Dataisbeautiful

Page 1 of 100

[OC] Preliminary survey of Paradise, CA

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

COMMENTS

● ● ●

The Distribution of Wikipedia Article Size [OC]

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

  • dwna
    1 points Nov 13,2018, 7:50pm

    The data was collected from the wikipedia module for python, graphed with matplotlib.

    There are approximately 53,000 articles in this dataset, slightly under 1% of the total amount of the total number of English Wikipedia articles (currently 5,751,237).

    Each article was retrieved randomly, using wikipedia.random(). The size was calculated from wikipedia.page(args).html().

    There are articles where the size is greater than shown, but the amount of them was too small to fit everything on the graph nicely, so I cut it off at 200 Kb.

COMMENTS

  • dwna
    1 points Nov 13,2018, 7:50pm

    The data was collected from the wikipedia module for python, graphed with matplotlib.

    There are approximately 53,000 articles in this dataset, slightly under 1% of the total amount of the total number of English Wikipedia articles (currently 5,751,237).

    Each article was retrieved randomly, using wikipedia.random(). The size was calculated from wikipedia.page(args).html().

    There are articles where the size is greater than shown, but the amount of them was too small to fit everything on the graph nicely, so I cut it off at 200 Kb.

● ● ●

How Green is Your Province or Territory? [OC]

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 5:19am

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/PaulsEggo!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    Not satisfied with this visual? Think you can do better? Remix this visual with the data in the citation, or read the !Sidebar summon below.


    OC-Bot v2.1.0 | Fork with my code | How I Work

  • Zaroth123
    1099 points Nov 09,2018, 11:09pm

    I was going to joke that Nunavut is red because it doesn't produce any energy but the stats show that that's true so now I don't know what to joke about

  • Khal_Pwno
    140 points Nov 10,2018, 4:18am

    I think PEI is only that high because most of our electricity used here isn't produced here. We get a majority of our electricity from New Brunswick.

  • PaulsEggo
    121 points Nov 09,2018, 11:03pm

    This was inspired by /u/Dr_Engineerd's post here. The data was taken from the National Energy Board. The colours were picked from a palette on Color Brewer 2.0. I put this together in Photoshop, based on this SVG render of Canada.

    The provincial and territorial statistics are as follows:

    ProvincePercentage of renewables
    British Columbia98%
    Alberta13%
    Saskatchewan17%
    Manitoba99%+
    Ontario32%, and 58% uranium
    Quebec99%
    New Brunswick30%, and 30% uranium
    Prince Edward Island98%+
    Nova Scotia22%
    Newfoundland & Labrador95%+
    Yukon95%+
    Northwest Territories35%
    Nunavut0%

    The x%+ is because the stats for some types of renewables on the NEB website say <1%. I'm simply basing these off of the pie charts on each province/territory's page.

  • BlueKnightBrownHorse
    82 points Nov 10,2018, 7:03am

    I agree with "and uranium" in the figures, but I think some people would have a high problem with that.

    I have an erection.

  • jimmyjazzx1150
    14 points Nov 10,2018, 9:02am

    No one is talking about NS so I'll say this. NS has no reason to be so low, it's so dam windy here that we could generate all our power from wind no problem and then with the new powerline built from Newfoundland hydro to smooth out demand.

    We do have a good number of windmills and driving out of the province to the west there are some huge windmill farms but around every town we have a huge NIMBY problem.

    Some investment in off shore windmills, or Cape Breton Island has some of the most sustainable high winds but no where near as many wind mills as we could.

    If your a Nova Scotian or Haligoanian take to your local political members about wanted NS Power to install more renewable energy. They last thing NS power did was REMOVE the grant for renewables. And PV solar still DO NOT count for their solar programs.

    Sorry for keeping the county down.

  • Droid1138
    129 points Nov 10,2018, 4:26am

    Albertan here. Some of us are trying to push into greener sources but most of us are hard to convince to switch over

  • deruch
    47 points Nov 10,2018, 2:34am

    For those unfamiliar with Canadian province and territory abbreviations. Bottom row, left to right:

    • British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia.

    Top row, left to right:

    • Yukon Territory, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Newfoundland & Labrador

    edit: see below.

  • cimmic
    8 points Nov 10,2018, 8:09am

    I would love to see a similar map of the regions in my own country (Denmark), so that regions that are behind can pull themselves together, and the green ones can be proud of themselves so they can invest even more in the green evolution.

