Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

[Logique2]

Is that you Barnaby?

And in which rural area do live? Let's see, "Country Lad".
Hint: Haberfield isn't the 'Country'

 

[sptrawler]

.

To SpTrawler..,you need to wake up mate.



..Logique2

Oh thankyou, at last the oracle has arrived, I knew it would happen I am woke, alleluya we are saved.

But I do love people who lead with their lip, it usually indicates they need a speed bump installed between their brain and their mouth.

I look forward to the banter.

 

[basilio]

Well Climate Change is just doing what the Science Nerds always said - Creating some pretty extreme weather events.

Right now there are some very impressive super cell thunder storms with Record Breaking hailstones smashing the living xhit out property up and down the East Coast. I wonder how many cars have been written off in the past few days ?

But of course they won't cause any damage to Logique 2 because he/she/it/troll is on a totally different planet to us Eh ?

‘Like snow’: freak hail storms batter Australia’s east coast

Coffs Harbour cops a hammering as shopping centre ceiling collapses; Australia records its largest ever hailstone

www.theguardian.com

 

[basilio]

Some heavy hitters in business are supporting green investments to combat CC. The sell is based on major new industries in rural Australia.

Atlassian co-founder Mike Cannon-Brookes sells economic benefits of green investment with $1.5b pledge​

ABC Illawarra
/ By Justin Huntsdale
Posted 3h ago3 hours ago

Atlassian co-founder Mike Cannon-Brookes will spread his investment across a number of industries.(Reuters: Daniel Munoz)
Help keep family & friends informed by sharing this article


From his home in the New South Wales Southern Highlands, Atlassian co-founder Mike Cannon-Brookes has his eyes firmly focused on the future of regional Australia.

Key points:​

• Atlassian co-founder Mike Cannon-Brookes and his wife will invest $1.5b in an effort to help fight climate change
• He says regional areas stand to benefit greatly from green investments that will create jobs and boost the economy
• Mr Cannon-Brookes says private industry and individuals need to share the responsibility with the government

The chief executive of the technology giant not only sees enormous potential of environmental investments — he thinks he knows the best way to sell them.
"The decarbonisation of the planet is the biggest economic opportunity for Australia over the next 20 years," he told ABC Radio Sydney's Breakfast program.
"Things like the creation of jobs, improvement in the standard of living and growth of our economy — but we have to make changes to take advantage of that, otherwise it will be taken advantage of by other nations and economies.

Australia's third-richest person to invest $1.5b in fight against climate change

Atlassian co-founder Mike Cannon-Brookes says he's putting up the huge sum in a bid to help dramatically reduce carbon emissions by 2030.

www.abc.net.au

 

[basilio]

The New York Times produced a film featuring the thoughts of Greta Thunberg on dealing with the the climate change crisis.
All she is doing is highlighting the research of CC scientists.

 

[sptrawler]

Interesting article on Putin's hold over Europe's energy decissions.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/07/world/europe/putin-russia-natural-gas-europe.html
From the article:
The televised exchange underlined the dominant position that Mr. Putin, for now, still commands as the leader of a country supplying more than 40 percent of the European Union’s natural gas imports. Russia has previously used its role as a critical energy source to pressure individual countries such as Belarus, Georgia and Ukraine. Now, the tensions are about something more existential: the future of Russia’s most important economic bond with Europe and of a key geopolitical lever for the Kremlin.

“We decided: ‘We’ll let them freeze a good bit this winter and then they’ll become more talkative, and won’t insist on quickly abandoning gas,’” said Mikhail I. Krutikhin, an energy analyst at the consultancy RusEnergy. “The stakes are very high.”

That sort of tough talk breeds deep mistrust in Europe, where critics see Russia as deliberately withholding extra natural gas from the market to try to pressure Germany and Brussels to quickly certify Nord Stream 2, the undersea pipeline that will transport huge amounts of gas to Western Europe.

The decision by the Russian state-owned energy giant Gazprom not to fill its European storage facilities has contributed to the high prices, according to Trevor Sikorski, head of global gas at Energy Aspects, a research firm based in London.

“The Russians can’t just wash their hands and say it has nothing to do with them,” Mr. Sikorski said. “It obviously has a lot to do with them.”

The European Commission is looking into the claim that Russia is manipulating the flow of gas to push up prices but has reached no conclusion. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, whose government has backed Nord Stream 2 and called it a business deal, not a geopolitical strategy, dismissed charges that Russia is partly to blame for the rise in European gas prices.

