How many years of comparable data are there for Belarus and Chile?

30 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 2021.

Where does this data come from?

Statizoid (derived), published as Adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current US$), per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Belarus vs Chile: Adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current) … square

Belarus

595.09 current US$ per square kilometre

in 2021

Chile

546.24 current US$ per square kilometre

in 2021

Belarus rank

130th

Chile rank

131st

Adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current) … square over time

Belarus
Chile

How they compare

Belarus currently reports 595.09 current US$ per square kilometre against 546.24 current US$ per square kilometre in Chile, a difference of 48.85 current US$ per square kilometre.

That makes Belarus's figure about 1.1 times Chile's.

Across all 30 years both countries report, Belarus has been ahead every year.

Belarus ranks 130th and Chile ranks 131st of 178 countries.

Belarus has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade	Belarus	Chile	Difference	Ahead
1990s	268.52 current US$ per square kilometre	168.18 current US$ per square kilometre	100.34 current US$ per square kilometre	Belarus
2000s	411.59 current US$ per square kilometre	223.17 current US$ per square kilometre	188.42 current US$ per square kilometre	Belarus
2010s	660.9 current US$ per square kilometre	449.96 current US$ per square kilometre	210.93 current US$ per square kilometre	Belarus
2020s	566.98 current US$ per square kilometre	506.72 current US$ per square kilometre	60.26 current US$ per square kilometre	Belarus

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current us$), per, Belarus or Chile?: Belarus, at 595.09 current US$ per square kilometre against 546.24 current US$ per square kilometre in Chile as of 2021.
What is the difference in adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current us$), per between Belarus and Chile?: 48.85 current US$ per square kilometre, with Belarus ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Belarus and Chile?: 30 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 2021.
How do Belarus and Chile rank globally for adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current us$), per?: Belarus ranks 130th and Chile ranks 131st of 178 countries.
Where does this data come from?: Statizoid (derived), published as Adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current US$), 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

Belarus vs Chile: Adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current US$), per. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 11 October 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/adjusted-savings-particulate-emission-damage-current-us-per-square-kilometre/belarus/chile/

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://economy.statizoid.com/compare/adjusted-savings-particulate-emission-damage-current-us-per-square-kilometre/belarus/chile/">Belarus vs Chile: Adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current US$), per</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator: Adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current US$), per square kilometre
Unit: current US$ per square kilometre
Source: Statizoid (derived)
Licence: Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage: 178 places, 5,405 data points, 1990–2021
Last refreshed: 04 October 2026

Adjusted savings: particulate emission damage (current US$) 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.