[Petrochemicals (OP)]

I was looking for this as Mr Kerry is asking everyone to cut their omissions more. Now my first reaction was that a USA politician lecturing anyone about carbon emissions is a bit of a joke, far beyond hypocrisy. But being the fair minded and well balanced individual I am, I remembered its not about emmisions but about carbon footprints, countries carbon emissions such as china are partly  "Embodied" carbon in manufacturing and transport of other countries consumer purchaces, you can't shoot the messenger after all.

Only thing is I cannot find any information on it, lots of emissions divided by populace, but no carbon footprint

[alancalverd]

The only meaningful definition or measure of carbon footprint is indeed the CO2 emission per capita of a given population. If the population sample is large enough, it will include all associated industries and the export thereof. Clearly in the case of China a considerable amount of raw material is imported, but you have to assign that to the country of export to avoid double counting.

The big emitters cheat by buying "carbon credits". Iceland has almost no native CO2-emitting industry so can sell its credits  to places like China, or host Chinese smokestack industries to bring its per capita emissions up to a world average.

 

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

The only meaningful definition or measure of carbon footprint is indeed the CO2 emission per capita of a given population. If the population sample is large enough, it will include all associated industries and the export thereof. Clearly in the case of China a considerable amount of raw material is imported, but you have to assign that to the country of export to avoid double counting.

The big emitters cheat by buying "carbon credits". Iceland has almost no native CO2-emitting industry so can sell its credits  to places like China, or host Chinese smokestack industries to bring its per capita emissions up to a world average.

 

I really do not believe the statistics Alan include exports and imports. China for example consumes more in energy per capita than the U. K. but it doesn't seem likely unless China are attributed carbon for export manufacturing. Germany, another manufacturer is significantly above the uk event hough they are very up on eco issues having a very large and powerful green party.

[alancalverd]

The carbon footprint includes all emissions whether for export or home consumption of the end product. You may be confused by the notion of "exported carbon" - the carbon credits purchased from places like Iceland, Norway and Switzerland whose industries use very little, are deducted from the actual emissions. Since Kyoto, almost all heavy industry has been centered on China and India, which were exempt. 

German's "green credentials" are effectively limited to phasing out nuclear power, from 20% of total electricity to zero. The balance has been made up by burning coal and biofuels.

Yes, folks, it's all bullshit, and will be until the coal runs out.

[evan_au]

I thought that the accounting for carbon footprint/equivalent CO₂ was based on how much was emitted into the atmosphere by each country (and then divided by the population of that country).

Australia is a fairly small nation (population around 25 million), but we do export a lot of coal and iron ore to China and natural gas to various places. I was under the impression that:
- The CO₂ produced in digging up the coal (which is mostly carbon) is counted against Australia
- The CO₂ produced by burning coal for electricity generation in Australia  is counted against Australia
- The CO₂ produced in burning the coal and natural gas to produce electricity in China is counted against China, as is the CO₂ emitted in turning iron ore into steel.

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

The carbon footprint includes all emissions whether for export or home consumption of the end product. You may be confused by the notion of "exported carbon" - the carbon credits purchased from places like Iceland, Norway and Switzerland whose industries use very little, are deducted from the actual emissions. Since Kyoto, almost all heavy industry has been centered on China and India, which were exempt. 

German's "green credentials" are effectively limited to phasing out nuclear power, from 20% of total electricity to zero. The balance has been made up by burning coal and biofuels.

Yes, folks, it's all bullshit, and will be until the coal runs out.

It does not add up Alan, me as a UK resident with car planes etc, uses less carbon than the average China resident. I may well try and emigrate to China for the higher standard of living if true. Germany have a long history of green issue policy, the "passuvehaus" isn't spelt like that because of Facebook fashion.

https://www.passivhaustrust.org.uk/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

Nope the statistics are not taking the products into account, such as bmws and anything made in china.

[Petrochemicals (OP)]

I thought that the accounting for carbon footprint/equivalent CO₂ was based on how much was emitted into the atmosphere by each country (and then divided by the population of that country).

Australia is a fairly small nation (population around 25 million), but we do export a lot of coal and iron ore to China and natural gas to various places. I was under the impression that:
- The CO₂ produced in digging up the coal (which is mostly carbon) is counted against Australia
- The CO₂ produced by burning coal for electricity generation in Australia  is counted against Australia
- The CO₂ produced in burning the coal and natural gas to produce electricity in China is counted against China, as is the CO₂ emitted in turning iron ore into steel.

Yes I think that is it, but Australia buys alot of produce from China. It doesn't look like it, not from the look of the statistics Evan, if the uk citizen is less impacting than the Chinese citizen, I will eat my hat!

[alancalverd]

uses less carbon than the average China resident.

Your personal consumption is almost certainly more than the average Chinese resident. But the UK has almost no heavy industry, a significant proportion of nuclear and wind generated electricity, and only two tiny functioning coal mines. 

It takes around 1.5 tons of CO2 to produce a ton of steel and 1 ton of CO2 per ton of concrete, which is why HS2 is an environmental disaster compared with air travel. But there is very little major construction work going on in the UK compared with China where they lay about 2000  miles of new high speed track per year, compared with 10 miles of corrupt and overpriced nonsense per year in the UK. And China supplies most of the track and rolling stock for the rest of the world, apart from India, which supplies most of the sheet steel for everyone else and is also building massive concrete infrastructure.