The U.S. Census Bureau is hard at work on the 2010 Census, fighting technological hurdles and an apparent malaise about being counted. In order to highlight the tradition of the these population counts that occur ever 10 years, the agency has put together some highlights for each of the 23 counts that have taken place since 1790.

The “Through the Decades” website contains interesting facts about the population size, the number of census workers, any new types of questions or race categories, and any new technologies deployed to ease this monumental task. There are some fascinating facts here about the changing size and makeup of the population as well as the march of technology.

Here are some of the details about the progression of computers and geospatial tools:

• 1890 is the first year that census workers were given detailed maps to help complete their tasks, and it’s also the same year that an electric tabulating system was utilized for the count
• 1950 was the first time a computer was used to tabulate results, and it was also the first computer designed for civilian use
• 1960 was the first time that census results were digitally recorded (on magnetic tape)
• 1970 was the first time that census data products were made available digitally on magnetic tape.
• 1980 saw the creation of the State Data Center Program for easier access to digital data on computer tapes
• 1990 was the year that the Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER), computer-based maps, was introduced. It also was the first year that data was released on CD-ROM
• 2000 was when the Internet became the primary means of distributing Census data
• 2010 won’t include the “long form” because this more detailed collection has been converted to the ongoing American Community Survey

Taken in 10 year chunks, this condensed history provides uncovers some trends about how society has changed, the growing role of technology for administration, and the way that Americans view themselves. The 2010 Census is less of a focal point for geospatial technologists given that the American Community Survey has provided much more detailed and ongoing data for spatial analysis, but it’s still the largest ongoing geographic data collection effort in the world.

Cost of entry into Mobile Mapping work is a considerable expense according to Lewis Graham of GeoCue from the ASPRS Hot Topics Session at ILMF 10 in Denver.

• $750 to 900K for the mapping system
• Vehicle $50K
• Production hardware $150K
• Production software $125K (can share some hardware and software if you already have airborne)

Personnel costs include the need for a driver, equipment operator and surveyor on the collection side. On the office side there’s a need for a production manager, geometric correction specialist, and at least two data collection technicians.

Mobile mapping has hit its commercial stride in 2009. As many as 10 different systems were sold last year even in a down economy.

Software is lagging now to exploit the data, but more software and solutions will emerge to speed up the data processing and visualizations of the final product.

The algorithms behind the functionality of Microsoft’s Photosynth offering began as Noah Snavely’s Ph.D. dissertation at the University of Washington. Snavely is now a computer scientist at Cornell University, and he’s working to push the scale of montaging 2D photos to create 3D realities beyond current limitations of dozens or hundreds of photos toward tens of thousands and even millions of photos.

The project dubbed PhotoCity is discussed in detail in a feature in today’s New York Times. A novel approach to this new effort to create large 3D models is that the capability is being built around a social game scenario that will spur competing teams to add and improve images where there is little coverage. Users will be able to use their iPhones to upload collections of digital images.

This harnessing of collaborative approaches seems to be the next map paradigm shift, witnessed recently in the swift OpenStreetMap mapping of Haiti. This next move toward the creation of richly detailed 3D realities as crowd-sourced efforts cuts out the data provider role, and the simpler collection methods that are accessible to all have some serious repercussions for commercial data collectors.

View the gameplay tutorial via YouTube in the video below.

There has been much in the news about the abandoned and empty housing stock in Detroit now that there are far fewer jobs to support workers in that city. The city just completed a new survey to precisely map their parcels, and to determine the quantity, location and impacts of vacated housing stock.

The survey by the Detroit Data Collaborative found 91,000 vacant residential lots and 31,000 vacant structures. In the process, the survey also worked to map the neighborhoods that are in the best condition and that might warrant more attention for redevelopment. The city’s mayor, David Bing, is advocating the creation of a smaller city and a focus on making the city more livable.

