Was thinking the same. There must be some glitch in how this is calculated, as we definitely have >30% tree coverage in every city. Maybe the vast areas of shrub-filled countryside and farmland are skewing the data.
Not sure. 30% sounds like a lot. The streets in central Amsterdam _might_ have 30% cover if you don’t count the water, but what about the houses, gardens, etc?
But then, as you scale towards higher density (e.g., replacing parking lots with garages), you end up with less space for trees. Unless you put them on top of buildings, ofc.
