan’s Second National Communication 0 Kura-Aras predicts a further increase of sea level for another 30 to Lowland Kura Segment 3 40 years within the range of -26.5 to -25.0 m BS. Projected 372 Caspian Sea level damage to the economy would be within the magnitude of Aras200 Neftchala mBS change in 1840–2005 500 USD 4.1 bn. Consequently Azerbaijan is preparing to take 60 -26 adaptation measures (Azerbaijan’s Second National Com- 1000 32 -27 munication, 2010). Talysh IRAN Segment 4 -28 -29 Astara 1840 1880 1920 1960 2000 2000

Source: Azerbaijan’s Second National Communication, 2010; MENR-Azerbaijan.

42 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Changes in seasonal and annual Temperature and Precipitation in the Lake Sevan basin, compared to 1961–1990

Temperature change (C°) Precipitation change (%)

Winter Spring Summer Autumn Annual Winter Spring Summer Autumn Annual

2030 1.4 0.9 1.8 1.8 1.5 East shore -7 - 4 -9 -2 - 5.5 2030 West shore 7 +4 -5 5 2.8 2070 3.2 2.1 3.9 3.9 3.3 East shore -15 -7 -18 -4 -11 2100 4–6 2.5–4.5 5–7 5–7 4.1–6.1 2070 West shore 15 11 -11 11 6

East shore -20 -10 -25 -5 -15 2100 Sources: Vulnerability of water resources in the Republic of Armenia West shore 20 10 -15 15 7.5 under climate change, Yerevan, 2009.

Calm and nice Lake Sevan, sometimes as stormy as any sea

Impact of Climate Change and Adaptation Measures 43 Terek Mudflow and high risk zones in the South Caucasus Nalchik Abkhazia Magas Grozny Makhachkala Sukhumi i Vladikavkaz

r u g Sulak I n Rioni BLACK CASPIAN Kutaisi Tskhinvali RUSSIAN SEA Poti Rioni SEA Alazani FEDERATION GEORGIA Gori Kura Batumi Adjara Telavi Tbilisi Akhaltsikhe Rustavi Samur Kura Iori

Alaverdi Sheki Kura Debed i) Mingechevir kh Gyumri Vanadzor ro Ganja reserv. ho Sumgayit (C ARMENIA Çoruh TURKEY Mingechevir Kars an d z a Lake AZERBAIJAN r Sevan Baku Armavir H Kura Yerevan Nagorno- Karabakh Aras Lachin Khankendi (Stepanakert) AZ Goris Nakhchivan Kapan Neftchala Lake Aras Van Nakhchivan Meghri Mudflow Landslide

Source: Armenian’s Second National Communica- tion, 2010; Alizadeh E.K. (2007); MEP-Georgia. IRAN 0 100 km

IMpACT oF CLIMATE ChAnGE: nATuRAL DISASTERS There are major climate change impacts taking place in seasonal distribution of precipitation with possible dra- the South Caucasus, as shown by the observations of the matic consequences. As a result, the probability of dev- national hydrometeorology services of Armenia, Azerbai- astating natural disasters such as , avalanches, jan and Georgia. In particular, there is a recorded increase river fl oods, fl ash fl oods and mudfl ows, causing human in both mean and extreme air temperatures, in addition to casualties and economic losses, is expected to rise in the changes in rainfall amounts and patterns. Climate change near future (Second National Communications of Armenia, projection models predict even more increase of extreme Azerbaijan and Georgia). weather conditions, translating to a heavier and uneven

44 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Flooding and avalanche high risk Terek zones in the South Caucasus Nalchik Abkhazia Magas Grozny Makhachkala

