Air quality comparison · South Sudan, 640 km apart
Juba vs Winejok Air quality index (AQI) today
Juba has cleaner air than Winejok right now: AQI 61 (Moderate) against 86 (Moderate).
Both sit in the same EPA band, so the health advice is the same for each today. Over the past 7 days, on modeled daily averages, Juba averaged AQI 69 against 78, and it was the cleaner of the two on 5 of those days. Juba has lost more forest since 2001. Juba has more tree cover.
Updated . Lower is better on the US EPA index: 0–50 is Good, above 300 is Hazardous. Measured by Airleaf.
Juba61Winejok86
Head to head
Juba vs Winejok at a glance
Juba is ahead on 5 of 6 measures, and Winejok on 1. The better figure in each row is marked.
| Juba | Winejok | |
|---|---|---|
| Air quality nowUS AQI. Lower is better. | 61 (better) | 86 |
| PM2.5Fine particles, µg/m³. | 13 (better) | 31 |
| Past week's averageUS AQI, 7 days. | 69 (better) | 78 |
| Forest lost since 2001Within 10 km of the center. | 17 ha | under 1 ha (better) |
| Tree coverWithin 2 km of the center. | 8.6% (better) | 4.7% |
| Trees still neededTo reach a healthy canopy. | 67.2K (better) | 79.5K |
Air quality today
What is the air like in Juba and Winejok right now?
Juba has cleaner air than Winejok right now: AQI 61 (Moderate) against 86 (Moderate). PM2.5 is setting the index in both.
Winejok's PM2.5 is about 2.1× the WHO's 24-hour guideline of 15 µg/m³.
Both readings are model estimates, with no ground station close enough to either.
JubaWinejok
Concentrations at the same moment as the index above, for the pollutants both places report. Lower is better. The dark marks on the PM2.5 and PM10 rows show the WHO's 24-hour guidelines (15 and 45 µg/m³).
Juba: Model estimate · no ground station nearby. Data: Open-Meteo / CAMS, US EPA index.
Winejok: Model estimate · no ground station nearby. Data: Open-Meteo / CAMS, US EPA index.
The past week
Which had cleaner air over the past 7 days?
Over the past 7 days, on modeled daily averages, Juba averaged AQI 69 against 78, and it was the cleaner of the two on 5 of those days. A single reading can catch a city on a bad afternoon; the week says whether it was the weather or the place.
- Cleaner days
- Juba5Winejok2
- Average AQI
- Juba69Winejok78
- Worst day, AQI
- Juba82Winejok96
The daily numbers (7 days)
| Day | Juba | Winejok |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 5 | 59 | 73 |
| Nov 6 | 73 | 68 |
| Nov 7 | 82 | 79 |
| Nov 8 | 68 | 96 |
| Nov 9 | 68 | 95 |
| Nov 10 | 65 | 66 |
| Nov 11 | 65 | 66 |
Daily averages from the CAMS atmospheric model for both places, so the week compares like with like. They can differ from today's reading at the top of the page wherever that comes from a ground station.
What it means today
Is it safe to go outside in Juba and Winejok today?
Unusually sensitive people should consider limiting long outdoor exertion. Both are in the same EPA band today (Moderate), so the advice is the same.
Exercise outdoors
Fine for most people; unusually sensitive people should take long or hard exercise easier.
Windows
Fine to open; close them if you are sensitive to pollution.
Masks
Not needed for most people.
Air purifier
Worth running if you are sensitive.
Against everywhere else
How do Juba and Winejok compare with the rest of the world?
Right now Juba's air is cleaner than 46% of the 5,420 places Airleaf tracks, and Winejok's is cleaner than 27%. Within South Sudan, that is 100% and 25% of its 5 measured places.
Cleaner air than…
- Juba
- Beats 46%
- Winejok
- Beats 27%
More tree cover than…
- Juba
- Beats 18%
- Winejok
- Beats 10%
Includes model estimates as well as station readings, so it can differ from our most polluted and cleanest air rankings, which use station readings only.
Deforestation · 2001–2025
Which has lost more forest, Juba or Winejok?
Juba has lost more: about 17 ha of forest within 10 km of its center from 2001 to 2025, against under 1 ha around Winejok. 15 ha of that was cleared for good, for farms, mines or towns.
Measured within 10 km of each center, from the yearly satellite maps of forest loss: a wider circle than the one for tree cover, because forest is usually lost at a city's edges.
Worst year: 2007, with 2 ha lost.
No forest lost in any year.
| Juba | Winejok | |
|---|---|---|
| Forest lost since 2001Cleared, burned or logged. | 17 ha | under 1 ha (better) |
| Cleared for goodTurned into farms, mines or towns. | 15 ha | under 1 ha (better) |
| Recent trend2021–2025 against the five years before. | Too little to call | Too little to call |
| Main known cause | Farms, pasture and plantations (56%) | Not classified |
Satellite timelapses
Watch both change, year by year
A clear satellite photo a year of the land around each city. Press play, turn on the forest cleared since the first year, or drag the before and after.
Juba
2017: satellite photo from January 2017 of a 5 × 5 km area in the city center.
Winejok
2017: satellite photo from January 2017 of a 5 × 5 km area in the city center.
Trees
Which has more trees, Juba or Winejok?
Juba has more tree cover: 8.6% of the land within 2 km of its center against 4.7% around Winejok, or about 27,018 trees against 14,765.
The dark mark is each place's canopy target: 30% of the land, raised where air quality is poor.
| Juba | Winejok | |
|---|---|---|
| Trees standingEstimated from the canopy area. | 27.0K (better) | 14.8K |
| Trees still neededTo reach the target. Fewer is better. | 67.2K (better) | 79.5K |
| CO₂ absorbed each yearBy the trees already standing. | 594K kg (better) | 325K kg |
Tree cover on the satellite image
The same 2 km radius around each center, with the tree cover the satellite found marked on it.
Reading these numbers
How this comparison is made
Air quality index
The US EPA index, computed from current pollutant concentrations: ground stations where a place has them nearby, and the CAMS atmospheric model everywhere else. It moves hour to hour, so it is a snapshot rather than a verdict on either place. The guideline marks are from the WHO's 2021 air quality guidelines.
Trees and forest
Tree cover is the share of ground under canopy within 2 km of each center, read from Sentinel-2 satellite imagery at 10 m detail. It measures that circle, not the whole municipality, which is what makes the two comparable. Forest loss comes from the University of Maryland's Global Forest Change maps.
More on the method on the About Airleaf page.
Frequently asked
Juba vs Winejok: your questions answered
Is Juba cleaner than Winejok?
On air quality, yes, right now: Juba reads AQI 61 against 86, a gap of 25 points on the US EPA index. This is a live reading rather than an annual average, so it can reverse within a day. Over the past 7 days, on modeled daily averages, Juba averaged AQI 69 against 78, and it was the cleaner of the two on 5 of those days.
Is it safe to exercise outdoors in Juba and Winejok today?
The advice is the same for both today. Unusually sensitive people should consider limiting long outdoor exertion. Juba reads AQI 61 and Winejok reads AQI 86.
Which has lost more forest, Juba or Winejok?
Juba has lost more: about 17 ha of forest within 10 km of its center from 2001 to 2025, against under 1 ha around Winejok. 15 ha of that was cleared for good, for farms, mines or towns.
Which has more trees, Juba or Winejok?
Juba has more tree cover: 8.6% of the land within 2 km of its center against 4.7% around Winejok, or about 27,018 trees against 14,765. Both figures describe the same-sized circle of ground around each center, not the whole municipality.
How many more trees do Juba and Winejok need?
Juba needs about 67,230 more to reach its canopy target of 30%, and Winejok about 79,482 to reach 30%. The target starts at 30% of the land and rises where air quality is poor.
Are Juba and Winejok measured the same way?
The method is the same: the US EPA index for air, and Sentinel-2 satellite imagery at 10 m detail over an identical radius for trees. Both readings are model estimates, with no ground station close enough to either. Nothing is adjusted for population, city limits or climate.
How often does the Juba vs Winejok comparison update?
The air readings refresh about once an hour, and each reading's local time is shown at the top of the page. Tree cover comes from the latest clear satellite image of each area (Sep 8, 2026 and Sep 19, 2026), and the forest figures are published yearly.
Keep going
Compare them with somewhere else
Build your own
Compare Juba with somewhere else
This place
Juba