  • roguetowel
    29 points Nov 10,2018, 5:04am

    I mean, B.C.'s just living off hydroelectric, aren't we? It's not like there's some sort of innovative tech going on, is there?

  • thetallcanadian
    11 points Nov 10,2018, 8:35am

    I thought Ontario would be higher. Especially since I was under the assumption that the only nuclear power plants were in Ontario and Quebec.

  • ktango95
    4 points Nov 10,2018, 9:31am

    Idk about that. Southern Alberta is packed with wind turbines. Its gotta be a higher percentage than that.

  • Mybugsbunny20
    4 points Nov 10,2018, 9:35am

    This is a great example of how just looking at a chart can be misleading. If you had no idea about the population (or lack of) nunavut, you would think they are the sole reason for polluting the earth. Goes to show you can really do whatever you want with data presentation to push your agenda

  • i7-4790Que
    4 points Nov 10,2018, 9:43am

    "by renewables and uranium"

    it's funny because contrarian people love to use nuclear while they hide behind oil/gas. But it's the biggest oil/gas producers who don't want nuclear OR solar/wind.

    https://imgur.com/gallery/S9wwG

  • YoBooMaFoo
    4 points Nov 10,2018, 10:16am

    Depends how you define “green”. Dams are incredibly environmentally destructive. Hence the whole BC protests on Site C.

  • TheMeisterOfThings
    9 points Nov 10,2018, 6:53am

    And now I realise that I know just 2 names of Canadian Territories/Probinces. Quebec and Newfoundland.

  • Paroxysm111
    3 points Nov 10,2018, 10:19am

    I wish more people knew about this. I hear a lot of people saying there's no point in getting an electric car because the electricity is generated by fossil fuels, but I live in BC. It's all hydro dams. Having an electric car here makes a ton of sense

  • Mollyarty
    3 points Nov 10,2018, 11:07am

    Manitoba uses almost exclusively hydro electric power. That's why we're so green. That being said we do drive a lot and it doesn't look like fossil fuels have been taken in to account here.

  • EngineeringNeverEnds
    5 points Nov 10,2018, 10:11am

    As an environmental engineer, I'm really stoked to finally see nuclear getting lumped in with green technologies.

  • DeeplyClosetedFaggot
    16 points Nov 10,2018, 5:30am

    Quebec, Ontario, Motherboard, SK gaming, Alabama, British Columbus, YouTube, Northwest Territory, Nibiru, New Balance, Pei, Nice shot, Newfoundland. I love Canada.

  • Jacob_Trouba
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 9:13am

    Gotta love Hydro power, just spent my summer working on the Keeyask Generating Station in Northern Manitoba on the Nelson river.

    It was supposed to be ready for next year, but im pretty sure it wont be ready until 2022 at the earliest. They are behind schedule and way over budget, there is something really fishy going on.

    I know times have changed as well as the economy, but the Kettle Generating Station nearby on the same river which is larger, only cost 240 million where as the Keeyask Generating Station is already at 8.7 billion and could go over 10.5 billion in next couple years. Even the Limestone Generating Station, largest in Manitoba and also on the Nelson river, cost only 1.43 billion. Doesn't make much sense to me, Keeyask is also taking longer than the others did.

  • fastinserter
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 10:44am

    I think it's strange that it is a 20, 20, 55, and 5 percent increments for the key.

  • stoicsamuel
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 11:40am

    There's debate about whether or not hydroelectricity should actually be considered renewable. Here's an article that goes into the situation a little bit, but it's US focused, so take it as you will.
    Beyond the fact that a lot of hydroelectric facilities existed before widespread renewable rollout plans had started taking place, causing it to be excluded from these renewable rollout plans so as not to skew the numbers, hydroelectric facilities can have their own environmental issues.

    Here's a study that was done in China that attempted to quantify the methane emissions rising from hydro-reservoirs. When a reservoir is flooded, there's typically a bunch of organic material that is submerged. This matter is then digested, mostly anaerobically, producing methane (a GHG more potent than CO2). Though the equivalent CO2 emissions are still far less than an equivalent, say, coal plant, it's still something to consider.

    Furthermore, there's the effect on the river ecosystems in which these facilities are built. Here's a study that looked at the effect of a hydroelectric plant's operation on a Chinook salmon populations in the Columbia River. Long story short, the operation of the dam had an effect on the success of the population, what a surprise. Of course, there's a huge diversity in the kinds of hydroelectric power facilities and some have virtually no effect on fish-life.

