New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Heat Is on These Countries for the Heat

A new analysis calculates each of the world's countries total amount of CO2 pollution, along with responsibility for the ensuing global warming

 

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


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.


Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have now touched 400 parts per million—and keep rising. So who's responsible?
 
Scientists peg the start of this seemingly inexorable rise to about 1750, when people started burning coal to run steam engines. But the CO2 increase also stems from activities like clearing forestlands for farming.

Now a new analysis assigns national blame for CO2 pollution and its ensuing global warming.
The seven biggest contributors—both historically and today—are, in alphabetical order: Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States.  The report is in the journal Environmental Research Letters. [H. Damon Matthews et al., National contributions to observed global warming]

The undisputed champion of greenhouse gas pollution is no surprise: the U.S. Our emissions to date mean we’re responsible for 0.15 degree Celsius of the 0.8 degree Celsius rise in global average temperatures: 19 percent of the total. That’s more than twice as much as the next highest country, China. The worst polluting country per person? The tiny U.K.
 
Unfortunately, China looks set to pass the U.S., unless their reliance on coal changes in short order. As for us, after several years of our greenhouse gas pollution falling, CO2 emissions rose again in 2013. Here’s one area in which the U.S. shouldn’t want to lead.

—David Biello

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
 

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe