News   Apr 18, 2024
 459     0 
News   Apr 18, 2024
 3.5K     1 
News   Apr 18, 2024
 2.1K     4 

Area of Gulf Oil Spill Compared to the GTA

À propos getting at the gravel and stone lying underneath useless suburban development: perhaps there would be some point in combining that with the construction of subways! Although considering the pace of transit development in Toronto, maybe that's not such a brilliant idea... Toronto is ugly enough without making it look like Swiss cheese.
 
The NY Times map is good, but I'm not sure what the differences in the oil slick extent shown there and in Paul Rademacher's oil slick. Presumably the data sources and their evaluation are different.

Here is today's oil slick moved into the southern Ontario area:

paulrademacher_com_oilspill_Toronto_20100603.jpg


"Toronto" was specified as the location, but as you can see, it has been spared today, and now Oshawa, Oakville, Hamilton and Buffalo are now covered in a nice film of oil.
 

Attachments

  • paulrademacher_com_oilspill_Toronto_20100603.jpg
    paulrademacher_com_oilspill_Toronto_20100603.jpg
    74.1 KB · Views: 402
Just an update for today, June 12, 2010. The surface oil slick superimposed on the GTA looks like this:

paulrademacher_com_oilspill_Toronto_20100612.jpg


Pretty awful.

A week ago, Paul Rademacher was good enough to answer some questions I had about the source and currency of his data:
[T]he oil spill data on my page is up to date daily. I'm using the data feed from http://www.google.com/crisisresponse/oilspill/, which itself gets data generated directly by NOAA. There's a real lack of authoritative data in the press: multiple data sources, and simplifications of the data. Even NOAA itself provides these high-details oil spill outlines along with much lower-res coverage maps and projected-trajectory maps. In short, the data situation a mess.
 

Attachments

  • paulrademacher_com_oilspill_Toronto_20100612.jpg
    paulrademacher_com_oilspill_Toronto_20100612.jpg
    84.1 KB · Views: 353

Back
Top