Metropolitan cities' scorecard for ozone (four-hour) NEPM standard, based on analysis of air quality index values 1999-2014

This assessment summary component has changed from 2011.

  • This assessment summary was previously assessed for the years 1999-2008 

The original 2011 summary, grade, trend and confidence levels have been replicated here to assist comparison of changes between reporting cycles.
 

    Metropolitan cities’ score card for ozone (four-hour) NEPM standard, based on analysis of air quality index values, 1999–2008
    Ambient air quality
    State and trends
    Air toxicsOzone
    Metropolitan cities' scorecard for ozone (four-hour) NEPM standard, based on analysis of air quality index values 1999-2014
    Very poor,Poor,Fair,Good,Very good

    Adelaide - ozone (4-hour average)

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 49; good 50; fair 1; poor 0; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2016
    4
    Improving
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Comparable

    Adelaide - ozone (4-hour average)

    20162011
    Ambient air quality
    State and trends

    Approach/Process

    The approach is based on the characterisation of the air quality of an airshed using its worst performing NEPM compliance station (monitoring site) for ozone. For the metropolitan Adelaide airshed, that was the Netley station.

    For each year from 2009 to 2014, monitoring data from the selected station were converted into air quality index values (AQI), which express the measured concentration as a percentage of the standard. An AQI of 100 means that the pollutant is present in the air at the level of the standard. The AQIs were allocated to one of five qualitative categories commonly used by Australian environment protection agencies to report air quality (very good 0–33, good 34–66, fair 67–99, poor 100–149, and very poor 150+).

    The yearly percentage distributions were then used as the basis for assigning an overall AQI for the pollutant at each station using the criteria set out in Table A. The assessment was compared with that given in SoE 2011 to assess the trend. Note that a percentage of <1 means that there are values in a particular category, albeit at a very low count, whereas a percentage of 0 means there are no values present in a category.

    Table A Criteria for assigning overall AQI-based qualitative categories

     

    Annual distribution of AQI values

    Overall category

    Very good (%)

    Good (%)

    Fair (%)

    Poor (%)

    Very poor (%)

    Very good

    >50

    >20

    <10

    <10

    <5

    Good

    >20

    >30

    <20

    <20

    <10

    Fair

    <10

    <20

    >30

    >20

    <10

    Poor

    <10

    <20

    <20

    >30

    >20

    Very poor

    <5

    <10

    <10

    >20

    >50

    Supplementary rules for assessing overall AQI

    • If the percentage very good is greater than 45 and is also greater than the percentage good, the assessment grade is very good.
    • If the percentage good is greater than 75, the percentage very good can be as low as zero and the assessment grade is good.
    • If the assessment grade has stayed the same between the 2011 and 2016 reports but the frequency of percentages within the grade has increased, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

     

    Data/Information sources

    Data used in assessment: Ozone concentrations (4-hour averages) from Netley NEPM station in Adelaide airshed

    Quality of data used in assessment: High

     

    Data custodian: Environment Protection Authority South Australia

     

     

    Comments

    Nil.

    Topics

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 46; good 53; fair 1; poor 0; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2011
    4
    Stable
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Not assessed

    Topics

    Brisbane - ozone (4-hour average)

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 31; good 65; fair 4; poor <1; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2016
    4
    Stable
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Comparable

    Brisbane - ozone (4-hour average)

    20162011
    Ambient air quality
    State and trends

    Approach/Process

    The approach is based on the characterisation of the air quality of an airshed using its worst performing NEPM compliance station (monitoring site) for ozone. For the metropolitan Brisbane airshed, that was the Springwood station.

    For each year from 2009 to 2014, monitoring data from the selected station were converted into air quality index values (AQI), which express the measured concentration as a percentage of the standard. An AQI of 100 means that the pollutant is present in the air at the level of the standard. The AQIs were allocated to one of five qualitative categories commonly used by Australian environment protection agencies to report air quality (very good 0–33, good 34–66, fair 67–99, poor 100–149, and very poor 150+).

    The yearly percentage distributions were then used as the basis for assigning an overall AQI for the pollutant at each station using the criteria set out in Table A. The assessment was compared with that given in SoE 2011 to assess the trend. Note that a percentage of <1 means that there are values in a particular category, albeit at a very low count, whereas a percentage of 0 means there are no values present in a category.

