The graphic above was derived from this World Bank site. There are a couple of interesting things illustrated by that map.
U. S. CO2 emissions per dollar of GDP are about the same as Germany’s and a lot less than China’s or Russia’s. I found it particularly interesting that the figure for the U. S. is lower than that for Canada. Scroll through the list that is below the graphic and you’ll see all sorts of interesting things.
What prompted my search was this AP report:
GLASGOW, Scotland (AP) — Going into overtime Friday night, negotiators at U.N. climate talks in Glasgow were still trying to find common ground on phasing out coal, when nations need to update their emission-cutting pledges and, especially, on money.
Talks are at a “bit of a stalemate,†and the United States, with support from the European Union, is holding back talks, said Lee White, the Gabonese minister for forests and climate change.
No agreement was ready by the 6 p.m. local time scheduled end of the conference. And sometimes that helps diplomats get in a more deal-making mood.
“The negotiating culture is not to make the hard compromises until the meeting goes into extra innings, as we now have done,†said long-time climate talks observer Alden Meyer of the European think tank E3G. “But the U.K. presidency is still going to have to make a lot of people somewhat unhappy to get the comprehensive agreement we need out of Glasgow.â€
Three sticking points were making people unhappy on Friday: coal, cash and timing.
I really wish they’d stop comparing the U. S. with countries a tenth our size. The usage appears to be completely opportunistic. A better comparison is to compare the U. S. with the European Union. Their aggregate GDP is a little less than ours but not drastically so. Yes, Greece is a relatively poor country. Mississippi is a relatively poor state.
BTW, Germany uses coal to generate twice as much of their electricity as we do. Not all fossil fuels are created equal. While I’m on the subject some of Germany’s claims about renewables are bogus. They use compressed wood chips for heating. Those count as renewable only if you’re not cutting down old growth forests in the U. S. and Brazil to make them.
Canada does a lot of extractive activities, a lot of agriculture (read: drying), a lot of air and trucking over large distances …………..and a lot of heating. Pretty energy intensive per GDP.
Plus all those hockey players breath really hard………
Should we be counting by CO2 emissions by final good consumption, not when CO2 is consumed to produce a good, otherwise one falls into the fallacy that outsourcing production is the solution to reducing CO2 emissions while maintaining a high standard of living.?
i.e. the CO2 to produce steel made in China that goes into a German made car that is imported into the US should count as US emissions.
If one looks at it that, I suspect US emissions per GDP would be substantially higher because (a) the US consumer is the highest source of demand worldwide (b) the US imports far more energy/CO2 intensive goods then it exports.
I think CO is correct. Its one of the reasons I tend to be dismissive of all these research papers and studies that get bandied about. You can make those studies dance to get results that fit your point of view.
BTW the energy intensity of manufacturing is higher in China than the U. S., i.e. they use more energy to produce equal product. In fairness they’ve improved that a lot over the last 20 years but it’s still higher.
Dave, I think you have to be kidding.
I know you’re not a fool. The entire thing is a hustle, and you know it.
The Gabonese minister for forests and climate change, is interested in the effects of climate change? To the extent that he’s paid to give that impression, sure. But he’s really only interested in what all the attendees are, m o n e y.
Our leaders have already established that they are whores, now it’s only haggling over the price.