Brazil vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change, per square

Brazil
16,434 tonnes per square kilometre
in 2023
Saint Kitts and Nevis
16,053 tonnes per square kilometre
in 2023
Brazil rank
97th
Saint Kitts and Nevis rank
100th

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

  • Brazil
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
05.0k10.0k15.0k196119922023

How they compare

Brazil currently reports 16,434 tonnes per square kilometre against 16,053 tonnes per square kilometre in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a difference of 381 tonnes per square kilometre.

Across all 63 years both countries report, Brazil has been ahead every year.

Brazil ranks 97th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 100th of 192 countries.

Brazil has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Brazil Saint Kitts and Nevis Difference Ahead
1960s 3,989 tonnes per square kilometre 2,510 tonnes per square kilometre 1,479 tonnes per square kilometre Brazil
1970s 5,412 tonnes per square kilometre 2,197 tonnes per square kilometre 3,215 tonnes per square kilometre Brazil
1980s 7,247 tonnes per square kilometre 2,694 tonnes per square kilometre 4,553 tonnes per square kilometre Brazil
1990s 9,480 tonnes per square kilometre 2,654 tonnes per square kilometre 6,827 tonnes per square kilometre Brazil
2000s 12,277 tonnes per square kilometre 5,205 tonnes per square kilometre 7,072 tonnes per square kilometre Brazil
2010s 14,539 tonnes per square kilometre 10,290 tonnes per square kilometre 4,249 tonnes per square kilometre Brazil
2020s 16,058 tonnes per square kilometre 14,980 tonnes per square kilometre 1,078 tonnes per square kilometre Brazil

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher cumulative co₂ emissions including land-use change, per square, Brazil or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
Brazil, at 16,434 tonnes per square kilometre against 16,053 tonnes per square kilometre in Saint Kitts and Nevis as of 2023.
What is the difference in cumulative co₂ emissions including land-use change, per square between Brazil and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
381 tonnes per square kilometre, with Brazil ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Brazil and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Brazil and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for cumulative co₂ emissions including land-use change, per square?
Brazil ranks 97th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 100th of 192 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Cumulative 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

Brazil vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change, per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 22 September 2026, from https://climate.statizoid.com/compare/cumulative-co2-emissions-including-land-use-change-per-square-kilometre/brazil/st-kitts-and-nevis/

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-per-square-kilometre/brazil/st-kitts-and-nevis/">Brazil vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Cumulative CO₂ emissions including land-use change, per square</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Cumulative 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, 10,796 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Cumulative 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.