Difference between revisions of "ISSS608 2017-18 T3 Assign Miko Tan Mei Jia Conclusion"
(Conclusion) |
|||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
<font size="5"><font color="#373f51">'''Conclusion'''</font></font> | <font size="5"><font color="#373f51">'''Conclusion'''</font></font> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
<br> | <br> | ||
| Line 35: | Line 32: | ||
2) The hydrology department is collecting sufficient data in terms of the number of chemicals covered. There are 106 chemicals covered in the data, since 1998. One change that could be made to the sampling approach to best understand the environmental impact across the preserve would be to categorize the different measures into those which are good for the environment, and those which are detrimental. It would also be good to have a benchmark for each measure so that it is made known what is the acceptable level of a specific chemical present in the soil. In addition, samples should be taken regularly. The sensor readings in the dataset are currently very patchy, which consistent data collected during certain time periods, and then missing data in other time periods. In order to understand the trends for a particular contaminant that could potentially have a big impact on the environment, regular, accurate, consistent and reliable sensor readings are required. | 2) The hydrology department is collecting sufficient data in terms of the number of chemicals covered. There are 106 chemicals covered in the data, since 1998. One change that could be made to the sampling approach to best understand the environmental impact across the preserve would be to categorize the different measures into those which are good for the environment, and those which are detrimental. It would also be good to have a benchmark for each measure so that it is made known what is the acceptable level of a specific chemical present in the soil. In addition, samples should be taken regularly. The sensor readings in the dataset are currently very patchy, which consistent data collected during certain time periods, and then missing data in other time periods. In order to understand the trends for a particular contaminant that could potentially have a big impact on the environment, regular, accurate, consistent and reliable sensor readings are required. | ||
| − | 3) | + | 3) There is certainly a concern for the Pipit and other wildlife in the preserve due to the presence of contaminants such as heavy metals, cyanides, chlorodinine and methylosmolene across various locations in the preserve. These contaminants are known to be toxic to living organisms, yet the readings are not only present in recent times but also in the past as far back as 1998. As such, it is a cause for concern. The sampling strategy can be improved by ensuring consistent and reliable sampling. It would be best for all the data to be sampled on the same dates, and at regular intervals throughout the years in order for a fair comparison to be made across different chemicals over the various locations. It is currently difficult to look at how readings taken at another station impacts readings at a different station because the sampling dates are scattered and inconsistent. |
Latest revision as of 23:57, 8 July 2018
VAST Challenge 2018 MC2: Suspense at the Wildlife Preserve
|
|
|
|
|
Conclusion
1) There were some anomalies found in the dataset and it is not certain whether these are due to errors with the sensor, or if the actual reading was true. For example, the methylosmolene readings were very high at Somchair. However, since the values did not change over time, and Somchair is not in close proximity to the location of the waste dumping, it is safe to assume that there is a problem with the sensor at the Somchair station.
2) The hydrology department is collecting sufficient data in terms of the number of chemicals covered. There are 106 chemicals covered in the data, since 1998. One change that could be made to the sampling approach to best understand the environmental impact across the preserve would be to categorize the different measures into those which are good for the environment, and those which are detrimental. It would also be good to have a benchmark for each measure so that it is made known what is the acceptable level of a specific chemical present in the soil. In addition, samples should be taken regularly. The sensor readings in the dataset are currently very patchy, which consistent data collected during certain time periods, and then missing data in other time periods. In order to understand the trends for a particular contaminant that could potentially have a big impact on the environment, regular, accurate, consistent and reliable sensor readings are required.
3) There is certainly a concern for the Pipit and other wildlife in the preserve due to the presence of contaminants such as heavy metals, cyanides, chlorodinine and methylosmolene across various locations in the preserve. These contaminants are known to be toxic to living organisms, yet the readings are not only present in recent times but also in the past as far back as 1998. As such, it is a cause for concern. The sampling strategy can be improved by ensuring consistent and reliable sampling. It would be best for all the data to be sampled on the same dates, and at regular intervals throughout the years in order for a fair comparison to be made across different chemicals over the various locations. It is currently difficult to look at how readings taken at another station impacts readings at a different station because the sampling dates are scattered and inconsistent.