The data collection effort is part of a push by City Connect Detroit Inc., which is funded by foundations, to create an in-depth regional data system to promote economic prosperity. The system takes a “data-driven approach to decision making with asset-based analysis” in order to inform and monitor planning decisions.

Read an overview of the study, including maps of the area, in this article from the Detroit Free Press.

The incoming chairman of the Spatial Industries Business Association (SIBA) has just sent out a press release that declares the country the world leader in spatial technology. The audacious claim tones down a bit in the body of the release, and more simply states that there is the intent for the country to be great at spatial technology.

Certainly Australia can lay claim to some geospatial greatness. I’m aware of the good software development work there that spawned ER Mapper and much of Intergraph’s location-based services offerings. I’m sure there are other world-class companies and research institutions in Australia that have contributed to the development of the technology, and I’m sure there are also passionate users of the technology.

Canada can lay claim to being the birthplace of GIS and other policy-driven systems of geospatial monitoring and analysis. I’ve had good exposure to the research and development work that takes place in that nation. There are software companies from Canada that offer products of great utility to the spatial community, including Safe Software and various open source GIS developers that are world leaders in the development of that toolset. The geospatial software development for Autodesk was headquartered in Calgary for years, and I understand there’s still a good contingent there. Bentley also houses their geospatial software development team in Quebec City.

The United Kingdom has a number of geospatial companies and operations. I know of Cadcorp on the software development side, and there’s the influential Center for Advanced Spatial Analysis at the University College London on the research side. There’s also the Ordnance Survey with their amazing map data accuracy and collection processes. I’m sure there are other worthy companies and efforts of note there.

The rest of the European Union has a rich history in spatial technology development, but I’m far less in tune with any other countries in Europe as that’s the domain to my partner Jeff Thurston in Berlin.

The United States is the home to the largest geospatial software company in ESRI, and there are a number of other large software development companies and research efforts. Just in the state of California there is the headquarters of Autodesk and the research facilities of Mike Goodchild and team at the University of California, Santa Barbara. There are also U.S.-based associations that have been around since the inception of GIS in both URISA and GITA that have helped shape the development of the technology by supporting both users and vendors. There are other top-notch geospatial research and development efforts such as the Center for Advanced Spatial Technology at the University of Arkansas, and the Center for Advanced Research of Spatial Information at Hunter College, among others.

This issue of world dominance is a spatial problem that encapsulates not just company headquarters or institutions, but also the nationalities of all the key spatial thinkers and application specialists. I’ve known quite a diverse group of technologists that hail from far and wide, and often travel far and wide. Mike Goodchild for one is a native of the United Kingdom that spent years teaching in Canada before settling in the United States.

I’m wondering if the Olympics helped to spur Australia’s announcement of world dominance with this release that promotes nationalist pride. It’s Australia’s summer right now, and perhaps they’re feeling left out given the winter focus of these games. Who do you think can lay claim to “#geoglobaldomination”?

NAVTEQ has just released new 3D city models for Europe. The new map products add textures and colors to cityscapes, and emphasize flexibility in how the data can be used by developers.

This new product is extremely flexible, enabling navigable 3D animation to be generated in real-time. For example, buildings in the foreground can be made transparent, while leaving texture detail only on the corner of the next manoeuvre.  It provides system developers with a wide range of customisation options on functions such as texture and camera perspective which can be used to create differentiation between products and brands.

The competition for developers and users of rich navigation experiences means that the quality of map data for navigation and point of interest are ever increasing. This developer-centric focus points to the limits of data providers to control the experience themselves as they rely on device and application developers to make the most of the raw products that they provide. We can expect more realism, and more variety in data products as these markets continue to mature.

Upon hearing the news some months ago that each federal agency has been mandated to create an open portal to their data, I’ve been anxiously awaiting the sites from several key agencies with strong geospatial and sustainability ties. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is now among the list to have a portal, and it can be accessed at http://epa.gov/open/ (news lead found via Twitter @druidsmith).

