Hong Kong, China vs Singapore: Coal consumption, per square kilometre

Hong Kong, China
0.0389 terawatt-hours per square kilometre
in 2023
Singapore
0.0054 terawatt-hours per square kilometre
in 2023
Hong Kong, China rank
1st
Singapore rank
3rd

Coal consumption, per square kilometre over time

  • Hong Kong, China
  • Singapore
00.020.040.060.080.1196519942023

How they compare

Hong Kong, China currently reports 0.0389 terawatt-hours per square kilometre against 0.0054 terawatt-hours per square kilometre in Singapore, a difference of 0.0335 terawatt-hours per square kilometre.

That makes Hong Kong, China's figure about 7.1 times Singapore's.

The two have swapped places 6 times across 59 shared years of data; in 1965 it was Hong Kong, China ahead.

Hong Kong, China ranks 1st and Singapore ranks 3rd of 205 countries.

Hong Kong, China has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Hong Kong, China Singapore Difference Ahead
1960s 0.0009 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0009 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Hong Kong, China
1970s 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Hong Kong, China
1980s 0.0351 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0349 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Hong Kong, China
1990s 0.0591 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0002 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0589 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Hong Kong, China
2000s 0.0718 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0001 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0717 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Hong Kong, China
2010s 0.0766 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0055 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0711 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Hong Kong, China
2020s 0.0389 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0067 terawatt-hours per square kilometre 0.0322 terawatt-hours per square kilometre Hong Kong, China

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher coal consumption, per square kilometre, Hong Kong, China or Singapore?
Hong Kong, China, at 0.0389 terawatt-hours per square kilometre against 0.0054 terawatt-hours per square kilometre in Singapore as of 2023.
What is the difference in coal consumption, per square kilometre between Hong Kong, China and Singapore?
0.0335 terawatt-hours per square kilometre, with Hong Kong, China ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Hong Kong, China and Singapore?
59 years are reported by both, from 1965 to 2023.
How do Hong Kong, China and Singapore rank globally for coal consumption, per square kilometre?
Hong Kong, China ranks 1st and Singapore ranks 3rd of 205 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Coal consumption, 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

Hong Kong, China vs Singapore: Coal consumption, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 03 September 2026, from https://energy.statizoid.com/compare/coal-consumption-per-square-kilometre/hong-kong-sar-china/singapore/

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/coal-consumption-per-square-kilometre/hong-kong-sar-china/singapore/">Hong Kong, China vs Singapore: Coal consumption, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Coal consumption, per square kilometre
Unit
terawatt-hours per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
205 places, 9,288 data points, 1965–2023
Last refreshed

Coal consumption 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.