Sukhumi i

r Vladikavkaz u g Sulak I n Rioni

BLACK CASPIAN Kutaisi Tskhinvali RUSSIAN SEA Poti Rioni SEA Alazani Kura FEDERATION GEORGIA Gori Batumi Telavi Adjara Tbilisi Akhaltsikhe Rustavi Iori Samur Kura Sheki Kura Alaverdi Debed i) Mingechevir kh Gyumri Vanadzor ro Ganja reserv. ho Sumgayit (C ARMENIA Mingechevir Çoruh TURKEY Kars an d AZERBAIJAN z a Lake r Sevan Baku Armavir H Kura Euphrates Yerevan Nagorno- Karabakh Aras Lachin Khankendi (Stepanakert) Goris AZ Neftchala Nakhchivan Kapan Lake Aras Nakhchivan Avalanche Van Meghri

Source: Armenian’s Second National Communication, 2010; Iritz, L. and Jincharadze, Z. (2010); SoE-Georgia, 2007–2009; ReliefWeb. IRAN 0 100 km

Georgia is particularly exposed to weather extremes, most displaced from their homes between 1970 and 1987. About likely because of its closer proximity to the Black Sea, 53,000 locations damaged by gravitational landslides had abundance of water resources, larger amount of ­annual been identified by 2009. Mudflows are estimated to cause and seasonal precipitation, high soil humidity, etc. The damage of approximately USD 100 m annually. Overall, damage caused by the flooding during the last three years economic damage caused by mudflows in Georgia over was put at USD 65 m. An increasing frequency and inten- the period 1987 to 1991 exceeded USD 1 bn; the damage ­ sity of avalanches has been detected since the last dec- caused by mudflows from 1995 to 2008 was over USD ades of the 20th century. More than 20,000 people were 330 m (State of the Environment Georgia, 2010).

Impact of Climate Change and Adaptation Measures 45 IMPACT OF CLIMATE CHANGE: Melting

1972 2002

In these pictures: Melting of the Laboda Glacier in Georgia: photos taken in 1972 and 2002. Source: Institute of , Javakhishvili State University, Tbilisi, Georgia.

Glacier melting in the Caucasus Laboda-Zopkhito Glaciers Glaciers are sensitive to climate change. Some climatolo- gists suggest the contribution of melting glaciers to sea- level rise may have been increasing by as much as 27% for GEORGIA the last few decades (Dyurgerov, 2003). The climate change scenarios published by the IPCC predict up to 60% glacier loss in the northern hemisphere by 2050 (Schneeberger et al 2003). The Earth Policy Institute (www.earth-policy.org) Shkelda-Djankuat Glaciers zone says glacial volume in the Caucasus has declined by 50% during the last century and will decrease more severely in the foreseeable future. Glaciers are very important water resources for local communities, and play a significant role in the water budget. Smaller glaciers are known to respond for 51 glaciers between 1972 and 1986. Chris R. Stokes, more rapidly to climate change and are therefore more im- Stephen D. Gurney, Maria Shahgedanova, Victor Popovin portant in calculating overall impact. (Late 20th-Century Changes in Glacier Extent in the Cau- Glaciers cover an area estimated at around 1,600 km² in casus Mountains, /Georgia) analysed glaciers of the the Caucasus. Exact up-to-date information on the chang- central Caucasus region, extending the analysis of Bedford es in their mass balance is not available. There is visual evi- and Barry, and showed that the retreat trend has continued dence of glacier recession in the Caucasus, but information throughout the 1980s and 1990s. Melting rates have greatly concerning the latter stages is limited. However those stud- accelerated since the mid-1990s. Moreover, the study indi- ies that have focused on glacier change in the Caucasus cates that the retreat of Caucasus glaciers from the mid- (Bedford and Barry, 1994) reported a strong retreat trend 1970s to 2000 correlates well with the temperature record.

