Papua New Guinea vs Trinidad and Tobago: Potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (MOP) — Agricultural Use
Potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (MOP) — Agricultural Use over time
- Papua New Guinea
- Trinidad and Tobago
How they compare
Trinidad and Tobago currently reports 1,520 t against 1,236 t in Papua New Guinea, a difference of 284 t.
That makes Trinidad and Tobago's figure about 1.2 times Papua New Guinea's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 5 shared years of data; in 2002 it was Trinidad and Tobago ahead.
Papua New Guinea ranks 74th and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 72nd of 106 countries.
Trinidad and Tobago has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (mop) — agricultural use, Papua New Guinea or Trinidad and Tobago?
- Trinidad and Tobago, at 1,520 t against 1,236 t in Papua New Guinea as of 2011.
- What is the difference in potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (mop) — agricultural use between Papua New Guinea and Trinidad and Tobago?
- 284 t, with Trinidad and Tobago ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Papua New Guinea and Trinidad and Tobago?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2006.
- How do Papua New Guinea and Trinidad and Tobago rank globally for potassium chloride (muriate of potash) (mop) — agricultural use?
- Papua New Guinea ranks 74th and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 72nd 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