This is the sort of political image of CO2 emissions that you usually see presented. The Big Bad USA and Australia get most of the blame for CO2 emissions.
Image above from myclimatechange.net. Note that the artist could not have picked a worse image to portray the message since CO2 is heavier than air and in the real world, none of those balloons would float. Most people learn this in grade school. Even so, lighter than air CO2 balloons seem to be a recurring theme in warmland.
I ran across this interesting tidbit on CO2 emissions per capita which I found interesting. While many warmist organizations concentrate on pushing lifestyle changes related to CO2 emissions, we usually see that framed in reference to total CO2 emissions per country. When you look at the per capita values, an entirely different picture emerges.
LIST OF COUNTRIES RANKED BY 2006 TOTAL CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FOSSIL-FUEL
DATA : Marland, G., T.A. Boden, and R. J. Andres. 2008. Global, Regional, and National CO2 Emissions.
In Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview.html
(UNIT : Tons of CO2 per capita)
COUNTRY TONS OF CO2 PER CAPITA
Qatar 49.26
Kuwait 34.22
United-Arab-Emirates 32.94
Bahrain 28.62
Luxembourg 23.89
USA 18.95
Australia 17.93
Canada 16.65
Oman 16.03
Saudi-Arabia 16.03
Estonia 13.02
Finland 12.62
Kazakhstan 12.62
Singapore 12.51
Taiwan 11.93
Czech-Republic 11.16
Russia 10.94
Ireland 10.32
Netherlands 10.28
Japan 10.24
Belgium 10.17
Greenland 9.99
Israel 9.99
Denmark 9.91
South-Korea 9.8
Germany 9.77
Nor-ssb 9.59
United-Kingdom 9.04
South-Africa 8.74
Austria 8.67
Greece 8.63
Norway 8.6
Libya 8.27
Spain 7.97
Italy 7.72
New-Zealand 7.28
Iceland 7.24
Bosnia 7.13
Belarus 7.06
Malaysia 7.02
Slovakia 6.91
Ukraine 6.8
Iran 6.62
Venezuela 6.33
Bulgaria 6.22
France 6.18
Hungary 5.7
Portugal 5.67
Sweden 5.59
Switzerland 5.56
Croatia 5.3
Macedonia 5.3
China 4.64
Romania 4.53
Argentina 4.42
Uzbekistan 4.28
Lithuania 4.17
Thailand 4.17
Azerbaijan 4.13
Mexico 4.13
Lebanon 3.76
Jordan 3.69
Turkey 3.69
Chile 3.66
Mongolia 3.66
Syria 3.66
North-Korea 3.58
Latvia 3.25
Iraq 3.22
Botswana 2.78
Belize 2.67
Cuba 2.63
Egypt 2.26
Tunisia 2.26
Moldova 2.19
Uruguay 2.04
Brazil 1.86
Indonesia 1.5
Morocco 1.5
Namibia 1.39
Peru 1.39
Armenia 1.35
Columbia 1.35
India 1.35
Georgia 1.24
Vietnam 1.24
Bolivia 1.17
Kyrgyzstan 1.06
Yemen 1.02
Honduras 0.98
Guatemala 0.91
Pakistan 0.91
Angola 0.87
Swaziland 0.87
Western-Sahara 0.87
Zimbabwe 0.84
Palestine 0.76
Polen 0.76
Phillippines 0.76
Nigeria 0.69
Paraguay 0.65
Bhutan 0.58
Sri-Lanka 0.58
Congo 0.4
Ghana 0.4
Senegal 0.4
Benin 0.36
Kenya 0.32
Bangladesh 0.29
Cambodia 0.29
Sudan 0.29
Laos 0.25
Liberia 0.21
Zambia 0.21
Cameroon 0.18
Madagascar 0.14
Tanganyika 0.14
Tanzania 0.14
Eritrea 0.1
Mozambique 0.1
Nepal 0.1
Burkina-Faso 0.07
Ethiopia 0.07
Faroe-Islands 0.07
Rwanda 0.07
Burundi 0.03
Chad 0.03
Mali 0.03
(DATA : Marland, G., T.A. Boden, and R. J. Andres. 2008. Global, Regional, and National CO2 Emissions.
In Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global Change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/overview.html)
Paul R (18:34:19) :
Canada has no balloons.
Absolutely not true. I spent a few summer weeks in Edmonton a few decades ago where the sun did not set until after ten PM and the sky was full of wonderful hot-air balloons. My hosts had lots of winter-horror stories, but Edmonton in the summer, and its balloons, are a cherished memory.
