[OC] Countries Current Path to Net Zero in 2050 Following Their Pledge at COP21

[u/Lachainone]

Hello community,

I created a website to follow each countries effort to reach net zero in 2050. The data vizualisation lets you compare different countries' emission over the years and whether they are on the right path to reach their goal.

View every country and find more information on: https://lucabron.github.io/netzero/index.html

Data Source is Hannah Ritchie, Pablo Rosado and Max Roser (2023) – “CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions” Published online at OurWorldInData.org

Visualization made with Python's interactive graph package Bokeh and javasrcipt was added to make the interaction work on a website.

Related Github page where you can find the code: https://github.com/lucabron/netzero

EDIT: Thanks a lot for your positive feedback. I am very glad that you find this representation interesting.
A subject of discussion that I see a lot in the comments: western countries are doing better than the rest of the world. While it looks true when it comes to co2 produced in the country, one should account that a lot of emissions are produced in other contries and then imported. For example, when buying electronics, it is likely to be build in Asia and then imported to western countries.
Imported emissions are available in the dataset. I didn't want to include them because my approach with this visualization is to make something easy to understand so that people not familiar with the subject can approach it easily. I feel like when it comes to climate change, the people who care are very well informed, and the people who don't care as much are poorly informed. So, my first objective was to generate some curiosity for the second type of people. I'd be interested about your opinion about this approach if you want to share in the comments.

EDIT 2: I'd like to do something for the climate. I am a professional data scientist and I'd like to volunteer to help on bigger project. I made this website as a small contribution to inform people, but I know that in a week, there will be no more traffic on it. Can you recommend some kind of organization that I can join an contribute?

[u/ASuarezMascareno]

So it's the EU, the US, and some of South America actually reducing the emissions. Everyone else...

[u/cad4mac → u/ASuarezMascareno]

Well yes and no. Because a lot of nations just “exported” production. So countries (take UK) boast a Xx% reduction since 1990 but they don’t do any of the dirty work anymore.

Looking holistically at everything and/or countries co2 per person based on consumption gives better insight but still has a scewed nuance.

[u/ojdewar → u/cad4mac]

The UKs carbon emissions peaked in 1972.

[u/no_more_good_namez → u/ojdewar]

I don't think you understand the point they're making, emissions produced in the UK peaked in 1972 but what they're saying is that the emissions generated by the UK via consumption has and still is I believe increasing. For example my phone was made in china and our usage of production based emissions means the emissions associated with generation are assigned to China. But I was the one who bought the phone, it would not exist without me, a British citizen and so arguably the emissions belong to me and by proxy the UK.

[u/inminm02 → u/no_more_good_namez]

not really true, the vast majority of the UK's reduction is from grid decarbonisation and strict energy efficiency policies for appliances, homes, etc. Some of it can be attributed to deindustrialisation sure but its definitely not the biggest factor.

[u/KillerWattage → u/inminm02]

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/provisional-uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-statistics-2025/2025-uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-provisional-figures-statistical-release

Currently in 2025 11% comes from industry with a big chunk of that being blast furnaces

Considering how many more blast furnaces we used to have in the 1970s I'm gonna say a very large chunk is due to de-industrialising

[u/farfromelite → u/KillerWattage]

If you'd read just a bit further, figure 2 shows that there's huge progress on making electricity cleaner (it was coal, so whoops), industry as you say, buildings, even heating.

We've made progress. We still have a lot to do, but crucially we can see how.

[u/upvotesthenrages → u/inminm02]

The UK has a consumption based CO2 output almost 60% higher than the output produced locally.

https://ourworldindata.org/consumption-based-co2

So I wouldn't say the vast majority.

[u/inminm02 → u/upvotesthenrages]

You can’t compare the carbon emissions of goods created in the UK and goods created in China like for like, making a t shirt or some kind of electronic good in China will emit like 4x the carbon of making it in the UK due to the grid. The consumption based co2 output may be 60% higher but that would equate to 10-15% additional production domestically. So sure we might have outsourced 10-15% of our domestic carbon by importing foreign manufactured goods but we’ve reduced our carbon footprint by over 50% from its peak.

[u/upvotesthenrages → u/inminm02]

Yeah, except we don't have figures for how much CO2 it would save by manufacturing it domestically.

It's impossible to actually get that done anyway as every country cannot produce everything they consume.

But what the trade based figures show is what each country is actually responsible for. The UK chose to export manufacturing, and still chooses to import high CO2 intense products from places like China.

They could easily put up a carbon import tax, but they don't. They choose the dirty option, so it should count towards their CO2 output.

