Burundi vs Luxembourg: Potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (MOP) — Agricultural Use
Potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (MOP) — Agricultural Use over time
- Burundi
- Luxembourg
How they compare
Burundi currently reports 1,085 t against 983 t in Luxembourg, a difference of 102 t.
That makes Burundi's figure about 1.1 times Luxembourg's.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Luxembourg has been ahead every year.
Burundi ranks 75th and Luxembourg ranks 78th of 106 countries.
Luxembourg has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Burundi | Luxembourg | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 56 t | 1,485 t | 1,429 t | Luxembourg |
| 2010s | 183.5 t | 875 t | 691.5 t | Luxembourg |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (mop) — agricultural use, Burundi or Luxembourg?
- Burundi, at 1,085 t against 983 t in Luxembourg as of 2016.
- What is the difference in potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (mop) — agricultural use between Burundi and Luxembourg?
- 102 t, with Burundi ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Burundi and Luxembourg?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2011.
- How do Burundi and Luxembourg rank globally for potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (mop) — agricultural use?
- Burundi ranks 75th and Luxembourg ranks 78th of 106 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (MOP) — Agricultural Use. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
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