Mauritius vs Norway: Ammonia, anhydrous — Agricultural Use

Mauritius
10 t
in 2024
Norway
0 t
in 2024
Mauritius rank
9th
Norway rank
12th

Ammonia, anhydrous — Agricultural Use over time

  • Mauritius
  • Norway
0204060201220182024

How they compare

Mauritius currently reports 10 t against 0 t in Norway, a difference of 10 t.

Across all 13 years both countries report, Mauritius has been ahead every year.

Mauritius ranks 9th and Norway ranks 12th of 33 countries.

Mauritius has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Mauritius Norway Difference Ahead
2010s 34.62 t 0 t 34.62 t Mauritius
2020s 23.6 t 0 t 23.6 t Mauritius

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher ammonia, anhydrous — agricultural use, Mauritius or Norway?
Mauritius, at 10 t against 0 t in Norway as of 2024.
What is the difference in ammonia, anhydrous — agricultural use between Mauritius and Norway?
10 t, with Mauritius ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mauritius and Norway?
13 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2024.
How do Mauritius and Norway rank globally for ammonia, anhydrous — agricultural use?
Mauritius ranks 9th and Norway ranks 12th of 33 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Ammonia, anhydrous — Agricultural Use. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Ammonia, anhydrous — Agricultural Use
Unit
t
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Licence
CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO (FAO)
Coverage
34 places, 299 data points, 2002–2024
Last refreshed

The Fertilizers by Product dataset contains information on the Production, Trade and Agriculture Use of inorganic (chemical or mineral) fertilizers products. The fertilizer statistics data are for a set of 23 product categories. Both straight and compound fertilizers are included. Methodological details can be found at: https://files-faostat.fao.org/production/RFB/RFB_EN_README.pdf