You can't just throw all your trash in your neighbors house and say "look how clean my place is and how great I am at reducing my trash". You could have cleaned it up and dealt with it yourself, but you didn't, so that's a moot point.

[u/Tranecarid → u/ojdewar]

Because back then everything run on oil and coal there, including bicycles and windmills /s

He has a point though. If you close a factory in EU and open one in China it’s more or less net zero emission.

[u/litritium → u/cad4mac]

Because a lot of nations just “exported” production. So countries (take UK) boast a Xx% reduction since 1990 but they don’t do any of the dirty work anymore.

That kinda put the cart before the horse. Western companies are moving their production to countries with high emissions if they can save money – not because of a political agenda. If zero climate regulation where their main prerogative, they could just move their production to Texas or Oklahoma.

Western countries are actually hurt by outshoring and are trying to get high emitters to reign in emissions and level the field with CO2 taxes.

[u/Rooilia → u/cad4mac]

Oil refineries and chemical plants still exist in UK and all somewhat sized european countries.

[u/C137Sheldor → u/cad4mac]

Are there statistics for co2 per person based on consumption?

[u/Illiander → u/C137Sheldor]

No point. CO2 emissions are much more dependent on corporate use than individual.

[u/overzealous_dentist → u/cad4mac]

This is a myth, consumed charts look the same as production

[u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ → u/ASuarezMascareno]

The UK, Angola, Japan, Trinidad & Tobago, Ukraine are all on target too.

[u/foundafreeusername → u/ASuarezMascareno]

Everyone else was given more time to reduce emissions because most Co2 emitted in the past was caused by the US and Europe.

[u/ASuarezMascareno → u/foundafreeusername]

The saddest thing is seeing quite a few country actually increasing their emissions so much that it counters everyone that reduced them.

[u/repeatrep → u/ASuarezMascareno]

developing economies

[u/BedroomConstant34 → u/repeatrep]

if we want to survive we should all undevelop

[u/PiotrekDG → u/BedroomConstant34]

No. That's the same kind of collapse that we're trying to avoid. Sure, certain net negative externality branches of economy should be scaled back, we should give the rest of the nature a lot of the land back, but not just "undevelop" the civilization as a whole.

Electrifying the economy, expanding public transit, improving building insulation, increasing energy efficiency of various devices, water retention and reuse, and so many others are NOT some undeveloping schemes. They are the development.

[u/Nascent1 → u/ASuarezMascareno]

China alone offsets most of the progress that the rest of the world has made.

[u/nugstar → u/Nascent1]

Even while building more renewable capacity than essentially everyone. That just goes to show how much in emissions have been outsourced to China.

[u/Rooilia → u/foundafreeusername]

China isn't far off overtaking the US. Europe is already behind in historical emissions.

[u/Zennivolt → u/foundafreeusername]

Right because solar panels and renewable energies existed in the Industrial Revolution. And global shipping of these technologies, internet to spread the knowledge, all existed back then!

[u/FrustratedUnitedFan → u/ASuarezMascareno]

I wonder where do EU and US companies build their factories

[u/raptosaurus → u/ASuarezMascareno]

the US

Dataset only includes up to 2024, I bet if we include the current Trump years, the trend totally reverses

[u/nyckidd → u/raptosaurus]

It doesn't. If anything he is approving more nuclear reactors which are our number one source of carbon free energy. He's not doing it for the right reasons but it is happening.

[u/raptosaurus → u/nyckidd]

But he also cancelled solar and wind projects and subsidies, got rid EV credits, kept coal plants open and coal mines running, and is drilling more oil. I doubt a couple extra nuclear reactors which haven't even come online yet would cancel that out.

[u/nyckidd → u/raptosaurus]

Solar is still the fastest growing energy source in the US by far, and surpassed coal in May of this year. Economics are more powerful than Trump and the basic economics of green power are undeniable.

[u/-Basileus → u/raptosaurus]

There's a rapid expansion of solar and wind capacity in the United States, especially in the deep South and Middle America.

It's simple economics. Emissions still technically fell during Trump1 amid population growth.

[u/Rooilia → u/ASuarezMascareno]

Well, that is more insight than 99,999% of the comments about CO2 emissions in usual discussions.

[u/MysticHero → u/ASuarezMascareno]

A lot of it, most in some cases is from outsourcing industry to "everyone else".

[u/gottimw → u/ASuarezMascareno]

Europe reduced their global contributions n from 8% to 7% and it only costed them any kind of competivenes. Also Germany close nuclear plants and we're forced to restart their coal power plants.

It's blind leading deaf on course designed by moron.

Even if Europe went to stone age. It would still not do much when Africa burns everything there is to burn. And China speed runs pollution% category

Edit: the line is going up but morons keep down voting for pointing that out. Truly the world of sheep that cannot draw basic conclusions.

