By the overall reduction in greenhouse gas emissions between 1990 and 2023, Latvia had the fourth-best result in the world. According to statistics compiled by the World Bank, Latvia's greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 were 66.6% lower than in 1990.
One of the European Union's most important indicators in implementing climate change policy is the volume of greenhouse gas emissions. Under the so-called European Climate Law (Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU) 2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’), the European Union's target is to reduce net domestic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 55% by 2030 compared with 1990 levels, while by 2050 the EU must become climate-neutral, meaning that net greenhouse gas emissions must reach zero.
The USA's new course
Since the start of this year, the United States government under President Donald Trump has begun pursuing a completely opposite policy, declaring that the main tenets of climate change policy are unscientific and not in the interests of the US. One of President Donald Trump's first executive orders after taking office (on 20 January 2025) concerned the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement (Executive order: Putting America First In International Environmental Agreements).
The order states: “The United States must grow its economy and preserve jobs for its people, while taking a leading role in global efforts to protect the environment. Over several decades, by pursuing sensible policies that do not restrict private-sector activity, the United States has simultaneously grown its economy, raised workers' wages, increased energy production, reduced air and water pollution, and cut greenhouse gas emissions. The United States' successful record in achieving both economic and environmental goals should serve as an example to other countries.”
In the order, the US president pledged that going forward the US would primarily pursue the interests of the United States and the American people, meaning the US would not enter into international agreements that “could harm the American economy or hinder its development”, or that would “unduly or unfairly burden the United States”. The order specified that the US ambassador to the UN must immediately submit a formal written notification of US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
“Yes!” to coal, “No!” to wind energy
Having renounced its international commitments, the US radically overhauled its energy policy. Under an executive order of 20 January 2025 (Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects), the licensing of new wind power stations and the extension of previously issued wind power licences in US territorial waters were withdrawn, while at the same time licences were allowed to be issued for extracting oil, natural gas and mineral resources off the US coast. An executive order of 8 April 2025 (Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending Executive Order 14241) mandated an increase in coal extraction: “To ensure the economic prosperity and national security of America, reduce the cost of living, and provide affordable and reliable electricity amid increasing electricity demand driven by new technologies, we need to increase domestic energy production, including coal production. Coal is abundant and affordable, and can be used in all weather conditions. Additionally, this industry has historically employed hundreds of thousands of Americans.
“America's coal resources are massive, their present-day value is estimated in the trillions of dollars, and they can do more than meaningfully advance America's energy independence, with any surplus able to be exported to support our allies and our economic competitiveness. Our nation's beautiful clean coal resources will be crucial to meeting rising electricity demand driven by the revival of domestic manufacturing and the construction of artificial-intelligence data centres. We must promote and support our nation's coal industry to increase our energy supply, lower electricity costs, stabilise our grid, create well-paid jobs, support rapidly growing industries and help our allies.” The new policy ended special support for so-called renewable energy and made coal extraction a US national priority:
“It is the policy of the United States that coal is essential to our national and economic security. It shall be the priority of the Federal Government to support the domestic coal industry by removing federal regulatory barriers that impede coal production, promoting the use of coal to meet growing domestic energy demand, increasing American coal exports, and ensuring Federal policy does not discriminate against coal production or coal-fired electricity generation.” At the same time, through several executive orders (Putting People over Fish: Stopping Radical Environmentalism to Provide Water to Southern California, Stopping Radical Environmentalism to Generate Power for the Columbia River Basin), the US president called for a halt (Stopping Radical Environmentalism) to so-called green extremism, halting what he considered unimportant nature-conservation measures that were harming people's interests.
Meanwhile, an executive order of 23 May 2025 (Restoring Gold Standard Science) pointed to entirely unscientific conclusions that had been used to pursue certain political goals.
The previous US administration's climate policy was not based on thorough and accurate scientific analysis. Of the many possible climate-change scenarios, the one supported was not the scenario with the highest probability of occurring but, quite the opposite – the “likely impact of climate change” was determined on the basis of a less probable, worst-case warming scenario.
The presidential order includes a reference to research (Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump is Restoring Gold Standard Science in America, The White House, May 23, 2025) showing that US climate policy was based on “the worst-case scenario, driven by highly implausible assumptions”. It also notes that “warnings from many scientists that the resulting output was misleading” were ignored.
It should be noted that the US president's executive orders in no way question the harm caused by industrial pollution or the need to reduce it, nor do they question the need to protect and preserve biodiversity. What is questioned is the link drawn between certain economic and business activities and very low-probability climate change (an extreme warming scenario), and there was also a firm demand to stop green extremists' actions in cases where, in order not to disturb the nesting site of a small bird population, significant harm was done to the water supply of millions of Americans.
