Baranovichi vs Espoo
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.
Espoo has more tree cover — 74.8% against 55.9%.
Espoo has cleaner air right now — AQI 11 against 30.
- Tree cover gap
- 18.9 points
- Espoo is ahead.
- Air quality gap
- 19 AQI
- Espoo is cleaner.
- Trees between them
- 59.7K
- Espoo has more standing.
Belarus
Finland
Tree cover
Share of the 2 km radius under canopy.
55.9%
74.8%
Air quality index
US EPA index, live, with its band. Lower is better.
30 · Good
11 · Good
Trees standing
Estimated from the measured canopy area.
175K
235K
Trees still needed
To reach the same canopy target. Fewer is better.
0
0
CO₂ absorbed each year
By the trees already standing.
3.9M kg
5.2M 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. Espoo is read from nearby ground stations and Baranovichi is modelled — worth knowing, since the two are not quite like for like.
PM2.5
Fine particles, the pollutant that usually sets the index.
7.3 µg/m³
2.6 µg/m³
PM10
Coarser particles — dust, pollen, road grit.
10.3 µg/m³
7 µg/m³
Nitrogen dioxide
Mostly traffic and combustion.
1.7 µg/m³
21.1 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.
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. Espoo leads here at 74.8%.
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: Baranovichi reads 30 (good) and Espoo reads 11 (good) right now.
Frequently asked
Baranovichi and Espoo, answered
Which has more trees, Baranovichi or Espoo?
Espoo, with roughly 234,991 trees inside its 2 km radius against 175,264. Tree cover tells a slightly different story from raw count: Espoo has the denser canopy at 74.8%.
Which has better air quality, Baranovichi or Espoo?
Espoo right now, at AQI 11 against 30 — a gap of 19 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?
Baranovichi needs about 0 more to reach its canopy target, and Espoo 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
- Baranovichi vs Lida63% tree cover · AQI 28Compare
- Baranovichi vs Pinsk47% tree cover · AQI 30Compare
- Baranovichi vs Minsk35% tree cover · AQI 31Compare
- Baranovichi vs Hrodna54% tree cover · AQI 52Compare
- Baranovichi vs Helsinki29% tree cover · AQI 19Compare
- Baranovichi vs Vantaa60% tree cover · AQI 18Compare
Build your own
Compare Baranovichi with somewhere else
This place
Baranovichi
Want a different pair? Browse comparisons or measure any address.