46 Climate Change in the South Caucasus In this picture: retreat of two glaciers on the South slope of the central Caucasus­­ —­ the Glaciers melting in south part of the Central Caucasus Loboda and Zopkhito glaciers, between 1971 ( yellow ) and 2009 ( blue ). The data on the N image­ is a combination of ­CORONA imagery dating from 1971, ­a SPOT image of 2007 and a Digital Globe image ( Google Earth ) of 2008. Laboda Source : Lambrecht, A., et al (2011). Glacier

Zopkhito Glacier

GEORGIA

Glacier boundary in 2009 0 500 m Source: Lambrecht A., et al (2011). Supra-glacial debris cover (trace of glacier) in 1971

In this picture: retreat of six neighbouring gla- ciers in the central Caucasus between 1985 Glaciers melting in north part of the Central Caucasus ( yellow ) and 2000 ( red ), including Djankuat N glacier ( furthest east ), which has an extensive RUSSIAN mass balance record, and Shkhelda glacier FEDERATION ( furthest west ) with one of the largest retreat rates in the Caucasus Kashkatash Source : Stokes, C. R., et al (2006). Glacier Bashkara Glacier Djankuat Glacier Bzhedukh Glacier Shkhelda Glacier

Glacier line 0 1 km Source: Stokes, C. R., et al (2006). in 1985 in 2000

Another group of scientists (Lambrecht et al, 2011) focused tensive ice melt. However, high cloudiness due to higher their study also on the central part of the Greater Cauca- radiation input also provides higher precipitation in the sus — the Djankuat glacier (Russia) and the Zopkhito ­gla- south than in the north. As a result, the effective glacier cier (Georgia). The results of the study show that at the melt is about 20% less in the south. Both regions experi- southern end of the Caucasus range the exposition (south- enced strong glacier area loss during recent decades and ern slope) causes higher radiation input and thus more in- a gradual increase in debris cover (Lambrecht, et al, 2011).

Impact of Climate Change and Adaptation Measures 47 Potential impact of climate change on winegrowing zones of Georgia

Terek

Abkhazia Zemo Svaneti Terek Sukhumi RUSSIAN i r

u

g Kvemo Svaneti FEDERATION n

I Sulak Rioni BLACK Samegrelo Tskhinvali SEA Rioni Kutaisi Poti Shida Kura Gori Telavi Samtskhe Batumi Achara Tbilisi Akhaltsikhe Rustavi Alazani GEORGIA TURKEY Kvemo Iori Kartli Kura Winegrowing area Flooding area (existing and potential) Debed Landslide area Drought area ARMENIA Mingechevir reserv. Hystorical- Mudflow area geographycal border Red, white and sparkling wines 0 50 km AZERBAIJAN Source: MEP-Georgia; booklet, 2001.

Impact of Climate Change on Winegrowing Zones of Georgia Viticulture and wine production is one of the most viable ate climate with a sufficient number of sunny days, frost-free and oldest agricultural activities that have been carried out winters and moist air, in combination with fertile soils, min- for centuries in South Caucasus and particularly Georgia. eral-rich and clean spring waters and a vast diversity of en- Both archaeology and history show that Georgia was cul- demic agricultural species provide outstanding conditions tivating grapevines and practicing ancient wine produc- for it. The total share of agriculture in the country’s GDP is tion more than 7,000 years ago (Ministry of Agriculture of about 10–14%, with viticulture and wine production playing Georgia,­ 2011 — www.samtrest.gov.ge). In many regards a very important role (Georgia’s Second National Commu- Georgia’s identity was closely connected with wine pro- nication, 2009). However, increasing natural disasters and duction, which was very popular among the former Soviet specific weather extremes caused by global climate change states and always highly prized. that is already affecting Georgia and especially its grape- Georgia has excellent conditions for viticulture. A moder- growing zones may jeopardize the sector considerably.

48 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Grape Varieties

Vineyard area in the South Caucasus in 2009 Percent of Area agriculture land thousand ha

0.8% Armenia 16.5

0.3% Azerbaijan 15

1.2% Georgia 37.4

Sources: State statistical services of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, Year Books, 2010.

