Metropolitan cities' scorecard for particles (PM10) NEPM 24-hour 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 for the 2011 report.

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

Component
Summary
Grade
Very poor Poor Fair Good Very good
Confidence
In Grade In Trend
Comparability
To previous years

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 59; good 37; fair 3; poor <1; very poor <1

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

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 42; good 51; fair 5; poor 1; very poor 1

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

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 69; good 29; fair 1; poor <1; very poor <1

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

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

Year(s): 
2011
5
Stable
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 85; good 13; fair 2; poor <1; very poor <1

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

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): 
Limited
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 50; good 38; fair 10; poor 2; very poor 1

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

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 56; good 42; fair 2; poor 0; very poor 0

Year(s): 
2011
5
Stable
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Limited
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 77; good 22; 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

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 73; good 26; fair 1; poor 0; very poor 0

Year(s): 
2011
5
Unclear
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Limited
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 51, good 42; fair 5; poor 1; very poor <1

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

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 36; good 50; fair 11; poor 2; very poor 1

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

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 54; good 43; fair 3; poor <1; very poor <1

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

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 49; good 47; fair 3; poor 0; very poor 0 (Note: borderline very good – good)

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

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 58; good 38; fair 3; poor <1; very poor <1

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

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 50; good 45; fair 4; poor 1; very poor 0 (Note: borderline very good – good)

Year(s): 
2011
4
Stable
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed
Keywood MD, Emmerson KM, Hibberd MF (2016). Ambient air quality: Metropolitan cities' scorecard for particles (PM10) NEPM 24-hour 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-particles-pm10-nepm-24-hour, DOI 10.4226/94/58b65c70bc372