Sacaba vs San Miguel de Tucumán
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.
San Miguel de Tucumán has more tree cover — 11.7% against 8.5%.
Sacaba has cleaner air right now — AQI 38 against 96.
- Tree cover gap
- 3.2 points
- San Miguel de Tucumán is ahead.
- Air quality gap
- 58 AQI
- Sacaba is cleaner.
- Trees between them
- 10.1K
- San Miguel de Tucumán has more standing.
Bolivia
Argentina
Tree cover
Share of the 2 km radius under canopy.
8.5%
11.7%
Air quality index
US EPA index, live, with its band. Lower is better.
38 · Good
96 · Moderate
Trees standing
Estimated from the measured canopy area.
26.7K
36.8K
Trees still needed
To reach the same canopy target. Fewer is better.
67.5K
57.5K
CO₂ absorbed each year
By the trees already standing.
587K kg
809K 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. San Miguel de Tucumán is read from nearby ground stations and Sacaba is modelled — worth knowing, since the two are not quite like for like.
PM2.5
Fine particles, the pollutant that usually sets the index.
9.1 µg/m³
33.7 µg/m³
PM10
Coarser particles — dust, pollen, road grit.
9.3 µg/m³
37.9 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 | Sacaba | San Miguel de Tucumán |
|---|---|---|
| 22 Sept | 39 | 42 |
| 23 Sept | 44 | 34 |
| 24 Sept | 54 | 45 |
| 25 Sept | 54 | 57 |
| 26 Sept | 41 | 58 |
| 27 Sept | 34 | 64 |
| 28 Sept | 39 | 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. San Miguel de Tucumán leads here at 11.7%.
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: Sacaba reads 38 (good) and San Miguel de Tucumán reads 96 (moderate) right now.
Frequently asked
Sacaba and San Miguel de Tucumán, answered
Which has more trees, Sacaba or San Miguel de Tucumán?
San Miguel de Tucumán, with roughly 36,757 trees inside its 2 km radius against 26,704. Tree cover tells a slightly different story from raw count: San Miguel de Tucumán has the denser canopy at 11.7%.
Which has better air quality, Sacaba or San Miguel de Tucumán?
Sacaba right now, at AQI 38 against 96 — a gap of 58 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?
Sacaba needs about 67,544 more to reach its canopy target, and San Miguel de Tucumán about 57,491. 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 Sacaba with somewhere else
This place
Sacaba
Want a different pair? Browse comparisons or measure any address.