View allAll Photos Tagged barchart
On Louisiana's gulf coast - birds on a bar-graph.
Draw your own conclusions from the data. My clear conclusion is that seagulls are slightly more intelligen than pelicans. The bird from the third bar was so smart its self-worth doesn't come from getting its picture taken, so it left to catch a dumb fish.
Red, Blue, Green, Yellow.
The (actual) distribution of my books.
A physical color histogram.
Day 200. July 19 2009.
explored.
and posted to gizmodo. mmhm.
follow me on twitter: twitter.com/patrickgage
Rscript ig-van-january2016-piechart-as-barchart.R see github.com/rtanglao/2016-r-rtgram/blob/master/ig-van-janu...
How to rotate x-axis labels on Gnuplot
If you would like to use this photo, be sure to place a proper attribution linking to xmodulo.com
► Update posted on 1 August 2012. The figures in the table above cover the period from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012. I've added the new figures at the bottom of my cumulative table - shown larger and in bold. I've also calculated the percentages so it's easier to see trends.
These figures show an improvement as measured by vehicle CO2 emissions. However, the most likely factor explaining this change is still lower emissions vehicles sold by car manufacturers. What Haringey Council originally justified as "environmentally friendly charges" should be described, more accurately, as a "Green" Tax levied on residents who live within one of the Borough's Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs).
My thanks to Haringey Parking Service who, on 1 August 2012, emailed me new figures showing the numbers of Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) permits issued in the borough, for vehicles with different carbon emission ratings. Please note that the twelve month period used is because the first full year of the scheme was from 1 July to 30 June 2007.
What's this About? Read More
In 2007 the London Borough of Haringey introduced what it described as "environmentally friendly parking charges", for parking permits in its Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs). Instead of a flat-rate charge for vehicles, residents buying a CPZ permit had to pay on a banded scale depending on the carbon emission rating of their vehicle. (Additional vehicles were charged more.)
The aim of the scheme was to give an incentive for people to use more fuel-efficient cars; and to encourage use of public transport. It was also “sold” to residents in the local press as an attack on so-called “gas guzzlers”, 4x4s, and "high polluters". (Source : Haringey Independent)
A statement from former Labour councillor Brian Haley, then "Cabinet" Member for Environment and Conservation, said:
"We are firm in our belief that grading parking charges according
to carbon emissions is one of the most powerful tools at our
disposal in the fight against climate change. We are confident
the new charges will make residents think twice before buying
high emission vehicles."
Critics of the banding - including me - questioned whether this would actually produce a significant switch to lower emission vehicles. If it did not, the banding was - in effect - a tax. In other words it was simply a money-making scheme which wouldn't change people's habits and reduce CO2 emissions. Instead residents who live in a Controlled Parking Zone simply pay more.
Once the scheme was in place, Haringey Council appeared to show no interest in testing whether or not it worked.
Two years later, in March 2009 I asked Haringey Parking Service for the figures. Initially they refused. But I persisted, and in April 2009 I got figures for the first 18 months. Then for the first two full years of the scheme; and for subsequent years. I've posted the figures on Flickr.
As a Haringey Labour councillor I was a member of the majority Labour Group (until 2012). I can't recall us ever having a formal discussion about this policy. And I've no idea if any of my councillor colleagues have read, discussed, or even thought about the implications of these figures over the past five years.
My Comments on the July 2011 - June 2012 figures
Last year I commented on the 2010-11 figures. Here's an update.
● Once more there are increased numbers of permits - an additional 1007. (Although I have been told that Haringey Parking Service does not have figures for each CPZ, I do not believe these could not be obtained from computer records).
● The first row of figures was from a sample of 1000 vehicles before the scheme came into operation. Compared to the actual figures from all cars with Haringey CPZ permits in every year of the scheme since then, it's clear that the sample was skewed. Council staff recommended the scheme and Haringey Labour councillors made their decision to introduce it, based on these skewed data. Because the sample showed that 41% of vehicles fell within the 101-150 g/km band, the Council was able to claim that most drivers would not pay more. This turned out to be untrue.
