Sudan vs Uzbekistan: Waste — Emissions (CO2eq) from CH4 (AR5)
Waste — Emissions (CO2eq) from CH4 (AR5) over time
- Sudan
- Uzbekistan
How they compare
Uzbekistan currently reports 7,672 kt against 7,392 kt in Sudan, a difference of 280 kt.
Across all 12 years both countries report, Uzbekistan has been ahead every year.
Sudan ranks 53rd and Uzbekistan ranks 50th of 232 countries.
Uzbekistan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Sudan | Uzbekistan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 5,792 kt | 6,646 kt | 854 kt | Uzbekistan |
| 2020s | 7,098 kt | 7,462 kt | 364 kt | Uzbekistan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher waste — emissions (co2eq) from ch4, Sudan or Uzbekistan?
- Uzbekistan, at 7,672 kt against 7,392 kt in Sudan as of 2023.
- What is the difference in waste — emissions (co2eq) from ch4 between Sudan and Uzbekistan?
- 280 kt, with Uzbekistan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Sudan and Uzbekistan?
- 12 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2023.
- How do Sudan and Uzbekistan rank globally for waste — emissions (co2eq) from ch4?
- Sudan ranks 53rd and Uzbekistan ranks 50th of 232 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Waste — Emissions (CO2eq) from CH4 (AR5). 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