Granted, California is different than Minnesota. I suspect our footprint would look slightly different, considering that Minnesota’s electricity sector is generally more fossil-fuel dependent than those on the West Coast (though Xcel is quickly moving away from coal). The other big difference, I am guessing, would be energy use for home heating.
But with this detailed chart, via the Daughter Number Three blog and the California Legislative Analyst’s Office, you get a good sense of the big picture of where CO2 and other climate change pollution comes from. Please note the size of the “light-duty vehicles” section of the chart.
This chart really underscores, again, the importance of moving away from fossil fuels and driving.
California also has a cap and trade system for GHG emissions, which has probably contributed to the reduction of the “industrial” portion of the pie chart. As a double bonus, revenues from the cap and trade auction go towards funding transportation infrastructure and affordable housing that reduce GHG emissions and vehicle miles traveled.
CA also has mandatory smog checks on private vehicles, so it’s also likely that the average CA car emits less GHG per mile than the average MN car, but that doesn’t account for total vehicle miles traveled.
Good to know!
Bill, thanks for the post. Re: your question what Minnesota’s version of this would look like, the MN Pollution Control Agency publishes GHG inventory data here: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/air/greenhouse-gas-emissions-data. If you click “Change in Emissions by Sectors, 2005-16,” you can see the breakdown by sector. MPCA does not to my knowledge publish a doughnut chart like the one above for California, but E3 developed one for us based on the MPCA data, which I’m happy to provide. I cannot figure out how to paste it into my reply but if you send me an e-mail I can provide it to you.
Great I will put this up soon!