● The percentages over the three years June 2007-2010 showed little change in the proportions of high-to-low emission vehicles. So it appeared likely that banded charges had not increased the proportion of lower emission vehicles.
● Changes shown by the figures from June 2011-2012 are positive in every respect. For example, the lowest rating (up to 100 g/km) has more than doubled, although the numbers and proportion remain tiny (2.12%). The largest band 151-185 g/km has fallen by 4.5% after remaining fairly steady for four years.
● N.B. I have not rounded the percentage figures up or down. So they don't add up to exactly 100%.
Factors causing Changes
From the figures for four years it seemed unlikely that the scheme was achieving its main aim of encouraging low emissions vehicles. So should the figures for 2011-20012 be interpreted optimistically as evidence that the scheme is beginning to work? I would like to believe this. But reading the reports of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, such optimism is probably misplaced. Why? Because there's an important external factor which is far more likely to explain the changes.
In line with EU regulations, car manufacturers are making vehicles with lower emission ratings*.
As a result, for several years across the UK we've seen substantial reductions in the carbon emission rating figures for new cars. And the CO2 average of new cars in the UK continues to fall. This trend is shown in the annual reports of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT). Here's a link to its detailed 2012 Report on new car CO2 emissions. The SMMT website reproduces the longer report's summary barcharts which show the strong trend - a steady and significant drop in the average CO2 emissions figures for new cars since 1997.
As newer models are resold, the same will increasingly apply to many second-hand cars. In other words, over time we are seeing a fall in average emission ratings for all cars on the road. (Known as "the vehicle parc"). Locally, we could reasonably expect this to affect the profile of vehicle emissions regardless of Haringey’s banded charges.
So overall, while the falls in the CO2 emission bandings of the cars in Haringey’s CPZs are welcome, it appears that critics were probably right. Since the scheme began in July 2007, these charges have not been: "a powerful tool in the fight against climate change".
Instead they have been a tax. Many people may say it's a justified 'green' environmental tax on larger cars - "gas guzzlers". But it is a tax which falls only on residents living in Haringey's CPZs who choose to own a car with a relatively higher CO2 emission rating. Excluding those who own a private driveway or garage where they can park it off-road. Or those on a Haringey Council Estate who have a free estate parking scheme run by Homes for Haringey.
The point about private driveways raises an interesting question. Rather than being "environmentally friendly", perhaps we should ask if these charges may have had unintended negative consequences? Have they been a factor encouraging the paving over of front gardens; making our borough less green and possibly increasing the risk of localised flooding by increasing run-off from rainfall?
________________________________________________
§ Link to the website of Autobloggreen.
§ Crazy Paving: The environmental importance of London’s front gardens - September 2005
§ Haringey Overview and Scrutiny Committee Paving Over Front Gardens 27 July 2009.
§ It's raining It's pouring. Leaflet on flood risk in East Hertfordshire.
§ Royal Horticultural Society leaflet about front gardens and sustainable gardening.
One of my better finds. According to eBird barcharts, this bird is supposed to be rare in Buenos Aires, at the southernmost tip of its range ... and yet there it was, foraging in and amongst the sidewalk cafes, totally unafraid of people.
This bird is banded (ringed) with color markers. I reported it to the USGS, but never heard back. If anyone knows whom to report it to in Argentina, please let me know.
Annual carbon dioxide emissions per-capita. The image shows the ACTUAL VOLUME of gas emitted with a person for scale.
Annual carbon dioxide emissions per-capita. The image shows the ACTUAL VOLUME of gas emitted with the UN Building in New York for scale.
This bar chart compares the team's attendances for each match day in a season; so the third home game of this season compared against all the other "third home game of the seasons". This year's attendances are in yellow, the 2011 figures are in dark gray, and the previous average (1996 - 2011, leaving this year out) are in the lighter gray.
