New study identifies UAE, Australia and USA as worst CO² polluters


With the 2010 UN climate talks due to start in Cancun on November 29th, a new study rating 183 countries on their CO² emissions from energy use has identified United Arab Emirates, Australia, USA, Canada, Netherlands and Saudi Arabia as the six nations with the worst performance in relation to CO² pollution.


The CO² Emissions from Energy Use Index (CEEI) is produced by global risk advisory firm Maplecroft to raise awareness and help companies identify their risk exposures. It also helps to identify those countries which may be subject to future regulation of CO² emissions or pressure from public interest groups to address emissions. The index is calculated by evaluating countries’ annual CO² emissions from energy use, CO² emissions per capita, and cumulative CO² emissions from 1900 to 2006 to provide a complete picture of a country’s CO² polluting record. UAE (1), Australia (2), USA (3), Canada (4), Netherlands (5) and Saudi Arabia (6) are bottom of the ranking and the only countries rated as ‘extreme risk’ by Maplecroft on the basis of their high CO² emissions from energy use.


The poor performance of UAE and Saudi Arabia is reflective of a near 100% reliance on fossil fuels and their use of energy intensive desalination plants to produce drinking water. Saudi Arabia was the 11th highest global emitter in 2008 with 466 MtCO². However, the desalination process that produces 70% of the country’s drinking water accounts for 50% of CO² emissions. UAE dropped 15 places from last year to take the bottom spot due to a huge 25% jump in its overall carbon output between 2006 and 2008 and a 20% rise in per capita emissions. Maplecroft recognises that desalination is a positive way to address water security but high emissions underline the need to find more energy efficient innovations.


Australia, last year’s worst performing nation, remains ahead of USA on per capita emissions with 20.82 tCO² per person against 19.18 tCO² per person for the USA. A vast majority of Australia’s electricity is sourced from coal (44.5%), which is a key factor in Australia’s per capita emissions and the carbon intensity of energy in the country, which is 20% higher than the global average. USA (3) and Canada (4) both achieved decreases in emissions per capita of 3.13% and 8.92% respectively, as well as reductions of 1.2% and 7.12% in their annual emissions from energy use. However, both countries remain extreme risk in the index.


The Netherlands is the only European country to be rated ‘extreme risk.’ Natural gas discoveries in the 1980’s saw consumer prices in the country drop, which pushed it towards a high carbon economy. Emissions have since increased due to sustained economic growth; with annual per capita rates of 15.86 tCO² and total emissions of 264.01 MtCO². Germany (13), UK (15) and France (24) all saw decreases in emissions between 2006 and 2008, but this could be attributable to the economic downturn and they are rated as ‘high risk’ due to both high emissions per capita and high historical emissions.


The world’s largest overall emitter of CO², China (26), is rated as high risk in the index. Despite the country registering the highest globally recorded CO² emissions in 2008 at 6533 MtCO², its per capita emissions are less than 20% of that in Australia, and its cumulative emissions of 99,204 MtCO² pale against the 323,916 MtCO² emitted by the USA since 1900. China’s recent high emissions reflect its huge economic growth, a reliance on coal as a fuel source, and large increases in the use of cars and household appliances throughout its population. China’s president, Hu Juntao, has responded with an ambitious call to cut emissions per unit of economic output by 40-45% of 2005 levels by 2020.


|12| ENVIRONMENT INDUSTRY MAGAZINE


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152