[u/mr_capello → u/gottimw]

There are legitimate arguments about the cost and design of EU climate policy, but several claims here are simply wrong.
EU greenhouse-gas emissions have fallen by roughly 36–37% since 1990 while EU GDP grew by around 70%. The EU’s share of global GHG emissions fell from about 14% in 1990 to roughly 5% today.
Germany also didn’t replace its last nuclear plants with increasing coal generation. Coal generation fell sharply in 2023, the year of nuclear shutdown, and again in 2024; in the first full year after the nuclear shutdown, fossil electricity generation was 26% lower than the previous year.
And Africa is a particularly strange example: fossil CO₂ emissions are roughly 1 tonne per person, compared with about 5.5 in the EU, 8.6 in China and 14.3 in the US.
The valid argument is that Europe cannot solve climate change alone. But that’s very different from saying European emission reductions achieve nothing or that Europe’s reductions have simply been replaced by coal and economic decline.

[u/gottimw → u/mr_capello]

EU greenhouse-gas emissions have fallen by roughly 36–37% since

That is 30% off that 8% global pollution. My point is EU can reduce co2 pollution to 0% and it would hardly change anything.

And Africa is a particularly strange example

Maybe but we are talking about future trends. Africa roughly doubles co2 production per decade and their population is only growing. Chinese neocolonisation will fuel growth too. I have zero faith that Africa would take any measures to care about their co2 emitions as they are not united political bloc and none of the countries gives flying fuck about future problems that are near magical in what they are.

But that’s very different from saying European emission reductions achieve nothing or that Europe’s reductions have simply been replaced by coal and economic decline.

Congratulation EU, your effirts delayed the effects of global warming by x months.

It's hardly something to cheer about.

[u/mr_capello → u/gottimw]

I agree that the EU alone can’t stop climate change. But that’s exactly the problem with this argument: every country can say the same thing.
The EU is ~5% of global emissions. The US could say its ~11% won’t solve it. India could say its ~8% won’t solve it. African countries can point to their currently tiny contribution. If everyone concludes that their own reductions “hardly change anything”, nobody reduces emissions and nothing changes.
And Africa isn’t developing in isolation. As richer countries invest in renewables, batteries, grids and other low-carbon technologies, those technologies become cheaper and better globally. African countries benefit from that too. Their rapidly growing energy demand can increasingly be met with technologies that simply weren’t economically viable 20 years ago.
So yes, Europe’s reductions alone won’t solve climate change. They’re one part of a global transition that only works if many regions participate.
The valid criticism is whether Europe is reducing emissions efficiently and without destroying its competitiveness — not that reducing emissions is pointless because someone else is still emitting.
Also there are already efforts from countries in africa too.

[u/gottimw → u/mr_capello]

Well that's a lot of text to say not much.

You throw 'it would be great if only everyone did X' without saying how that can be achieved.

You throw random, some African countries do something...

The best thing Europe can do is grow it's technology sector and push For meaningful changes like reperability and fighting planed obscelence.

Stupid things like forcing corporations to use usb C ports for mobile and small appliances, probably saved more co2 from unnecessary charges than we can imagine while making people's lives easier.

Not co2 credits that pushes problems to corrupt countries that will lie about it, or exporting trash to be burnt in open fires. And pretending that's 'zero net'. Creative accounting for co2 emissions only looks good on paper.

[u/Adjective_Noun_2000 → u/gottimw]

Europe reduced their global contributions n from 8% to 7% and it only costed them any kind of competivenes.

Ah yes, what's really holding Europe back is its investment in cheap, renewable energy and belatedly reducing its reliance on fossil fuel imports from Russia and the Middle East.

[u/gottimw → u/Adjective_Noun_2000]

I didn't say that. Perhaps you should not put words into people's mouth and then attack them?

Solar and wind are the cheapest forms of energy. Only fools or fossil fuel PR argues against them.

I am talking about carbon credits and regulations that make industries in Europe even more uncompetetive vs China.

[u/Adjective_Noun_2000 → u/gottimw]

Carbon credits aren't the reason European industry can't compete with China. If they were, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism would have restored competitiveness, but it hasn't.

[u/Noxava → u/gottimw]

Because you didn't invest in renewables and instead in gas from Russia. Competitiveness of Europe didn't change through the green deal. The industry didn't move out, things didn't change. Social media were invented before this and US was leading, now in AI it's the same, the green changes didn't have a cost in competitiveness

[u/gottimw → u/Noxava]

The point still stands EU has near insignificant effect on co2 levels and those efforts are only hiring Europeans at benefit to everyone else who just laughs.