    On that note, these smaller, run-of-river systems typically don't have a reservoir or if they do, it's a lot smaller. So, the methane emissions are greatly reduced, if not eliminated. Also, the water cycle provides the actual energy that's being collected by hydroelectric facilities. So, the source should keep on keepin' on indefinitely, which some argue is the only constraint needed for something to be considered renewable.

    Whatever you end up believing, I think it would be interesting to see this map but only with "new-age" renewables (solar PV, solar thermal power, on and off-shore wind, biofuels, etc.). Such a map might give a better, albeit grimmer, idea of the progress Canada is making on shifting to a renewable energy economy.

    TL;DR: Show me the numbers excluding hydro and nuclear

  • TheLonelyNudist
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 2:43pm

    This map is very misleading, although it does show electricity usage made by renewables, it does not show total energy consumption.

    BC’s energy consumption, for example, is only around 18% made up from electricity.The rest of the energy consumption actually uses energy sources of non-renewables such as oil, coal, or natural gas.Source: http://globe.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/globe_endlessenreport.pdf

  • Neovoe
    3 points Nov 10,2018, 9:19am

    Manitoba chilling in the middle with basically 100% renewables, being the battery for the surrounding provinces and states

  • 2-Shanks
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 9:54am

    Alberta and Saskatchewan would be able to go green if all you other provinces would stop driving and stop eating beef.

    We're the houses that feeds everyone. You're all at the dinner table, complaining about the food and making remarks about how dirty the house is.

  • dsguzbvjrhbv
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 8:46am

    In Canada adding Uranium probably makes sense but generally it does depend on whether things are done cheaper than they should be or with unreliable partners, where the material itself comes from and where it is stored afterwards.

    Renewables includes hydro which can be anywhere from reasonably clean to extremely dirty depending on details of the power plant, the ecosystem it replaces and it's surroundings. Many of them even produce large amounts of methane through anaerobic mud or use so much concrete that the CO2 emission from making that distributed over the long lifetime of it is still substantial

  • northof420
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 9:32am

    Not sure how you got the NWT stats but it’s completely wrong around 75% or more of our power is renewable (hydro). In the video link posted it’s a bit dated now but we have way more solar as well. One community is able to run 100% on solar/battery bank system in the summer (diesel in the winter), we also have been given huge funding to push for even more renewable over the next 10 years!

    Yellowknife alone is around 50% of our population and they’re on hydro (snare/bluefish)Source:Work in industryhttps://youtu.be/T8eRs4OAAV0

  • Clytho
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 10:05am

    After experiencing “Dark NL” in Newfoundland, I find it very hard to believe those stats. One Bunker C oil power plant could not sustain the Avalon when two of the three turbines were down.

  • Alexlayden
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 10:30am

    I would like to take a second and point out that part of the renewable electricity Quebec is producing from our fucking dam is being sold straight to the states

  • MeatySweety
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 10:50am

    Small thing.. The abbreviation for the northwest territories is technically just NT as all provinces and territories just use two letters now.

  • nondirtysocks
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 10:51am

    I live in PEI and I really didn't think that 95% of electricity was produced by renewables or uranium here. For the purpose of this data set, what did you consider to be renewable energy?

  • Recipegatherer
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 11:11am

    Such a gap in percentages. 21-41%? Then 41-95%? 95%+? This data mapping is a bit of a joke, and probably made to make Ontario look good as a comfy light green.

  • white_shadow131
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 11:11am

    Well, if Nova Scotia's provincial government can't pay teachers enough, how will they turn the province green?

  • Simmerdowwnn
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 11:47am

    I moved to alberta 3 years ago and our recycling program is a joke so im not surprised about them trying to find alternative energy solutions. It would also compete with its already discounted oil industry and would cause other political issues. As far as hyrdo goes maybe dams along the saskatchewan river but idk man that could fuck up more things

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 5:19am

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/PaulsEggo!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    Not satisfied with this visual? Think you can do better? Remix this visual with the data in the citation, or read the !Sidebar summon below.


    OC-Bot v2.1.0 | Fork with my code | How I Work

  • Zaroth123
    1099 points Nov 09,2018, 11:09pm

    I was going to joke that Nunavut is red because it doesn't produce any energy but the stats show that that's true so now I don't know what to joke about

  • Khal_Pwno
    140 points Nov 10,2018, 4:18am

    I think PEI is only that high because most of our electricity used here isn't produced here. We get a majority of our electricity from New Brunswick.

