Puerto Rico vs Sao Tome and Principe: Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues, per

Puerto Rico
0 units per square kilometre
in 2019
Sao Tome and Principe
0 units per square kilometre
in 2019
Puerto Rico rank
165th
Sao Tome and Principe rank
165th

Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues, per over time

  • Puerto Rico
  • Sao Tome and Principe
00000196119902019

How they compare

Puerto Rico currently reports 0 units per square kilometre against 0 units per square kilometre in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0 units per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 59 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Puerto Rico ahead.

Puerto Rico ranks 165th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 165th of 184 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Puerto Rico averaged higher in 2 and Sao Tome and Principe in 4.

Head to head by decade

Decade Puerto Rico Sao Tome and Principe Difference Ahead
1960s 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre Puerto Rico
1970s 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre Puerto Rico
1980s 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre Sao Tome and Principe
1990s 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre Sao Tome and Principe
2000s 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre Sao Tome and Principe
2010s 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre Sao Tome and Principe

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher emission totals - indirect emissions (n2o) - crop residues, per, Puerto Rico or Sao Tome and Principe?
Puerto Rico, at 0 units per square kilometre against 0 units per square kilometre in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2019.
What is the difference in emission totals - indirect emissions (n2o) - crop residues, per between Puerto Rico and Sao Tome and Principe?
0 units per square kilometre, with Puerto Rico ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Puerto Rico and Sao Tome and Principe?
59 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2019.
How do Puerto Rico and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for emission totals - indirect emissions (n2o) - crop residues, per?
Puerto Rico ranks 165th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 165th of 184 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues, per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Puerto Rico vs Sao Tome and Principe: Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues, per. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 14 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/emission-totals-indirect-emissions-n2o-crop-residues-per-square-kilometre/puerto-rico-us/sao-tome-and-principe/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/emission-totals-indirect-emissions-n2o-crop-residues-per-square-kilometre/puerto-rico-us/sao-tome-and-principe/">Puerto Rico vs Sao Tome and Principe: Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues, per</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues, per square kilometre
Unit
units per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
184 places, 9,657 data points, 1961–2019
Last refreshed

Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.