Interactive Map: CO2 emissions by state per capita

A new report from the Center for American Progress, “The Clean and Clear Winners,” finds:

Just released data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration on carbon dioxide emissions per state in 2005 shows that renewable energy initiatives do pay off. The 10 cleanest states based on per capita emissions–in order, the District of Columbia, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Vermont, California, Idaho, New York, Oregon, Massachusetts, and Washington–have aggressive renewable energy and/or efficiency programs.

Click here for an interactive map to see how much carbon dioxide the average citizen in each state releases into the atmosphere each year.

6 Responses to Interactive Map: CO2 emissions by state per capita

  1. David says:

    I have a question about how these emissions were calculated. If state x manufactures concrete, and they export 5% of it to state y, how are the emissions from the manufacturing of that concrete allocated? Do they all goto state x, or do 5% of them goto state y?

  2. Rick C says:

    Wow, my state of Texas even beat California in annual CO2 emissions. It beat my birth state of New Jersey by 5 times! Joe is part of the CO2 emissions from the energy that goes into refined oil products that the other states then consume? If the energy costs were spread proportionally to the states that use Texas oil and gas would the CO2 emissions shift?

  3. alex says:

    Some of the statistics are, shall we say, surprising.

    How on earth do Wyoming citizens generate 124 tonnes of CO2 a year?

    From previous research I understood Texas to have both the highest total CO2 and the highest per-capita CO2, yet it comes out looking quite good on your chart.

    Alaska is high on the list. Is that why Palin isn’t big on GW?

  4. David B. Benson says:

    alex — Look under manufactoring and mining in

  5. alex says:

    DBB – Thanks. It shows that this way of calculating per-capita emissions is a bit meaningless. The CO2 for that big juicy steak should be attributed to the stockbroker in New York that ate it, not the farmer that grew it.

  6. ClaudeB says:

    The CO2 emissions per capita data is interesting, but I was surprised by some numbers after I played with the spreadsheet for a few minutes. Using a “Kyoto-style” calculation (emissions growth over the 1990 numbers), DC still rates in first place (the district actually decreased its CO2 emissions by 11.5% from 1990 to 2005), followed by Delaware (+0.3%), New York and Massachussetts (tied at +1.4%) and… Louisiana (+1.7%)!

    Using this metric, West Virginia rates 8th in the US with an increase of 6.1%, which is three times less than the US average of +19.2%. Yes the home of coal is among the biggest emitter per capita, but at least they seem to be doing something to slow the growth of CO2 emissions.

    Which brings me to some of the “10 cleanest states”. Yes, 11 t per capita is good, but some of these states have not been that good at limiting the growth of their emissions between 1990 and 2005: Idaho (+39.6%) or Oregon (+38.7%), are among the 10 worst as far as controlling emissions is concerned.