    Table A Criteria for assigning overall AQI-based qualitative categories

     

    Annual distribution of AQI values

    Overall category

    Very good (%)

    Good (%)

    Fair (%)

    Poor (%)

    Very poor (%)

    Very good

    >50

    >20

    <10

    <10

    <5

    Good

    >20

    >30

    <20

    <20

    <10

    Fair

    <10

    <20

    >30

    >20

    <10

    Poor

    <10

    <20

    <20

    >30

    >20

    Very poor

    <5

    <10

    <10

    >20

    >50

    Supplementary rules for assessing overall AQI

    • If the percentage very good is greater than 45 and is also greater than the percentage good, the assessment grade is very good.
    • If the percentage good is greater than 75, the percentage very good can be as low as zero and the assessment grade is good.
    • If the assessment grade has stayed the same between the 2011 and 2016 reports but the frequency of percentages within the grade has increased, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

     

    Data/Information sources

    Data used in assessment: Ozone concentrations (4-hour averages) from Springwood NEPM station in Brisbane airshed

    Quality of data used in assessment: High

     

    Data custodian: Department of Science, Information Technology and Innovation

     

     

    Comments

    Nil.

    Topics

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 31; good 64; fair 55; poor 0; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2011
    4
    Stable
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Not assessed

    Topics

    Canberra - ozone (4-hour average)

    Average percentage frequency distribution: Very good 38; good 61; fair 1; poor 0; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2016
    4
    Stable
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Comparable

    Canberra - ozone (4-hour average)

    20162011
    Ambient air quality
    State and trends

    Approach/Process

    The approach is based on the characterisation of the air quality of an airshed using its worst performing NEPM compliance station (monitoring site) for ozone. For the metropolitan Canberra airshed, that was the Monash station.

    For each year from 2009 to 2014, monitoring data from the selected station were converted into air quality index values (AQI), which express the measured concentration as a percentage of the standard. An AQI of 100 means that the pollutant is present in the air at the level of the standard. The AQIs were allocated to one of five qualitative categories commonly used by Australian environment protection agencies to report air quality (very good 0–33, good 34–66, fair 67–99, poor 100–149, and very poor 150+).

    The yearly percentage distributions were then used as the basis for assigning an overall AQI for the pollutant at each station using the criteria set out in Table A. The assessment was compared with that given in SoE 2011 to assess the trend. Note that a percentage of <1 means that there are values in a particular category, albeit at a very low count, whereas a percentage of 0 means there are no values present in a category.

    Table A Criteria for assigning overall AQI-based qualitative categories

     

    Annual distribution of AQI values

    Overall category

    Very good (%)

    Good (%)

    Fair (%)

    Poor (%)

    Very poor (%)

    Very good

    >50

    >20

    <10

    <10

    <5

    Good

    >20

    >30

    <20

    <20

    <10

    Fair

    <10

    <20

    >30

    >20

    <10

    Poor

    <10

    <20

    <20

    >30

    >20

    Very poor

    <5

    <10

    <10

    >20

    >50

    Supplementary rules for assessing overall AQI

    • If the percentage very good is greater than 45 and is also greater than the percentage good, the assessment grade is very good.
    • If the percentage good is greater than 75, then the percentage very good can be as low as zero and assessment grade is good.
    • If the assessment grade has stayed the same between 2011 and 2016 reports but the frequency of percentages within the grade has increased, then the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

     

    Data/Information sources

    Data used in assessment: Ozone concentrations (four-hour averages) from Monash NEPM station in Canberra airshed

    Quality of data used in assessment: High

     

    Data custodian: Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate

     

     

    Comments

    Nil.

    Topics

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 43; good 55; fair 2; poor 0; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2011
    4
    Deteriorating
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Not assessed

    Topics

    Melbourne - ozone (4-hour average)

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 94; good 6; fair 0; poor 0; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2016
    5
    Improving
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Comparable

    Melbourne - ozone (4-hour average)

    2016
    Ambient air quality
    State and trends

    Approach/Process

    The approach is based on the characterisation of the air quality of an airshed using its worst performing NEPM compliance station (monitoring site) for ozone. For the metropolitan Melbourne airshed, this was the Melton station.

