Brazil vs Turks and Caicos Islands: Annual change in primary energy use, per square kilometre

Brazil
0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre
in 2023
Turks and Caicos Islands
0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre
in 2023
Brazil rank
91st
Turks and Caicos Islands rank
89th

Annual change in primary energy use, per square kilometre over time

  • Brazil
  • Turks and Caicos Islands
0000.0010.0010.001196619942023

How they compare

Turks and Caicos Islands currently reports 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre against 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre in Brazil, a difference of 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre.

That makes Turks and Caicos Islands's figure about 1.2 times Brazil's.

The two have swapped places 14 times across 43 shared years of data; in 1981 it was Turks and Caicos Islands ahead.

Brazil ranks 91st and Turks and Caicos Islands ranks 89th of 204 countries.

Across the 5 decades both report, Brazil averaged higher in 1 and Turks and Caicos Islands in 4.

Head to head by decade

Decade Brazil Turks and Caicos Islands Difference Ahead
1980s 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Brazil
1990s 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Turks and Caicos Islands
2000s 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Turks and Caicos Islands
2010s 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Turks and Caicos Islands
2020s 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Turks and Caicos Islands

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher annual change in primary energy use, per square kilometre, Brazil or Turks and Caicos Islands?
Turks and Caicos Islands, at 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre against 0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre in Brazil as of 2023.
What is the difference in annual change in primary energy use, per square kilometre between Brazil and Turks and Caicos Islands?
0 terawatt-hours per square kilometre, with Turks and Caicos Islands ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Brazil and Turks and Caicos Islands?
43 years are reported by both, from 1981 to 2023.
How do Brazil and Turks and Caicos Islands rank globally for annual change in primary energy use, per square kilometre?
Brazil ranks 91st and Turks and Caicos Islands ranks 89th of 204 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Annual change in primary energy use, per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Brazil vs Turks and Caicos Islands: Annual change in primary energy use, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 10 September 2026, from https://energy.statizoid.com/compare/annual-change-in-primary-energy-use-per-square-kilometre/brazil/turks-and-caicos-islands/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://energy.statizoid.com/compare/annual-change-in-primary-energy-use-per-square-kilometre/brazil/turks-and-caicos-islands/">Brazil vs Turks and Caicos Islands: Annual change in primary energy use, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Annual change in primary energy use, per square kilometre
Unit
terawatt-hours per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
204 places, 9,193 data points, 1966–2023
Last refreshed

Annual change in primary energy use divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.