  • Nixon4Prez
    291 points Nov 10,2018, 5:49am

    For anyone wondering why AB and SK are so much lower than the provinces surrounding them, it's because they don't have any good hydroelectric sites. BC, MB, ON, and QC all have very large rivers and/or mountains, and the vast majority of their power comes from relatively easy to exploit hydro. Flat places are stuck with coal.

  • PaulsEggo
    121 points Nov 09,2018, 11:03pm

    This was inspired by /u/Dr_Engineerd's post here. The data was taken from the National Energy Board. The colours were picked from a palette on Color Brewer 2.0. I put this together in Photoshop, based on this SVG render of Canada.

    The provincial and territorial statistics are as follows:

    ProvincePercentage of renewables
    British Columbia98%
    Alberta13%
    Saskatchewan17%
    Manitoba99%+
    Ontario32%, and 58% uranium
    Quebec99%
    New Brunswick30%, and 30% uranium
    Prince Edward Island98%+
    Nova Scotia22%
    Newfoundland & Labrador95%+
    Yukon95%+
    Northwest Territories35%
    Nunavut0%

    The x%+ is because the stats for some types of renewables on the NEB website say <1%. I'm simply basing these off of the pie charts on each province/territory's page.

  • BlueKnightBrownHorse
    82 points Nov 10,2018, 7:03am

    I agree with "and uranium" in the figures, but I think some people would have a high problem with that.

    I have an erection.

  • jimmyjazzx1150
    14 points Nov 10,2018, 9:02am

    No one is talking about NS so I'll say this. NS has no reason to be so low, it's so dam windy here that we could generate all our power from wind no problem and then with the new powerline built from Newfoundland hydro to smooth out demand.

    We do have a good number of windmills and driving out of the province to the west there are some huge windmill farms but around every town we have a huge NIMBY problem.

    Some investment in off shore windmills, or Cape Breton Island has some of the most sustainable high winds but no where near as many wind mills as we could.

    If your a Nova Scotian or Haligoanian take to your local political members about wanted NS Power to install more renewable energy. They last thing NS power did was REMOVE the grant for renewables. And PV solar still DO NOT count for their solar programs.

    Sorry for keeping the county down.

  • Droid1138
    129 points Nov 10,2018, 4:26am

    Albertan here. Some of us are trying to push into greener sources but most of us are hard to convince to switch over

  • deruch
    47 points Nov 10,2018, 2:34am

    For those unfamiliar with Canadian province and territory abbreviations. Bottom row, left to right:

    • British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia.

    Top row, left to right:

    • Yukon Territory, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Newfoundland & Labrador

    edit: see below.

  • cimmic
    8 points Nov 10,2018, 8:09am

    I would love to see a similar map of the regions in my own country (Denmark), so that regions that are behind can pull themselves together, and the green ones can be proud of themselves so they can invest even more in the green evolution.

  • roguetowel
    29 points Nov 10,2018, 5:04am

    I mean, B.C.'s just living off hydroelectric, aren't we? It's not like there's some sort of innovative tech going on, is there?

  • thetallcanadian
    11 points Nov 10,2018, 8:35am

    I thought Ontario would be higher. Especially since I was under the assumption that the only nuclear power plants were in Ontario and Quebec.

  • ktango95
    4 points Nov 10,2018, 9:31am

    Idk about that. Southern Alberta is packed with wind turbines. Its gotta be a higher percentage than that.

  • Mybugsbunny20
    4 points Nov 10,2018, 9:35am

    This is a great example of how just looking at a chart can be misleading. If you had no idea about the population (or lack of) nunavut, you would think they are the sole reason for polluting the earth. Goes to show you can really do whatever you want with data presentation to push your agenda

  • i7-4790Que
    4 points Nov 10,2018, 9:43am

    "by renewables and uranium"

    it's funny because contrarian people love to use nuclear while they hide behind oil/gas. But it's the biggest oil/gas producers who don't want nuclear OR solar/wind.

    https://imgur.com/gallery/S9wwG

  • YoBooMaFoo
    4 points Nov 10,2018, 10:16am

    Depends how you define “green”. Dams are incredibly environmentally destructive. Hence the whole BC protests on Site C.

