Skip to content
Airleaf

Abū Ghurayb vs Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah

Tree cover and air quality for both, measured the same way: Sentinel-2 imagery at 10 m detail over a 2 km radius from each city centre, and the live US EPA air quality index. Same radius and same index, so the two numbers compare directly.

Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah has more tree cover — 6.0% against 5.4%.

Abū Ghurayb has cleaner air right now — AQI 102 against 114.

Tree cover gap
0.6 points
Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah is ahead.
Air quality gap
12 AQI
Abū Ghurayb is cleaner.
Trees between them
1.8K
Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah has more standing.

Tree cover

Share of the 2 km radius under canopy.

5.4%

6.0%

Air quality index

US EPA index, live, with its band. Lower is better.

102 · Unhealthy for sensitive groups

114 · Unhealthy for sensitive groups

Trees standing

Estimated from the measured canopy area.

17.0K

18.8K

Trees still needed

To reach the same canopy target. Fewer is better.

93.0K

90.7K

CO₂ absorbed each year

By the trees already standing.

373K kg

413K kg

Air quality in detail

What each city is breathing

Concentrations in µg/m³, measured at the same moment as the index above. Lower is better in every row. Abū Ghurayb is read from nearby ground stations and Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah is modelled — worth knowing, since the two are not quite like for like.

PM2.5

Fine particles, the pollutant that usually sets the index.

36 µg/m³

40.6 µg/m³

The last week, day by day

A single reading can catch a city on a bad afternoon. The week says whether it was the weather or the place.

Abū GhuraybNāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah· daily US EPA index, last 7 days
05010022 Sept25 Sept28 Sept
Daily air quality index for Abū Ghurayb and Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah
DayAbū GhuraybNāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah
22 Sept8071
23 Sept8689
24 Sept5557
25 Sept4856
26 Sept5863
27 Sept7677
28 Sept8892

Reading these numbers

What is actually being measured

Tree cover

The share of ground under canopy inside a 2 km radius of each city centre, read from Sentinel-2 satellite imagery at 10 m detail. It is a measurement of that circle, not of the whole municipality — which is exactly what makes the two comparable, since city boundaries are drawn to wildly different rules around the world. Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah leads here at 6.0%.

Air quality index

The live US EPA index, computed from current pollutant concentrations — ground stations where a city has them nearby, and a model everywhere else. It moves hour to hour, so this is a snapshot rather than a verdict on either place: Abū Ghurayb reads 102 (unhealthy for sensitive groups) and Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah reads 114 (unhealthy for sensitive groups) right now.

Frequently asked

Abū Ghurayb and Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah, answered

Which has more trees, Abū Ghurayb or Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah?

Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah, with roughly 18,774 trees inside its 2 km radius against 16,965. Tree cover tells a slightly different story from raw count: Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah has the denser canopy at 6.0%.

Which has better air quality, Abū Ghurayb or Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah?

Abū Ghurayb right now, at AQI 102 against 114 — a gap of 12 points. This is a live reading rather than an annual average, so it can reverse within a day.

How many more trees does each city need?

Abū Ghurayb needs about 92,991 more to reach its canopy target, and Nāḩiyat al Iskandarīyah about 90,742. The target is the same share of ground for both, so the figures are directly comparable.

Are these two measured the same way?

Yes — that is the point of the page. Identical radius, identical satellite source at 10 m detail, and the same US EPA index for air. Nothing here is adjusted for population, city limits or climate, so the numbers describe the same-sized circle of ground in each place.

Keep going

Other comparisons nearby

Build your own

Compare Abū Ghurayb with somewhere else

This place

Abū Ghurayb

Want a different pair? Browse comparisons or measure any address.