Energy > Gas-diesel oils Stats: compare key data on Cuba & Poland

SHARE TWEET EMBED

Select year 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

•  

STAT	Cuba	Poland	HISTORY
Consumption by households and other consumers	537,000 ton Ranked 49th.	3.31 million ton Ranked 15th. 6 times more than Cuba
Consumption by industry and construction	452,000 ton Ranked 35th.	523,000 ton Ranked 34th. 16% more than Cuba
Consumption by transportation industry	195,000 ton Ranked 109th.	5.52 million ton Ranked 23th. 28 times more than Cuba
Consumption by transportation industry > Per capita	17.3 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 136th.	144.63 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 70th. 8 times more than Cuba
Consumption in agriculture	169,000 ton Ranked 49th.	2.55 million ton Ranked 10th. 15 times more than Cuba
Consumption in agriculture per 1000	14.97 ton Ranked 52nd.	66.81 ton Ranked 10th. 4 times more than Cuba
Consumption in inland and coastal waterways	418,000 ton Ranked 10th. 209 times more than Poland	2,000 ton Ranked 51st.
Consumption in road transport	195,000 ton Ranked 105th.	5.36 million ton Ranked 23th. 27 times more than Cuba
Consumption in road transport > Per capita	17.3 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 127th.	140.41 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 71st. 8 times more than Cuba
Consumption in road transport per 1000	17.27 ton Ranked 115th.	140.41 ton Ranked 62nd. 8 times more than Cuba
Conversion > Transport and distribution losses > Per capita	0.444 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 7th. 9 times more than Poland	0.052 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 8th.
Conversion in thermal power plants	45,000 ton Ranked 76th. 9 times more than Poland	5,000 ton Ranked 129th.
Conversion to other forms of energy > Per capita	3.99 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 99th. 3 times more than Poland	1.21 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 133th.
Energy balance requirement	859,000 ton Ranked 31st.	1.98 million ton Ranked 10th. 2 times more than Cuba
Imports	1.25 million ton Ranked 35th.	2.84 million ton Ranked 16th. 2 times more than Cuba
Energy balance requirement > Per capita	76.22 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 80th. 47% more than Poland	51.91 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 90th.
Net inland availability	1.18 million ton Ranked 72nd.	9.35 million ton Ranked 21st. 8 times more than Cuba
Energy balance requirement per 1000	76.07 ton Ranked 66th. 47% more than Poland	51.91 ton Ranked 74th.
Changes in stocks per 1000	33.39 ton Ranked 6th. 9 times more than Poland	3.9 ton Ranked 33th.
Consumption by households and other consumers per 1000	47.56 ton Ranked 49th.	86.75 ton Ranked 38th. 82% more than Cuba
Consumption by transportation industry per 1000	17.27 ton Ranked 123th.	144.63 ton Ranked 61st. 8 times more than Cuba
Consumption in inland and coastal waterways per 1000	38.42 ton Ranked 5th. 733 times more than Poland	0.0524 ton Ranked 54th.
Conversion in other energy-producing plants per 1000	2.67 ton Ranked 8th. 2 times more than Poland	1.07 ton Ranked 13th.
Changes in stocks > Per capita	33.45 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 6th. 9 times more than Poland	3.9 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 33th.
Production from refineries	395,000 ton Ranked 84th.	7.46 million ton Ranked 29th. 19 times more than Cuba
Conversion to other forms of energy	45,000 ton Ranked 79th.	46,000 ton Ranked 76th. 2% more than Cuba
Bunkers	15,000 ton Ranked 69th.	116,000 ton Ranked 34th. 8 times more than Cuba
Consumption by energy sector	20,000 ton Ranked 30th.	36,000 ton Ranked 20th. 80% more than Cuba
Consumption by energy sector > Per capita	1.77 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 20th. 88% more than Poland	0.943 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 27th.
Consumption by industry and construction > Per capita	40.11 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 36th. 3 times more than Poland	13.7 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 70th.
Consumption by other industries and construction	452,000 ton Ranked 34th. 4% more than Poland	433,000 ton Ranked 35th.
Consumption in inland and coastal waterways > Per capita	38.67 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 5th. 744 times more than Poland	0.052 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 55th.
