# 2023 US CO2 emissions from energy **URL:** \ **Category:** Macro Economic Trends and Risks\ **Created:** [March 28, 2024, 8:27pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/2023-us-co2-emissions-from-energy/103462 "2024-03-28T20:27:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![waterfell](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/waterfell/32/8050_2.png) [@waterfell](https://discussion.fool.com/u/waterfell)\ **Post date:** [March 28, 2024, 8:27pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/2023-us-co2-emissions-from-energy/103462/1 "2024-03-28T20:27:12Z")
EIA recently published the year-end energy-related CO2 emissions numbers for 2023 for the US. CO2 emissions from coal combustion continues to go down, while natural gas continues to go up. CO2 from burning oil products (gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, etc) is relatively flat, with a slight uptrend since the COVID-related economic disruptions of 2020. The decrease in CO2 from coal was larger than the increases from natural gas and oil, so the overall trend was down for last year. Units are in Million Metric Tons of CO2. ``` US CO2 emissions, all sectors Year Coal NatGas Oil Total 2017 1318 1471 2332 5132 2018 1263 1627 2377 5278 2019 1078 1685 2374 5147 2020 876 1653 2044 4584 2021 1003 1656 2235 4905 2022 939 1742 2249 4941 2023 781 1756 2259 4807 ``` EIA pdf link [here](https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec11_3.pdf). Petroleum products remain the leading source of CO2 in the US. Those products are mostly consumed in the transportation sector. Note: In these tables, there are a few minor sources of CO2 that are not included, so the sum of coal, natural gas and oil does not quite equal the total. In the electricity sector, natural gas is now the leading source of CO2. Last year was the first time natural gas produced more CO2 than coal in the power sector. ``` US CO2 emissions, electric power sector Coal NatGas Oil Total 2017 1207 506 19 1743 2018 1153 578 22 1764 2019 974 617 16 1618 2020 788 635 16 1450 2021 910 613 18 1551 2022 851 659 21 1542 2023 697 705 14 1427 ``` EIA link [here](https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec11_9.pdf). The current government administration has a goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 50% by 2030 (from 2005 levels) and to get to net zero by 2050. Based on past and current trends, there is little chance of either of those things happening. CO2 from energy is only a part of total greenhouse gas releases, but the CO2 portion needs to be greatly reduced to achieve overall reductions. The increasing reliance on natural gas to provide dispatchable, reliable power generation guarantees the US will keep emitting large amounts of CO2 into the foreseeable future. Reliance on oil for transportation will continue. For natural gas, there is also the issue of fugitive emissions of methane along the production supply line. That methane is also a significant greenhouse gas. - Pete ---
**Author:** ![waterfell](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/waterfell/32/8050_2.png) [@waterfell](https://discussion.fool.com/u/waterfell)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2024, 9:54pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/2023-us-co2-emissions-from-energy/103462/2 "2024-03-30T21:54:24Z")
If we take the total US energy related [CO2 emissions for 2023](https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec11_3.pdf) and divide by the estimated population for 2023, we get (4807 million tonnes / 334.9 million people) = 14.4 tonnes per capita. This is down slightly from recent years, but is still high compared to other industrialized nations. Below is a short list for comparison. The US is for 2023. All other nations are for 2022, as reported in [this link](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita), but shouldn’t be too much different for 2023. Also, the link provided might include small sources such as cement manufacture and other industrial sources. ``` Tonnes CO2 per capita United States 14.4 Canada 14.2 United Kingdom 4.7 Germany 8.0 France 4.6 Russia 11.4 China 8.0 Australia 15.0 Japan 8.5 South Korea 11.6 ``` India (2 tonnes per capita) is somewhat lower than the countries listed above, but India’s per capita GDP is still low. It should also be noted that both China and India have increasing trends on the amount of CO2 emitted per year, whereas most other nations have declining trends. **On an absolute basis, China emits more than twice as much CO2 per year than the US, and India is catching up.** ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Looking at the electricity sector, the best metric for comparison is grams of CO2 emitted per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated. US [tonnes of CO2](https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec11_9.pdf) in the electricity sector US [kwh of electricity](https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=table_1_01) (Small scale solar in included in the total.) The US electric power CO2 intensity for 2023 was 336 grams per kwh. Looking at previous years, we can see a declining trend. ``` Year Grams of CO2 per kwh 2017 429 2018 419 2019 388 2020 358 2021 373 2022 359 2023 336 ``` The decreasing trend in the US is largely due to replacing coal-fired power generation with natural gas-fired power plants. The increasing amounts of wind and solar renewable energy also contribute to a decrease in CO2 intensity. However, since natural gas is still a fossil fuel, and natural gas is needed to back up the intermittent renewable sources, there is a limit as to how low the US power grid CO2 intensity can go. Below are some comparisons. (Again, the US is for 2023. All other countries are for 2022, from the [link here](https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/carbon-intensity-electricity).) ``` United States 336 gramsCO2/kwh Canada 126 United Kingdom 261 Germany 385 France 85 Russia 364 China 534 Australia 502 Japan 495 South Korea 438 ``` - Pete ---
**Author:** ![Leap1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/leap1/32/72176_2.png) [@Leap1](https://discussion.fool.com/u/Leap1)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2024, 12:25am UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/2023-us-co2-emissions-from-energy/103462/3 "2024-03-31T00:25:08Z")
Heard something interesting this morning on NPR. The US utilities price against Nat Gas. Meaning it is assumed nat gas prices are the main price determinant. They are not in many instances the main determinant. Renewables are being undercounted. ---
**Author:** ![waterfell](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/waterfell/32/8050_2.png) [@waterfell](https://discussion.fool.com/u/waterfell)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2024, 9:01pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/2023-us-co2-emissions-from-energy/103462/4 "2024-03-31T21:01:27Z")
> [@Leap1](#): > > Heard something interesting this morning on NPR. The US utilities price against Nat Gas. Meaning it is assumed nat gas prices are the main price determinant. Natural gas is the [largest source](https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=table_1_01) of electric power generation in the US (over 40%), and fuel costs are the largest part of total operating costs. Therefore, yes, the price of natural gas is a driver for the price of electricity. Operating expenses for US electric power generation: > **[SAS Output](https://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa_08_04.html)** In the link above, for Fossil Steam, fuel costs 3.2 cents/kwh, or 73% of total Operation, Maintenance and Fuel costs. If we look at the newer combined cycle gas plants, fuel costs are more than 80% of total O&M+F. Nuclear, on the other hand, is about 27% for fuel, 46% operation, and 27% maintenance. This doesn’t include the amortized costs of construction and other capital expenses. Since the intermittent renewables are so unreliable, they always need to have gas, coal, hydro or nuclear backup in order to keep the lights on. The most common form of backup in the US is natural gas, so the renewables producers would like to have gas prices remain low. Will they remain low forever? I’m guessing probably not. - Pete ---
**Author:** ![Leap1](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/leap1/32/72176_2.png) [@Leap1](https://discussion.fool.com/u/Leap1)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2024, 10:55pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/2023-us-co2-emissions-from-energy/103462/5 "2024-03-31T22:55:48Z")
There are interesting dynamics in that conversation. Batteries are not up to snuff. If they were renewables would master it all. That is part of the dynamics.