Eric Jensen has already provided a nice link to a description of the basic structure of the ${\rm CO}_{2}$ spectrum, so I'll focus on the question of why there's a "spike" at 15.0 microns in the Earth spectrum, but not in the Venus or Mars spectra.
If you look at the link in Eric's answer, the very first image shows a high-resolution version of the ${\rm CO}_{2}$ absorption spectrum, including the main features to the right and left. There is also a very strong absorption peak in the middle (the "Q-branch") at about 15.0 microns (667 ${\rm cm}^{-1}$ in wavenumbers). The question then becomes: why does this feature show up as an extra dip in the Venus spectrum (and, barely visible, in the Mars spectrum) -- as one might expect -- but apparently as a peak in the Earth spectra?
The answer hinges on the fact that the spectra shown in the question are not, strictly speaking, absorption spectra. They are actually radiance/intensity measurements of infrared light emitted by different layers in the atmosphere of the planet in question, as seen from orbiting spacecraft. (In the first figure, it's narrowed to the atmosphere above certain locations on the Earth.) They thus show a combination of the molecular absorption spectra and the temperature structure of the atmosphere.
In simple terms, the spectra show thermal (blackbody) emission from layers in the atmosphere where upward-going photons can escape to space without being absorbed by higher layers in the atmosphere. The altitude of these layers is determined by the amount of the absorbing gas (e.g., ${\rm CO}_{2}$) and the strength of the absorption at a given wavelength. The stronger the absorption, the higher up is the layer that can emit freely to space.
(Note that for wavelengths with effectively zero absorption from any molecule, the "emitting layer" is actually the surface of the planet.)
How much infrared light is emitted at a given wavelength then depends on the temperature of the emitting layer, and it is here that the vertical temperature structure of the atmosphere becomes important. For Venus and Mars -- and for most of the emitting altitudes for Earth -- the temperature decreases with altitude, so that higher emitting layers have lower temperatures and thus emit less radiation. The net effect is to reproduce the absorption features, even though the whole thing is not, technically, an absorption spectrum.
But in the case of the Earth, the strongest absorption -- e.g., in the Q-branch part of the ${\rm CO}_{2}$ absorption, at 15.0 microns -- forces an emitting altitude that is so high it is actually in the stratosphere. And in the stratosphere, the temperature increases with altitude. So the Q-branch absorption peak forces the emitting layer to be at a higher temperature than is the case for the rest of the ${\rm CO}_{2}$ absorption regime.
This University of Chicago MODTRAN web page, which plots predicted emission from the Earth's atmosphere as seen from an altitude of 70 km (default setting), shows this rather nicely. The default parameters include a modern ${\rm CO}_{2}$ concentration of 400 ppm, which gives the feature seen in the Earth observations (i.e., the local emission peak in the middle of the 15 micron trough, which I've labeled "Q-branch reversal"):
But if you dial the ${\rm CO}_{2}$ concentration way down (e.g., to 10 ppm), the emitting altitudes are lower for all ${\rm CO}_{2}$-absorbing wavelenths, so much so that the emitting altitude for the Q-branch is down below the stratosphere, and so is at a lower temperature than the rest, and thus emits less flux, giving you the expected profile (i.e., with the weakest emission at the Q-branch wavelength, instead of a reversal):
(Finally, I believe the peculiar spectrum for the "Antarctic" case in the first figure is due to the unusual temperature profile of atmosphere in arctic regions, which includes the temperature increasing with altitude in the first few km above the ground; the fact that the interior of Antarctica is high altitude might also be relevant.)