After a period of five consecutive games in which the team drew higher-than-average crowds, the team plummeted back to work in the last week. One significant cause was the rescheduled home game against Toronto, which pushed the game from a weekend to a Wednesday night (worse, the same night that many local school years began, restricting family attendance even further). Another is undoubtedly the concentration of home games through this stretch of the season.
Shows the percentage by which the human population has increased over the last ten years, by continent. Note Africa's very high growth rate.
How to plot a bar graph on Gnuplot
If you would like to use this photo, be sure to place a proper attribution linking to Ask Xmodulo
Royalty-free financial 3d computer generated clipart picture image of an orange person standing on a silver and green bar graph chart, reaching back to assist another person up to the top.
This is a chart comparing 2012 game day attendance to both the previous year and all time history. While the past season did improve significantly on the previous year, it only regained lost ground and restored levels back to those seen from 2008-2010.
Like all councils, Central Bedfordshire Council is keen to reduce its carbon footprint. The first step is understanding where savings can be made. Breaking down the Council's footprint into different sectors helps, but it also helps to have a feel for scale of the actual emissions. This film combines the best of both worlds - it is a chart that reveals the relative contribution of different council activities but it is also an illustration of the actual rate of emission.
The person standing by the y-axis is to-scale.
Video is available here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6PUa_8f4VU
COPD-EMPHYSEMA
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.
"Need-to-know" information focusing on emphysema so you can take action for yourself or a loved one.
Per-capita carbon dioxide emissions in 2006 shown as actual volumes of gas creating an animated bar-chart. The countries/regions displayed (in order of emissions) are Somalia, Bangladesh, Africa, India, Central and South America, whole World, China, Italy, United Kingdom, Germany, South Korea, Japan, Russia, Canada, Australia, United States. (Data: CDIAC)
Bastard child design of Juhan Sonin and Stephen Few... WITH A SPRINKLING OF MCCREADY AWESOMENESS!!!! Never picked up by anybody, but I thought it looked cool...
Chart of the mean number of pictures per month uploaded per cat, from when we adopted the cat to now (since I upload pictures of cats that have died).
I'm not entirely sure why I uploaded more pictures of Tigger than any other cat, but that's what the data says. Also, I didn't really start uploading lots of cat pictures until probably 2009 or 2010 with the ready availability of call phones to snapshots at will. (Which is why Assam, Bonkers, Argent, and Norio are relatively low - they were around for a long time (and still are for Bonkers, Argent, and Norio) but without many uploaded pictures. (Also, I lost about 7 months of kitten pictures after we first got Yuba and Tigger due to a hard disk crash.)
Another reason why Tigger and Nobuo (who was with us the shortest amount of time) have more pictures uploaded per month than the others is they made themselves available for pictures by hanging around us a lot while the others were elsewhere in the house (or in the cat run in California).
Because some people asked for it on Twitter, here is a quick chart showing the Crew's average attendance patterns for this year vs. their history. The gray series indicates average attendances for game #N over the team's 16-year history, while the yellow series graphs that game's attendance for this year, 2011.
As you can see, Game 5 has been problematic both this year (7.148) and over time (12,476).
One interesting reading of this chart is that, while the Crew's attendances have certainly been disappointing this season, the game-over-game patterns have - generally - followed the patterns set in previous years. The toughest games, attendance-wise, are not the first games, but those next few after the opening rush is over. As the summer has moved on, attendances have typically risen - peaking around a dozen games into the season.
The last game of the season has done very well, but it should be noted that Game 16 has not always been played due to the length of the season (the last year was 2006). As such, the reported average for that game is artificially inflated. Which is a good thing, as the capacity of Crew Stadium is below what the average for that game at this point.
The chart was produced by Microsoft Excel, with no post-processing. If this sort of thing proves interesting, I may revisit it.
