Posts Tagged ‘texas’

How to split up the US (Pete Search)

Tuesday, February 16th, 2010

6a00d83454428269e20120a86baaf6970b-800wi

[Editor's note: Topology analysis of the Facebook social network (how many people in one town are connected to another) overlayed on a curious map base in geographic and regrouped into regions like Greater Texas, Socalistan, and Mormonia. Not quite sure of how the author define's Pacfiica and the map suffers from poor red-green contrast but cool concept.]

Republished from Pete Search.

As I’ve been digging deeper into the data I’ve gathered on 210 million public Facebook profiles, I’ve been fascinated by some of the patterns that have emerged. My latest visualization shows the information by location, with connections drawn between places that share friends. For example, a lot of people in LA have friends in San Francisco, so there’s a line between them.

Looking at the network of US cities, it’s been remarkable to see how groups of them form clusters, with strong connections locally but few contacts outside the cluster. For example Columbus, OH and Charleston WV are nearby as the crow flies, but share few connections, with Columbus clearly part of the North, and Charleston tied to the South:

Columbus Charleston

Some of these clusters are intuitive, like the old south, but there’s some surprises too, like Missouri, Louisiana and Arkansas having closer ties  to Texas than Georgia. To make sense of the patterns I’m seeing, I’ve marked and labeled the clusters, and added some notes about the properties they have in common.

Continue reading at Pete Search . . .

50 States and 50 Metros (fake is the new real)

Tuesday, December 8th, 2009

[Editor’s note: Fascinating look at the cultural geography of the United States sorted by large cities and subtracted from the 50 states. For instance, considered as metros, New York city, Los Angeles, and Chicago are larger in population than the non-metropolitan portions of Texas, California, North Carolina, Florida, and Pa. The author has another good post on subway systems around the world all scaled to the same size. Thanks Jo!]

Republished from fake is the new real.
By Neil Freeman, artist and urban planner.

The fifty largest metro areas (in blue), disaggregated from their states (in orange). Each has been scaled and sorted according to population. The metro areas are US-Census defined CBSAs and MSAs.

Small sampling below. Click on image for all 100 shapes.

50states50metros

Map Scale Calculator Tools? (Kelso)

Monday, December 15th, 2008

Do you know of any good tools for converting a map’s graphic scale bar measurement to a representational fraction (RF)? Please share them! We often think of maps as 1:24,000 or 1:1,000,000 natural scale but more often than not a scale bar is the only indication of scale we have on a map. How to convert that back to the more familiar representational fraction?

What are the features and interface you’d like to see for such a tool?

The best that I’ve been able to dig up is:

From Oregon State University Library
http://oregonstate.edu/~reeset/html/scale.html

Type in the number of units per distance (or distance per unit) and it’ll return the relational fraction. It does not do a very good job allowing you to type in both the units and the distance as variable. I hardly ever find scale bars on maps that are exactly an inch long. So involves some pre-math to get this tool to work.

Screenshots below:

This University of Texas site does the opposite:
http://www.beg.utexas.edu/GIS/tools/scale2.htm

Enter the representational fraction of the map and get “1 inch = X miles” verbal statements where the left and right terms do not have the same units.

Then there is the general problem of converting between map units.

Google provides the most ready answer:
Type in “convert 12 miles to km” and it will return the conversion.

The same OSU site also has a version:

Read more about map scales.

Some example map scales and worked formula examples from Richard Layton (source).

  • 1 inch equals 10 miles
  • 1 inch = 10 miles
  • 1 inch = 10 miles x 12 inches/foot x 5280 feet/mile
  • 1 inch = 10 x 63360 inches = 633,600 inches
  • 1:633,600

To convert from RF to Verbal Scale you convert the fraction to familiar units of measurements; for example:

  • 1:250,000
  • 1 inch = 250,000 inches
  • 1 inch = 250,000 inches [d] 12 inches/foot = 20,833.3 feet
  • 1 inch = 20,833.3 feet [d] 5280 feet/mile = 4 miles or
  • 1 inch = 250,000 [d] 63360 inches/mile = 4 miles
  • 1 inch equals 4 miles

[Note: [d] = divided by]

SOME COMMON SCALES. Here is a list of RF scales commonly used in the Map Collection and their equivalent Verbal Scales.

  • 1:24,000 - 1 in. = .379 mi.
  • 1:62,500 - 1 in. = .986 mi.
  • 1:100,000 – 1 in. = 1.578 mi.
  • 1:250,000 - 1 in. = 4 mi.
  • 1:500,000 - 1 in. = 7.891 mi.
  • 1:1,000,000 – 1 in. = 15.783 mi.

