It goes to show that measurement is crucially difficult. I don't know how some people believe they can construct a carbon trading market from this mess.
Patrick
***
USA: Total Energy Consumption (2002E): 98.3 quadrillion Btu; (2003E): 98.1 quadrillion Btu (25% of world total energy consumption) Energy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions (2002E): 5,796 million metric tons of carbon (about 24% of world total carbon emissions) Per Capita Energy Consumption (2003E): 338 million Btu Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions (2002E): 20.3 metric tons Energy Intensity (2003E; nominal): 8,918 Btu Carbon Dioxide Intensity (2002E; nominal): 0.55 metric tons of carbon dioxide/thousand dollars
SOUTH AFRICA: Total Energy Consumption (2002E): 4.5 quadrillion Btu* (1.11% of world total energy consumption) Energy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions (2002E): 377.6 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (1.5% of world carbon dioxide emissions) Per Capita Energy Consumption (2002E): 101.5 million Btu (vs. U.S. value of 339.1 million Btu) Per Capita Carbon Dioxide Emissions (2002E): 2.3 metric tons of carbon dioxide (vs. U.S. value of 5.5 metric tons of carbon) Energy Intensity (2002E): 9,853 Btu/$1995 (vs. U.S. value of 10,619 Btu/$1995)** Carbon Dioxide Intensity (2002E): 0.81 metric tons of carbon dioxide/thousand $1995 (vs. U.S. value of 0.63 metric tons/thousand $1995)**
***
>From my book Unsustainable South Africa (2002, London, Merlin Press):
Not including net exports of greenhouse gas pollutants--since South Africa
is the world's second largest exporter of coal after Australia--the energy
sector contributed 78% to South Africa's share of global warming and more
than 90% of all carbon dioxide emissions in 1994. What happened
subsequently? Data are still coming in, but the trends are disturbing. In
1998, South Africa emitted 354 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide,
equivalent to 2,291 kilograms of carbon per person (a 4% increase from 1990
levels). South Africa is amongst the worst emitters of CO2 in the world when
corrected for both income and population size, far worse than even the
United States, as shown in Table 6. Only a few countries rival South Africa
in a CO2/GDP*population comparison, most of which are mainly producers of
fossil fuels and which flare gas or oil, rather than competing with South
Africa as inefficient energy consumers through the minerals beneficiation
process. In terms of population size alone, many countries of the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have higher
emissions, but when corrected again for both population and income, South
Africa is far worse than nearly all the major developed countries. Both
globally and in South Africa, carbon emissions are growing, not reducing, in
spite of economic stagnation and mass employment loss. In 1990, the average
carbon emissions from fossil fuel production internationally was 1,130
kilograms per person. Already, experts judged this to be 70% above
unsustainable levels, and set a target of reductions from 1990
levels--indexed at 100--to 339 kilograms of carbon emissions per person. To
reach the sustainable level would put the world at a '0' point on a
sustainability vector. South Africa took no action to reduce emissions over
the period 1990-98, and indeed allowed them to increase from 2,205 to 2,291
kilograms of carbon per person. Instead of lowering emissions on the 0-100
vector scale, the emissions/person ratio actually increased, from 226 in
1990 to 247 in 1998.
Table 6 Energy sector carbon emissions, 1999
Area
Population (mns)
CO2/
person
GDP
($bns)
CO2/GDP
(kg/$bn)
CO2(kg)/
GDP*pop
S.Africa
42
8.22
$164
2.11
0.0501
Africa
775
1.49
$569
1.28
0.0016
USA
273
20.46
$8,588
0.65
0.0023
OECD
1116
10.96
$26,446
0.46
0.0004
World
5921
3.88
$32,445
0.71
0.0001
NOTE: The carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are those measureable through fuel combustion.