If anyone here is interested in exploring the complex relationships between various statistical categories for nations throughout the world I will repeat a recommendation I have made here several times that you check out Gapminder.org at http://www.gapminder.org/. They have vast amounts of statistical data in over 150 indicators covering most of the world with some of the data going back to 1800 or further back. Their software allows you to easily create animated graphs charting any indicator against any other with a few clicks. Individual countries can be highlighted and tracked and for those who want to explore deeper there are numerous other capabilities embedded in the system. The main site has quite a number of videos available which demonstrate the possibilities of the software.
Geoff Sherington (00:37:50) :
Here in Australia we are mutteringthat the Government is proposing Robin Hood economics with a variation. They take from the rich, then keep it.
“Blimey mate, at least Dick Turpin had the decency to wear a mask!”
Consumption of electricity in the USA is falling. Bad economy, job losses, no money. I think they outsourced to the tipping point. There isn’t anything left to rebuild with. The Globalists own it all.
“Geoff Sherington (00:37:50) :
oakgeo (22:51:08) :
Re Robin Hood. Here in Australia we are mutteringthat the Government is proposing Robin Hood economics with a variation. They take from the rich, then keep it.
I love the Python sketch, saw it long ago.”
Errrr…..they do that already, how else can they afford their gilt edge pension funds after only one term “in service”, while the “rest of us” have to wait until 65. Oh hang on, “they” just changed that to 67. Thanks Australian politicians.
If you mean CO2 emissions, it is wrong because CO2 does no measurable harm.
On the OP, the “balloon” analogy is just so lame, trouble is, politicians are milking it all the way to the bank, and, it seems in Australia at least, most are happy to be shafted.
How can 20mil people’s “emissions” be just behind 300mil? Are American’s, somehow, 15 times more efficient in consumption/emission?
Thanks to everyone who ‘weighed in’ on tons vs tonnes. I’ll just have to admit to being ‘tone’ deaf.
Dave Wendt (02:38:10) :
“If anyone here is interested in exploring the complex relationships between various statistical categories for nations throughout the world I will repeat a recommendation I have made here several times that you check out Gapminder.org at http://www.gapminder.org/.”
I checked it out and it’s every bit as good as you said. I now have a shortcut to that site. I have a visual handicap that makes it hard to view graphs (and just about everything else), but they have some options that allow one to compare stats by selecting other types of visuals that are easier for me to see. I LIKE it!
“Roger Sowell (10:17:28) :
Hot gases rise, and diffuse into the surrounding gas volume. Thus, the hot CO2 and water vapor from an exhaust stack on a power plant do indeed rise.”
…You missed out the bit about when the C02 cools it falls to earth.
The Earth has been likened to a giant carbon dioxide sponge because so many life forms need it for their survival. A carbon dioxide molecule can’t survive in the atmosphere longer than about 14 months before being absorbed into the sea or the Earth’s biomass, and most C02 molecules disappear from the air much sooner than that. The Earth’s carbon-based life forms need about 207 billion tons of C02 per year just to survive.
Soda cans maybe a better graphic!
I like Euro Trash and Trailer Trash – often funny and occasionally better educated than most of the snobs out there.
>>>To answer the title question (Greenpeace and Qatar):
>>>Because Qatar wouldn’t put up their s#!+, that’s why.
These were the last four Greenpeacenicks to make a complaint to Iran. Apparently, canceling their return flights saved 14 tonnes of CO2, so all’s well that ends well.
.
>>>To answer the title question (Greenpeace and Qatar):
>>>Because Qatar wouldn’t put up their s#!+, that’s why.
These were the last four Greenpeacenicks to make a complaint to Iran.
http://irantoday.co.kr/photo/2007/09/23/iran_execution-thumb-510×446.jpg
Apparently, canceling their return flights saved 14 tonnes of CO2, so all’s well that ends well.
.
Here’s a compilation of Monty Python’s ‘Dennis Moore’ sketches. I don’t remember having seen any of these before. I don’t think that they would show Monty Python on Quatari TV…
>>When does the U.S. get credit for allowing so much of
>>>our land to grow fallow and revert to forests?
And how many Carbon Credits does the US get for exporting so much grain to the rest of the world?
http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/baseline/gallery/gallery2002/CoarseExports.gif
All those fields could be converted to forest, to gain Carbon Credits, so continuing to grow grain should earn Virtual Carbon Credits as an offset. If the US does not get any VCCs for grain, they should stop growing the grain and let the Third World starve. The rest of the world would then have to chop down their own forests to grow grain and loose their CCs.
Confused?
.
