Kazakhstan vs Philippines: Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change, gaps filled

Kazakhstan
18.97 billion tonnes
in 2024
Philippines
15.28 billion tonnes
in 2024
Kazakhstan rank
27th
Philippines rank
30th

Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change, gaps filled over time

  • Kazakhstan
  • Philippines
05.0B10.0B15.0B20.0B185019372024

How they compare

Kazakhstan currently reports 18.97 billion tonnes against 15.28 billion tonnes in Philippines, a difference of 3.68 billion tonnes.

That makes Kazakhstan's figure about 1.2 times Philippines's.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 118 shared years of data; in 1907 it was Kazakhstan ahead.

Kazakhstan ranks 27th and Philippines ranks 30th of 194 countries.

Across the 13 decades both report, Kazakhstan averaged higher in 10 and Philippines in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Kazakhstan Philippines Difference Ahead
1900s 1.36 billion tonnes 188.43 million tonnes 1.17 billion tonnes Kazakhstan
1910s 1.58 billion tonnes 838.37 million tonnes 737.06 million tonnes Kazakhstan
1920s 1.88 billion tonnes 1.79 billion tonnes 83.76 million tonnes Kazakhstan
1930s 2.06 billion tonnes 2.62 billion tonnes 559.62 million tonnes Philippines
1940s 2.29 billion tonnes 3.19 billion tonnes 898.88 million tonnes Philippines
1950s 3.83 billion tonnes 4.12 billion tonnes 297.35 million tonnes Philippines
1960s 6.37 billion tonnes 5.93 billion tonnes 441.80 million tonnes Kazakhstan
1970s 8.47 billion tonnes 7.61 billion tonnes 856.97 million tonnes Kazakhstan
1980s 10.85 billion tonnes 9.59 billion tonnes 1.26 billion tonnes Kazakhstan
1990s 13.11 billion tonnes 10.61 billion tonnes 2.49 billion tonnes Kazakhstan
2000s 14.20 billion tonnes 11.81 billion tonnes 2.38 billion tonnes Kazakhstan
2010s 16.33 billion tonnes 13.50 billion tonnes 2.84 billion tonnes Kazakhstan
2020s 18.42 billion tonnes 14.87 billion tonnes 3.55 billion tonnes Kazakhstan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher cumulative co₂ emissions including land-use change, gaps filled, Kazakhstan or Philippines?
Kazakhstan, at 18.97 billion tonnes against 15.28 billion tonnes in Philippines as of 2024.
What is the difference in cumulative co₂ emissions including land-use change, gaps filled between Kazakhstan and Philippines?
3.68 billion tonnes, with Kazakhstan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Kazakhstan and Philippines?
118 years are reported by both, from 1907 to 2024.
How do Kazakhstan and Philippines rank globally for cumulative co₂ emissions including land-use change, gaps filled?
Kazakhstan ranks 27th and Philippines ranks 30th of 194 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change, gaps filled. 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

Kazakhstan vs Philippines: Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change, gaps filled. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 21 September 2026, from https://climate.statizoid.com/compare/cumulative-co2-emissions-including-land-use-change-gaps-filled/kazakhstan/philippines/

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/cumulative-co2-emissions-including-land-use-change-gaps-filled/kazakhstan/philippines/">Kazakhstan vs Philippines: Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change, gaps filled</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change, gaps filled
Unit
tonnes
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
194 places, 21,015 data points, 1850–2024
Last refreshed

Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change with 79 missing years estimated by linear interpolation between the nearest real observations. Only gaps of 4 years or fewer are filled, and never beyond the first or last actual measurement — these are filled holes, not forecasts.