Consumption in agriculture > Per capita	15 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 54th.	66.81 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 11th. 4 times more than Cuba
Conversion in other energy-producing plants > Per capita	2.68 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 8th. 2 times more than Poland	1.07 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 13th.
Conversion to other forms of energy per 1000	3.99 ton Ranked 87th. 3 times more than Poland	1.21 ton Ranked 119th.
Conversion in thermal power plants per 1000	3.99 ton Ranked 83th. 30 times more than Poland	0.131 ton Ranked 134th.
Consumption by other consumers	368,000 ton Ranked 24th. 18% more than Poland	311,000 ton Ranked 28th.
Conversion in other energy-producing plants	29,000 ton Ranked 7th.	41,000 ton Ranked 6th. 41% more than Cuba
Conversion in thermal power plants > Per capita	3.99 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 95th. 30 times more than Poland	0.131 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 147th.
Consumption by other industries and construction > Per capita	40.11 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 35th. 4 times more than Poland	11.35 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 70th.
Consumption by petroleum refineries	20,000 ton Ranked 14th. 4 times more than Poland	5,000 ton Ranked 19th.
Consumption by petroleum refineries > Per capita	1.77 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 7th. 14 times more than Poland	0.131 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 22nd.
Consumption by other industries and construction per 1000	40.03 ton Ranked 34th. 4 times more than Poland	11.35 ton Ranked 69th.
Net inland availability per 1000	104.85 ton Ranked 98th.	245.09 ton Ranked 55th. 2 times more than Cuba
Gross inland availability per 1000	111.05 ton Ranked 112th.	247.34 ton Ranked 72nd. 2 times more than Cuba
Consumption by industry and construction per 1000	40.03 ton Ranked 35th. 3 times more than Poland	13.7 ton Ranked 69th.
Consumption by petroleum refineries per 1000	1.77 ton Ranked 6th. 14 times more than Poland	0.131 ton Ranked 20th.
Consumption by other consumers per 1000	32.59 ton Ranked 29th. 4 times more than Poland	8.15 ton Ranked 62nd.
Conversion > Transport and distribution losses per 1000	0.443 ton Ranked 7th. 9 times more than Poland	0.052 ton Ranked 8th.
Gross inland availability	1.25 million ton Ranked 77th.	9.44 million ton Ranked 21st. 8 times more than Cuba
Imports > Per capita	111.01 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 83th. 49% more than Poland	74.47 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 98th.
Total > Production > Per capita	35.05 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 85th.	195.44 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 55th. 6 times more than Cuba
Net inland availability > Per capita	105.06 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 108th.	245.09 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 65th. 2 times more than Cuba
Production from refineries > Per capita	35.05 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 85th.	195.44 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 55th. 6 times more than Cuba
Statistical differences > Per capita	-5,092,659,601,271.56 ton per 1e+15 people Ranked 74th.	104.81 billion ton per 1e+15 people Ranked 41st.
Changes in stocks	377,000 ton Ranked 7th. 3 times more than Poland	149,000 ton Ranked 16th.
Consumption by other consumers > Per capita	32.66 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 31st. 4 times more than Poland	8.15 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 66th.
Consumption by households and other consumers > Per capita	47.65 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 51st.	86.75 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 40th. 82% more than Cuba
Conversion > Transport and distribution losses	5,000 ton Ranked 6th. 3 times more than Poland	2,000 ton Ranked 5th.
Bunkers per 1000	1.33 ton Ranked 64th.	3.04 ton Ranked 52nd. 2 times more than Cuba
Gross inland availability > Per capita	111.28 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 130th.	247.34 ton per 1,000 people Ranked 88th. 2 times more than Cuba
Production from refineries per 1000	34.98 ton Ranked 80th.	195.44 ton Ranked 52nd. 6 times more than Cuba
Consumption by energy sector per 1000	1.77 ton Ranked 19th. 88% more than Poland	0.943 ton Ranked 25th.
Imports per 1000	110.79 ton Ranked 67th. 49% more than Poland	74.47 ton Ranked 83th.

15 30 60 All

APA MLA MHRA CSE AMA Chicago Bluebook Bluebook/JOLT Citation