Greenpeace is actually a predatory extortion organization. As such, and like all predators in every food chain, they only try to approach weak targets which won’t fight back. The Western world fits that description. No moral fiber for fighting back against extortionists.
A Greenpeace action in Qatar would end up in a very ugly jail sentence. And they know it. So they keep their mouths shut.
The Balloon picture tells it all.
If we control Co2, we control humanity so finally we have found a way to establish a long lasting basis for a Global Marxist Society, read Fascist Society.
As it has become clear that Obama’s shadow government of Czars make no secret of their Marxist Revolutionary backgrounds we now know exactly where we are up to.
The cold war has started again.
If the Revolutionaries win, this will be our future:
http://www.climatedepot.com/a/2796/ALERT-German-Climate-Advisor-proposes-creation-of-a-CO2-budget-for-every-person-on-planet
Our best bet for a sustainable, clean, healthy, and free society is to provide energy within our own soils and not be beholden to any one group of nations. Our next president, if truly focused on his/her constituents, will begin the process of responsibly mining for all sources of energy and investing in building the refineries for these mining products. With cheap and efficient energy, we can competitively manufacture the products sought the world over while maintaining family wages.
In the meantime, the president should develop an energy research facility that funds the R&D necessary to produce alternative liquid energy that can be easily transported and used safely. The country that produces its own energy more cheaply will be in a better position to care for its oceans and lands.
More Climate Alarmism:
This time “Tectonic Armageddon”
http://volcanism.wordpress.com/2009/09/06/climate-change-scientists-warn-of-tectonic-volcanic-geo-apocalyptic-mega-mayhem/
Ron de Haan (10:45:39) :
Wow, my pickup might cause earthquakes. Awesome!
Is there no end to this? My God, Monty Python never ended… it just morphed into climate science.
Pamela Gray (10:39:31) :
“In the meantime, the president should develop an energy research facility that funds the R&D necessary to produce alternative liquid energy that can be easily transported and used safely. The country that produces its own energy more cheaply will be in a better position to care for its oceans and lands”.
Right, that why the use of coal to generate electricity is on the rise.
Anthony, the link you gave in answer to Sekerob (09:23:40) seems to be about CO2 distribution horizontally, close to the surface.
I’ve asked the same question on other sites about vertical distribution of CO2 particularly above the tropopause. I’ve never had a real, measured, widely sampled answer about this.
Do we assume that in a 1 g gravity field acting over 30km or so molecules 50% heavier than the other constituents of air don’t have a concentration gradient, particularly as above the tropopause there isn’t the massive convective mixing present in the troposphere?
All I’ve ever had in answer to this is vague arm waving about “molecular diffusion”. No hard data. It is wise to sometimes check assumptions against real world measurements. Anybody know of any? Alternatively does anybody know enough about molecular diffusion to do the calculation for CO2 in air or point to somewhere that has done this?
CO2 emissions appear to be a function of
1) wealth
2) cheapness of fossil fuels (oil states have higher emissions)
3) nuclear power (france has really low emissions)
4) climate (Scandanavia and canada stung here)
5) Hydro-electric power availability
So-called “green” technologies are irrelevant.
As an Aussie, proud to be #2 on the deciever’s chart. Means the nation must be doing something right. Viva la carbon!
The fixation of CO2-e emmissions is misleading and dangerous. First let us assume that:
a) AGW is occurring *cough*;
b) black CO2-filled balloons float; and
c) It is those black balloons that are causing the AGW.
I think I have that about right so far… Hookay, so Australia is a large CO2-e (black balloon) emmitter per capita. This is true. Australia is also:
a) a net exporter of energy ; and
b) a net exporter of energy intensive products (e.g. aluminium).
Some of these exports return to Australia in other forms such as automobiles, plant and machinery, but the bulk is destined for other nations such as the USA, Eurotrashland*, Canada and so on.
Should Australia therefore be penalised for producing black balloons for a tonne of aluminium that ends up in Toyota cars (for example) that end up in the Italian market? No, clearly this is preposterous and any unilateral ETS in Australia would lead to energy-intensive industries moving overseas where no such regime is enforced.
This also applies to the Australian LNG industry (and Qatari one for that matter). LNG is a “cleaner” fossil fuel than coal, but we (Australia and Qatar) are to be penalised for producing it and exporting it overseas to offset foreign black balloon emmissions.
Any agreement in Copenhagen will tilt the economic playing field disastrously unless the agreements are global (to the major economies/emmitters) such that there is no relative disadvantage to energy intensive-exporters such as Australia.
* Being half Dutch I am entitled to say this /nod