TABLES

TABLES
 SAMPLES:
The table below shows the amount of waste production (in millions of
tonnes) in six different countries over a twenty-year period.
The chart compares the amounts of waste that were produced in six countries in the
years 1980, 1990 and 2000.
In each of these years, the US produced more waste than Ireland, Japan, Korea, Poland
and Portugal combined. It is also noticeable that Korea was the only country that
managed to reduce its waste output by the year 2000.
Between 1980 and 2000, waste production in the US rose from 131 to 192 million
tonnes, and rising trends were also seen in Japan, Poland and Portugal. Japan’s waste
output increased from 28 to 53 million tonnes, while Poland and Portugal saw waste
totals increase from 4 to 6.6 and from 2 to 5 million tonnes respectively.
The trends for Ireland and Korea were noticeably different from those described above.
In Ireland, waste production increased more than eightfold, from only 0.6 million
tonnes in 1980 to 5 million tonnes in 2000. Korea, by contrast, cut its waste output by
12 million tonnes between 1990 and 2000.
The table below gives information on consumer spending on different
items in five different countries in 2002.
The table shows percentages of consumer expenditure for three categories of products
and services in five countries in 2002.
It is clear that the largest proportion of consumer spending in each country went on
food, drinks and tobacco. On the other hand, the leisure/education category has the
lowest percentages in the table.
Out of the five countries, consumer spending on food, drinks and tobacco was noticeably
higher in Turkey, at 32.14%, and Ireland, at nearly 29%. The proportion of spending on
leisure and education was also highest in Turkey, at 4.35%, while expenditure on
clothing and footwear was significantly higher in Italy, at 9%, than in any of the other
countries.
It can be seen that Sweden had the lowest percentages of national consumer
expenditure for food/drinks/tobacco and for clothing/footwear, at nearly 16% and just
over 5% respectively. Spain had slightly higher figures for these categories, but the
lowest figure for leisure/education, at only 1.98%.
The table below shows the proportion of different categories of families
living in poverty in Australia in 1999.
The table gives information about poverty rates among six types of household in
Australia in the year 1999.
It is noticeable that levels of poverty were higher for single people than for couples, and
people with children were more likely to be poor than those without. Poverty rates were
considerably lower among elderly people.
Overall, 11% of Australians, or 1,837,000 people, were living in poverty in 1999. Aged
people were the least likely to be poor, with poverty levels of 6% and 4% for single aged
people and aged couples respectively.
Just over one fifth of single parents were living in poverty, whereas only 12% of parents
living with a partner were classed as poor. The same pattern can be seen for people with
no children: while 19% of single people in this group were living below the poverty line,
the figure for couples was much lower, at only 7%.
The table below shows changes in the numbers of residents cycling to
work in different areas of the UK between 2001 and 2011.
The table compares the numbers of people who cycled to work in twelve areas of the UK
in the years 2001 and 2011.
Overall, the number of UK commuters who travelled to work by bicycle rose

considerably over the 10-year period. Inner London had by far the highest number of
cycling commuters in both years.
In 2001, well over 43 thousand residents of inner London commuted by bicycle, and this
figure rose to more than 106 thousand in 2011, an increase of 144%. By contrast,
although outer London had the second highest number of cycling commuters in each
year, the percentage change, at only 45%, was the lowest of the twelve areas shown in
the table.
Brighton and Hove saw the second biggest increase (109%) in the number of residents
cycling to work, but Bristol was the UK’s second city in terms of total numbers of cycling
commuters, with 8,108 in 2001 and 15,768 in 2011. Figures for the other eight areas
were below the 10 thousand mark in both years.

TABLES

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TABLES

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

TABLES

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TABLES

Overall, the number of UK commuters who travelled to work by bicycle rose

You might also like