Impact of Climate Change and Adaptation Measures 49 Number of tourists in the Upper Svaneti in 2009–2011

2011 26,000 (prognosed)

2010 13,000

2009 6,200

Source: www.komersanti.ge (6.01.2011)

Number of tourists in Georgia in 2000–2011

Million

3

2

1

0 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 Source: Georgian National Tourism Agency.

Upper Svaneti, GEORGIA

THE Impact of Climate Change on GEORGIA’S Tourist Sector: Upper Svaneti The Upper Svaneti region of Georgia has been a very popu- Svaneti has increased considerably in recent years, after lar tourist destination for a long time. Unique and mostly the launch of infrastructure rehabilitation projects and the untouched natural landscapes, high mountains, abundant construction of hotels and a brand new airport in historical monuments and its exceptional cultural herit- (the regional capital). The airport now has a modern navi- age are only few of the wonders ensuring this popularity. gation system and connects Svaneti to major Georgian Access to this region has never been easy though, due to airports, as well as some international destinations. The its rigid topography and the dilapidated infrastructure in number of visiting tourists has doubled compared with post-Soviet Georgia, exhausted by ethnic conflicts, civil recent years, since a ski resort (operating for about six wars and consequent economic devastation. Attention to months each year) was developed in Hatsvali, a highland

50 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Potential impact of climate change in the a Upper Svaneti touristic zone e G r t GEORGIA Hatsvali a C u Dolra Shkhelda c 4,368 m L e k h z i r

Ushba a UNESCO World Nenskra Nakra la Ushba a Heritage Site h 4,710 m c

a

Tita i

t

s s Naki Mazeri e

M Gistola Lakhiri Tsaneri Iskari Tsaneri 4,853 m Mestia Tetnuldi Dolra Zhabeshi 4,852 m Ipari Ienashi Tsvirmi u Inguri Mulkhra Inguri Ieli Adishi Khudoni reserv. Shkhara s (projected) 5,068 m

Khaishi Laila Laila Iprari Inguri

S 4008 m e t i Kasleti n g v a n Laskadura r E a e Tsana g Tvibi r iKhobistskali Tskhenistskali i s r a n Mananauri g Kheledula Tsanashi e Lentekhi Mele

Avalanche hazard Landslide Forest area Motor road Historical monument hazard Dirt road Very strong Ski resort Svaneti priority Strong Dolra Glaciers Airport conservation area Moderate (WWF-Caucasus proposal) 0 10 km Sources: MEP-Georgia; MENR-Georgia; 1:50,000 Topographic maps. resort close to one of the most charming mountain peaks systems in coming years. This will become an even more of Georgia — Ushba (4,710 m above sea level). Access to sensitive issue as the region is located in the landslide and the UNESCO world heritage site at has also been avalanche high-risk zone and changing climate patterns, restored. However, an increased number of tourists will with the predicted temperature rise and precipitation de- also mean increased pressure on the fragile natural eco- crease, are cause for serious concerns.

Impact of Climate Change and Adaptation Measures 51 Potential impact of climate change in the South Caucasus

Terek Nalchik

Magas Grozny Makhachkala Sukhumi Vladikavkaz Abkhazia i r u g

n I Lentekhi Sulak li a Rioni sk ist n e h BLACK k CASPIAN s Tskhinvali RUSSIAN Poti T Kutaisi SEA Rioni FEDERATION SEA GEORGIA Gori Kura Telavi Batumi Adjara Rustavi Akhaltsikhe Tbilisi Iori Alazani Samur TURKEY Kura Sheki Alaverdi ) Kura hi Debed ok or Mingechevir Ch h ( reserv. ru Gyumri Sumgayit Ço Vanadzor Mingechevir Kars AZERBAIJAN ARMENIA Ganja an d z a Lake r Baku Aras H Sevan Yerevan Nagorno- Increased fashfloods due to weather extremes Karabakh

Kura Potential inundation area due to sea levele rise Lachin Khankendi (Stepanakert) Goris Neftchala Depletion of water resources Nakhchivan

Land degradation and desertification Kapan AZ Aras Glaciers melting Lake Nakhchivan Van Meghri Depopulation due to increase natural disasters

Spread of malaria IRAN

Sources: Second National Communications of Armenia-2010, Azerbaijan-2010 0 100 km and Georgia-2009; MEP-Armenia; MEP-Azerbaijan; MEP-Georgia; WHO-Europe.

