Contributed by Robert Lyman © 2018


Link to Full Report:


Proponents of urgent action to reduce greenhouse emissions in Canada usually maintain that the countries of the world are all cooperating to sharply reduce emissions, and that Canada must not separate itself from the “international community”. The purpose of this note is to provide data from some authoritative sources to test the validity of these claims.


British Petroleum is one of the most expert and respected sources of statistics on historical and current energy supply, demand and emissions. It produces an annual Statistical Review of World Energy and makes it available without charge. The 2018 edition of the Review provides data concerning the carbon dioxide equivalent emissions from energy combustion from countries, regions and the whole world over the period 2007 to 2017 inclusive. From 2006 to 2017:


  • Global emissions increased by 3,365 megatonnes (Mt), from 30079 Mt to 33,444 Mt.
  • The only regions that reduced emissions over the past decade are Europe, the Russian Commonwealth (CIS) countries, and North America.
  • Emissions grew significantly in all other regions, but especially in the Middle East and Asia-Pacific regions.
  • The non-OECD countries increased their emissions by 4,547 Mt, almost four times as fast as OECD countries’ emissions declined.
  • Emissions in China and India alone increased by 3,000 Mt.
  • China’s emissions alone increased at the monthly rate of 166 Mt; the increases in China’s emissions every three and a half months exceeded Canada’s 2017 annual emissions.


Using data from the BP Statistical Reviews back to 1990, when governments began setting emission reduction targets:


  • The use of fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) grew from 7 billion tonnes of oil equivalent (Gtoe) in 1990 to 11.4 Gtoe in 2016.
  • The share of total world energy consumption held by fossil fuels declined from 88% to 86%; in effect, the world is “decarbonizing” at the rate of about 1% per decade, not urgently as claimed by proponents.


The International Energy Agency, in its Global Energy and CO2 Status Report of 2017, used a slightly different methodology than BP, but made similar findings. In 2017:


  • Global emissions grew by 1.4% to 32.5 Gt.
  • 72% of the growth in global energy demand was met by fossil fuels.
  • World oil demand rose by 1.6% (or 1.5 million barrels per day), exceeding the annual average rate on 1% during the previous decade.
  • Global natural gas demand grew by 3%.
  • Global coal demand grew by 1%, reversing the decline in the previous two years.


The continuing growth in global emissions is the complete opposite of what the U.N and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change claim is required to meet the goals set out in the 2015 COP21 Agreement in Paris. The continuing growth in emissions, driven by the desire of the developing countries for higher incomes and living standards, show that there is nothing countries like Canada can do affect the overall trends, regardless of the costs incurred.


Robert Lyman is an Ottawa energy policy consultant. He was a public servant for 27 years and prior to that a diplomat for 10 years.


  1. Ken Gregory

    The recent SR15 report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimated the costs of meeting the emissions target of 1.5 C above pre-industrial temperatures in the year 2030 is equivalent to a carbon tax median estimate of 880 US$/tCO2, and the 25%-75% estimate ranges from 330 to 1200 US$/tCO2. According to the average results of two integrated assessment models, being FUND and DICE, the benefit of the expenditure assuming an observation-based climate sensitivity of 1.6 C and assuming all climate change was human-caused is 4.2 US$/tCO2. However the DICE model grossly overestimates sea level rise compared to IPCC estimates, and contains only insignificant benefits of CO2 fertilization. The FUND models shows that CO2 emissions in 2030 are net beneficial even assuming that all warming is caused by humans. Including natural climate change, FUND estimates emissions cause a net benefit of 8 US$/tCO2. Therefore, limiting CO2 emissions is a complete waste of resources.

  2. Frank Bellini

    NOAA sea level data dating back to 1850s shows no impact from either the entire Industrial Revolution or recent spike in CO2.

  3. sterngardfriegen

    Yes, and tobacco, asbestos, lead and mercury are good for you, too. Thanks to British Petroleum for its expertise in developing, selling and lying about fossil fuels.

    • Harold

      Stern, Thanks for your non-sequitur.

Leave a Reply! Please be courteous and respectful; profanity will not be tolerated.

Privacy Policy Cookies Policy
©2002-2024 Friends of Science Society
Friends of Science Calgary