Chad vs China: Forest land — Carbon stock in living biomass, per capita
Chad
0 million t per person
in 2025
China
0 million t per person
in 2025
Chad rank
134th
China rank
136th
Forest land — Carbon stock in living biomass, per capita over time
- Chad
- China
How they compare
Chad currently reports 0 million t per person against 0 million t per person in China, a difference of 0 million t per person.
Across all 36 years both countries report, Chad has been ahead every year.
Chad ranks 134th and China ranks 136th of 200 countries.
Chad has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Chad | China | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0 million t per person | 0 million t per person | 0 million t per person | Chad |
| 2000s | 0 million t per person | 0 million t per person | 0 million t per person | Chad |
| 2010s | 0 million t per person | 0 million t per person | 0 million t per person | Chad |
| 2020s | 0 million t per person | 0 million t per person | 0 million t per person | Chad |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher forest land — carbon stock in living biomass, per capita, Chad or China?
- Chad, at 0 million t per person against 0 million t per person in China as of 2025.
- What is the difference in forest land — carbon stock in living biomass, per capita between Chad and China?
- 0 million t per person, with Chad ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Chad and China?
- 36 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2025.
- How do Chad and China rank globally for forest land — carbon stock in living biomass, per capita?
- Chad ranks 134th and China ranks 136th of 200 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Forest land — Carbon stock in living biomass, per capita. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Forest land — Carbon stock in living biomass divided by Population, total, matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.