Belarus vs China, Macao SAR: Food Transport — Energy Use

Belarus
21.58 TJ
in 2023
China, Macao SAR
21.22 TJ
in 2023
Belarus rank
55th
China, Macao SAR rank
56th

Food Transport — Energy Use over time

  • Belarus
  • China, Macao SAR
0100200300199220072023

How they compare

Belarus currently reports 21.58 TJ against 21.22 TJ in China, Macao SAR, a difference of 0.36 TJ.

Across all 10 years both countries report, Belarus has been ahead every year.

Belarus ranks 55th and China, Macao SAR ranks 56th of 65 countries.

Belarus has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Belarus China, Macao SAR Difference Ahead
2010s 34.91 TJ 11.04 TJ 23.87 TJ Belarus
2020s 22.59 TJ 18.04 TJ 4.55 TJ Belarus

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher food transport — energy use, Belarus or China, Macao SAR?
Belarus, at 21.58 TJ against 21.22 TJ in China, Macao SAR as of 2023.
What is the difference in food transport — energy use between Belarus and China, Macao SAR?
0.36 TJ, with Belarus ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Belarus and China, Macao SAR?
10 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2023.
How do Belarus and China, Macao SAR rank globally for food transport — energy use?
Belarus ranks 55th and China, Macao SAR ranks 56th of 65 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Food Transport — Energy Use (Natural Gas, including LNG). 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

Belarus vs China, Macao SAR: Food Transport — Energy Use. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Retrieved 08 September 2026, from https://climate.statizoid.com/compare/food-transport-energy-use-natural-gas-including-lng/belarus/china-macao-sar/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://climate.statizoid.com/compare/food-transport-energy-use-natural-gas-including-lng/belarus/china-macao-sar/">Belarus vs China, Macao SAR: Food Transport — Energy Use</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Food Transport — Energy Use (Natural Gas, including LNG)
Unit
TJ
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
102 places, 2,449 data points, 1990–2023
Last refreshed

The FAOSTAT domain on Emissions from Pre- and post- agricultural production includes the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and related activity data, generated from pre- and post-agriculture production stages of the agri-food systems. Data are computed following the Tier 1 methods of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for National greenhouse gas (GHG) Inventories (IPCC, 1996; 1997; 2000; 2002; 2006; 2014). The domain includes methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), carbon dioxide (CO2) and CO2 equivalent (CO2eq) emissions from the above activities as well as the aggregate fluorinated gases (F-gases) emissions. Estimates are available by country, with global coverage and are updated annually.The FAOSTAT domain disseminates information estimates of CH4, N2O, CO2 emissions, F-gases, their aggregates in CO2eq in units of kilotonnes (kt, or 10^6 kg), and the underlying activity data. CO2eq emissions are computed by using the IPCC Fifth Assessment report global warming potentials, AR5 (IPCC, 2014). Data are available for most countries and territories, for standard FAOSTAT regional aggregations, and for Annex I and non-Annex I country groups.