Skip to content
Airleaf

Al ‘Amārah vs Qal‘at Sukkar

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.

Qal‘at Sukkar has more tree cover — 6.7% against 2.3%.

Qal‘at Sukkar has cleaner air right now — AQI 65 against 119.

Tree cover gap
4.4 points
Qal‘at Sukkar is ahead.
Air quality gap
54 AQI
Qal‘at Sukkar is cleaner.
Trees between them
13.5K
Qal‘at Sukkar has more standing.

Tree cover

Share of the 2 km radius under canopy.

2.3%

6.7%

Air quality index

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

119 · Unhealthy for sensitive groups

65 · Moderate

Trees standing

Estimated from the measured canopy area.

7.2K

20.7K

Trees still needed

To reach the same canopy target. Fewer is better.

102K

72.0K

CO₂ absorbed each year

By the trees already standing.

158K kg

456K 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. Both are modelled, with no ground station close enough to either.

PM2.5

Fine particles, the pollutant that usually sets the index.

43 µg/m³

18.6 µg/m³

PM10

Coarser particles — dust, pollen, road grit.

136 µg/m³

43.3 µg/m³

Nitrogen dioxide

Mostly traffic and combustion.

4.9 µg/m³

7.2 µg/m³

Ozone

Forms in sunlight; peaks on hot, still afternoons.

76 µg/m³

66 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.

Al ‘AmārahQal‘at Sukkar· daily US EPA index, last 7 days
022545022 Sept25 Sept28 Sept
Daily air quality index for Al ‘Amārah and Qal‘at Sukkar
DayAl ‘AmārahQal‘at Sukkar
22 Sept9075
23 Sept19698
24 Sept40298
25 Sept42872
26 Sept26073
27 Sept17078
28 Sept10863

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. Qal‘at Sukkar leads here at 6.7%.

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: Al ‘Amārah reads 119 (unhealthy for sensitive groups) and Qal‘at Sukkar reads 65 (moderate) right now.

Frequently asked

Al ‘Amārah and Qal‘at Sukkar, answered

Which has more trees, Al ‘Amārah or Qal‘at Sukkar?

Qal‘at Sukkar, with roughly 20,712 trees inside its 2 km radius against 7,204. Tree cover tells a slightly different story from raw count: Qal‘at Sukkar has the denser canopy at 6.7%.

Which has better air quality, Al ‘Amārah or Qal‘at Sukkar?

Qal‘at Sukkar right now, at AQI 65 against 119 — a gap of 54 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?

Al ‘Amārah needs about 102,422 more to reach its canopy target, and Qal‘at Sukkar about 72,028. 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 Al ‘Amārah with somewhere else

This place

Al ‘Amārah

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