    For each year from 2009 to 2014, monitoring data from the selected station were converted into air quality index values (AQI), which express the measured concentration as a percentage of the standard. An AQI of 100 means that the pollutant is present in the air at the level of the standard. The AQIs were allocated to one of five qualitative categories commonly used by Australian environment protection agencies to report air quality (very good 0–33, good 34–66, fair 67–99, poor 100–149, and very poor 150+).

    The yearly percentage distributions were then used as the basis for assigning an overall AQI for the pollutant at each station using the criteria set out in Table A. The assessment was compared with that given in SoE 2011 to assess the trend. Note that a percentage of <1 means that there are values in a particular category, albeit at a very low count, whereas a percentage of 0 means there are no values present in a category.

    Table A Criteria for assigning overall AQI-based qualitative categories

     

    Annual distribution of AQI values

    Overall category

    Very good (%)

    Good (%)

    Fair (%)

    Poor (%)

    Very poor (%)

    Very good

    >50

    >20

    <10

    <10

    <5

    Good

    >20

    >30

    <20

    <20

    <10

    Fair

    <10

    <20

    >30

    >20

    <10

    Poor

    <10

    <20

    <20

    >30

    >20

    Very poor

    <5

    <10

    <10

    >20

    >50

    Supplementary rules for assessing overall AQI

    • If the percentage very good is greater than 45 and is also greater than the percentage good, the assessment grade is very good.
    • If the percentage good is greater than 75, then the percentage very good can be as low as zero and assessment grade is good.
    • If the assessment grade has stayed the same between 2011 and 2016 reports but the frequency of percentages within the grade has increased, then the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

     

    Data/Information sources

    Data used in assessment: Ozone concentrations (4-hour averages) from Melton NEPM station in Melbourne airshed

    Quality of data used in assessment: High

     

    Data custodian: Environment Protection Authority Victoria

     

     

    Comments

    Nil.

    Topics

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 34; good 63; fair 3; poor 0; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2011
    4
    Stable
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Not assessed

    Topics

    Perth - ozone (4-hour average)

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 67; good 32; fair <1; poor <1; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2016
    5
    Improving
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Comparable

    Perth - ozone (4-hour average)

    20162011
    Ambient air quality
    State and trends

    Approach/Process

    The approach is based on the characterisation of the air quality of an airshed using its worst performing NEPM compliance station (monitoring site) for ozone. For the metropolitan Perth airshed, this was the Rolling Green station.

    For each year from 2009 to 2014, monitoring data from the selected station were converted into air quality index values (AQI), which express the measured concentration as a percentage of the standard. An AQI of 100 means that the pollutant is present in the air at the level of the standard. The AQIs were allocated to one of five qualitative categories commonly used by Australian environment protection agencies to report air quality (very good 0–33, good 34–66, fair 67–99, poor 100–149, and very poor 150+).

    The yearly percentage distributions were then used as the basis for assigning an overall AQI for the pollutant at each station using the criteria set out in Table A. The assessment was compared with that given in SoE 2011 to assess the trend. Note that a percentage of <1 means that there are values in a particular category, albeit at a very low count, whereas a percentage of 0 means there are no values present in a category.

    Table A Criteria for assigning overall AQI-based qualitative categories

     

    Annual distribution of AQI values

    Overall category

    Very good (%)

    Good (%)

    Fair (%)

    Poor (%)

    Very poor (%)

    Very good

    >50

    >20

    <10

    <10

    <5

    Good

    >20

    >30

    <20

    <20

    <10

    Fair

    <10

    <20

    >30

    >20

    <10

    Poor

    <10

    <20

    <20

    >30

    >20

    Very poor

    <5

    <10

    <10

    >20

    >50

    Supplementary rules for assessing overall AQI

    • If the percentage very good is greater than 45 and is also greater than the percentage good, the assessment grade is very good.
    • If the percentage good is greater than 75, then the percentage very good can be as low as zero and assessment grade is good.
    • If the assessment grade has stayed the same between 2011 and 2016 reports but the frequency of percentages within the grade has increased, then the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

     

    Data/Information sources

    Data used in assessment: Ozone concentrations (4-hour averages) from Rolling Green NEPM station in Perth airshed

    Quality of data used in assessment: High

     

    Data custodian: Office of Environment Protection Authority

     

     

    Comments

    Nil.

