Developing Countries to Vastly Outpace OECD in Carbon Emissions

Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions from developing countries will be 127 percent higher than in the world's most developed economies by 2040, according to figures released Thursday by the U.S.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions from developing countries will be 127 percent higher than in the world's most developed economies by 2040, according to figures released Thursday by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Under the policies currently in place worldwide, carbon emissions will grow 46 percent by 2040 from a 2010 baseline, the EIA projected in its biennial International Energy Outlook.

Energy-related emissions will total around 45.5 billion tonnes in 2040, up from a reference level of 31.2 billion tonnes in 2010, said the agency, which is part of the U.S. Department of Energy.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Developing countries' carbon dioxide emissions will outpace emissions from the developed countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) over the next three decades due to their generally stronger rate of economic growth and continued use of fossil fuels.

The projection for developing countries' emissions to vastly exceed OECD emissions in 2040 compares with 2010, when non-OECD emissions exceeded OECD emissions by just 38 percent.

The fast economic growth of China and India over the coming years will play a central role in the global outlook for energy demand. "These two countries combined account for half the world's total increase in energy use through 2040," said EIA Administrator Adam Sieminski.

The report also projects that the carbon intensity of energy production will by 2040 have declined by 1.9 percent in OECD countries and by 2.7 percent in non-OECD countries from 2010 levels. Lower intensity levels mean there is less pollution produced per unit of economic output.

The EIA lowered its forecast of emissions in OECD countries in 2035 relative to its previous projection in 2011.

Although carbon emissions rose between the previous estimate and the current outlook in Japan, which had to substitute some of its lost nuclear capacity with fossil fuels after the 2011 tsunami, lower emissions in the United States due to a shift to shale gas and in the OECD nations of Europe offset the increase, said senior international energy analyst Linda Doman.

Multilateral international financial institutions, such as the World Bank and the European Investment Bank, have in recent weeks sought to lower fossil fuel use in developing countries and voted to curtail their investments in coal projects overseas.

(Reporting by Valerie Volcovici Editing by Ros Krasny and Eric Beech)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe