Talk:List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Environment / Climate change  (Rated List-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Climate change task force.

Untitled comment[edit]

EU double counting[edit]

How is it that EU has a listing and then underneath individual states are listed? Is this double counting or twice the polution? This data looks very dodgy indead.

Because math allowes for it. It's not like that column is called "% of emissions between these countries" - it's called "% of world emissions". Try to add them up and you'll get more than 100%. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:35, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Why is there no cumulative EU / Eurozone emissions figure on this list???[edit]

Normally the Europas are only too happy to have their entries on "lists of countries" aren't they? GDP, trade and so on. The reason is that if you add up European emissions, it would easily exceed US emissions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:02, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Well someone would have to take the time to add them all up. Being that it's mostly EU-ers that care the most of the EU, they have that natural bias to do that grunt work, unless its in a negative light. But if you want to make that list, go right ahead.Woody60707 (talk) 03:01, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

"Why is there no cumulative EU" ---> there is now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:37, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

The EU as itself should not even be there as it is not a _country_ by itself however as above is said US is. However if people want grouping it should done by all areas, middle east, africa, india surroundings and asia exluding china. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


omitting the per capita factor makes this an extremely misleading article, in favour of the worst world polluters and nature destroyers, ie USA, CANADA and AUSTRALIA. this article is bad and also biased. mad , Greece — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:28, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

It would be helpful if you would avoid political invective in your post. However, looking just at information content, you are right that the per-capita number would be a useful good addition. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 15:46, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Done. As you can see there are a several worse "vandals" than those you, in your bias, chose to highlight. -Oosh (talk) 03:39, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Is there an error in Australia's ranking[edit]

I notice Australia is ranked as #7, however the emissions are 399,21 / 1.32% which are lower than 16th placed Canada. Error, or is this ranked per capita? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bprazner (talkcontribs) 02:10, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

2009 data[edit]

2009 data are already at UN site. I start updating at User:Jklamo/List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions. Feel free to help (but use template:In use), sorted data are on (note that there is decimal mark error). I also removed unnecessary source column (as all data are from CDIAC - although presented by UN), readded ranking column (not sure why was removed) and added columns per capita and per $1 GDP (PPP) (unfortunately 2009 data for per $1 GDP are currently erroneous). --Jklamo (talk) 19:45, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I am updating with 2010 data. I thought this page used to show multiple years, and let people sort by the year they want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:03, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not going to wade in and change it without raising the issue in the talk page first, but the U.S. percentage is wrong. 4,422,057/31,350,455=14.14%, not 17.33% The math for China is correct, but the U.S. percent is wrong. But, again, I'm not going to wade in and change it without seeing whether whoever put this together has some explanation (and, also because I wouldn't do that without recalculating all the percentages, which I'm too dang lazy to do). Spiff221 (talk) 18:12, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

The list is sorted in the wrong order[edit]

The list of countries is currently sorted in alphabetical order instead of listing the countries by total emissions. Is it possible to fix this? Jarble (talk) 04:52, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

It's a sortable list, just use the up/down arrows in the header, the default sort order is a product of the source data and largely immaterial. -Oosh (talk) 07:06, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

There are a large group of entities listed that are not countries. I understand EU, and continent listings, but there are other numbers which are cluttering the top of the rankings.

Sorting countries by "carbon emission" or by "carbon emission per capita" is not correct. More population would decrease carbon emission capita for any given country. Certainly the solution for this greenhouse gas is not rooted in increasing the population of a country. Countries should be normalized based on land mass. A larger country has a larger CO2 sink (i.e plants and ocean). If you are putting out a large amount of CO2 without the sink....then you are polluting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:10, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Maybe I'm missing something, but the first and third numerically sortable columns appear to sort in "alphabetical" order, so that any number no matter how large or small whose left-most digit is a "1" is "higher" than any number no matter how large or small whose leftmost digit is a "2" etc. In other words, the sortability of these numerical columns is completely useless. (Actually, all three columns do this, but it's less noticeable in the middle column.) Agent Cooper (talk) 17:46, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

per capita data[edit]

We have a separate article call List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita. So isn't it a bit strange to also have per capita data here? --Raminagrobis fr (talk) 19:03, 16 November 2014 (UTC)