“To my knowledge, there are no orders where Russia has said we won’t deliver it to you,” Ms. Merkel told reporters on Wednesday. “Russia can only deliver gas on the basis of contractual obligations.”
Jake Sullivan, the White House national security adviser, said in an interview on Thursday in Brussels that Russia had a history of using energy “as a political weapon,” but added, “Whether that’s what’s happening here now is something I’ll leave to others.”

But he said that the United States had “a real concern” that energy supply was not keeping up with recovering demand. He said he had discussed the issue on Thursday with E.U. officials and that the United States would “like to be aligned with Europe” in securing more supplies. The U.S. has opposed Nord Stream 2 on the grounds that it would increase European dependence on Russian gas, but in August it dropped its threat to block the pipeline.

“We have a fundamental interest in seeing global energy supplies, in both gas and oil, at sufficient levels to support global economic recovery and not stall it out,” Mr. Sullivan said. “We’d like to see energy suppliers take measures to ensure that that is the case.”

Russia has been fulfilling its contractual obligations to European clients, analysts and officials say, but has resisted delivering significantly more even as demand increasingly outpaced supply. That has exacerbated an energy crisis fueled by a variety of factors, including the increase in demand as the world comes out of the pandemic, a cold end to last winter that left storage tanks low, higher demand from China and low wind speeds in Europe that reduced renewable energy production.
Gazprom’s defenders point out that the company is not required to deliver gas beyond what it pledged in its contracts and that European officials have themselves to blame if they failed to plan properly.

“Do we have an obligation to deliver additional new volumes of gas? No we don’t,” Sergei Pikin, a Russian energy analyst, said. “Where should Europeans be getting new volumes of gas from? Nord Stream 2.”

Aleksandr Novak, a deputy prime minister, made the link to the gas pipeline explicit in his televised video conference with Mr. Putin on Wednesday. Certification and approval of Nord Stream 2 by the E.U. “as fast as possible” would give “a positive signal” that could “cool down the current situation,” Mr. Novak told the president.

With Nord Stream 2 operating, Russia’s hold on Europe’s energy market would tighten even further — giving Mr. Putin more opportunities to influence European politics. And it would reduce Russia’s reliance on Ukraine as a transit country for gas exports to Western Europe, potentially weakening a regional foe.

Mr. Putin insisted that Russia was not at fault for Europe’s predicament. But he did not shy away from one of his favorite modes of criticism.

 

[sptrawler]

At least the media narrative is starting to move from fairies at the bottom of the garden waving a wand, to a more realistic view of how this is all going to be achieved, which has to raise the level of the debate IMO.
At least now we move from the wish list, to the reality.
IMO it is a good article, whether you believe in climate change, don't believe, or don't care. It covers the issues that are going to affect you.

Big business 'sniffs' the green dollar at COP26

Climate change conferences were once the domain of scientists and bureaucrats. Now, they are increasingly attended by big business delegations eyeing off the "green dollar".

www.abc.net.au

From the article:
Climate change conferences, such as today's COP26, were once the domain of scientists and bureaucrats.

Now, they are increasingly attended by big business delegations eyeing off the "green dollar" — former climate negotiator for Australia, Richie Merzian, calls it a "trade show" for climate change.

It's a sign that climate change is as much an economic challenge as it is a scientific one.

In fact, one of the four goals of Glasgow is "mobilising finance"; $90 trillion is needed for infrastructure to assist the economy to decarbonise by 2030, according to the World Bank.

One of Australia's biggest investors in renewables, Mike Cannon-Brookes, said "$90 trillion is probably an understatement".

"And if you're a major fossil fuel producer, the majority of your emissions are when your goods are burnt.

"We're seeing a rise of greenwashing. We're seeing more junk credits being put on the market and purchased up by big polluters. We're seeing a lot more marketing, and not a lot of action. And that's the real risk."

In Australia, one in five carbon credits generated here could very well be hot air, according to new research by the Australian Conservation Foundation.

​

 

[sptrawler]

India to set net zero target by 2070.

Modi says it will take India until 2070 to hit net zero emissions and asks for $1 trillion

The world's third-biggest greenhouse gas emitter has pledged net zero emissions by 2070, decades beyond what scientists say is needed to avoid catastrophic climate change.

www.abc.net.au

From the article:
He noted that though India represented 17 per cent of the world's population, it was "responsible for only 5 per cent of global emissions".