One data set that is now freely downloadable from the site is the  Emission & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID). The eGRID data includes environmental characteristics of electric power generation, with air emission and resource mix information for thousands of power plants and generating companies. eGRID allows direct comparison of the environmental attributes of electricity from different plants, companies, States, or regions of the power grid.

Among the mapping-oriented features of this site is the EPA’s mapping tool for enforcement cases that allows you to view facilities in the United States where EPA has conducted environmental enforcement actions.

This new site has a wealth of data, and the public is encouraged to provide feedback and help the agency develop their Open Government Plan.

Give the wealth of available online data, one can’t help but think about the possible applications that citizens will be able to create with this information. In light of the decreasing investigative power of the press due to the economic pressures on that medium, these open data initiatives can serve to act as a watchdog for environmental and economic justice issues.

I spoke today with Carla Burzyk, Director of Office of Budget and Performance at the U.S. Geological Survey, to understand better the proposed cuts to the National Geospatial Program. She filled me in on the budget process and addressed some of the concerns that I’ve outlined in previous posts about the status of the National Map partnerships.

• Status of the budget: This is the first round of the 2011 budget that won’t be decided until the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30. The budget is the vehicle for deliberation by Congress, and much can be changed in the process.
• Tradeoffs: The budget represents eight months of deliberations to conform to guidance that is set by the Office of Management and Budget. Given this guidance there were a number of decisions made to align funds to high-priority programs, and grant programs were seen as the first target for cuts. While there is a $3.5M cut to the Partnership Implementation program, the entire budget of the program was $14M so the bulk of the program remains.
• Jobs: The priority for cuts was also aimed at areas where people would not be let go. While the justification indicates that liaison positions in 13 states will go away, these duties are just a part of larger jobs and the duties will go while the people stay.
• Justification: I was most interested in hearing some justification for this loss of data collection, hoping that there was some off-setting reason to reduce data collection efforts. The USGS did receive $140M in funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and $14.6 Million of that went to improving imagery and elevation maps. It was suggested that the USGS would be looking at a decrease in data if it weren’t for these funds, so with the funds and the cuts, the agency will maintain roughly the same level of data as in they past years.
• IFTN Speculation: My speculation about the possibility that the Imagery for the Nation Program might reach approval wasn’t part of the thinking. While there has been some positive indications that the proposal is meeting with greater support, there’s no pending action.

I appreciated the quick and thorough response that I received regarding these questions. Overall the increases to the USGS budget are still positive, with the budget larger than it has been in past years, but there areas where it could certainly be larger. Much could change when Congress deliberates over this guidance, so I’ll work to stay on top of this as it develops.

There’s a 590-page Budget Justifications document (PDF) available that outlines the proposed U.S. Geological Survey budget changes that was forwarded to me by Learon Dalby (@LearonDalby). On page 225 of this document the proposed cut of $3.5 Million to the National Map partnerships is discussed and lamented:

“For 2011, the USGS proposes to reduce the funding for the Partnership Implementation component by $3.5 million. The proposed reduction eliminates all funds used to leverage with Federal, State and local agencies to acquire new data. Through this leverage, the USGS typically benefits from a ratio ranging from 15:1 for imagery to 4:1 for hydrography data. The amount of the proposed reduction actually results in the loss of as much as $20 million worth of geospatial data to the Federal Government, the USGS, and the public annually. This reduces the USGS’ ability to maintain the currentness and improve the quality of The National Map.”

Further, the document advises that this cut will mean the loss of liaison positions for 13 states, eliminating an important coordination position particularly of service during emergencies. There’s also the caution that these cuts would hamper America’s geospatial industry, and undermine previous recommendations by the Office of Management and Budget for a stronger national geospatial framework.

Clearly, this cut isn’t in the best interest of the geospatial community or the safety of the nation. It’s important to remember that this is a “proposed” budget, with perhaps some room for advocacy.