Denmark vs Libya: Savanna fires — Emissions
Savanna fires — Emissions over time
- Denmark
- Libya
How they compare
Denmark currently reports 0 kt against 0 kt in Libya, a difference of 0 kt.
The two have swapped places 6 times across 34 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Libya ahead.
Denmark ranks 142nd and Libya ranks 142nd of 216 countries.
Across the 4 decades both report, Denmark averaged higher in 1 and Libya in 3.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Denmark | Libya | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 0.0007 kt | 0.0086 kt | 0.0078 kt | Libya |
| 2000s | 0.0028 kt | 0.0019 kt | 0.0009 kt | Denmark |
| 2010s | 0 kt | 0.0176 kt | 0.0176 kt | Libya |
| 2020s | 0 kt | 0.0035 kt | 0.0035 kt | Libya |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher savanna fires — emissions, Denmark or Libya?
- Denmark, at 0 kt against 0 kt in Libya as of 2023.
- What is the difference in savanna fires — emissions between Denmark and Libya?
- 0 kt, with Denmark ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Denmark and Libya?
- 34 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2023.
- How do Denmark and Libya rank globally for savanna fires — emissions?
- Denmark ranks 142nd and Libya ranks 142nd of 216 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Savanna fires — Emissions (CH4). 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 Totals summarizes the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions disseminated in the FAOSTAT Climate Change domains of emissions from agrifood 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). Emissions from other economic sectors as defined by the IPCC are also disseminated in the domain for completeness. Methodological details can be found at: https://files-faostat.fao.org/production/GT/GT_en.pdf