The graph I created is one that shows the annual CO2 emissions per capita per U.S. State with data up until 2017.
(I couldn’t get the chart to upload with better quality for some reason, so please use this link instead to view it as a PDF)
In metric tonnes, this data helps to show the amount of CO2 emissions produced per state per person. When looking at this graph, it is very easy to see where the high amounts of CO2 emissions per capita are found: states like Wyoming, North Dakota, and Alaska stand out as the worst offenders for CO2 emissions per capita. This is in contrast to states like New York, California, Oregon, and Maryland who comparatively have very small CO2 emissions per capita.
This could lead people to believe that states like Wyoming, North Dakota, Alaska, etc. are more responsible for the large CO2 emissions put out annually by the U.S. as opposed to states like New York, California, etc., but that would be incorrect. What this chart tells us instead is that states on this chart that appear to be putting out gargantuan amounts of CO2 are instead putting out large amounts of CO2 in comparison to their population. A state like Wyoming that has a relatively small population but large amounts of farming/agriculture could appear to produce extreme amounts of CO2 compared to a state like New York, when in reality New York could be putting out much more CO2, but due to its large population it doesn’t appear to be as extreme of a CO2 emitter as Wyoming.
WORKS CITED
https://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/state/analysis/
Very interesting to see Wyoming at the top. The graph you selected represents this very well.
I never would have guessed that Wyoming would have the greatest CO2 emissions per capita, but after you explained how the small size of the population affected this, it really made a lot more sense to me!
I would have also expected to see New York and California at the top, since you would think large cities such as NYC or Los Angeles would be the leading cause to CO2 emissions rising. You would have never thought that a state such as Wyoming would be the biggest contributor.
Incredible graphs. I thought that the diversity in the data helped me to understand how geographical differences contribute to the overall CO2 emission of the United States. Good job!
Wow! Your research is a very interesting material that needs to be studied in more detail. I would never have thought that Alaska would have the largest emission of CO2. I actually work in agricultural engineering and recently wrote this article https://engre.co/blogs/articles/what-is-an-agricultural-engineer/ and thought I should also add a few sentences about your research on CO2 emissions.
That cannot be https://nail-salonsnearme.com/pedicure-near-me/
such as a car part that can’t fit into a typical recycling bin or plastic bottles that are too large for a recycling bin.
Do you enjoy playing video games? With the added challenge, fall guys is a fun and enjoyable game for people of all ages. Compete against the other participants. Compete in congested areas and overcome obstacles chapters to win.
cool post
It is such an interesting and informative post, thank you for sharing the postKurt Russell Monarch Legacy of Monsters Jacket
This article not only provides a thought-provoking analysis of the graph but also encourages readers to delve deeper into the nuances of environmental data and understand the implications of population size when assessing a state’s contribution to climate change.khalidelarbi———-business for sale
I’m the administrator of the game website quordle game, and I want to thank you very much for the useful information you shared. Keep going, and know that I will always be here for you.