Australia vs South Sudan: Millet — Crop residues
Millet — Crop residues over time
- Australia
- South Sudan
How they compare
Australia currently reports 0.002 kt against 0.0019 kt in South Sudan, a difference of 0.0001 kt.
That makes Australia's figure about 1.1 times South Sudan's.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 12 shared years of data; in 2012 it was South Sudan ahead.
Australia ranks 40th and South Sudan ranks 42nd of 87 countries.
South Sudan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Australia | South Sudan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 0.0015 kt | 0.0017 kt | 0.0002 kt | South Sudan |
| 2020s | 0.0016 kt | 0.0019 kt | 0.0003 kt | South Sudan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher millet — crop residues, Australia or South Sudan?
- Australia, at 0.002 kt against 0.0019 kt in South Sudan as of 2050.
- What is the difference in millet — crop residues between Australia and South Sudan?
- 0.0001 kt, with Australia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and South Sudan?
- 12 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2023.
- How do Australia and South Sudan rank globally for millet — crop residues?
- Australia ranks 40th and South Sudan ranks 42nd of 87 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Millet — Crop residues (Indirect emissions N2O). 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 Crops provides estimates of emissions associated with crop processes, namely 1) crop residues, 2) burning of crop residues, and 3) rice cultivation and the application of nitrogen (N) fertilizers, including mineral and chemical fertilizers, to soils. Estimates are computed at Tier 1 following the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National greenhouse gas (GHG) Inventories (IPCC, 2006).