    Topics

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 16; good 79; fair 4; poor 0; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2011
    4
    Stable
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Not assessed

    Topics

    Sydney - ozone (4-hour average)

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 63; good 37; fair 0; poor 0; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2016
    5
    Improving
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Comparable

    Sydney - ozone (4-hour average)

    20162011
    Ambient air quality
    State and trends

    Approach/Process

    The approach is based on the characterisation of the air quality of an airshed using its worst performing NEPM compliance station (monitoring site) for ozone. For the metropolitan Sydney airshed, this was the Oakdale station.

    For each year from 2009 to 2014, monitoring data from the selected station were converted into air quality index values (AQI), which express the measured concentration as a percentage of the standard. An AQI of 100 means that the pollutant is present in the air at the level of the standard. The AQIs were allocated to one of five qualitative categories commonly used by Australian environment protection agencies to report air quality (very good 0–33, good 34–66, fair 67–99, poor 100–149, and very poor 150+).

    The yearly percentage distributions were then used as the basis for assigning an overall AQI for the pollutant at each station using the criteria set out in Table A. The assessment was compared with that given in SoE 2011 to assess the trend. Note that a percentage of <1 means that there are values in a particular category, albeit at a very low count, whereas a percentage of 0 means there are no values present in a category.Table A Criteria for assigning overall AQI-based qualitative categories

     

    Annual distribution of AQI values

    Overall category

    Very good (%)

    Good (%)

    Fair (%)

    Poor (%)

    Very poor (%)

    Very good

    >50

    >20

    <10

    <10

    <5

    Good

    >20

    >30

    <20

    <20

    <10

    Fair

    <10

    <20

    >30

    >20

    <10

    Poor

    <10

    <20

    <20

    >30

    >20

    Very poor

    <5

    <10

    <10

    >20

    >50

    Supplementary rules for assessing overall AQI

    • If the percentage very good is greater than 45 and is also greater than the percentage good, the assessment grade is very good.
    • If the percentage good is greater than 75, the percentage very good can be as low as zero and the assessment grade is good.
    • If the assessment grade has stayed the same between the 2011 and 2016 reports but the frequency of percentages within the grade has increased, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

     

    Data/Information sources

    Data used in assessment: Ozone concentrations (four-hour averages) from Oakdale NEPM station in Sydney airshed

    Quality of data used in assessment: High

     

    Data custodian: New South Wales Environment Protection Authority

     

     

    Comments

    Nil.

    Topics

    Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 17; good 72; fair 9; poor 2; very poor 0

    Year(s): 
    2011
    4
    Stable
    Confidence (in grade): 
    Adequate
    Confidence (in trend): 
    Adequate
    Comparability (to previous reports): 
    Not assessed

    Topics

    Assessment Summary Key

    Grades

    Very good

    Air quality is considered very good, and air pollution poses little or no risk

    Good

    Air quality is considered good, and air pollution poses little or no risk

    Fair

    Air quality is acceptable. However, there may be a health concerns for very sensitive people

    Poor

    Air quality is unhealthy for sensitive groups. The general population is not likely to be affected in this range

    Very poor

    Air quality is unhealthy, and everyone may begin to experience health effects. People from sensitive groups
    may experience more serious health effects

    Recent Trends

    • Improving

    • Stable

    • Deteriorating

    • Unclear

    Confidence

    • Adequate: Adequate high-quality evidence and high level of consensus

    • Somewhat adequate: Adequate high-quality evidence or high level of consensus

    • Limited: Limited evidence or limited consensus

    • Very limited: Limited evidence and limited consensus

    • Low: Evidence and consensus too low to make an assessment

    Comparability

    • Comparable: Grade and trend are comparable to the previous assessment

    • Somewhat comparable: Grade and trend are somewhat comparable to the previous assessment

    • Not comparable: Grade and trend are not comparable to the previous assessment

    • Not previously assessed

    Keywood MD, Emmerson KM, Hibberd MF (2016). Ambient air quality: Metropolitan cities' scorecard for ozone (four-hour) NEPM standard, based on analysis of air quality index values 1999-2014 . In: Australia state of the environment 2016, Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy, Canberra, https://soe.environment.gov.au/assessment-summary/ambient-air-quality/metropolitan-cities-scorecard-ozone-four-hour-nepm-standard, DOI 10.4226/94/58b65c70bc372