This morning I decided to look up some recent carbon dioxide production statistics. I performed a Google search and selected the Natural Resources Defense Council website, which came up first on the search (and you wondered how Google made money). The site was chock full of climate propaganda and half truths. I selected the following question from their website:
Q: What country is the largest source of global warming pollution?
A: The United States. Though Americans make up just 4 percent of the world’s population, we produce 25 percent of the carbon dioxide pollution from fossil-fuel burning — by far the largest share of any country. In fact, the United States emits more carbon dioxide than China, India and Japan, combined. Clearly America ought to take a leadership role in solving the problem. And as the world’s top developer of new technologies, we are well positioned to do so — we already have the know-how.
Al Gore used similar data in his 2006 film, An Inconvenient Truth.
Both Al and the Environmental lobby are wrong. Big Surprise! They must be using ancient data. The data used by Mr. Gore in his 2006 released film has a 1999 copyright date. Data takes time to compile. I’d guess the actual data was probably produced using data form the mid 1990’s. 2014 data is now available .
I wish the Natural Resource Defense Council had spent a bit more on content editing and a bit less on online advertising.
The Statistica website has data from 2014. Their data shows the USA is second place with 14.7% of total manmade carbon dioxide production. China leads and has led the country chart since 2006. Their 2014 share was 23.4%, a number that has been steadily rising for over 20 years. India, another rapid grower sits in third position with 5.7%, followed by Russia (4.9%), Brazil (4.7.%), Japan(3.6%), Indonesia (2.31%), Germany (2.23%) and Korea (1.71%).
Why did Al Gore use old statistics in 2006 when he made his film and why does the USA’s largest environmental lobby still use 20 year old data today? Because it works as a fundraising tool. Potential givers want to feel important. China (and India too) have the ability to overwhelm the mathematics. Why give. We in the USA are powerless to impact the autocracy that is China.
I’d argue the data doesn’t begin to tell the full story. Population density, location and GDP all must also be considered. China and the USA are about the same size, but China has 4 times as many people and produces less than 50% of the goods the USA produces. All those people with middle class desires. Urbanization will lead to additional carbon production. Throw in GDP differences and China looks more and more like the Elephant in the room nobody talks about
China is a bit closer to the equator than the USA, which means they need to use less energy to keep warm. The USA has been reducing their carbon footprint steadily since about 2000. China continues to grow theirs at nearly 8% per year.
India is another rapid grower and that has the potential to be a perplexing problem for the climate control crowd. India is about 1/3 the size of the USA and produces a bit more than 1/3 of the USA’s total carbon dioxide. Their population is still growing rapidly which means that their carbon production will grow rapidly unless they can use much less on a per capita basis. Their current per capita use is rising from a very low level which means that India has a long runway of increased carbon production in front of them.
China’s impact is huge. India’s is growing rapidly. The USA’s potential climate impact (if you trust the UN scientists) has been declining for most of the 21st century. Who knows what will happen next. Any notion that we in the USA can change the world with rather modest changes at home seems a bit fanciful.
Perhaps the guys at the UN are wrong. Their temperature predictions for the first 15 years of the 21st century have been awful. The world has been colder than predicted. Yes surface data shows 2014 as being a warm year. Satellite data disagrees; and both land based and satellite data are lower than UN predictions made just a few years ago. Perhaps increased carbon dioxide won’t be as damaging as advertised.
China’s growth rate is slowing and they are building a bunch of new Nuclear Power Plants which should slow their emissions growth rate in the 2020’s. Maybe the elephant in the room will move more carefully a few years from now.
Time will tell.