Pakistan vs United States: GHG emissions from food systems, by gas (Mt CO2 eq) - Methane

Pakistan
190,684
in 2015
United States
362,114
in 2015
Pakistan rank
6th
United States rank
4th

GHG emissions from food systems, by gas (Mt CO2 eq) - Methane over time

  • Pakistan
  • United States
100.0k200.0k300.0k400.0k199020022015

How they compare

United States currently reports 362,114 against 190,684 in Pakistan, a difference of 171,430.

That makes United States's figure about 1.9 times Pakistan's.

Across all 26 years both countries report, United States has been ahead every year.

Pakistan ranks 6th and United States ranks 4th of 204 countries.

United States has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Pakistan United States Difference Ahead
1990s 110,887 380,572 269,685 United States
2000s 140,840 358,531 217,690 United States
2010s 177,163 355,384 178,220 United States

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher ghg emissions from food systems, by gas (mt co2 eq) - methane, Pakistan or United States?
United States, at 362,114 against 190,684 in Pakistan as of 2015.
What is the difference in ghg emissions from food systems, by gas (mt co2 eq) - methane between Pakistan and United States?
171,430, with United States ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Pakistan and United States?
26 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2015.
How do Pakistan and United States rank globally for ghg emissions from food systems, by gas (mt co2 eq) - methane?
Pakistan ranks 6th and United States ranks 4th of 204 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Tubiello, F.N. and Leip, A. EDGAR-FOOD data. Figshare, doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13476666 (2021), published as GHG emissions from food systems, by gas (Mt CO2 eq) - Methane. 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

Pakistan vs United States: GHG emissions from food systems, by gas (Mt CO2 eq) - Methane. Statizoid, drawing on Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Tubiello, F.N. and Leip, A. EDGAR-FOOD data. Figshare, doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13476666 (2021). Retrieved 01 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/ghg-emissions-from-food-systems-by-gas-mt-co2-eq-methane/pakistan/united-states/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/ghg-emissions-from-food-systems-by-gas-mt-co2-eq-methane/pakistan/united-states/">Pakistan vs United States: GHG emissions from food systems, by gas (Mt CO2 eq) - Methane</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
GHG emissions from food systems, by gas (Mt CO2 eq) - Methane
Source
Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Tubiello, F.N. and Leip, A. EDGAR-FOOD data. Figshare, doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.13476666 (2021)
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
204 places, 5,304 data points, 1990–2015
Last refreshed

GHG emissions from food systems disaggregated by gas are generated from EDGAR-FOOD, a global emission inventory of GHGs from the food systems. EDGAR-FOOD has been developed to aid the understanding of the activities underlying the energy demand and use, agriculture and land use change emissions associated with the production, distribution, consumption and disposal of food through the various stages and sectors of the composite global food system. These data were complemented with data from the FAOSTAT database on GHG emissions from land use related to agriculture (FAO, 2020). EDGAR-FOOD represents the first database consistently covering each stage of the food chain for all countries with yearly frequency for the period 1990-2015. Details regarding the methodology applied are available in Crippa et al. (2021).