Jiangmen vs Tseung Kwan O
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.
Tseung Kwan O has more tree cover — 75.0% against 25.1%.
Jiangmen has cleaner air right now — AQI 57 against 98.
- Tree cover gap
- 49.9 points
- Tseung Kwan O is ahead.
- Air quality gap
- 41 AQI
- Jiangmen is cleaner.
- Trees between them
- 157K
- Tseung Kwan O has more standing.
China
Hong Kong
Tree cover
Share of the 2 km radius under canopy.
25.1%
75.0%
Air quality index
US EPA index, live, with its band. Lower is better.
57 · Moderate
98 · Moderate
Trees standing
Estimated from the measured canopy area.
77.7K
234K
Trees still needed
To reach the same canopy target. Fewer is better.
15.2K
0
CO₂ absorbed each year
By the trees already standing.
1.7M 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. Tseung Kwan O is read from nearby ground stations and Jiangmen is modelled — worth knowing, since the two are not quite like for like.
PM2.5
Fine particles, the pollutant that usually sets the index.
14.8 µg/m³
34.5 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 | Jiangmen | Tseung Kwan O |
|---|---|---|
| 22 Sept | 151 | 124 |
| 23 Sept | 140 | 109 |
| 24 Sept | 115 | 95 |
| 25 Sept | 102 | 86 |
| 26 Sept | 103 | 77 |
| 27 Sept | 60 | 61 |
| 28 Sept | 51 | 51 |
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. Tseung Kwan O leads here at 75.0%.
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: Jiangmen reads 57 (moderate) and Tseung Kwan O reads 98 (moderate) right now.
Frequently asked
Jiangmen and Tseung Kwan O, answered
Which has more trees, Jiangmen or Tseung Kwan O?
Tseung Kwan O, with roughly 234,441 trees inside its 2 km radius against 77,671. Tree cover tells a slightly different story from raw count: Tseung Kwan O has the denser canopy at 75.0%.
Which has better air quality, Jiangmen or Tseung Kwan O?
Jiangmen right now, at AQI 57 against 98 — a gap of 41 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?
Jiangmen needs about 15,163 more to reach its canopy target, and Tseung Kwan O 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
- Jiangmen vs Shaping25% tree cover · AQI 64Compare
- Jiangmen vs Nantou12% tree cover · AQI 90Compare
- Jiangmen vs Zhongshan26% tree cover · AQI 80Compare
- Jiangmen vs Daliang22% tree cover · AQI 97Compare
- Jiangmen vs Tsing Yi Town55% tree cover · AQI 95Compare
- Jiangmen vs Fanling56% tree cover · AQI 95Compare
Build your own
Compare Jiangmen with somewhere else
This place
Jiangmen
Want a different pair? Browse comparisons or measure any address.