![]() CO 2 can also be emitted from direct human-induced impacts on forestry and other land use, such as through deforestation, land clearing for agriculture, and degradation of soils. Carbon dioxide (CO 2): Fossil fuel use is the primary source of CO 2.Details about the sources included in these estimates can be found in the Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. ![]() I think the Washington Post got this one wrong.Source: IPCC (2014) Exit based on global emissions from 2010. My verdict? Pruitt's claim is entirely defensible, and on a nuanced topic like this certainly shouldn't be considered mostly false. Coal Industry for a deeper dive on this topic). (See Don't Blame Renewable Energy For Dying U.S. can be attributed directly to natural gas substituting for coal in the power sector. Renewables also contributed, but the vast majority of the emissions decline in the U.S. shale gas production began a decade-long growth spurt. is still a high per capita emitter, but that doesn't contradict the points that Pruitt made.įinally, one item left unsaid was the reason U.S. I understand that the Washington Post wants to push the fact that the U.S. At the same time, China's carbon dioxide emissions increased by 50%, and India's increased by 88%. Many European countries experienced declines of 20% to over 30%. had the highest overall decline in carbon dioxide emissions, we didn't have the largest percentage decline. When the Post asked the EPA about the discrepancy, a spokesperson said Pruitt “was referencing the CO2 footprint from energy-related industries,” based on a report from the Association of Air Pollution Control Agencies that says that “per capita energy-related carbon dioxide emissions were down 18.1 percent on average nationally.” The per capita number is certainly consistent with Pruitt's claims, though the date range isn't. carbon dioxide emissions fell by 12.4% on an absolute basis and by 19.9% on a per capita basis. carbon dioxide emissions continued to rise until 2005. I am not sure why anyone is using numbers from 2000, as U.S. The story quoted Pruitt a second time: “We have reduced our CO2 footprint by over 18 percent, almost 20 percent, from 2000 to 2014.” The Post also disputes this claim, citing EPA numbers that stated "energy-related CO2 emissions" have fallen by 7.5% since 2000. China's lower per capita carbon dioxide emissions are more than offset by its greater population, so China emits over 70% more carbon dioxide annually than the U.S. But, China has 4.3 times as many people, and that matters from an overall emissions perspective. So, we are not the largest per capita emitter, but we do emit 2.2 times as much on a per capita basis as China. per capita carbon dioxide emissions rank 11th among countries. However, the Washington Post story claimed: "The United States may have had the largest decrease in carbon emissions, but it is still the largest per capita emitter."Īccording to World Bank data, U.S. per capita emissions are still among the highest in the world. The Washington Post gets into per capita emissions, and indeed despite the decline, U.S. is leading the world in reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Thus, I don't think it's the least bit misleading to claim that the U.S. At the same time, China's carbon dioxide emissions grew by 3 billion metric tons, and India's grew by 1 billion metric tons. ![]() By comparison, the second largest decline during that period was registered by the United Kingdom, which reported a 170 million metric ton decline. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |