- Tree cover
- 10.8%
- Air quality
- 32Good
- Trees in this area
- 33.9K
- More trees needed
- 60.3K
- Area analyzed
- 12.57 km²
- Satellite image
- Sep 16, 2026
Sukrah's tree count comes to 33,929 trees across 12.57 km² — 19 points below the 30% tree-cover level considered healthy for this area, meaning roughly 60,319 more trees would close the gap. Air quality currently reads AQI 32 (Good): Air quality is satisfactory for everyone.
Tree cover detail
Tree cover in Sukrah: Critically low
10.8% tree cover against a 30% healthy-neighborhood target, across 12.57 km².
Trees in this area
33,929
Target trees
94,248
More trees needed
60,319
CO₂ if planted / yr
1,327 t
Air quality detail
Air quality in Sukrah today: AQI 32, Good
Observed Oct 19, 12:00 local time via Open-Meteo / CAMS, US EPA index. Values in µg/m³.
Model estimate · no ground station nearby
Health signal
Air quality is satisfactory for everyone.
PM2.5
5.7
PM10
9.3
NO₂
2.9
O₃
80.0
SO₂
1.8
CO
127.0
Deforestation · 2001–2025
How much forest has Sukrah lost?
Since 2001, the area within 10 km of Sukrah has lost about 64 hectares of forest (about 89 football pitches): 20% of the forest it had in 2000. Most of it (76%) was deforestation, forest cleared for good, mainly for towns and roads.
2018: satellite photo from September 2018 of a 5 × 5 km area in the city centre.
- Forest lost since 2001
- 64 haabout 89 football pitches
- Share of its forest
- 20%of what there was in 2000
- Cleared for good
- 48 hadeforestation: turned into farms, mines or towns
The worst year was 2009, when about 18 hectares of forest were lost.
Hectares of forest lost each year
Show the figures as a table
| Year | Cleared for good | Can grow back | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2002 | 2 ha | under 1 ha | 2 ha |
| 2003 | 4 ha | 1 ha | 5 ha |
| 2004 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2005 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2006 | 3 ha | under 1 ha | 3 ha |
| 2007 | 6 ha | under 1 ha | 6 ha |
| 2008 | 2 ha | 6 ha | 8 ha |
| 2009 | 18 ha | under 1 ha | 18 ha |
| 2010 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2011 | 4 ha | under 1 ha | 5 ha |
| 2012 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2013 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2014 | under 1 ha | 1 ha | 2 ha |
| 2015 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2016 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2017 | under 1 ha | 2 ha | 3 ha |
| 2018 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2019 | 1 ha | 1 ha | 2 ha |
| 2020 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2021 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2022 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
| 2023 | 1 ha | under 1 ha | 2 ha |
| 2024 | 2 ha | under 1 ha | 2 ha |
| 2025 | under 1 ha | under 1 ha | under 1 ha |
What is causing deforestation around Sukrah?
- Towns and roadscleared for good74% · 47 ha
- Wildfirescan grow back21% · 14 ha
- Farms, pasture and plantationscleared for good1.4% · under 1 ha
Also: mining and energy, unknown causes.
Causes for 2025 are estimates, based on what caused forest loss in the same places up to 2024.
Forest gained and lost, 2000–2020
- Forest in 2000
- 469 ha
- Forest in 2020
- 502 ha
- Overall change
- +33 hamore forest than in 2000
Comparing satellite maps from 2000 and 2020, the forest around Sukrah grew from about 469 hectares to 502 hectares, a net gain of about 33 hectares (+7%). New forest grew on about 59 hectares, while 27 hectares were lost.
These 2000 and 2020 maps, from the University of Maryland, count any land with trees taller than 5 m as forest, including plantations and orchards. Forest that was cut or burned and had grown back by 2020 counts in both years, so the loss here is smaller than the yearly figures.
These figures cover everything within 10 km of the city centre, a wider area than the report above, because forest is usually lost at a city's edges.
Source: Hansen/UMD/Google/USGS/NASA, Global Forest Change (GFC-2025-v1.13); causes: WRI/Google DeepMind drivers of forest loss; both CC BY 4.0, summed by Airleaf for each area. Forest gained and lost 2000–2020: Potapov et al. 2022, UMD GLAD Global Land Cover and Land Use Change, CC BY 4.0. Images: contains modified Copernicus Sentinel data. How it's measured
In the same region
Measured cities near Sukrah
Same 2 km radius, same index — so they compare directly.
- El Mourouj18.5 km
Tunisia
- Tree cover
- 2%
- Air quality
- 32
- Hammamet62.5 km
Tunisia
- Tree cover
- 9%
- Air quality
- 28
- Sousse122.1 km
Tunisia
- Tree cover
- 2%
- Air quality
- 33
- Kairouan134.0 km
Tunisia
- Tree cover
- 1%
- Air quality
- 31
Build your own
Compare Sukrah with anywhere
This place
Sukrah
Use this data
Put Sukrah's numbers on your site
Free to embed. Updates itself as the measurement refreshes.
Frequently asked
Questions about Sukrah
What is the tree count in Sukrah?
Sukrah has an estimated 33,929 trees across the 12.57 km² measured — 10.8% tree cover, 19 percentage points short of the 30% tree-cover target set for this area.
How many more trees does Sukrah need?
Sukrah needs roughly 60,319 more trees to close a 19-point shortfall against its 30% tree-cover target — about 1,327 t of extra CO₂ absorbed per year once grown.
What is the air quality (AQI) in Sukrah right now?
The latest reading for Sukrah shows an AQI of 32 (Good), observed Oct 19, 12:00 local time via Open-Meteo / CAMS, US EPA index. Air quality is satisfactory for everyone.
How much forest has the area around Sukrah lost since 2001?
Since 2001, the area within 10 km of Sukrah has lost about 64 hectares of forest (about 89 football pitches): 20% of the forest it had in 2000. Most of it (76%) was deforestation, forest cleared for good, mainly for towns and roads. Comparing satellite maps from 2000 and 2020, the forest around Sukrah grew from about 469 hectares to 502 hectares, a net gain of about 33 hectares (+7%). New forest grew on about 59 hectares, while 27 hectares were lost.
How is Sukrah's tree cover and air quality measured?
Tree cover is measured from Sentinel-2 L2A (ESA Copernicus) via Earth Search satellite imagery at 10 m detail across a 2 km radius around La Soukra; the tree count is an estimate derived from that cover. Air quality comes from ground monitoring stations via OpenAQ where one reports nearby, and otherwise, as here, from the Open-Meteo / CAMS model, which may differ from street-level monitors.
See your own area
What does your neighborhood look like?
Pick any point and radius to get the same tree-cover and air-quality breakdown.
Check my address