Search CARMA by country, state, province, county, metro area, city, power company,
power plant, or zip code.

CARMA’s First 48 Hours


The numbers are just fantastic: 150,000 visitors from 187 countries in CARMA’s first two days. Just as important are the hundreds of comments and emails we’ve received with congratulations, suggestions, and questions. Thank you. We will begin sifting through them next week. In the mean time, continue spreading the word. There’s so much more to be done — and you’re at the heart of it.

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.


Other Posts

Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.

Reader Comments

There is nothing surprising for your site to have so many visitors in just a few hours as what you bring to the world is fantastic.

Indeed, all the data one needs on the CO2 emissions of the energy sector is here. This is just GREAT !

I did an article on CARMA on my blog as I believe the data you’re giving should go around in order to make people and governments act toward a greener future…

I wish you all the success one can have !

[Reply]

The Bruce !!!nuclear!!! power plant is NE of Toronto in Ontario, not Nova Scotia (where it appears to show on the map). Presently disposal of the waste from this plant appears to be a problem cheap to leave to the next millenium. No probs, eh?

[Reply]

Well, I just looked at that top C02 producer map and China is far and away the worst offender. Perhaps the “hug-a-tree” crowd will think that it’s time to nuke China to save the planet!

[Reply]

Why does this look like it’s bashing the US? I’m no scientist, but when the number of KWH is bigger than the Tons of CO2 it seems like you are above the power curve (pardon the pun). China is so far below that it is not even close. They have a lot less per capita because their population is so HUGE…many of whom don’t even have electricity. How is that a fair comparison. Why don’t you compare tons per subscriber?

Besides all that, it’s been proven that the amount of CO2 in the air is not the cause but the result of global warming. We need to realize we aren’t that significant. The sun is the source of our warming not my SUV.

The earth has survived numerous warming and cooling cycles. It is part of the solar cycle. We have very little to do with it.

[Reply]

Hi,
I am very impressed of the huge amount of useful information found on your websites, however, I would appreciate if you used the metric system consequently instead of mixing and confusing the information with pounds, short tons etc.
Thanks and good Luck!

[Reply]

Got the link from CNN.
Keep up the good work!

from Brazil

[Reply]

Check it!:

“Why does this look like it’s bashing the US? I’m no scientist, but when the number of KWH is bigger than the Tons of CO2 it seems like you are above the power curve (pardon the pun). China is so far below that it is not even close. They have a lot less per capita because their population is so HUGE…many of whom don’t even have electricity. How is that a fair comparison. Why don’t you compare tons per subscriber?

Besides all that, it’s been proven that the amount of CO2 in the air is not the cause but the result of global warming. We need to realize we aren’t that significant. The sun is the source of our warming not my SUV.

The earth has survived numerous warming and cooling cycles. It is part of the solar cycle. We have very little to do with it.”

When americans blame global warming on,….global warming, naturally others are going to “bash” americans.

[Reply]

[...] for Action, that within the first two days of it’s existence has already been hit by 150,000 visitors since starting operation on November 14, 2007. Indeed, the news is spreading fast. I found out [...]

I am so tired of hearing all about this stuff. I can’t wait for the next “fad” to come along so the media and other “bored” people will have something else to talk about!!!!

[Reply]

i think the downloadable data would be more helpful if region or continent of each country were listed, and the correct lat/longitudes were listed.

[Reply]

According CARMA numbers, the power plant that is nearest to me is rated at 48,900,000 MWh. I would like to convert from MWh to MW. I believe that the unit of “MW” is a standard size rating of a power plant most often used by government. I know that 1 Wh = 3600 Joules (from Wikipedia). I know that 1 watt = 1 J/s and there are 60 seconds per minute and 60 minutes per hour (60×60=3600). How would I convert the 48,900,000 MWh to MW? Would I simplely divide 48,900,000 MWh by 3600? But that doesnt’ seem right. Can anyone help?

[Reply]

Pretty map. It’s a start. I see the obvious fossil power plants listed in red; but, I do not see any nuclear power plants listed in green. What’s the definition in Megawatts per ton of red and green. What about oil refineries, hydro, wind and solar power plants. Clearly we need more information and definitions to be accurate and project the truth. Hope to see more data on all levels

[Reply]

Megawatt-hours are simply the number of Megawatts made multiplied by the number of hours produced. If 48,900,000 MWh is annual production, divide by 8760 hours per year giving an average of 5582 Megawatts per hour (total thermal heat). Fossil plants do not typically operate 24 hours a day. A typical power plant is about 35% efficient; thus, 5582 Megawatts (thermal) multiplied by 0.35 results in 1953 Megawatts (electric) delivered to the power grid. Divide that by total “hourly” CO2 emmissions and you get MWe/ton of CO2. This would be a standard unit to compare various plants; however, even this neglects the generation of CO2 created during fuel creation (mining) and transportaion (rail, barge) to the end plant (which is signifcant). Now comes the next question. Is it better to create CO2 at one location with scrubbers and conversion systems or create it everywhere using our cars that are only 20% efficient? Oh yes, and let’s not neglect the toxic chemicals and CO2 created during production of battery cells for electric cars, Hybrids and solar cells. We must evaluate the entire picture and process not the individual parts. Food for thought.

[Reply]

The temperature of the planet is based on the amount of energy on the surface and how it radiates into space (the ultimate heat sink). Throughout history, energy on the planet was the direct result of the energy of the sun and the atmospheric composition changes that occur from our evolving world. During world history, many events have changed the atmosphere and thus the temperature of the planet (megavolcano’s, asteroid impacts, etc). Now, within the past hundred years or so, human population has sky rocketed (yes, our bodies create heat and emit CO2) as well as our generation of heat of the surface of the planet (fire, electricity, cars, etc). The energy from the sun and the temperature of the universe has not changed but we are generating more energy on the surface. To radiate this energy into space, temperature on the surface must rise and the atmosphere must change. Those are the logical facts. The cause is clearly extra energy being produced on the surface. It can be measured by many means. Maybe CO2 emission is the cause and maybe it is the effect. We have been watching this for only a few decades out of the past few billion years. Not very long! This could be the end of the world within the next century or a bump in the road that the planet will self correct. We simple don’t know. If you measure the length of daylight starting in March, by mid-April you will see that each day gets a little longer. Then you will makeup various explanations and be very sure that by December daylight will last 24 hours and night will no longer exist. But we all know that this isn’t the case. Yes, the planet is slowly warming up. How much? How far? Why? We just don’t fully know yet. We suspect..but that is all. Look at a picture of the earth at night. You can see where energy is created. It’s obvious.

[Reply]

Some interesting facts to consider in relation to CO2 emissions:

The United States emits about 6200 MMT of CO2 per year from the following sources:

33% Transportation
28% Industrial
21% Residential
18% Commercial

45% Electric Generation (split across all four sectors) or 2790 MMT of CO2

US oil consumption is 20.7 million barrels per day as follows:

70% Transportation
20% Industrial
5% Residential
5% Electric Generation

To be effective, Environmental/Energy Policy must consider not only electric power production; but, transportation, industrial and residential CO2 emissions as well. There must be incentives for new Nuclear and renewable energy usage and Foreign Policy/Trade agreements must include incentives for other countries to reduce their emissions.

[Reply]

[...] All this data comes from CARMA, home to a massive interactive computer archive that went live on Nov. 14. In its first two days of operation, some 150,000 people from 187 countries logged tapped into the data, according to the CARMA blog. [...]

Incredible job.

There are of course errors here and there, and it would be nice to add more detailed information about the plants themselves rather than just the stats.

How can we help??? Because I would like to!

Andrew.

[Reply]