52 Climate Change in the South Caucasus Potential impact of climate change in the South Caucasus Index of vulnerability to climate change*

Tajikistan Terek Nalchik Albania

Kyrgystan Magas Grozny Index of vulnerability to climateARMENIA change* Makhachkala Sukhumi Vladikavkaz Abkhazia i r GEORGIA u Tajikistan g Uzbekistan n I Lentekhi Sulak Albania li AZERBAIJAN a Rioni k s TurkmenistanKyrgystan ist n e h ARMENIATurkey BLACK k CASPIAN s Tskhinvali RUSSIAN Poti T Kutaisi MoldovaGEORGIA SEA Rioni SEA FEDERATION UzbekistanSerbia GEORGIA Gori AZERBAIJANMacedonia (F.Y.R.) Kura Telavi TurkmenistanRussia Batumi Adjara Rustavi TurkeyBulgaria Akhaltsikhe Tbilisi Iori Alazani MoldovaBosnia Samur KazakhstanSerbia

TURKEY MacedoniaRomania (F.Y.R.) Kura Sheki Alaverdi UkraineRussia i) Kura Debed kh ro ho Mingechevir C Bosnia h ( reserv. Croatia ru Gyumri Mingechevir Sumgayit Ço Vanadzor Kazakhstan Kars AZERBAIJAN Poland ARMENIA Ganja RomaniaLatvia an d z Ukraine a Lake Aras r Baku H Sevan Belarus Hungary Yerevan SlovakiaCroatia Nagorno- Sensitivity to climate change Poland Increased fashfloods due to weather extremes Karabakh Exposure to impacts Estonia

Kura Adaptive capacity Czech RepublicLatvia Potential inundation area due to sea levele rise Lachin Khankendi LithuaniaSlovenia (Stepanakert) Depletion of water resources Goris Neftchala Hungary Nakhchivan 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 -6 Sensitivity to climate change Land degradation and desertification Kapan AZ Aras IncreasingExposure sensitivity to impacts and exposure AdaptationEstonia capacity Glaciers melting Nakhchivan *VulnerabilitySource:Adaptive Climate to capacity Changeclimate in changeCentral Asia, is a2009. combination Czech of: Republic i) exposure Lake to hazards, measuring the strength of future climate change rela- Van Meghri tive to today’s climate; ii) sensitivity, indicating which economicSlovenia Depopulation due to increase natural disasters sectors and ecosystem services are likely to be affected in view of climate change, e.g. renewable water resources, agriculture 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 -6 Spread of malaria IRAN and hydro-power production ; and iii) adaptive capacity to climate change, e.g. social, economic, and institutional settings to re- spondIncreasing to weather sensitivity shocks and and exposure variability. Adaptation capacity Sources: Second National Communications of Armenia-2010, Azerbaijan-2010 0 100 km and Georgia-2009; MEP-Armenia; MEP-Azerbaijan; MEP-Georgia; WHO-Europe. Source: Climate Change in , 2009.

Impact of Climate Change and Adaptation Measures 53 Climate Change-related Issues in the South Caucasus

Water resources land and water Food security Land contamination by pesticides and heavy metals, saliniza- tion of soils, overgrazing pastures, illegal and ill-maintained waste dumps close to water streams, glacier melting, deple- Biodiversity tion of freshwater sources (eastern part of South Caucasus) lack of safe and good quality of drinking water. Social problems Impact on livelihoods, agriculture, human health