  • TheMeisterOfThings
    9 points Nov 10,2018, 6:53am

    And now I realise that I know just 2 names of Canadian Territories/Probinces. Quebec and Newfoundland.

  • Paroxysm111
    3 points Nov 10,2018, 10:19am

    I wish more people knew about this. I hear a lot of people saying there's no point in getting an electric car because the electricity is generated by fossil fuels, but I live in BC. It's all hydro dams. Having an electric car here makes a ton of sense

  • Mollyarty
    3 points Nov 10,2018, 11:07am

    Manitoba uses almost exclusively hydro electric power. That's why we're so green. That being said we do drive a lot and it doesn't look like fossil fuels have been taken in to account here.

  • EngineeringNeverEnds
    5 points Nov 10,2018, 10:11am

    As an environmental engineer, I'm really stoked to finally see nuclear getting lumped in with green technologies.

  • DeeplyClosetedFaggot
    16 points Nov 10,2018, 5:30am

    Quebec, Ontario, Motherboard, SK gaming, Alabama, British Columbus, YouTube, Northwest Territory, Nibiru, New Balance, Pei, Nice shot, Newfoundland. I love Canada.

  • Jacob_Trouba
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 9:13am

    Gotta love Hydro power, just spent my summer working on the Keeyask Generating Station in Northern Manitoba on the Nelson river.

    It was supposed to be ready for next year, but im pretty sure it wont be ready until 2022 at the earliest. They are behind schedule and way over budget, there is something really fishy going on.

    I know times have changed as well as the economy, but the Kettle Generating Station nearby on the same river which is larger, only cost 240 million where as the Keeyask Generating Station is already at 8.7 billion and could go over 10.5 billion in next couple years. Even the Limestone Generating Station, largest in Manitoba and also on the Nelson river, cost only 1.43 billion. Doesn't make much sense to me, Keeyask is also taking longer than the others did.

  • fastinserter
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 10:44am

    I think it's strange that it is a 20, 20, 55, and 5 percent increments for the key.

  • stoicsamuel
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 11:40am

    There's debate about whether or not hydroelectricity should actually be considered renewable. Here's an article that goes into the situation a little bit, but it's US focused, so take it as you will.
    Beyond the fact that a lot of hydroelectric facilities existed before widespread renewable rollout plans had started taking place, causing it to be excluded from these renewable rollout plans so as not to skew the numbers, hydroelectric facilities can have their own environmental issues.

    Here's a study that was done in China that attempted to quantify the methane emissions rising from hydro-reservoirs. When a reservoir is flooded, there's typically a bunch of organic material that is submerged. This matter is then digested, mostly anaerobically, producing methane (a GHG more potent than CO2). Though the equivalent CO2 emissions are still far less than an equivalent, say, coal plant, it's still something to consider.

    Furthermore, there's the effect on the river ecosystems in which these facilities are built. Here's a study that looked at the effect of a hydroelectric plant's operation on a Chinook salmon populations in the Columbia River. Long story short, the operation of the dam had an effect on the success of the population, what a surprise. Of course, there's a huge diversity in the kinds of hydroelectric power facilities and some have virtually no effect on fish-life.

    On that note, these smaller, run-of-river systems typically don't have a reservoir or if they do, it's a lot smaller. So, the methane emissions are greatly reduced, if not eliminated. Also, the water cycle provides the actual energy that's being collected by hydroelectric facilities. So, the source should keep on keepin' on indefinitely, which some argue is the only constraint needed for something to be considered renewable.

    Whatever you end up believing, I think it would be interesting to see this map but only with "new-age" renewables (solar PV, solar thermal power, on and off-shore wind, biofuels, etc.). Such a map might give a better, albeit grimmer, idea of the progress Canada is making on shifting to a renewable energy economy.

    TL;DR: Show me the numbers excluding hydro and nuclear

  • TheLonelyNudist
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 2:43pm

    This map is very misleading, although it does show electricity usage made by renewables, it does not show total energy consumption.

    BC’s energy consumption, for example, is only around 18% made up from electricity.The rest of the energy consumption actually uses energy sources of non-renewables such as oil, coal, or natural gas.Source: http://globe.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/globe_endlessenreport.pdf

  • Neovoe
    3 points Nov 10,2018, 9:19am

    Manitoba chilling in the middle with basically 100% renewables, being the battery for the surrounding provinces and states

  • 2-Shanks
    2 points Nov 10,2018, 9:54am

    Alberta and Saskatchewan would be able to go green if all you other provinces would stop driving and stop eating beef.

