Ecuador vs Uruguay: Potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (MOP) — Agricultural Use
Potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (MOP) — Agricultural Use over time
- Ecuador
- Uruguay
How they compare
Ecuador currently reports 161,428 t against 141,974 t in Uruguay, a difference of 19,454 t.
That makes Ecuador's figure about 1.1 times Uruguay's.
Across all 12 years both countries report, Ecuador has been ahead every year.
Ecuador ranks 14th and Uruguay ranks 16th of 106 countries.
Ecuador has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Ecuador | Uruguay | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 80,913 t | 8,582 t | 72,332 t | Ecuador |
| 2010s | 146,917 t | 77,864 t | 69,053 t | Ecuador |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (mop) — agricultural use, Ecuador or Uruguay?
- Ecuador, at 161,428 t against 141,974 t in Uruguay as of 2023.
- What is the difference in potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (mop) — agricultural use between Ecuador and Uruguay?
- 19,454 t, with Ecuador ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Uruguay?
- 12 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2018.
- How do Ecuador and Uruguay rank globally for potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (mop) — agricultural use?
- Ecuador ranks 14th and Uruguay ranks 16th 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