FLOODS AND NATURAL DISASTERS Increased number of catastrophic floods due to weather extremes (Black Sea coast, Alazani Valley, Kura lowland in Azerbaijan), devastating natural disasters — landslides, mudflows, flash-floods, avalanches in mountainous zones, inundation of croplands, settlements at lowlands. Impact on livelihoods, infrastructure, threat to human life and health, local and transboundary problems, deterioration of social conditions

Agriculture Land degradation and desertification (eastern part of South Caucasus), salinization, droughts, coastal inundation and bogging (Black and Cas- pian Sea coastal zones), loss of soil fertility, decrease of crop production, degradation of wine- and citrus-growing zones. Impact on livelihood and food security

54 Climate Change in the South Caucasus FORESTS, FAUNA AND FLORA Displacement of natural boundaries at sensitive areas of eastern South Caucasus (temperate forest ecosystems), loss of resilience of flora and fauna to invasive species, loss of natural ecosystem “corridors” for migration of rare and endemic species, increased cases of forest fires, degradation of landscape diversity, loss of biodiversity.

Impact on livelihoods, biodiversity, freshwater resources, agriculture, human health

sea and coastal Sea level rise, land inundation, coastal erosion, increased number of storm surges, pollution of sea water by oil products (Caspian Sea) and by untreated wastewater discharge (Black and Caspian Seas), coastal line change, lack of safe drinking water, decrease in number and diver- sity of marine specifies, deterioration of coastal infrastructure, spread of Malaria at inundated areas (eastern part of South Caucasus). Impact on coastal and sea biodiversity, livelihoods, agriculture, transport and other infrastructure, tourism

PEOPLE AND WELLBEING Depopulation and eco-migration due to increased number of devastating natural disasters — landslides, mudflows, avalanches at highland zones of Adjara and Svaneti (Western Georgia), lack of safe drinking water and food, increase of poverty, spread of infectious diseases, increased stress due to heat waves, increased cases of cardiovascular diseases. Threat to human life, health and social conditions

Climate Change-related Issues in the South Caucasus 55 References

Main background documents: Caucasus Environment Outlook (2002), UNEP.

First National Communication of the Republic of Armenia (1998). Ministry of Climate Change in Central Asia (2009). Zoï Environment Network. Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia. Dyurgerov, M.B. 2003. Mountain and subpolar glaciers show an increase Armenia’s Second National Communication to the United Nations Frame- in sensitivity to climate warming and intensification of the water cycle. work Convention on Climate Change (2010). Ministry of Nature Protection ­J. Hydrol.,­ 282(1–4), 164–176. of the Republic of Armenia. Geopolitical Atlas of the Caucasus (2010), Autrement, . Initial National Communication of Azerbaijan Republic on Climate Change (2000). National Climate Research Centre. Georgian National Tourism Agency.

Azerbaijan’s Second National Communication to the United Nations Georgian Wine booklet (2001), Tbilisi. Framework Convention on Climate Change (2010). Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Azerbaijan Republic. GRID-Arendal (2008) Caucasus ecoregion.

Georgia’s Initial National Communication under the United Nations frame- GRID-Tbilisi data. European Tribune: work convention on Climate Change (1999). National Climate Research www.eurotrib.com/story/2006/11/20/113536/31 Centre. Institute of Geography, Javakhishvili State University, Tbilisi, Georgia. Georgia’s Second National Communication to the UNFCCC (2009). Minis- try of Environment Protection and Natural Resources of Georgia. Iritz, L. and Jincharadze, Z. Needs Assessment of a Flood Early Warning System in Georgia. Disaster Risk Reduction Consultancy Report. June Regional Climate Change Impacts Study for the South Caucasus Region 2010, UNDP. Tbilisi, Georgia. (2011). ENVSEC, UNDP. Commersant. Online Magazine (6.01.2011): Additional references: www.commersant.ge