How can emission volumes be compared?
Air pollution will arise in the economy of any country in the world, from any economic activity. Even burning ecologically clean firewood in a hearth or a campfire releases carbon dioxide and other gaseous products into the air as a result of combustion, including nitrogen and sulphur oxides, since nitrogen and sulphur are present in plant cells. Natural processes, and processes linked to the breakdown of waste, release carbon dioxide, methane and other gaseous compounds into the air as well. To compare different sectors of the economy – industry, agriculture, transport, construction, and so on –, an aggregate indicator is used internationally – the carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e), in which all the main gaseous substances that cause air pollution (including the greenhouse effect), in set proportions, are converted into an equivalent amount of carbon dioxide.
According to statistics compiled by the World Bank on greenhouse gas emissions in carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e), up until 2024 the US was the largest source of greenhouse gases in the world, considerably ahead of all EU member states combined. In 2005, China's greenhouse gas emissions were 6.26 billion tonnes CO₂e, the US figure was 5.9 billion tonnes CO₂e, while the EU's was – 2.7 billion tonnes CO₂e. Over the last 20 years China significantly increased its industrial output, and at the same time China's total greenhouse gas emissions also increased. The EU began implementing policy on a broad scale, giving greater priority to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Such priorities affected industrial output in the EU. In 2024, the EU's total industrial output, at constant 2010 prices, was only 11.6% higher than in 2008. Meanwhile, the EU's greenhouse gas emissions fell from 3.58 billion tonnes CO₂e in 2008 to 2.5 billion tonnes CO₂e in 2023. Over the same period, China's industrial output at constant prices was 2.68 times higher in 2023 than in 2008. At the same time, China's greenhouse gas emissions rose from 7.8 billion tonnes CO₂e in 2008 to 13.26 billion tonnes CO₂e in 2023.
The European Union has a negligible impact on CO₂ volumes
Purely mathematically, even if the EU could quickly reduce its total greenhouse gas emissions by 50% relative to the 2023 level, that still would not offset the increase in greenhouse gas emissions in China alone between 2019 and 2023.
In 2023, China was the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the world. China's emissions were 13.26 billion tonnes CO₂e, the US figure was 4.7 billion tonnes CO₂e, while the EU's was – 2.5 billion tonnes CO₂e. Meanwhile, in 2023 India, by volume of greenhouse gas emissions (2.96 billion tonnes CO₂e), overtook the EU and became the third-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the world.
Between 2008 and 2023, the EU reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 1.07 billion tonnes CO₂e. India's greenhouse gas emissions, meanwhile, rose from 1.5 billion tonnes CO₂e in 2008 to 2.96 billion tonnes CO₂e in 2023, an increase of 1.45 billion tonnes CO₂e. If greenhouse gas emissions do have some effect on climate change, then all the reductions achieved by the EU were more than outweighed by India alone, which significantly increased its greenhouse gas emissions in CO₂e terms.
The impact of war on emission volumes
Russia's greenhouse gas emissions peaked shortly before the collapse of the USSR in 1990, when Russia's emissions stood at 2.4 billion tonnes CO₂e. In 2023, Russia's greenhouse gas emissions were 2.07 billion tonnes CO₂e. It should be noted, however, that during the Russia-Ukraine war (since February 2022) both sides, through their military operations, are generating considerable atmospheric pollution from sulphur and nitrogen oxides, since sulphur and nitrogen are present in explosives and munitions. The atmospheric pollution generated during hostilities even exceeds the greenhouse gas emissions generated by industry.
Japan's greenhouse gas emissions declined during the 21st century in proportion to the decline in Japan's industrial output. In 2023, Japan's greenhouse gas emissions were 0.945 billion tonnes CO₂e.
If the world's three largest greenhouse gas emitters (China, the US and India) neither plan nor implement any “climate change” measures in the sense of the European Union's strict approach, and continue to pursue industrial, energy and transport policy according to their own national interests, then no unilateral EU actions will be able to significantly affect the total global volume of CO₂e.
Mathematically, EU climate policy is pointless. It most likely serves other – entirely unrelated to any potential influence on climate change – purposes.
Regardless of whether greenhouse gas emissions do or do not affect changes in atmospheric temperature, the gases included in the so-called greenhouse gas emissions calculation do cause atmospheric pollution. Moreover, a high concentration of nitrogen and sulphur oxides in industrial emissions creates very dangerous pollution for the surrounding environment. It is the common task of every country and society in the world to reduce the pollution generated by economic activity to a rational level and to switch to, or introduce, technologies that reduce pollution of every kind.
This kind of work is going on continuously at a global scale, independently of international forums or climate activists' initiatives. Since 2013, when it reached 36.2 billion tonnes CO₂e, the world's total greenhouse gas emissions have broadly stabilised and continue to rise only slightly. In 2023 the figure was 39 billion tonnes CO₂e. Over ten years, the world's total greenhouse gas emissions rose by 7.8%.
At the same time, world greenhouse gas emissions are increasing at a slower pace compared with the average growth in industrial output worldwide. As a result, since 2011 the world's per-capita greenhouse gas emissions have stabilised and are gradually decreasing. If in 2013 the world's total greenhouse gas emissions were 5 tonnes CO₂e per person on the planet, by 2022 that had fallen to 4.8 tonnes CO₂e per person, while in 2023 it was 4.86 tonnes CO₂e per person.
Emission volumes in the Baltics
The total volume of greenhouse gas emissions in the Baltic states has historically been linked to each country's energy specialisation. While Estonia's energy sector was heavily dependent on the use of a fuel mined in Estonia – oil shale –, Estonia had the highest total greenhouse gas emissions among the Baltic states. In Latvia, following the construction of the Daugava hydropower cascade and the gasification of heat energy, the country had the lowest total greenhouse gas emissions among the Baltic states. After the restoration of independence, the Baltic states' industrial output (and energy production) fell considerably, so the Baltic states' total greenhouse gas emissions also fell considerably. In 1990, Estonia's greenhouse gas emissions were 39.5 million tonnes CO₂e, Lithuania's figure was 35.1 million tonnes CO₂e, while Latvia's was – 19.6 million tonnes CO₂e. In 2023, meanwhile, Estonia's greenhouse gas emissions were 11.4 million tonnes CO₂e, Lithuania's figure was 13.1 million tonnes CO₂e, while Latvia's was – 6.6 million tonnes CO₂e. With reductions of this size, the Baltic states are among the world leaders in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in 2023 relative to 1990. In 2023 relative to 1990, the world leader in reducing greenhouse gas emissions was Ukraine. In 2023, Ukraine's greenhouse gas emissions were 82.7% lower than in 1990. In second place, with minus 71%, was Estonia; in third place (-68.8%) was Moldova, while in fourth place – Latvia (-66.6%). The world's top ten also included Armenia (-62.8%), Georgia (-62.7%), Lithuania (-62.7%), Romania (-62.3%), Kyrgyzstan (-55.8%) and North Korea (-51.3%). On average in the EU in 2023, greenhouse gas emissions were 34.1% lower than in 1990. The US reduction, meanwhile, amounted to only 6.1%.
Of the 182 countries for which data are available, greenhouse gas emissions fell in 51 countries between 1990 and 2023, while they rose in 131 countries, and in 105 countries greenhouse gas emissions at least doubled.
The largest increases in greenhouse gas emissions occurred in countries where, during this period, employment shifted from being dominated by agriculture towards industrial development. In India, greenhouse gas emissions increased almost fourfold between 1990 and 2023, while in China – 5.5-fold. In South Asia, greenhouse gas emissions increased on average fivefold between 1990 and 2023, while in the least developed countries, according to the UN classification – 5.7-fold. The global average increase was +72%.
CO₂e per capita
According to calculations based on statistics compiled by the World Bank, the highest per-capita greenhouse gas emissions are found in countries with the highest per-capita value added generated by industry and construction.
In 2023, the highest per-capita greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂e) in the world were in Qatar (47.1 tonnes per capita), Kuwait (25.9 tonnes per capita) and Bahrain (25.2 tonnes per capita). Next came the UAE (21.6 tonnes per capita), Brunei (21.5 tonnes per capita) and Oman (20.0 tonnes per capita).
The world's top ten also included Trinidad and Tobago (17.7 tonnes per capita), Saudi Arabia (16.9 tonnes per capita), Russia (14.4 tonnes per capita) and Canada (14.3 tonnes per capita). The US, with 14 tonnes per capita, was 12th in the world. China, with 9.4 tonnes per capita, was 19th in the world. Estonia, with 8.4 tonnes per capita, was 22nd in the world. Poland (7.8 tonnes per capita) was 28th in the world. On average in the European Union in 2023, the highest per-capita greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂e) were 5.6 tonnes, while the world average was – 4.9 tonnes per capita. Lithuania (4.6 tonnes per capita) was 52nd in the world, while Latvia (3.5 tonnes per capita) was 74th in the world. In 2023, the lowest per-capita greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂e) in the world were in countries with an insignificant or negligible per-capita value added from industry and construction – Afghanistan, Guinea-Bissau, Uganda, Chad, Madagascar, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, Rwanda, Niger, the Central African Republic, Burundi and the DR Congo.
