A Web-wide "tour" of pre-1963 Glen Canyon . . . the whole canyon.  Preserving the imagery of that Glen Canyon -- now deteriorating on chemical emulsions.

Also, note that electrical power generated by a dam is not as "renewable and pollution-free" as superficial analysis suggests.  A dam taps into the negative-entropy flow from sun to earth to outer space.  It blocks the removal of silt which that flow ordinarily accomplishes.  Our ideas about energy-entropy transfers...and silt...are almost universally oversimplified.

Construct an "Adventure Cave" game (hopefully linked to many Web sites) in which seeing "Eurekas" lets you discover new "rooms."  These are "Eurekas" that can help crumble the building blocks of pseudoscience.

Using puzzles and "Adventure cave" kinds of games to achieve the cognitive dissonance activity stressed by such researchers as Lillian McDermott and Fred Reif.  Also, note that when the more-abstract "simple but difficult" principles that underlie many physics misconceptions are seen, those principles can also be seen to be important in day-to-day living in often surprising ways.  This leads to "N Eurekas to Useful Physics." 

Consider:
The lowly bee sees and knows in ways we humans cannot . . . polarization of light, ultraviolet radiation, optical images that are not focused replicas of what they represent.  Birds know color to which we are profoundly colorblind, and we have great difficulty trying to think about.  It is profoundly simplistic and self-servingly arrogant to rank order Earth's creatures with humans at the head of the line.  Environmental problems result when human beings oversimplify from an egocentric or anthropocentric viewpoint. 

The real and rich subtlety of the world of other living things straddles the edges of human comprehension. 

Much environmental education is seeing what's wrong with Floyd Dominy's statement in Cadillac Desert (book by Marc Riesner and PBS-TV program):

...Nature can't improve upon Man; we're probably the supreme being.
 

The problem of gross inaccuracy of street maps is common in maps of cities other than Portland.  This is not simply a matter of careless map makers.  There is something about map reading that seems to lie "at the edge of human comprehension."  Reasons given by defenders of inaccurate maps usually imply that correspondence between lines on the map and streets on the ground is not a criterion for acceptability of a map.  Many people admit that reading a map is not one of their strong points, "Give me a verbal description of how to get there."  But some of us can't remember enough of those words to find our way. We need a map. An accurate map.

People helping people in an environment where various agents persistently nibble away at the threads of the social fabric.  Those threads seem to be at the edges of human comprehension.

We are currently encouraging community centers to organize walks—with maps and route descriptions available on Web sites—designed to better acquaint walkers with neighborhoods and neighbors.  Furthermore, these hilly parts of Portland offer vigorous hill-climbing exercise, valuable for augumenting your aerobics and your weight-training sessions.