CJones: GIS - GoogleEarth - Cartography
734 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Claire Jones from Geography Education
Scoop.it!

Remote Sensing and Land Cover Change

Remote Sensing and Land Cover Change | CJones: GIS - GoogleEarth - Cartography | Scoop.it

By moving the slider, the user can compare 1990 false-color Landsat views (left) with recent true-color imagery (right). Humans are increasingly transforming Earth’s surface—through direct activities such as farming, mining, and building, and indirectly by altering its climate.


This interactive feature includes 12 places that have experienced significant change since 1990.  This is an user-friendly way to compare remote sensing images over time.  Pictured above is the Aral Sea, which is and under-the-radar environmental catastrophe in Central Asia that has its roots in the Soviet era's (mis)management policies.  

 

Tags: remote sensing, land use, environment, geospatial, environment modify, esri, unit 1 Geoprinciples, zbestofzbest.


Via Seth Dixon
more...
Jake Red Dorman's curator insight, November 13, 2014 2:25 PM

Clearly the water level has decreased in Kazakhstan from 1990 until now. Farming, mining, and building are all indirectly changing the geography of some places. The use of rivers for cotton irrigation has shrunk by 3 quarters in the last 50 years and it is extremely affecting the Aral Sea. 

Edelin Espino's curator insight, December 13, 2014 3:10 PM

Is sad to see how humans are changing the environment forcing the wild creatures to abandon the places they've been living for hundred or years or die of starvation. I wonder what will happen in 300 years when there is no more big lakes and the oceans will be completed polluted .

Tanya Townsend's curator insight, November 20, 2015 2:57 PM

Great tool to show students how human use of natural resources can change landscapes and have permanent impacts on geographical landmarks such as the aerial sea. How do we stop it? Can we undo the damage done? How do we prevent these tragedies from happening in the future?

Rescooped by Claire Jones from Geography Education
Scoop.it!

Image Analysis

Image Analysis | CJones: GIS - GoogleEarth - Cartography | Scoop.it
One of a number of large wildfires that have affected northern California in 2012, the Chips fire burned more than 75,000 acres by the time firefighters had contained it.

 

2012 is going to go down in United States history as the year with the most acres burned in a single year (statistics only go back to 1960).  The two featured images were taken earlier this month to display a Northern California wildfire; both with the same spatial resolution and acquired for the same instrument (Advanced Land Imager on EO-1 satellite), yet they are quite distinct.  One shows an aerial photograph, displaying exactly what standard visible portion of the electromagnetic spectrum (showing us what our eyes would normally see).  The other image displays a false color (near infrared) image. 

 

Questions to ponder: what advantages does each image have for analyzing the fire damage?  Drawbacks?  How does the data from both images work together to create a more complete picture of the situation?     

 

Tags: remote sensing, images, environment, land use, disasters, biogeography. 


Via Seth Dixon
more...
Lisa Fonseca's comment, September 17, 2012 10:22 AM
The first image displays a better visual of exactly where the fire damaged the land, the second image doesn't provide a clear visual to someone, the land effected is foggy. If I was going to visit this specific area in Northern California I would much rather use the first aerial image.
Jesse Gauthier's comment, September 17, 2012 10:31 AM
The first image gives a good spatial shot of where the exact hot spots are located that cannot be seen by the naked eye. The second photo will give you a spatial view of what you can actually see. Both are needed to put out the hot spot because they each will provide two different solutions to stop the burning acres.
Seth Dixon's curator insight, September 25, 2013 8:33 AM

2012 is going to go down in United States history as the year with the most acres burned in a single year (statistics only go back to 1960).  The two featured images were taken earlier this month to display a Northern California wildfire; both with the same spatial resolution and acquired for the same instrument (Advanced Land Imager on EO-1 satellite), yet they are quite distinct.  One shows an aerial photograph, displaying exactly what standard visible portion of the electromagnetic spectrum (showing us what our eyes would normally see).  The other image displays a false color (near infrared) image. 


Questions to ponder: what advantages does each image have for analyzing the fire damage?  Drawbacks?  How does the data from both images work together to create a more complete picture of the situation?     


Tags: remote sensing, images, environment, land use, disasters, biogeography.