    We're the houses that feeds everyone. You're all at the dinner table, complaining about the food and making remarks about how dirty the house is.

  • dsguzbvjrhbv
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 8:46am

    In Canada adding Uranium probably makes sense but generally it does depend on whether things are done cheaper than they should be or with unreliable partners, where the material itself comes from and where it is stored afterwards.

    Renewables includes hydro which can be anywhere from reasonably clean to extremely dirty depending on details of the power plant, the ecosystem it replaces and it's surroundings. Many of them even produce large amounts of methane through anaerobic mud or use so much concrete that the CO2 emission from making that distributed over the long lifetime of it is still substantial

  • northof420
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 9:32am

    Not sure how you got the NWT stats but it’s completely wrong around 75% or more of our power is renewable (hydro). In the video link posted it’s a bit dated now but we have way more solar as well. One community is able to run 100% on solar/battery bank system in the summer (diesel in the winter), we also have been given huge funding to push for even more renewable over the next 10 years!

    Yellowknife alone is around 50% of our population and they’re on hydro (snare/bluefish)Source:Work in industryhttps://youtu.be/T8eRs4OAAV0

  • Clytho
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 10:05am

    After experiencing “Dark NL” in Newfoundland, I find it very hard to believe those stats. One Bunker C oil power plant could not sustain the Avalon when two of the three turbines were down.

  • Alexlayden
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 10:30am

    I would like to take a second and point out that part of the renewable electricity Quebec is producing from our fucking dam is being sold straight to the states

  • MeatySweety
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 10:50am

    Small thing.. The abbreviation for the northwest territories is technically just NT as all provinces and territories just use two letters now.

  • nondirtysocks
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 10:51am

    I live in PEI and I really didn't think that 95% of electricity was produced by renewables or uranium here. For the purpose of this data set, what did you consider to be renewable energy?

  • Recipegatherer
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 11:11am

    Such a gap in percentages. 21-41%? Then 41-95%? 95%+? This data mapping is a bit of a joke, and probably made to make Ontario look good as a comfy light green.

  • white_shadow131
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 11:11am

    Well, if Nova Scotia's provincial government can't pay teachers enough, how will they turn the province green?

  • Simmerdowwnn
    1 points Nov 10,2018, 11:47am

    I moved to alberta 3 years ago and our recycling program is a joke so im not surprised about them trying to find alternative energy solutions. It would also compete with its already discounted oil industry and would cause other political issues. As far as hyrdo goes maybe dams along the saskatchewan river but idk man that could fuck up more things

● ● ●

A Visualization of Local Plane Traffic (ADS-B) [OC]

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

COMMENTS

● ● ●

[OC] RI Voter Turnout 2012 vs. 2016

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 08,2018, 7:50am

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/SmirkyGraphs!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • SmirkyGraphs
    2 points Nov 08,2018, 7:48am

    Tools used:

    python - data prep

    tableau - visualization

    Source: RI BOE

     

    2018 results by precincts have not been released yet that is why I used 2012/2016.

     

    This visualization compares voter turnout between the 2012 election and 2016 election by Precinct. I choose2012 over 2014 because there is a much larger turnout for presidential elections.

     

    It appears a bit blurry and gets cut short probably because its a bit long, but its as fast as tableau pages goes. If you visit the actual link https://i.imgur.com/UMQXyWU.gif it should be the full thing. If you just want to see the end here is the final image.

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 08,2018, 7:50am

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/SmirkyGraphs!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • SmirkyGraphs
    2 points Nov 08,2018, 7:48am

    Tools used:

    python - data prep

    tableau - visualization

    Source: RI BOE

     

    2018 results by precincts have not been released yet that is why I used 2012/2016.

     

    This visualization compares voter turnout between the 2012 election and 2016 election by Precinct. I choose2012 over 2014 because there is a much larger turnout for presidential elections.

     

    It appears a bit blurry and gets cut short probably because its a bit long, but its as fast as tableau pages goes. If you visit the actual link https://i.imgur.com/UMQXyWU.gif it should be the full thing. If you just want to see the end here is the final image.

