3 ms·
Wait, what? In 2020, China was burning 82.27 exajoules, Germany 1.84 exajoules. Reference: https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate
by iwanttocomment 3y ago
Wait, what?
In 2020, China was burning 82.27 exajoules, Germany 1.84 exajoules. Reference: https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2021-coal.pdf https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/c...
According to their national censuses, China's population in 2020 was 1,419.9m. Germany's was 84.4m.
That's .0579 exajoules per million in China, .0218 per million in Germany. Looks like... less than half coal per capita in Germany?
There's some less reliable, more recent statistics, but nothing at all that hints that Germany is burning more coal than China per capita. Sources?
- kazinator 3y agoEven if it were true, per capita figures where the we are dividing by a vast number of people living in third-world conditions are disingenuous. If we are looking at any sort of pollution, we should only divide it by the headcount of those actual consumers who produce it. Not hundreds of millions of their countrymen who just pad the per capita denominator. In related news, Canada doesn't pollute that badly ... per square kilometer.
- iwanttocomment 3y agoAll righty then, at exajoule per million square kilometers, China's still way ahead burning coal at 8.572 versus Germany at 5.146. Canada burned only half an exajoule of coal in 2020 per my source quoted above. That's, uh, .013 exajoule per million residents, far below China or Germany, or .05 exajoule per million square kilometers, again far below China or Germany. So yeah, Canada doesn't pollute with coal that badly. Good job Canada. I still don't even know what "those actual consumers who produce it" is supposed to mean. Like, people who work at coal plants? Are you sentient?