Metropolitan cities' scorecard for particles (PM2.5) NEPM 24-hour standard, based on analysis of air quality index values, 2009-2014

Ambient air quality
State and trends
Fine particulate matter (PM2.5)Air toxics
Metropolitan cities' scorecard for particles (PM2.5) NEPM 24-hour standard, based on analysis of air quality index values, 2009-2014
Very poor,Poor,Fair,Good,Very good

Adelaide - PM2.5 (24-hour average)

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 71; good 29; fair <1; poor <1; very poor 0

Year(s): 
2016
5
Improving
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Adelaide - PM2.5 (24-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 PM2.5. 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 the 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 trend was determined from analysis of data in the 2009–2014 assessment period . 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 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, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

 

Data/Information sources

Data used in assessment: PM2.5 concentrations (24-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

Brisbane - PM2.5 (24-hour average)

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 91; good 8; fair 1; poor <1; very poor <1

Year(s): 
2016
5
Stable
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Brisbane - PM2.5 (24-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 PM2.5. 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 the 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 trend was determined from analysis of data in the 2009–2014 assessment period . 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 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, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

 

Data/Information sources

Data used in assessment: PM2.5 concentrations (24-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

Canberra - PM2.5 (24-hour average)

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 77; good 17; fair 5; poor 1; very poor <1

Year(s): 
2016
5
Deteriorating
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Canberra - PM2.5 (24-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 PM2.5. 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 the 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 trend was determined from analysis of data in the 2009–2014 assessment period . 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 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, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

 

Data/Information sources

Data used in assessment: PM2.5 concentrations (24-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

Darwin - PM2.5 (24-hour average)

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 58; good 29; fair 10; poor 3; very poor 1

Year(s): 
2016
5
Deteriorating
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Darwin - PM2.5 (24-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 PM2.5. For the metropolitan Darwin airshed, data were used from multiple sites (Casuarina, Palmerston, Winnellie).

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 the 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 trend was determined from analysis of data in the 2009–2014 assessment period . 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 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, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase. .

 

Data/Information sources

Data used in assessment: PM2.5 concentrations (24-hour averages) from multiple NEPM stations (Casuarina, Palmerston, Winnellie) in Darwin airshed. The use of multiple sites is due to several changes to the monitoring plan. Darwin does not have any major industrial point-source emissions, so the PM2.5 concentration is generally consistent across the region.

Quality of data used in assessment: High

 

Data custodian: Northern Territory Environment Protection Authority

 

 

Comments

Nil.

Topics

Hobart - PM2.5 (24-hour average)

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 78; good 17; fair 5; poor 1; very poor <1

Year(s): 
2016
5
Improving
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Hobart - PM2.5 (24-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 PM2.5. For the metropolitan Hobart airshed, that was the Newtown 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 the 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 trend was determined from analysis of data in the 2009–2014 assessment period . 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 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, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

 

Data/Information sources

Data used in assessment: PM2.5 concentrations (24-hour averages) from Newtown NEPM station in Hobart airshed

Quality of data used in assessment: High

 

Data custodian: Environment Protection Authority Tasmania

 

 

Comments

Nil.

Topics

Melbourne - PM2.5 (24-hour average)

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 69; good 27; fair 3; poor 1; very poor <1

Year(s): 
2016
5
Stable
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Melbourne - PM2.5 (24-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 PM2.5. For the metropolitan Melbourne airshed, that was the Alphington 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 the 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 trend was determined from analysis of data in the 2009–2014 assessment period . 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 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, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

 

Data/Information sources

Data used in assessment: PM2.5 concentrations (24-hour averages) from Alphington NEPM station in Melbourne airshed. Note: The Alphington station only measured every third day until February 2014.

Quality of data used in assessment: High

 

Data custodian: Environment Protection Authority Victoria

 

 

Comments

Nil

Topics

Perth - PM2.5 (24-hour average)

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 68; good 30; fair 1; poor <1; very poor <1

Year(s): 
2016
5
Deteriorating
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Perth - PM2.5 (24-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 PM2.5. For the metropolitan Perth airshed, that was the Quinns Rock 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 the 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 trend was determined from analysis of data in the 2009–2014 assessment period . 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 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, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

 

Data/Information sources

Data used in assessment: PM2.5 concentrations (24-hour averages) from Quinns Rock NEPM station in Perth airshed

Quality of data used in assessment: High

 

Data custodian: Office of Environment Protection Authority

 

 

Comments

Nil.

Topics

Sydney - PM2.5 (24-hour average)

Average percentage frequency distribution: very good 64; good 32; fair 3; poor <1; very poor <1

Year(s): 
2016
5
Deteriorating
Confidence (in grade): 
Adequate
Confidence (in trend): 
Adequate
Comparability (to previous reports): 
Not assessed

Sydney - PM2.5 (24-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 PM2.5. For the metropolitan Sydney airshed, that was the Liverpool 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 the 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 trend was determined from analysis of data in the 2009–2014 assessment period . 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 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, the trend is set to ‘improving’ to reflect the increase.

 

Data/Information sources

Data used in assessment: PM2.5 concentrations (24-hour averages) from Liverpool NEPM station in Sydney airshed

Quality of data used in assessment: High

 

Data custodian: New South Wales Environment Protection Authority

 

 

Comments

Nil.

Topics

Darwin began measuring PM2.5 in 2011. Melbourne Alphington station measured every 3 days until February 2014. Assessment trend is determined from trend during assessment period.

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 particles (PM2.5) NEPM 24-hour standard, based on analysis of air quality index values, 2009-2014 . 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-pm25-nepm-24-hour, DOI 10.4226/94/58b65c70bc372