● ● ●

The Republican Party's drastic 30 year transformation. [OC]

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 08,2018, 3:26pm

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/phil_g!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • phil_g
    12 points Nov 08,2018, 3:05pm

    DW-NOMINATE is, roughly speaking, a method of quantifying politicians' ideological positions based on their votes in Congress. The researchers who developed it found that two axes were sufficient to classify every in useful ways. The first axis is more or less the liberal-conservative spectrum, from the perspective of greater or lesser government involvement in the economy. The second axis captures regional differences, including opinions on slavery and segregation.

    If you graph the liberal-conservative axis over time, you can not only see the orientation of the US's political parties, you can see how they've shifted over time. Notably, the Democratic Party has remained fairly consistent, but starting in 1980 the Republican Party has moved further and further away from, well, everyone else.

    I pulled the data from the link above into Python with Pandas and graphed it with Matplotlib. I did a graph of the Senate, too, but the greater membership in the house shows trends better, I think.

  • Brodman_area11
    6 points Nov 08,2018, 3:27pm

    So if I’m reading this right, Democrats have shifted a little, Republicans a lot, and the most liberal republicans now are as conservative at the most conservative Republicans during the Regan era?

  • guitmusic12
    1 points Nov 08,2018, 3:14pm

    When did the Republican/Democrat "Switch" happen?

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 08,2018, 3:26pm

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/phil_g!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • phil_g
    12 points Nov 08,2018, 3:05pm

    DW-NOMINATE is, roughly speaking, a method of quantifying politicians' ideological positions based on their votes in Congress. The researchers who developed it found that two axes were sufficient to classify every in useful ways. The first axis is more or less the liberal-conservative spectrum, from the perspective of greater or lesser government involvement in the economy. The second axis captures regional differences, including opinions on slavery and segregation.

    If you graph the liberal-conservative axis over time, you can not only see the orientation of the US's political parties, you can see how they've shifted over time. Notably, the Democratic Party has remained fairly consistent, but starting in 1980 the Republican Party has moved further and further away from, well, everyone else.

    I pulled the data from the link above into Python with Pandas and graphed it with Matplotlib. I did a graph of the Senate, too, but the greater membership in the house shows trends better, I think.

  • Brodman_area11
    6 points Nov 08,2018, 3:27pm

    So if I’m reading this right, Democrats have shifted a little, Republicans a lot, and the most liberal republicans now are as conservative at the most conservative Republicans during the Regan era?

  • YortData
    5 points Nov 08,2018, 4:14pm

    Super interesting that modern Republicans seem to pretty much align with the Federalists.

  • guitmusic12
    1 points Nov 08,2018, 3:14pm

    When did the Republican/Democrat "Switch" happen?

● ● ●

Visualization of temporal interpolation of a Sentinel-2 DataCube [OC]

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 1:42pm

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/Master4pprentice!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • Master4pprentice
    3 points Nov 06,2018, 1:30pm

    Description:

    The left column shows Sentinel-2 acquisition images over a random area for a span of 1 year, where the missing data corresponds to clouds and such. The right column shows the same data after the process of linear interpolation in the temporal dimension. Handling missing data is an important step in such an application of a machine learning pipeline.

    This data was obtained using the python packages eo-learn and sentinelhub-py.

    The image was created in Wolfram Mathematica.

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 1:42pm

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/Master4pprentice!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • Master4pprentice
    3 points Nov 06,2018, 1:30pm

    Description:

    The left column shows Sentinel-2 acquisition images over a random area for a span of 1 year, where the missing data corresponds to clouds and such. The right column shows the same data after the process of linear interpolation in the temporal dimension. Handling missing data is an important step in such an application of a machine learning pipeline.

    This data was obtained using the python packages eo-learn and sentinelhub-py.

    The image was created in Wolfram Mathematica.

● ● ●

[OC] I compiled every text message between my girlfriend and me from the time we started texting for her birthday (about 2 years). These graphs show our most frequently used words and our daily frequency of texting. [OC]

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 1:05pm

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/COLOLFUL_SHEEP!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • COLOLFUL_SHEEP
    6 points Nov 06,2018, 1:03pm

    For this project I collected every text that my girlfriend and I sent to each other since our first text until her birthday. I used a backup software to get the raw data off of my phone. I created a program in C# (yeah, I know) that would parse the data, filter out other text messages, correct spelling, and add everything to a CSV sheet by word and frequency. I modified that code to parse dates of the texts into a separate document, and include any missing dates. After this, I sorted the data in excel, and brought it into illustrator.

    The graphs were generated using Adobe Illustrator's built in bar graph and Pie Chart tools.

