The Nation States of Climate Change

Posted by Eric de Place

06/27/2007 11:45 AM

What's your state's global warming status?

*Update: Newer and better versions of these maps are here.

Ever wondered if your state's climate policy really makes a difference in the big global scheme of things? If so, here's a little map I made.

For each state, the map shows a nation with equivalent greenhouse gas emissions from energy.

The full US version is here.

When I've shown drafts to people, almost everyone wants to compare populations. The Western states population comparison is after the jump. The full data are here (xls).

Number of people (in millions), 2003

Arizona	5.6	Nigeria	122.8
California	35.5	Mexico	103.7
Colorado	4.5	Cuba + Columbia	52.9
Idaho	1.4	Jordan	5.5
Montana	0.9	Morocco	31.7
Nevada	2.2	Norway	4.6
New Mexico	1.9	Finland	5.2
Oregon	3.6	Ireland	3.9
Utah	2.4	North Korea	22.5
Washington	6.1	Iraq	24.7
Wyoming	0.5	Vietnam	81.8
Total	65	Total	459

I find the full US map a bit overwhelming. Even more so when I realize that the 2003 population of the US -- less than 300 million -- has the same climate impact as the more than 1.5 billion people represented by the other countries listed on the map.

And now, a word about my methodology. All data are from the US Department of Energy. Ghg data are an average of the period from 2001 to 2003; population data are for 2003. Emissions are from energy use only and they do not include carbon sinks. Countries are considered "equivalent" if their total emissions are within 10 percent of a state's emissions. Obviously, there a million ways to slice these comparisons since many states and countries have similar levels of emissions.

More information:

Permalink

Comments

Posted by jesse.d.jenkins 06/29/2007 04:19 PM

This is great graphical representation of the scale of the United States' climate impacts - and the cost of our inaction in the face of the climate crisis. Thank you for posting this.

Posted by Arie v. 06/29/2007 07:34 PM

The planet can only absorb so much carbon and what's being emitted today is only fractionally increasing emissions developed nations like the US have been responsible for since the industrial revolution. I see a lot of developing countries here that have only recently reached these levels.

Though I understand the purpose is to show how significant state policy is, this type of comparison significantly underestimates the share of the problem we shoulder. We've already eaten our slice of the pie (and then some) so-to-speak.

I'd love to see a cumulative comparison, that would really be an eye opener. That being said this is yet another great visual. Thanks Eric!

Posted by Eric de Place 07/02/2007 03:40 PM

Excellent point, Arie. If one were to factor in historical emissions, the US states would have a far greater impact than the developing nations on the map. (Unfortunatley, I simply don't have time for that little project this summer!)

On the flip side though many of the developed nations, particularly the industrial countries of Europe, have actually reduced their ghg emissions quite a bit over the last 10-20 years. So their contribution may actually be somewhat understated as well.

Posted by J Plunkett Consulting 07/19/2007 11:24 AM

No China? Given China's projected growth where will it fit in 10 years?

I agree that a cumulative comparison would be great; have seen something like it at UWs Climate Impacts Group

Thanks.

Posted by Eric de Place 07/19/2007 04:38 PM

J,
China's a massive emitter. It would be something like the entire eastern half of the US. So it would make the map look sort of odd. (Of course, it's worth keeping in mind that China has 1.3+ billion people, as compared to 300 million in the US.)