"India has increased its non-fossil fuel energy by 25 per cent, and this now represents 40 per cent of our energy mix," he told leaders.

"More people travel on the Indian railways every year than the entire population of the world. This huge railway system has committed to attain net zero by 2030. This initiative alone will reduce carbon emissions by 60 million tonnes annually."

The Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW), a think-tank based in Delhi, previously released a report suggesting 2070 to 2080 was a realistic time frame for India, with dependence on coal and other fossil fuels expected to peak in 2040.

Dr Pai said an Indian person's energy consumption was 8 per cent of that of a person in the US, but that was set to triple in future.

Apart from climate finance, barriers to India meeting the target include its young fleet of coal power plants and the need to ramp up renewables on such a large scale to cater for its 1.4 billion people.

Mr Modi said India expects wealthy countries to give $US1 trillion ($1.33 trillion) in climate finance, far more than the $US100 billion ($132 billion) promised but not yet delivered.

 

[wayneL]

COP26 has highlighted the most grotesque, the most obvious, the most brazen hypocrisies in the history of the planet.

That is all.

 

[basilio]

James Lovelock offers an independent scien

Beware: Gaia may destroy humans before we destroy the Earth​

James Lovelock

Covid-19 may well have been one attempt by the Earth to protect itself. Gaia will try harder next time with something even nastier

‘I am not hopeful of a positive outcome at Cop26, knowing who is participating. I was not invited to Glasgow, though that is hardly a surprise.’ Photograph: Magdalena Bujak/Alamy
Tue 2 Nov 2021 23.00 AEDT
Last modified on Wed 3 Nov 2021 04.08 AEDT
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...are-gaia-theory-climate-crisis-earth#comments
937
I don’t know if it is too late for humanity to avert a climate catastrophe, but I am sure there is no chance if we continue to treat global heating and the destruction of nature as separate problems.

That is the wrongheaded approach of the United Nations, which is about to stage one big global conference for the climate in Glasgow, having just finished a different big global conference for biodiversity in Kunming.

This division is as much of a mistake as the error made by universities when they teach chemistry in a different class from biology and physics. It is impossible to understand these subjects in isolation because they are interconnected. The same is true of living organisms that greatly influence the global environment. The composition of the Earth’s atmosphere and the temperature of the surface is actively maintained and regulated by the biosphere, by life, by what the ancient Greeks used to call Gaia.

Almost 60 years ago, I suggested our planet self-regulated like a living organism. I called this the Gaia theory, and was later joined by biologist Lynn Margulis, who also espoused this idea. Both of us were roundly criticised by scientists in academia. I was an outsider, an independent scientist, and the mainstream view then was the neo-Darwinist one that life adapts to the environment, not that the relationship also works in the other direction, as we argued. In the years since, we have seen just how much life – especially human life – can affect the environment. Two genocidal acts – suffocation by greenhouse gases and the clearance of the rainforests – have caused changes on a scale not seen in millions of years.

Beware: Gaia may destroy humans, before we destroy the Earth | James Lovelock

Covid-19 may well have been one attempt by the Earth to protect itself. Gaia will try harder next time with something even nastier

www.theguardian.com

 

[sptrawler]

It looks as though the World is heading toward a global carbon tax, which IMO is the best way forward in reducing emissions and stopping global warming.
Now all we need is an independent global body assembled to oversee it.

The EU has cottoned on to imperfect carbon workarounds introduced by countries such as Australia and things are about to change

A carbon tariff is a carbon tax applied to exports from countries like Australia that don't have one. And Europe is planning to impose one, whether our politicians like it or not, writes Peter Martin.

www.abc.net.au

From the article:

We are about to face carbon tariffs​

The European Union has cottoned on to the imperfect workarounds introduced by countries such as Australia, and is about to tackle things from the other direction.

Instead of treating foreign and local producers the same by letting them both off the hook, it's going to place both on the hook.

It's about to make sure producers in higher-emitting countries such as China (and Australia) can't undercut producers who pay carbon prices.

Unless foreign producers pay a carbon price like the one in Europe, the EU will impose a carbon price on their goods as they come in — a so-called Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, or "carbon tariff".

Canada is also exploring the idea, as part of "levelling the playing field". So is US President Joe Biden, who wants to stop polluting countries "undermining our workers and manufacturers".

Their arguments line up with those heard in Australia in the lead-up to our carbon price: that unless there's some sort of adjustment, a local carbon tax will push local employers towards "pollution havens" where emissions are untaxed.

 

[basilio]

The ABC has a droll but very interesting analysis of just how easy it could be to make huge inroads into our carbon emissions.
And all the solutions are clever win/win deals that will make us far more cost effective and productive.
Have to say it is one of the most encouraging stories I have read.

How dung beetles, a tiny molecule and a giant extension cord could help solve our climate mess

Here's how Australia could become a renewable superpower by 2030. Sounds too good to be true? You tell us.

www.abc.net.au

 

[bellenuit]

Some home truths for the current generation by Bill Maher

 

[wayneL]

Some home truths for the current generation by Bill Maher

Speaking of the cognitive dissonance Bill mentioned, it's such a shame he didn't point point out the conspicuous consumption (that he again mentioned) of the COP26 attendees.

Or perhaps his own massive carbon footprint?

What a monumental hypocrite.

 

[sptrawler]

Doesn't sound as though the U.K push to ban ICE cars, is getting much traction, with the big auto manufacturing countries..

US won’t sign up to British push to ban new petrol cars by 2035

The Biden administration fears backlash over any pledge to phase out fuel-guzzlers as the President struggles to get his climate bill through Congress.

www.smh.com.au

From the article:
Glasgow: The United States is refusing to sign up to plans led by the UK for a global deal to end the sale of new petrol and diesel cars during talks at the Cop26 climate summit.

Germany, Europe’s largest car manufacturer, cannot sign up to the agreement while it is still stuck in coalition talks, which could take weeks.

The UK wants all countries to commit to ending the sale of new polluting cars by 2035 for richer countries and 2040 for developing countries, in a major announcement expected in Glasgow on Wednesday. But it has been in last-minute talks with the Biden administration team which is resisting the commitment because of concerns of domestic political backlash as President Joe Biden struggles to get his climate agenda through Congress.

Senior Democrat politicians including former president Barack Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi are expected to fly to Glasgow for the second week of talks, amid growing frustration at US inaction at the summit.

China is also expected to reject the agreement, partly because Beijing is reluctant to sign a UK-led agreement while relations between the two countries remain at a low point.
The EU’s own deadlines on phasing out petrol and diesel cars are locked in negotiations among member states over its decarbonisation package, although individual states can join.
The absence of key players underscores the difficulty in achieving the UK’s aim at the conference to “keep alive” the ambitions of the Paris Agreement to limit warming to 1.5C.

In the US, Biden has only this year set a deadline for half of all car sales to be electric by 2030 and reversed moves by Donald Trump to loosen pollution standards.
The President has been locked for weeks in a struggle with Congress to secure funding for his climate plans, with an infrastructure deal that includes billions for clean energy only passing on Saturday morning AEDT.
The majority of climate change funding is still stuck in a second bill, which has been blocked by centrist Democrats who are concerned over costs.
Loading

Only about 2 per cent of cars sold a year in the US are pure electric, compared to around 7 per cent in the UK and 10 per cent in Europe.
Meanwhile, workers in the rust-belt states where car manufacturing is based are wary of moving too fast, with the auto workers union recently warning against “unrealistic mandates”.

Fears of a backlash among coal mining communities in the wake of the shock Democrat defeat in the Virginia governor race were highlighted as one of the reasons Biden declined to sign up to last week’s deal, which the UK touted as heralding “the end of coal”.

A COP spokesman said: “As Cop26 President, the UK continues to push the G20 and other countries to make the big policy decisions required to keep the 1.5C target alive, like ending coal power, accelerating the roll-out of electric vehicles and tackling deforestation plans.
“We’re looking forward to a productive second week to make further progress for a positive outcome for the planet.”

 

[rederob]

Doesn't sound as though the U.K push to ban ICE cars, is getting much traction, with the big auto manufacturing countries..

US won’t sign up to British push to ban new petrol cars by 2035

The Biden administration fears backlash over any pledge to phase out fuel-guzzlers as the President struggles to get his climate bill through Congress.

www.smh.com.au

From the article:
Glasgow: The United States is refusing to sign up to plans led by the UK for a global deal to end the sale of new petrol and diesel cars during talks at the Cop26 climate summit.

Germany, Europe’s largest car manufacturer, cannot sign up to the agreement while it is still stuck in coalition talks, which could take weeks.

The UK wants all countries to commit to ending the sale of new polluting cars by 2035 for richer countries and 2040 for developing countries, in a major announcement expected in Glasgow on Wednesday. But it has been in last-minute talks with the Biden administration team which is resisting the commitment because of concerns of domestic political backlash as President Joe Biden struggles to get his climate agenda through Congress.

Senior Democrat politicians including former president Barack Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi are expected to fly to Glasgow for the second week of talks, amid growing frustration at US inaction at the summit.

China is also expected to reject the agreement, partly because Beijing is reluctant to sign a UK-led agreement while relations between the two countries remain at a low point.
The EU’s own deadlines on phasing out petrol and diesel cars are locked in negotiations among member states over its decarbonisation package, although individual states can join.
The absence of key players underscores the difficulty in achieving the UK’s aim at the conference to “keep alive” the ambitions of the Paris Agreement to limit warming to 1.5C.

In the US, Biden has only this year set a deadline for half of all car sales to be electric by 2030 and reversed moves by Donald Trump to loosen pollution standards.
The President has been locked for weeks in a struggle with Congress to secure funding for his climate plans, with an infrastructure deal that includes billions for clean energy only passing on Saturday morning AEDT.
The majority of climate change funding is still stuck in a second bill, which has been blocked by centrist Democrats who are concerned over costs.
Loading

Only about 2 per cent of cars sold a year in the US are pure electric, compared to around 7 per cent in the UK and 10 per cent in Europe.
Meanwhile, workers in the rust-belt states where car manufacturing is based are wary of moving too fast, with the auto workers union recently warning against “unrealistic mandates”.

Fears of a backlash among coal mining communities in the wake of the shock Democrat defeat in the Virginia governor race were highlighted as one of the reasons Biden declined to sign up to last week’s deal, which the UK touted as heralding “the end of coal”.

A COP spokesman said: “As Cop26 President, the UK continues to push the G20 and other countries to make the big policy decisions required to keep the 1.5C target alive, like ending coal power, accelerating the roll-out of electric vehicles and tackling deforestation plans.
“We’re looking forward to a productive second week to make further progress for a positive outcome for the planet.”

I was looking at EV penetration in various markets over the weekend, and pricing trends.
Norway at 90%, Australia with less than one percent, and China with 20% of total sales in September, shows there are massively different market trajectories.
However, with China now dominating production and sales of EVs, and their segments ranging from AUD$10k upwards into the luxury car category, it is difficult to see how any non-China based company could compete on price given that most EV specs are superior for vehicles of comparable size.
As I read it, few if any vehicle manufacturers will be producing ICE vehicles after 2025 as they simply will not match comparable EV offerings. So I cannot see why anyone would bother to legislate the demise of ICE vehicles when the trend is so obvious.
Battery materials was going to be a constraint, but cheaper LiFePO4 batteries, without the constraint of nickel or cobalt availability, might be able to plug any shortfall given the nimble nature of Chinese manufacturing.
And although this is a bit off-topic, here's the tip off the iceberg:

 

[sptrawler]

I was a bit surprised only 2% of cars sold in the U.S are electric, 7% in the U.K and only 10% in Europe when you consider Norway is in Europe. I would be surprised if we don't overtake the U.S in E.V uptake very soon, Australia is quite fast to accept new technology.
I think the range anxiety is still a bit of an issue, I was talking to a mate who has a Tesla, he wishes he had stumped up the extra for the bigger battery. He lives 200klm from the city, can't make it there and back on a charge and he finds it a nuisance. I don't think it would be an issue for city dwellers.

 

[bellenuit]

I was a bit surprised only 2% of cars sold in the U.S are electric, 7% in the U.K and only 10% in Europe when you consider Norway is in Europe.

But Norway has only 5.4 million people compared to Europe's 747 million. What is of interest though is the take up of electric bikes in Europe. It is far in excess of the take up of EVs. I don't have the figures to hand.

 

[sptrawler]

But Norway has only 5.4 million people compared to Europe's 747 million. What is of interest though is the take up of electric bikes in Europe. It is far in excess of the take up of EVs. I don't have the figures to hand.

Yes I find the electric scooters are more versatile then the electric bikes, it would be interesting, as you say to know the uptake figures on alternative transport in Europe.
It is also interesting in Norway, that E.V's don't attract GST which in Norway is 25%, also E.V's have no road taxes.
It would be interesting if Australia followed suit, maybe do a complete overhaul of the taxes and up GST from10% to 25%, then remove it from climate friendly products such as E.V's, solar installations, high efficiency HWS etc. That would probably have no negative affect on the tax base, but would give incentive to buy "green" products.

 

[Wedgy]

Australia is being portrayed as the worse country in the world with implementing reductions to CO2 emissions, which is probably true, but is it fair? The greenies like to use CO2 per capita to show how bad Australia is, ignoring that Australia is a resource rich country supplying the world, mining and agriculture being major contributors to Australia's CO2 emissions. But perhaps a better guide would be CO2 per square KM, if you think of each country's surface area as a bar heater, heating the planet with CO2. Then the following table is interesting and paints a different picture with Australia not so bad after all:

Nation or Territory	CO2 emissions per km2 (tonnes of CO2)	Total fossil CO2 emissions (million tonnes of CO2)
1. Singapore	89764.5	64.8
2. Bahrain	44689.6	34.5
3. Hong Kong	38978.8	43.0
4. Qatar	11180.3	129.8
5. Trinidad and Tobago	7933.2	40.7
6. Taiwan	7502.1	271.5
7. South Korea	6148.1	616.1
8. Kuwait	5858.2	104.4
9. Netherlands	3859.2	164.0
10. Belgium	3279.5	100.1
11. Israel	3204.3	66.6
12. Japan	3189.4	1205.1
13. United Arab Emirates	2796.5	231.8
14. Germany	2239.0	799.4
15. Lebanon	1879.5	19.5
16. Brunei Darussalam	1772.4	10.2
17. United Kingdom	1571.4	384.7
18. Czech Republic	1368.1	107.9
19. Italy	1180.0	355.5
20. Poland	1044.5	326.6
21. China	1025.2	9838.8
22. Switzerland	970.6	40.1
23. Austria	833.9	69.9
24. Denmark	801.7	34.6
25. Malaysia	772.0	254.6
26. India	750.3	2466.8
27. Slovakia	724.5	35.4
28. Slovenia	720.6	14.6
29. France	651.3	356.3
30. Bangladesh	611.5	88.1
31. Viet Nam	603.3	198.8
32. Portugal	593.8	54.9
33. Greece	576.0	76.0
34. Turkey	573.8	447.9
35. Ireland	565.4	39.7
36. Spain	557.5	281.4
37. USA	547.1	5269.5
38. Hungary	541.2	50.3
39. Bosnia and Herzegovina	521.2	26.6
40. Serbia	510.3	45.1
41. North Korea	481.3	58.0
42. Iraq	444.9	194.5
43. Bulgaria	442.4	49.1
44. Azerbaijan	441.2	38.2
45. Estonia	438.0	19.8
46. Dominican Republic	436.5	21.3
47. Philippines	425.4	127.6
48. Iran	408.0	672.3
49. South Africa	374.1	456.3
50. Sri Lanka	352.7	23.1
51. Ukraine	351.4	212.1
52. Thailand	350.1	330.8
53. Romania	336.8	80.0
54. Cuba	329.3	36.5
55. Saudi Arabia	323.9	635.0
56. Oman	306.8	65.2
57. Croatia	303.9	17.2
58. Belarus	295.6	61.4
59. Indonesia	253.6	486.8
60. Mexico	248.6	490.3
61. Pakistan	247.3	198.8
62. Jordan	231.4	21.4
63. Uzbekistan	221.3	99.0
64. Egypt	218.3	218.7
65. Lithuania	205.4	13.4
66. Guatemala	191.7	20.9
67. Venezuela	175.0	159.6
68. Tunisia	172.0	28.1
69. Georgia	157.1	11.0
70. Syria	150.7	27.9
71. Turkmenistan	148.9	72.7
72. Morocco	140.5	62.7
73. Norway	138.3	44.8
74. Ecuador	136.8	38.8
75. Finland	135.9	46.0
76. New Zealand	134.0	36.0
77. Panama	128.6	10.1
78. Nigeria	116.2	107.3
79. Chile	111.8	84.6
80. Kazakhstan	107.7	292.6
81. Russian Federation	99.1	1692.8
82. Honduras	95.2	10.7
83. Sweden	92.2	41.5
84. Argentina	73.8	204.3
85. Colombia	71.3	81.2
86. Ghana	70.0	16.8
87. Algeria	63.2	150.6
88. Canada	57.4	572.8
89. Brazil	55.9	476.1
90. Australia	53.7	413.1
91. Kyrgyzstan	52.6	10.4
92. Peru	50.4	64.8
The Whole World	242.7	36153.3

Note: Those nations or territories with less than 50 tonnes of fossil CO2 emissions per square kilometer and those with a total of less than 10 million tonnes of fossil CO2 emissions are not included.