  • whatinallfucks
    3 points Nov 06,2018, 1:22pm

    I clicked hoping to find some actual words. I figured articles and what not would be filtered out. I’m mean those words would be the most used for anybody. I wanted to see “grandma” or “fishing” or some such.

  • aprilmariko
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 1:35pm

    It might be interesting to get an overlay of the most common words in the English language to see how the two of you deviate (or don’t) from them

  • nikausenpei
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 2:20pm

    Fun project and great results!! Gave me the motivation to do the same!I’d guess you coul easily sell this as a service

  • davidgilsonuk
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 2:31pm

    That's really cool. I'd have filtered out common words like "the" and "if", etc, because they're always going to be the most common words, and don't tell much of a story of what you communicated about over time. I suspect that if I did the same between my wife and I the common word would change from "love" to the name of our daughter after she was born.

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 1:05pm

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/COLOLFUL_SHEEP!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • COLOLFUL_SHEEP
    6 points Nov 06,2018, 1:03pm

    For this project I collected every text that my girlfriend and I sent to each other since our first text until her birthday. I used a backup software to get the raw data off of my phone. I created a program in C# (yeah, I know) that would parse the data, filter out other text messages, correct spelling, and add everything to a CSV sheet by word and frequency. I modified that code to parse dates of the texts into a separate document, and include any missing dates. After this, I sorted the data in excel, and brought it into illustrator.

    The graphs were generated using Adobe Illustrator's built in bar graph and Pie Chart tools.

  • whatinallfucks
    3 points Nov 06,2018, 1:22pm

    I clicked hoping to find some actual words. I figured articles and what not would be filtered out. I’m mean those words would be the most used for anybody. I wanted to see “grandma” or “fishing” or some such.

  • Palm-treess
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 1:08pm

    This is amazing. I really dig the right side that shows the tops words that were used. What program language did you use?

  • aprilmariko
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 1:35pm

    It might be interesting to get an overlay of the most common words in the English language to see how the two of you deviate (or don’t) from them

  • nikausenpei
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 2:20pm

    Fun project and great results!! Gave me the motivation to do the same!I’d guess you coul easily sell this as a service

  • davidgilsonuk
    1 points Nov 06,2018, 2:31pm

    That's really cool. I'd have filtered out common words like "the" and "if", etc, because they're always going to be the most common words, and don't tell much of a story of what you communicated about over time. I suspect that if I did the same between my wife and I the common word would change from "love" to the name of our daughter after she was born.

● ● ●

[OC] Top 10 Countries by Terrorist Attacks in 1993

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 04,2018, 7:18pm

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/Doktor_Ectoplasm!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • Doktor_Ectoplasm
    1 points Nov 04,2018, 2:29pm

    Dipping my toes into data visualization and analysis.

    Source: CSV file accessed through fivethirtyeight's github dataset repository. The actual data was retrieved by fivethirtyeight on November 13,2015 through the Global Terrorism Database.

    Tools: Python, using IPython, matplotlib, pandas, and numpy.

    I would really enjoy feedback (especially about the design itself)!

  • antros_12
    1 points Nov 04,2018, 3:11pm

    I think it's the number of attacks since 1993 not in 1993 or am I wrong? Can't remember 1993 was such a tough year

COMMENTS

  • OC-Bot
    1 points Nov 04,2018, 7:18pm

    Thank you for your Original Content, /u/Doktor_Ectoplasm!
    Here is some important information about this post:

    I hope this sticky assists you in having an informed discussion in this thread, or inspires you to remix this data. For more information, please read this Wiki page.


    OC-Bot v2.04 | Fork with my code | Message the Mods

  • Doktor_Ectoplasm
    1 points Nov 04,2018, 2:29pm

    Dipping my toes into data visualization and analysis.

    Source: CSV file accessed through fivethirtyeight's github dataset repository. The actual data was retrieved by fivethirtyeight on November 13,2015 through the Global Terrorism Database.

    Tools: Python, using IPython, matplotlib, pandas, and numpy.

    I would really enjoy feedback (especially about the design itself)!

  • antros_12
    1 points Nov 04,2018, 3:11pm

    I think it's the number of attacks since 1993 not in 1993 or am I wrong? Can't remember 1993 was such a tough year

● ● ●

I've been experimenting with visualizing NFL play-by-play data [OC]

Data Is Beautiful

COMMENTS

COMMENTS