Angola vs Libya: Forestland — Net emissions/removals (CO2) (Forest land)
Angola
-4.84 kt
in 2025
Libya
-5.01 kt
in 2025
Angola rank
111th
Libya rank
112th
Forestland — Net emissions/removals (CO2) (Forest land) over time
- Angola
- Libya
How they compare
Angola currently reports -4.84 kt against -5.01 kt in Libya, a difference of 0.17 kt.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 36 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Libya ahead.
Angola ranks 111th and Libya ranks 112th of 243 countries.
Across the 4 decades both report, Angola averaged higher in 1 and Libya in 3.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Angola | Libya | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | -0.0682 kt | 2.52 kt | 2.59 kt | Libya |
| 2000s | 2.38 kt | -3.86 kt | 6.24 kt | Angola |
| 2010s | -0.2494 kt | 1.81 kt | 2.06 kt | Libya |
| 2020s | -4.81 kt | -3.79 kt | 1.02 kt | Libya |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher forestland — net emissions/removals (co2), Angola or Libya?
- Angola, at -4.84 kt against -5.01 kt in Libya as of 2025.
- What is the difference in forestland — net emissions/removals (co2) between Angola and Libya?
- 0.17 kt, with Angola ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Angola and Libya?
- 36 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2025.
- How do Angola and Libya rank globally for forestland — net emissions/removals (co2)?
- Angola ranks 111th and Libya ranks 112th of 243 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Forestland — Net emissions/removals (CO2) (Forest land). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The FAOSTAT domain on Emissions from Forests consists of CO2 emissions and removals corresponding to forest carbon stock changes (aboveground and belowground living biomass). Estimates are computed following the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC, 2006).