The absurdity of the use of kph

-
Image
  First and foremost I apologise (yet again) for such a long gap in between blog posts. The return of freedom over the past year has kept me away from screens. They say it takes 66 days to develop a new habit. Running is a habit I developed over lockdown, but the return to the office (and I intend to never work from home again) and frequenting the pub has reduced frequency of this.  It is, however, not completely bleak for my physical well-being. Cramming a number of social events in after work has led to me doing a lot more walking around central London. I don’t have an Apple Watch, (other brands of smart watch exist), but my iPhone records my steps and a lot of really interesting data on my walking and running. As would be no surprise, I’ve configured everything in metric units. Thankfully, gone are the days where Apple would dictate to you , based on your location, the units of measurement you use. You have a chose whether to specify distances in miles or kilometres....
Post a Comment

Social distancing - easy adoption of the metre

-

 Anno Domini MMXX


The year 2020 has been a year like no other. Thanks to the novel coronavirus and the associated illness Covid-19, the world has been turned upside down. Actions which, only a matter of months ago, would have been seen as ludicrous are now routine. The use of masks, the frequent and almost obsessive application of hand sanitiser, and the treatment of other people like disease-carrying rats would have been unthinkable in 2019. 

A tool that governments have employed in response to the spread of the virus is social distancing. Simply put, it is the act of maintaining a safe distance between people to reduce the spread of the virus through aerosols and droplets.  

The government's public health campaign of hands, face, space notes (as below), that you should stay 2 metres from people or 1 metre with extra precautions. I appreciate that there's no conversion to feet and inches, creating a simple, clear message. 


The NHS website  also does not refer to feet and inches in its guidance, referring to 2 metres or 3 steps. 



It is extremely satisfying that for the most part, the UK has gone with the majority of the world in setting out its social distancing rules exclusively in metric units and has communicated them as such, with no conversions to imperial in sight.

In addition to that, and as businesses have reopened, they too have opted for signs showing social distancing rules exclusively in metres. But that is not the case everywhere. 

I have seen some signs which show social distancing rules in both metres and feet although in general, metric units are given priority.

The issue with mixing units of measurement is that it introduces inaccuracy.  The sign photographed below says 2 metres or 6 feet - but 2 metres is not 6 feet, but rather 6 feet 6 inches. 1.8 metres is 6 feet. Given the official guidance is given solely in metres and that the public have proven that they can understand this, there is little value in adding imperial measures - especially when they are inaccurate. 



The overwhelming majority of guidance and signs about social distancing are in metric units, truly reflecting the fact that we are a metric country. If only we did the same with things that are permanent like speed limits. 




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

the stupidity of the AA

-
I've just read the article that the AA published about their little "survey" on whether the British population prefer miles and rubbish versus kilometres and sense, and i noticed the fact that whoever wrote that article is a blithering idiot. First sample from their article: " Distances in kms rather than miles" - all sensible people should know by now that you never write kms. what crap is that? km! full stop... but it gets worse... Sample # 2 "Speed limits in Kph rather than Mph" - Kph? Are you telling me that the Automobile Association are that incompetent that they don't know how to properly write kilometres per hour... km/h ? [nobody cares how miles/h mph Mph M.P.H... or whatever you want to put is written] But this one is the KILLER! "Fuel consumption in Km/100litres"- the minor thing wrong with this is that it's km not Km obviously.. but I'm appauled bu the fact that the AA are saying that metric fuel consumption is...
Read more

Fuel consumption/ fuel effinciency

-
Miles per gallon, it's the "standard measure" of fuel consumption in the UK although the kilometre is much more widely used than the gallon. (making a metric measure more sensible!) But I don't care about miles per gallon... So, in civilised terms, fuel consumption is measured in litres per 100 kilometres. (L/100km) is this really practical? Most British car adverts show fuel consumption in L/100km (unfortunately most times in brackets and in small print). but why not kilometres per litre? (km/L) personally, I think km/L is simpler to get to grips with, and more practical because you know that you'll drive y km using x L of petrol at a given fuel consumption. ( y / x km/L). eg. 6 km on 2 litres of petrol at 3km/L! using L/100km is not as practical! so why make life more difficult? sure many people would rather switch to km/L rather than L/100km! why not use km/L ? ...they do in Latin America and Japan!
Read more