Air Quality score
Health-oriented air-quality conditions with context from WHO, EEA, and EPA benchmarks.
Air Quality in Los Angeles66/100
Air Quality
Air Quality in Los Angeles
Los Angeles' air-quality profile is shaped by basin geography, traffic, and seasonal wildfire smoke, with long-running policy attention. Air Quality in Los Angeles scores 66/100, placing it in the developing group of the indexed set.
- Last updated
- 2026-05-16
- Data year
- 2025
- Module score
- 66/100
Clean-air score
66/100
Mid-tier baseline with seasonal wildfire and ozone exposure.
Primary pollutant watch
Ozone and PM2.5
Ozone and fine particles are the central health benchmarks.
Monitoring confidence
High
EPA standards and reporting anchor pollutant interpretation.
Los Angeles air quality data table
This HTML table mirrors the visible score cards so important comparison data is never trapped in a browser-only chart.
| Metric | Value | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Clean-air score | 66/100 | Trend has improved meaningfully over decades. |
| Primary pollutant watch | Ozone and PM2.5 | Wildfire smoke drives episodic spikes. |
| Monitoring confidence | High | Public monitoring supports trend visibility. |
Air Quality city comparison
A crawlable comparison across a selection of same-country and top-scoring cities. The complete set is reachable via the rankings, the cities index, and each city profile.
| City | Score | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Los Angeles (this page) | 66/100 | Los Angeles' air-quality profile is shaped by basin geography, traffic, and seasonal wildfire smoke, with long-running policy attention. |
| Seattle | 84/100 | Seattle has strong baseline air quality with episodic wildfire smoke the main seasonal concern. |
| Madison | 80/100 | Madison's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| San Francisco | 78/100 | San Francisco has a healthy baseline air profile, with episodic wildfire-smoke events as the main exposure pressure in recent years. |
| Boston | 78/100 | Boston's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Minneapolis | 78/100 | Minneapolis's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Washington DC | 76/100 | Washington DC's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| San Diego | 76/100 | San Diego's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Portland | 76/100 | Portland's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Raleigh | 76/100 | Raleigh's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Boulder | 76/100 | Boulder's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Garland | 75/100 | Garland's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Santa Clarita | 75/100 | Santa Clarita's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Oyster Bay | 75/100 | Oyster Bay's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Jackson | 74/100 | Jackson's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Chicago | 74/100 | Chicago's air-quality profile is moderate-to-good, shaped by traffic and industrial sources, with strong EPA monitoring. |
| Charlotte | 74/100 | Charlotte's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Tampa | 74/100 | Tampa's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Orlando | 74/100 | Orlando's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Columbus | 74/100 | Columbus's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Kansas City | 74/100 | Kansas City's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Milwaukee | 74/100 | Milwaukee's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Chandler | 74/100 | Chandler's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Indianapolis | 73/100 | Indianapolis's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| San Antonio | 73/100 | San Antonio's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Cincinnati | 73/100 | Cincinnati's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Cleveland | 73/100 | Cleveland's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Laredo | 73/100 | Laredo's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Conroe | 73/100 | Conroe's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| Colorado Springs | 72/100 | Colorado Springs's air-quality profile is a directional indicator framed against WHO and regional benchmarks; verified city-level measurements appear in the dedicated air-quality dataset section once integrated. |
| New York | 72/100 | New York has extensive monitoring and policy capacity, but particulate and ozone exposure remain important health signals. |
Interpretation
Air-quality scoring weighs pollutant exposure against monitoring depth and policy momentum. Basin geography concentrates pollutants. Across the indexed cities the air quality average is 64/100, so Los Angeles is close to the median for this dimension. Data year 2025; last updated 2026-05-16. Drawn from 2 institutional references.
Read this module with the main open the los angeles city profile and the read the scoring methodology page so single-topic pages do not hide tradeoffs across dimensions.
Structured indicators on this page are directional and intended for orientation. Verified datasets are being integrated; official sources should be used for critical decisions.
Sources
2 institutional references inform this view, listed below with reliability notes. Structured indicators on this page are directional and intended for orientation; verified datasets are being integrated and official sources should be used for critical decisions.
- World Health Organization: WHO Global Air Quality Guidelines
Used to normalize air-quality indicators toward health-protective benchmarks.
- US Environmental Protection Agency: National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Used where United States city comparisons need air-quality benchmark context.
Continue exploring
These links connect module pages back to city, ranking, and sibling topic paths with crawlable href values.
Los Angeles city profile
Return to the complete Los Angeles profile with all module scores and source context.
Cost of Living in Los Angeles
Affordability, essential costs, and day-to-day financial pressure for residents.
Energy in Los Angeles
Clean-energy readiness, grid resilience, and solar or efficiency opportunity signals.
Safety in Los Angeles
Personal safety, institutional trust, and resilience signals informed by international safety and crime data.
Internet Speed in Los Angeles
Broadband and mobile connectivity quality, latency, and digital-readiness signals for residents and remote workers.
Climate Risk in Los Angeles
Climate exposure, hazard frequency, and adaptation context for floods, heat, storms, and wildfires.
Overall Intelligence
A balanced ranking of cities across affordability, air quality, clean-energy readiness, and resilience.
Quality of Life
Cities that combine strong services, mobility, safety, clean air, and resilience into a healthy day-to-day profile.