Alizadeh E.K. of mountain geosystems in the Lambrecht A., Mayer C., Hagg W., Popovnin V., Rezepkin A., Lomidze N. conditions of strengthening morphodynamic intensity (on an example of and Svanadze D. A comparison of glacier melt on debris-covered glaciers Azerbaijan), the bulletin of the Vladikavkaz centre of science, 2007, n°3. in the Northern and Southern Caucasus. The Cryosphere Discuss., 5, 431– 459, 2011: www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/5/431/2011/ Assessment of vulnerability of water resource to climate change in trans- boundary river basins (Khrami-Debed and Aghstev) and recommendations Londex Resources: www.londex.org/projects.html on the corresponding adaptation measures. Yerevan, 2011. Melconyan H., Hovsepyan A. Climate Change Scenarios over South Association of the power engineers and specialists of Azerbaijan (APESA): ­Caucasus Region. UNDP/ENVSEC Study on Climate Change Impact for www.azenerji.com. the South Caucasus, 2011.

Azerbaijan international Magazine (11.04.2003): www.azer.com — Pages Schneeberger, C., H. Blatter, A. Abe-Ouchi and M. Wild. 2003. Modeling similaires changes in the mass balance of glaciers of the northern hemisphere for a transient 2xCO₂ scenario. J. Hydrol., 282, 145–163. Bedford, D.P. and Barry, R.G. 1994. Glacier trends in the Caucasus, 1960s to 1980s. Phys. Geogr., 15(5), 414–424. State of the Environment of Armenia (2002), GRID-Arendal.

Caucasus ecoregion — environment and human development issues, State of the Environment of Georgia (2007-2009). Ministry of Environmental UNEP/GRID-Arendal, 2008. Protection and Natural resources of Georgia.

56 Climate Change in the South Caucasus State of the Environment of Georgia (2010), draft report. Ministry of Environ­ Statistical Year Book of Azerbaijan, 2010: mental Protection and Natural resources of Georgia. www.azstat.org/statinfo/demoqraphic/en/index.shtml; www.azstat.org/statinfo/environment/en/index.shtml Stokes, C.R., Gurney, S.D., Shahgedanova, M., Popovin, V. 2006. Late- 20th-Century Changes in Glacier Extent in the , Statistical Year Book of Georgia, 2010: www.geostat.ge/cms/site_images/_ ­Russia/Georgia. Journal of Glaciology, Vol. 52 No. 176. files/yearbook/Statistical%20Yearbook_2010.pdf

StratOil: www.stratoil.wikispaces.com/Azerbaijan Azerbaijan National Hydrometeorological Department: www.eco.gov.az/en/prog-buro.php UNDP/ENVSEC Study on Climate Change Impact for the South Caucasus, 2011. Climate Wizard: www.climatewizard.org

Vulnerability of water resources in the Republic of Armenia under climate Earth Policy Institute: www.earth-policy.org change, Yerevan, 2009. Index Mundi: www.indexmundi.com World Trade Press, 2007. Institute for Atmospheric Physics: 1:50,000 Topographic maps. www.dlr.de/pa/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-2559/3824_read-5749

Online databases and information sources: Global Energy Network Institute (GENI): www.geni.org

Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia: www.mnp.am Global Energy Observatory: www.globalenergyobservatory.org

Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of Azerbaijan Republic: International Energy Agency: www.iea.org www.eco.gov.az PRECIS Regional Climate Modelling System: www.metoffice.gov.uk/ precis Ministry of Environment Protection of Georgia: www.moe.gov.ge ReliefWeb: www.reliefweb.int/countries Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of Georgia: www.menr.gov.ge United Nations statistics: www.unstats.un.org/unsd/default.htm Ministry of Agriculture of Georgia: www.moa.gov.ge WHO-Europe, Malaria: www.euro.who.int Climate Change Information Center of Armenia: www.nature-ic.am World Bank statistics: www.data.worldbank.org Armenian State Hydrometeorological and Monitoring Service: www.meteo.am Photos:

National Environmental Agency of Georgia: www.meteo.gov.ge Atlas and Prometheus. Laconian Kylix, 6th c. BCE. Vatican Museums: www.utexas.edu/courses/larrymyth/2Prometheus2009.html National Statistical Service of the Republic of Armenia: www.armstat.am Alazani River in the border of Georgia and Azerbaijan, Jincharadze Z., 2007. The State Statistical Committee of the Republic of Azerbaijan: www.azstat.org Debed river at Northern Armenia, Jincharadze Z., 2007

National Statistics Office of Georgia: www.geostat.ge Upper Svaneti, GEORGIA, Naveriani V.

