Russian coal in a changing climate: risks and opportunities for industry and government

As one of the world’s major coal-producing and exporting states, Russia is central to discussions on the future of the industry in the context of global climate change. This is a question that has become particularly salient in light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Yet despite this, Russia remains understudied in the literature. As a result, we know little about the extent to which Russia is likely to contribute to the alleviation of coal-driven climate change or to its exacerbation. This analysis seeks to examine this question from the perspective of the coal industry, by exploring whether and how Russia’s coal companies incorporate the vulnerabilities and risks around climate change into their corporate presence and behaviour, and how this aligns with broader government policy on the coal industry. Drawing on a range of primary and secondary sources, including corporate reporting, government documents, and media commentary, this analysis identifies two central narratives emerging from coal companies. The first is focused on the risks around climate change, primarily in relation to reputation, increased regulation, and access to markets that a climate-driven global shift away from coal might entail. The second narrative acknowledges the potential opportunities around technology and ‘green coal’. Within government, both the pro-coal and coal-sceptic lobby recognise the significance of climate change; however, it is used purely instrumentally in policy debates. The coal sceptics employ climate to highlight risks around global reductions in coal demand but are unable to challenge government support for the industry. Ultimately, our findings suggest that both company behaviour and government policy in Russia remain strongly pro-coal, and that it will take a significant drop in global demand for that to change. We conclude that, before the invasion of Ukraine, selling as much coal as possible was a greater government priority than climate change policy, and the invasion is unlikely to shift the balance the other way.