The Philippines beats Malaysia in climate change performance (what about the rainforests?)
2014
The Philippines is Contribution Free in ClimatePositions while Malaysia was the 36th worst performing country out of 145 in 2010. In 2014, the Malaysian Climate Contribution (climate debt) increased to $997 per capita and the present ranking is 31st (see ‘here’). The first diagram (below) illustrates the typical correlation between rapid economic growth and loss of sustainability that increases climate debt. The Malaysian climate debt, computed as a percentage of GDP(ppp-$) annually since 2000 increased from 0.38% in 2010 to 0.41% in 2014 (see the ranking ‘here’). This clearly demonstrates the lack of sustainable growth. The following examines the indicators of CO2 Emissions, Ecological Footprint, Forest Area and Marine Protection of the Philippines and Malaysia.
Climate change performance of Saudi Arabia and Yemen
2014
Saudi Arabia was the 12th worst performing country in ClimatePositions 2010 (see the ‘ranking’). In 2014 the total Climate Contribution (climate debt) of the rich authoritarian Islamic oil regime rose to $148 billion or 1.06% of the national GDP(ppp-$) annually since 2000 (ranked number 7; see ‘here’). The neighboring Yemen, the poor authoritarian Islamic regime is Contribution Free. The first diagram shows the development of GDP(ppp-$) of Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Qatar and the world average. The following examines the indicators: CO2 Emissions, Ecological Footprint and Environmental Performance of Saudi Arabia and Yemen.
Update of GDP(ppp-$) 2013
2014
The Climate Contributions (climate debt) in ClimatePositions increases with growing GDP(ppp-$)¹. The 2013 updates and adjustments back in time have now been released (see the ‘World Bank’). For some countries, this means large growth of GDP(ppp-$) since 2000 and thus large increases in Climate Contributions. In other words, the previous data tended to be too modest with respect to the wealth of many countries, in particular Iraq, Jordan, Indonesia, Kazakhstan and Egypt, and the rich authoritarian oil regimes Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The updated Climate Contributions per capita worldwide are available ‘here’ and in the spreadsheet in the menu ‘Calculations‘. See the Climate Contributions as a percentage of the annual GDP(ppp-$) ‘here‘.
Climate performance of Nigeria and neighboring countries
2014
Nigeria and the neighboring countries Benin, Niger, Chad and Cameroon are Contribution Free in ClimatePositions. Nigeria is the world’s 8th most populous country and the annual population growth rate since 2000 is 2.2% or almost twice the world average (see the first diagram). The following examines the indicators of Forest, GDP(ppp), Environmental Performance, Ecological Footprint and CO2 Emissions (carbon dioxide).
Climate performance: United Kingdom versus Ireland
2014
In ClimatePositions 2010, United Kingdom was the 26th worst performing country while Ireland was number 14 out of 145. The first diagram shows the two countries’ Climate Contributions (climate debt) per capita over time in comparison with the United States, China and the world average (note the logarithmic scale). See the changes in Climate Contributions per capita since 2010 ‘here’).
Climate performance of Asia, the Americas and Europe
2014
83 countries out of 145 in ClimatePositions are located in Asia, the Americas or Europe. The 83 countries represent 82% of the included population and they are responsible for 88% of the Climate Contribution (climate debt). The 145 countries represent 96% of the global population. The following compares the climate performance of Asia, the Americas and Europe. Also read the posts on ‘Africa‘ and ‘Australia‘.
Pisa scores, CO2 Emissions and climate debt
2014
510,000 15-year old students from 65 countries were Pisa tested and ranked in Mathematics, Reading and Science in 2012. The following compares the average Pisa scores with 1) CO2 Emissions per capita and 2) Increase in Climate Contributions (climate debt) since 2010. The question is this: Do the countries which successfully emphasize “clever students” also emphasize climate responsibility and reductions in CO2 Emissions? Or may the student’s impressive skills be aimed at other national goals, such as economic growth?
Climate performance of Israel, Occupied Palestinian Territories and neighboring countries
2014
Israel was the 16th worst performing country out of 145 in ClimatePositions 2010 with a Climate Contribution of $1,790 per capita (see the ranking in the menu “Calculation”). The Palestinian Territories (Gaza Strip and West Bank, both occupied by Israel) were in reality Contribution Free (though excluded from the inventory due to lack of indicator data¹). The following examines the statistics of Israel, the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and Egypt.
Climate performance of Mexico and neighboring countries
2014
The Mexican CO2 Emissions per capita over time are similar to the world trend (see the diagram) and Mexico is the world’s 12th largest CO2 emitter. Together with the neighboring countries Mexico represent the full range of Climate Contributions (climate debt) worldwide. The following examines the statistics of Mexico in comparison with United States, Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras.
Climate performance of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh
2014
India, Pakistan and Bangladesh are all Contribution Free in ClimatePositions. With 23% of the world population, and 54% of the Contribution Free population, the three populous countries are natural candidates of climate change compensation. Bangladesh is considered one of the most vulnerable to climate change – where millions are expected to be displaced due to flooding. A Global Climate Fund could lead aid efforts, but this idea seems to be “stone dead” since the major of atmosphere-poisoning countries refuse to finance the damages they cause (see the country list in the menu “Contributions”). However, India has to be cautious of its own climate performance in the coming years.
Climate performance: Libya versus Chad
2014
Libya was the 29th worst performing country out of 145 in ClimatePositions 2010 and thus the worst performing country in Africa (read more ‘here’). The authoritarian oil-regime’s Climate Contribution (climate debt) has increased to $819 per capita in the updated calculation. Chad is Contribution Free in spite of a surprisingly large Ecological Footprint (excluding CO2 Emissions) – see the diagram. The large footprint is partly due to large herds of commercial cattle, goats, sheep, horses and donkeys. The following examines the indicators: CO2 Emissions, GDP(ppp-$) and the Climate Contributions over time.
