El Salvador vs Guatemala: Annual CO₂ emissions including land-use change, per square kilometre

El Salvador
442.58 tonnes per square kilometre
in 2024
Guatemala
461.53 tonnes per square kilometre
in 2024
El Salvador rank
64th
Guatemala rank
62nd

Annual CO₂ emissions including land-use change, per square kilometre over time

  • El Salvador
  • Guatemala
2004006008001.0k196119922024

How they compare

Guatemala currently reports 461.53 tonnes per square kilometre against 442.58 tonnes per square kilometre in El Salvador, a difference of 18.95 tonnes per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 10 times across 64 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Guatemala ahead.

El Salvador ranks 64th and Guatemala ranks 62nd of 192 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, El Salvador averaged higher in 1 and Guatemala in 6.

Head to head by decade

Decade El Salvador Guatemala Difference Ahead
1960s 202.35 tonnes per square kilometre 224.22 tonnes per square kilometre 21.87 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala
1970s 350.88 tonnes per square kilometre 281.28 tonnes per square kilometre 69.61 tonnes per square kilometre El Salvador
1980s 308.39 tonnes per square kilometre 499.41 tonnes per square kilometre 191.02 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala
1990s 407.8 tonnes per square kilometre 562.59 tonnes per square kilometre 154.79 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala
2000s 353.78 tonnes per square kilometre 504.6 tonnes per square kilometre 150.82 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala
2010s 314.78 tonnes per square kilometre 412.57 tonnes per square kilometre 97.79 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala
2020s 381.34 tonnes per square kilometre 447.93 tonnes per square kilometre 66.59 tonnes per square kilometre Guatemala

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher annual co₂ emissions including land-use change, per square kilometre, El Salvador or Guatemala?
Guatemala, at 461.53 tonnes per square kilometre against 442.58 tonnes per square kilometre in El Salvador as of 2024.
What is the difference in annual co₂ emissions including land-use change, per square kilometre between El Salvador and Guatemala?
18.95 tonnes per square kilometre, with Guatemala ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for El Salvador and Guatemala?
64 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2024.
How do El Salvador and Guatemala rank globally for annual co₂ emissions including land-use change, per square kilometre?
El Salvador ranks 64th and Guatemala ranks 62nd of 192 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Annual CO₂ emissions including land-use change, per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

El Salvador vs Guatemala: Annual CO₂ emissions including land-use change, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 13 November 2026, from https://climate.statizoid.com/compare/annual-co2-emissions-including-land-use-change-per-square-kilometre/el-salvador/guatemala/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://climate.statizoid.com/compare/annual-co2-emissions-including-land-use-change-per-square-kilometre/el-salvador/guatemala/">El Salvador vs Guatemala: Annual CO₂ emissions including land-use change, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Annual CO₂ emissions including land-use change, per square kilometre
Unit
tonnes per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
192 places, 10,987 data points, 1961–2024
Last refreshed

Annual CO₂ emissions including land-use change divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.