Results of the data analysis
Statistical analysis of the data shows that (excluding microstates) a close correlation can be observed between the size of per-capita value added in industry together with construction and per-capita greenhouse gas emissions (in CO₂e terms).
In countries where value added in industry and construction in 2023 was above 30,000 US dollars per capita, there is no close correlation between the size of per-capita value added in industry together with construction and per-capita greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂e).
There are only three such countries in the world: Qatar, Ireland and Norway.
For all other countries in the world, however, a functional relationship can be observed between the size of per-capita value added in industry together with construction and per-capita greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂e).
In countries where value added in industry and construction in 2023 was below 30,000 US dollars per capita, there is a close correlation between the size of per-capita value added in industry together with construction and per-capita greenhouse gas emissions (CO₂e).
For example, in the group of countries where value added in industry together with construction in 2023 was between 20,000 and 30,000 US dollars per capita, average per-capita greenhouse gas emissions were 18.2 tonnes CO₂e.
In the group of countries where value added in industry together with construction in 2023 was between 5,000 and 10,000 US dollars per capita, average per-capita greenhouse gas emissions were 6.5 tonnes CO₂e.
In the group of countries where value added in industry together with construction in 2023 was between 1,000 and 2,000 US dollars per capita, average per-capita greenhouse gas emissions were 2.4 tonnes CO₂e. In the group of countries where value added in industry together with construction in 2023 was below 1,000 US dollars per capita, meanwhile, average per-capita greenhouse gas emissions were 0.9 tonnes CO₂e.
The statistical analysis produced a close linear regression between the size of per-capita value added in industry together with construction and per-capita greenhouse gas emissions in CO₂e terms. The current global trend, at 2023 prices, can be expressed in the following relationships.
For every one-tonne reduction in per-capita greenhouse gas emissions in CO₂e terms, per-capita value added in industry together with construction will fall by 750 dollars a year. And conversely – for every one-tonne increase in per-capita greenhouse gas emissions in CO₂e terms, per-capita value added in industry together with construction will rise by 750 dollars a year.
The coefficient of determination of the regression line is 0.5. This means the regression line explains 50% of the total variance.
The result obtained is heteroscedastic, meaning that the standard deviation of both parameters increases as the size of the parameter increases. This most likely indicates that in countries with high per-capita greenhouse gas emissions and high per-capita value added in industry together with construction, at least two industrial development scenarios are being followed – one with relatively high per-capita greenhouse gas emissions and another with relatively low per-capita greenhouse gas emissions. Overall, however, the correlation obtained is statistically significant and indicates that a policy making a regular reduction in greenhouse gas emissions mandatory will lead to a decline in national wealth and economic growth, as well as a decline in the population's standard of living. If, alongside the requirement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, additional growth in value added is not secured, in sectors with a small impact on greenhouse gas emissions, of 750 US dollars for every tonne of CO₂e every year, then the consequence will be a decline in national wealth and national competitiveness.
Conclusions
Given the scale and growth trends of greenhouse gas emissions from the world's largest industrial producers (China, the US and India), other countries' policies on greenhouse gases and reducing their emissions cannot significantly affect the reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions in the near future.
Latvia is part of the European Union, and Latvia cannot fully ignore the policies pursued by the EU. However, it is in Latvia's interest to refrain from implementing, in an exaggerated way, EU policies that harm Latvia's economy and lower the quality of life of Latvia's population.
A sensible policy for Latvia is to avoid an exaggerated reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, since Latvia is already among the world leaders in reducing greenhouse gases over the last 35 years.
Regardless of the US's or the European Union's attitude towards whether so-called greenhouse gases are the main cause of climate change or not, these gases do cause air pollution and degrade the environment, so regardless of one's belief in global warming, climate change or a green paradise, it is in the interest of every society to reduce the amount of pollution that enters the atmosphere as a result of human economic activity. This should be the common task of every country's government, since, given the global circulation of the atmosphere, pollution generated in one country will affect both that country and its neighbours. It is in the interest of society in every country in the world to reduce the amount of pollution that enters the atmosphere, is deposited in the soil, or enters ground and surface waters. This should be the goal of both the European Union and other countries around the world: without pursuing other kinds of ambitions or claims, to reduce air pollution from all human economic activity to a rational level, and to introduce technologies that reduce pollution of every kind, rather than focusing on a single parameter around which speculation and trading in quotas tied to that parameter can spring up.
First published in the magazine “Dienas Bizness”, issue of 6 January 2026