Climate performance: South Africa versus Botswana
2014
South Africa was the 38th worst performing country out of 145 in ClimatePositions 2010 while the neighboring Botswana was the 60th. The Climate Contributions (climate debt) were respectively $448 and $69 per capita (with the latest updates the amounts have increased to $592 and $84 per capita). See the relative Contributions in 2000, 2005 and 2010 in the diagram with the global average set at 100. Below we highlight some of the national indicators in the calculations.
2012 update of GDP in ClimatePositions
2014
The annual national GDP(ppp-$) (standard of living measured by purchasing power) has a direct impact on the Climate Contributions. Updating of GDP for 2011 and 2012 are now entered ClimatePositions (Excel) and for most countries, this means considerable increases in the Climate Contribution (climate debt). In connection with the GDP update, a minor simplification of the calculation method has been made (recent years are still weighted more than previous years in GDP+).
The diagram shows the updated (and revised) GDP(ppp-$) 2000-2012 for the five largest CO2 Emitters: China, United States, Russia, India and Japan.
Sweden with Nuclear Power and Norway with oilfields
2014
In ClimatePositions 2010, Norway was the 14th worst performing country – Sweden was number 30. See the relative Contributions per capita over time in the diagram. Norway, with only 0.07% of the world’s population, produces 2.80% of the world’s oil (crude extracted from reserves). In 2011, Norway was the world’s 14th largest oil producer. The neighboring country Sweden has no oil production but has the world’s largest Nuclear Power generation per capita.
The following examines the indicators: CO2 Emissions, Ecological Footprint, GDP(ppp-$) and Nuclear Power.
COP19 negotiating positions: China, United States, India, Russia and Japan
2014
The world’s five largest CO2 emitters – China, United States, Russia, India and Japan – are responsible for 57% of global CO2 Emissions (2006-2010) and 58% of the Climate Contributions (climate debt) in ClimatePositions 2010 (see the front diagram). Add to the group the populous Contribution Free countries Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Philippines and Ethiopia and the total share would almost reflect the world average of Population (56%), CO2 Emissions (59%) and Climate Contributions (58%). Leaders of these ten countries sitting around an imaginary negotiating table should be able to create a global climate agreement with binding CO2 reductions and full financing – but it will not happen!
The following depicts the submissions, basic statistics and negotiating positions at COP19 in Warsaw of the five largest CO2 emitters. See the five countries’ Contributions over time ‘here‘, the Contributions as a percentage of GDP ‘here‘ and read about the COP19 country groups ‘here‘.
Country groups and positions at COP19
2013
The negotiation process during COP19 in Warsaw in November 2013 was frustrating and largely fruitless and the following organizations and movements withdrew from the climate conference in protest: ‘Aksyon Klima Pilipinas‘, ‘ActionAid‘, ‘Bolivian Platform on Climate Change‘, ‘Construyendo Puentes‘ (Latin America), ‘Friends of the Earth‘ (Europe), ‘Greenpeace‘, ‘Ibon International‘, ‘International Trade Union Confederation‘, ‘LDC Watch‘, ‘Oxfam International‘, ‘Pan African Climate Justice Alliance‘, ‘Peoples’ Movement on Climate Change‘ (Philippines) and ‘WWF‘.
First step to understanding the inherent conflicts of interest in the COP process would be to examine the nature of the COP country groups (submission groups) – a detailed study of the complex negotiating proces is another matter.
Climate performance: France versus Spain
2013
France was the 26th and Spain the 23rd worst performing country out of 145 in ClimatePositions 2010. As illustrated in the above diagram, the difference in the Contributions (climate debt) has narrowed between 2005 and 2010. Both countries have improved three rankings since 2005. See the full country list in the menu “Contributions/Per Capita US$ Rank”. The following examines the CO2 Emissions, forest area, GDP(ppp-$) and the world’s shares (Population, CO2 Emissions, GDP and Climate Contributions) of the two countries.
Indonesia fails on deforestation and CO2 Emissions
2013
Indonesia was the 73rd worst performing country out of 145 in ClimatePositions 2010 with a total Climate Contribution (climate debt) of 5.6 billion US$. As shown in the front diagram Indonesia cut down the total forest cover (mainly rainforest) from 65.4% in 1990 to 52.1% in 2010. Had Indonesia maintained the forest cover since 1990, then the saving in Contribution would have been 4.6 billion US$. In the updated calculation the Contribution (debt) has increased to 6.5 billion US$.
Climate Contributions as a percentage of GDP for the top ten CO2 Emitters
2013
The top ten CO2 Emitters were responsible for 67% of the global CO2 Emissions in 2006-2010. Adjusting the national Contributions (climate debt) for the size of the GDP(ppp-$) is essential. Allowing the wealthy United States get away with paying the same dollar price of a ton of CO2 (carbon dioxide) exceeded as China is of course absurd. The countries’ climate change performances are measured indirectly as the Contributions’ percentage of the national GDP(ppp-$).
Climate performance: Germany versus Poland
2013
Germany was the 24th worst performing country out of 145 in ClimatePositions 2010 and Poland was the 46th. Five years earlier in 2005 the rankings were respectively 23th and 66th. The diagram shows the performance relatively with the global average set at 100. Germany has performed continuous irresponsible, though slightly less irresponsible in recent years and Poland seems to have given up all the good intentions around 2003. Below we highlight three of the national indicators in the calculations.