Statistical Year Book of Armenia, 2010: www.armstat.am/en/?nid=45&year=2010

References 57 Abbreviations and Glossary

APESA Association of the Power Engineers and Specialists MENR Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources of Azerbaijan MEP Ministry of Environment Protection AZ Azerbaijan Mil Million BS Baltic Sea PP Power Plant CEO Caucasus Environment Outlook PRECIS In French précis — “PRAY-sea” — is based on the CORONA Series of American strategic reconnaissance satel- SoE Hadley Centre’s regional climate lites produced in 1959–1972 SPOT State of the Environment ECHAM Global climate model for climate research. The In French: Système Probatoire d’Observation de la model was given its name as a combination of its Terre. Probationary System of Earth Observation origin, the “EC” being short for ECMWF (European — high-resolution, optical imaging Earth observa- Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts) and tion satellite system operating from space the place of development of its parameterisation TWh Terawatt hour package, . UN United Nations ENVSEC The Environment and Security Initiative UNDP United Nations Development Programme GCCP Global Climate Change Processes UNESCO The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cul- GCM Global Circulation Model tural Organization GDP Gross Domestic Product UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate GEF Global Environment Facility Change GEL USD United States Dollar GENI Global Energy Network Institute WEAP Water Evaluation and Planning Model GHG Greenhouse Gas WHO World Health Organization GRID Global Resource Information Database HAD300 One of the global circulation model (GCMs) HADCM Hadley Centre Coupled Model (Coupled atmos- Chemical Combinations phere-ocean general circulation model developed at the Hadley Centre in the ) CO₂ Carbon dioxide HADCM3 Hadley Centre Coupled Model, version 3 CH₄ Methane HTC Hydrothermal Coefficient N₂O Nitrous oxide LULUCF Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry MAGICC/ MAGICC: User-friendly software package that takes SCENGEN emissions scenarios for greenhouse gases, reactive gases, and sulphur dioxide as input and gives glob- al-mean temperature, sea level rise, and regional climate as output. SCENGEN: Regionalization algorithm that uses a scaling method to produce climate and climate change information on a 5° latitude by 5° longitude grid.

58 Climate Change in the South Caucasus The Georgian artist, Nina Joerchjan, has produced a set of such a grim and existential subject as climate change? The collages to illustrate the Zoï Environment Network publica- ­answer comes in a second, closer look that the artwork tion, Climate Change in the South Caucasus. At first sight: ­deserves. New elements appear: an oil platform, a ski lift beautiful renderings of mountain landscapes, vineyards, and a somewhat strange, turtle-like structure giving the fruits, animals and archaic architecture. In the long tradi- ­Tbilisi skyline a new look. Even without these modern ele- tion of the region’s folk art, many scenes — such as Ararat ments, a sense of fragility becomes obvious. An idyll in the mountain — are immediately recognizable as Caucasian process of being destroyed, nature and livelihoods being icons. The images evoke Pirosmani, although people — the threatened, climate change being real. The artist has found main subject of the famous Georgian painter at the turn a silent, non-alarmist tone to show that things are still there, of the twentieth century — are almost completely absent. however fragile. It is up to us to preserve this unique herit- But why use such a traditional and happy style to illustrate age. There may still be time.

Abbreviation/Nina Joerchjan 59 Zoï Environment Network International Environment House Tel. +41 22 917 83 42 Chemin de Balexert 9 www.zoinet.org CH-1219 Châtelaine [email protected] Geneva,