Skip to content
Airleaf

Espoo vs Jyväskylä

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 63.0%.

Espoo has cleaner air right now — AQI 9 against 21.

Tree cover gap
11.8 points
Espoo is ahead.
Air quality gap
12 AQI
Espoo is cleaner.
Trees between them
58.4K
Espoo has more standing.
Espoo

Finland

Tree cover

Share of the 2 km radius under canopy.

74.8%

63.0%

Air quality index

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

9 · Good

21 · Good

Trees standing

Estimated from the measured canopy area.

235K

177K

Trees still needed

To reach the same canopy target. Fewer is better.

0

0

CO₂ absorbed each year

By the trees already standing.

5.2M kg

3.9M 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 read from nearby ground stations.

PM2.5

Fine particles, the pollutant that usually sets the index.

2.1 µg/m³

5.1 µg/m³

Nitrogen dioxide

Mostly traffic and combustion.

7.1 µg/m³

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.

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: Espoo reads 9 (good) and Jyväskylä reads 21 (good) right now.

Frequently asked

Espoo and Jyväskylä, answered

Which has more trees, Espoo or Jyväskylä?

Espoo, with roughly 234,991 trees inside its 2 km radius against 176,545. Tree cover tells a slightly different story from raw count: Espoo has the denser canopy at 74.8%.

Which has better air quality, Espoo or Jyväskylä?

Espoo right now, at AQI 9 against 21 — 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?

Espoo needs about 0 more to reach its canopy target, and Jyväskylä 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

Build your own

Compare Espoo with somewhere else

This place

Espoo

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