Submitted by Time_Crystals t3_zgfo95 in dataisbeautiful
st4n13l t1_izgq4vt wrote
Any reason you chose green as the middle and red as the high end of positive. Generally green would indicate positive and red would indicate negative. Considering this is for renewable energy, it would make even more sense to have green be the high end.
Time_Crystals OP t1_izguer1 wrote
>Any reason you chose green as the middle and red as the high end of positive.
Short answer: Basically I needed a lot of range.
Longer answer: I needed something bright for the low end and something with a wide range visually for the middle parts. Kansas was in a league of it's own in many ways. So basically anything with a green tint at all that wasn't completely yellow had a positive gain. For example, Washington State was -16%, Idaho was -24%, and Montana was +13%.
Hopefully that makes sense.
-domi- t1_izgwnbd wrote
Are we looking at different graphics? The one I'm looking at ranges from -0.4 (percent, presumably?) to +21, with the later applying only to Kansas, and most of everything being a pretty uniform tan.
Time_Crystals OP t1_izgwveg wrote
Yeah I could have made the graphic more clear. That -.39 is -39%, therefore the 21 is +2100%
-domi- t1_izgwzcl wrote
Thank you for clarifying that!
tayt087x t1_izhlj51 wrote
You gotta learn some color theory. You basically made.a scale from 2-3 with 1 in the middle.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments