Because they shipped their industrial base overseas where they have much lax environmental regulations than in britain. Unless britain's quality of life sunk to

Because they shipped their industrial base overseas where they have much lax environmental regulations than in britain. Unless britain's quality of life sunk to 1890 level, their real contribution is far higher than 1890. After all britain's consumption has increased significantly ( on a per capita basis ) and their population has risen significantly since 1890. So an honest article would say britain's CO2 emissions has risen significantly since 1890. But it's probably just paid PR study with an agenda like almost all of climate related news is. Another PR on the frontpage. "Google says its carbon footprint is now zero" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24468892 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24468892 It's like how parts of europe "recycled" most of their plastic/trash... by shipping it to china. https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-recycling-china-trash-ban-forces-europe-to-confront-its-waste-problem/ https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-recycling-china-trash... Just paid PR nonsense. And I can't wait for PR about how great norway is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_produ... The top 5 oil producer on a per capita basis.