For example you want a map of Arizona on a 8 1/2 x 11 inch piece of paper. To allow for 1/2-inch margins the new sheet will then be 7 1/2 x 10 inches. Since Arizona’s north-south dimension, 395 miles, is slightly longer than its east-west dimension, 340 miles, we will place the longer north-south dimension along the longer 10-inch dimension of the paper. The next step is to compute the scales for both dimensions of the State. The smaller of the two scales will be the one we need.

North-south
10 in = 395 mi
10 in = 395 mi x 63360 in/mi
10 in [d] 10 = 25027200 in [d] 10
1 in = 2502720 in
1:2,502,720

East-west
7.5 in = 340 mi
7.5 in = 340 mi x 63360 in/mi
7.5 in [d] 7.5 = 21542400 in [d] 7.5
1 in = 2872320 in
1:2,872,320

[Note: [d] = divided by]

We therefore need a map of Arizona at a scale of 1:2,872,320 or less to place it on an 8 1/2 x 11 inch sheet of paper.

Scale

Miles/inch

Line
Width on Ground*

Examples

1:2,000,000

~32

2000’

USGS
Nation-wide maps

1:1,000,000

~16

1000’

National and
state maps

1:500,000

~8

500’

State or
regional maps

1:250,000

~4

250’

US Army Map
Series

1:100,000

~1.6

100’

USGS 30′
quads

1:62,500

5208 feet

62.5’

USGS 15′
quads

1:24,000

2000 feet

24’

USGS 7′
quads

1:15,840

1320 feet

15.84’

Soils

1:9,600

800 feet

Aerial
photos

*Approximate real width on ground of a pencil line on a map – harder pencils give a finer line

1:2,000,000 to about 1:250,000 are SMALL-scale maps. Items on these maps appear small (e.g. a county on a 1:2,000,000 map is much smaller than on a 1:100,000 map).

1:24,000 on towards 1:9,600 are LARGE-scale maps. Items on these maps appear larger. 1:100,000 are
pretty much in the middle – intermediate scale.

Expansion of Pipeline Stirs Concerns Over Safety (WSJ)

Monday, August 4th, 2008

wsj pipeline map

[Editor's note: Map of existing and planned natural gas routes with neat magnitude treatment of largest connectors being built with the topology linkage emphasized. Red and green problematic for color impaired viewers but the online (color) version is easier to read than the black-and-white newsprint version, ever the bane of the newspaper cartographer.]

Natural-Gas Grid Increasingly Reaches Into Sensitive Areas

By BEN CASSELMAN
Reprinted from Wall Street Journal
August 4, 2008; Page A4

America’s natural-gas boom is driving the construction of thousands of miles of new pipelines, many of them crisscrossing heavily populated or environmentally sensitive areas.

About 4,400 miles of new pipeline will be built this year, according to government projections. That is more than 2.5 times last year’s figure and the biggest annual addition in the 10 years data have been collected. The new pipe will carry 47 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas, triple the amount carried by new pipeline in 2007, itself a record year.

The construction of highly pressurized lines snaking under farms and past residential areas is raising fears about safety and environmental impacts in communities along the new pipeline routes. Companies building the pipelines face lawsuits, eminent-domain battles and jurisdictional fights among the local, state and federal authorities that oversee the projects. Two New England projects have been held up or canceled in recent months because of local opposition. Even energy-friendly Texas has seen growing opposition to some projects in Fort Worth.

“The greatest need is in the most densely populated areas, which in turn are the most challenging places to site infrastructure,” said Robert Cupina, principal deputy director of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission office that oversees pipeline construction.

The pipeline boom is being driven by the need to distribute growing natural-gas production to markets across the nation. The U.S. is increasingly relying on natural gas as a fuel that is cleaner than coal, much cheaper than oil — albeit not as cheap as in past years — and, unlike most renewable alternatives, readily available. Natural gas generated 20% of U.S. electricity in 2006, up from 13% a decade earlier. Demand for natural gas could grow even faster if Congress passes new limits on carbon emissions, or if it becomes more popular as an alternative to gasoline, as Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens has recently proposed.

Natural-gas production “could be completely transformative to our country,” said Aubrey McClendon, chief executive of natural-gas giant Chesapeake Energy Corp. “The plumbing is being built right now.”

Continue reading at Wall Street Journal . . .