Anyang-si vs Gimpo-si
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.
Gimpo-si has more tree cover — 45.2% against 44.3%.
Gimpo-si has cleaner air right now — AQI 38 against 63.
- Tree cover gap
- 0.9 points
- Gimpo-si is ahead.
- Air quality gap
- 25 AQI
- Gimpo-si is cleaner.
- Trees between them
- 2.7K
- Gimpo-si has more standing.
Tree cover
Share of the 2 km radius under canopy.
44.3%
45.2%
Air quality index
US EPA index, live, with its band. Lower is better.
63 · Moderate
38 · Good
Trees standing
Estimated from the measured canopy area.
139K
142K
Trees still needed
To reach the same canopy target. Fewer is better.
0
0
CO₂ absorbed each year
By the trees already standing.
3.1M kg
3.1M 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. Anyang-si is read from nearby ground stations and Gimpo-si is modelled — worth knowing, since the two are not quite like for like.
PM2.5
Fine particles, the pollutant that usually sets the index.
17.7 µg/m³
7.9 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.
| Day | Anyang-si | Gimpo-si |
|---|---|---|
| 22 Sept | 60 | 67 |
| 23 Sept | 67 | 76 |
| 24 Sept | 69 | 71 |
| 25 Sept | 93 | 92 |
| 26 Sept | 54 | 61 |
| 27 Sept | 87 | 95 |
| 28 Sept | 60 | 53 |
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. Gimpo-si leads here at 45.2%.
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: Anyang-si reads 63 (moderate) and Gimpo-si reads 38 (good) right now.
Frequently asked
Anyang-si and Gimpo-si, answered
Which has more trees, Anyang-si or Gimpo-si?
Gimpo-si, with roughly 141,858 trees inside its 2 km radius against 139,173. Tree cover tells a slightly different story from raw count: Gimpo-si has the denser canopy at 45.2%.
Which has better air quality, Anyang-si or Gimpo-si?
Gimpo-si right now, at AQI 38 against 63 — a gap of 25 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?
Anyang-si needs about 0 more to reach its canopy target, and Gimpo-si about 0. 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
- Anyang-si vs Ansan-si42% tree cover · AQI 36Compare
- Anyang-si vs Suwon26% tree cover · AQI 45Compare
- Anyang-si vs Bucheon-si31% tree cover · AQI 56Compare
- Anyang-si vs Seongnam-si38% tree cover · AQI 56Compare
- Anyang-si vs Incheon19% tree cover · AQI 38Compare
- Anyang-si vs Seoul26% tree cover · AQI 56Compare
Build your own
Compare Anyang-si with somewhere else
This place
Anyang-si
Want a different pair? Browse comparisons or measure any address.