Global carbon dioxide emissions in 2006 (957 tonnes per second) are shown as actual volumes of gas with the United Nations Building for scale. Emissions are divided into two groups - 1) United States and China; 2) the rest of the World. Between them, the US and China account for 40% of the World's emissions. (Data: CDIAC)
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report:
www.gao.gov/products/GAO-15-131
HOUSING FINANCE SYSTEM: A Framework for Assessing Potential Changes
This is an attempt to graphically represent the player combinations being used by the Columbus Crew. In this case, the player in question is Josh Gardner - who has become the first choice left back for the Crew since supplanting Rich Balchan several games ago.
This visualization uses data through the end of June, so it is a bit behind dated at the time of posting (I'm still trying to determine the best way to automate this).
The minutes played by Gardner are depicted in yellow - in this case, just over eight games' worth of time. The time played by every other player is depicted in each column, where the placement of the column indicates the amount of time that player has combined with Gardner. For a player like Sebastian Miranda, who has played nearly every minute of the season, the graph doesn't tell us much - but if you compare Robbie Rogers and Andres Mendoza, for example, it should be evident that Gardner had (as of this dataset) played significantly less time with Rogers than with Mendoza, despite those two players' seeing roughly equal amounts of time.
What does this mean? Combined with data like goalscoring frequencies, this could help shed light on whether a given player is the true cause for his apparent impact, or if there might be other factors at play.
As I refine my routines, I would also like to generate impact figures for player combinations - but that might be some time coming.
To put this another way, Police Reports on collisions in (or on the roads immediately bordering) Clifton and Cabot include about 300 walkers and cyclists getting hurt (or worse) each year. Data from the NHS suggest that there are even more A&E cases that come in from "non-collision injuries" (ice, potholes, broken paving stones, misjudged kerbs and so on).
In the period shown here cycling and walking numbers have gone up a lot and motor vehicle counts (especially cars) have declined.
NB A mistake I made in showing an oddly low figure for the 2005 pedestrian "slight injury" category has now been corrected. (15/03/2015)
Clara Miller is an amazing woman with an enormous amount of knowledge on non-profit funding and equity. Unfortunately for her, her laptop crashed this morning, so we had to improvises for the Pop!Tech Fellows program.
Eric and myself became 2 bars in her bar chart.
Please see animated image below www.flickr.com/photos/flights_of_fancy/12136845345/sizes/o.
Entropy is the measure of disorder within an isolated system and is based on the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics which states that the distribution of energy will become uniform over time.
I have illustrated this as a bar graph with fluctuating energy levels. Where there is a wide variation in height of the bars you can say that the energy is organised and is able to do work. When the bars are at the same level they are disorganised and the Entropy is at its maximum. While the amount of energy remains the same there is no longer the ability to do work, as the energy is no longer concentrated in one place.
The waves also represent Entropy if you think of a choppy sea as being able to rock a boat (do work) which becomes steady as the sea calms.
Juan Tello has kindly given permission to use his water ripple photo www.flickr.com/photos/junctions/2937689351 which I have animated in ‘Sqirlz Water Reflections’. The bar chart was created in MS Excel and the final piece was animated in UnFREEz.
I have provided a translation of some of the tags I use on Flickr which you may find interesting www.flickr.com/photos/flights_of_fancy/6973610225/
This image is excerpted from a U.S. GAO report: www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-683R
FOREIGN ASSISTANCE: Briefing on U.S. International Water-Related Assistance
Note: Amounts shown may not sum to total because of rounding. Amounts shown include about $4.3 million in reported interagency transfers and about $6.9 million in "other" funding such as staff and travel costs. USAID data include about $17 million in State funding for water-related programs. All agencies except USAID reported obligations data; USAID reported "allocations" data. According to State and USAID, USAID's financial accounting systems are not configured to easily link obligations data to congressional spending requirements, because single obligations can be used to satisfy more than one requirement. USAID therefore uses allocations data as a proxy when reporting on spending requirements to Congress. DOD data include funding reported by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and multiple combatant commands. One combatant command reported data for disaster risk reduction efforts broadly, not for water-related disaster risk reduction only; therefore, actual DOD funding for water-related assistance may be less than shown. See appendix II for more details on U.S. agency grants and contracts funding data.