Acre not to be abolished – unfortunately

The media just can’t get it right. Nor can they miss any opportunity, however unfounded, to knock both the metric system and the European Union. The latest non-story is to be found in the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail of 21 July.

With a headline “EU abolishes British acre” the Telegraph declares that “The acre, one of Britain’s historic imperial measurements, is to be banned from use under a new European directive.” Similarly, the Daily Mail’s headline announced: “Selling land by the acre to be banned under new EU ruling.” See these links:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1036895/Selling-land-acre-banned-new-EU-ruling.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2310257/European-Union-abolishes-the-British-acre.html

Both papers then go on to print verbatim the misinformed comments of a Conservative spokesman – from which it is obvious that the story emanates from a Conservative Party press release.

In fact the acre is not to be abolished. All that has happened is that, since the UK’s Land Registries have for many years used hectares rather than acres for land registration, it has been agreed that the exemption for acres for this purpose (and this purpose only) is redundant. So the decision is a tidying up measure that makes no practical difference to this or any other uses of the acre.

In any case, land is not bought and sold by unit of area (that is, priced per acre or hectare). Each site is unique and is sold as a single lot. You can’t stroll into the estate agent and order “10 acres/hectares of land, please”. Where acres and hectares are used, they are simply descriptions of the size of a site.

However, when it comes to paying of EU subsidies under the Common Agricultural Policy, hectares are of course mandatory. This is because a consistent means of calculating subsidies is necessary, and since every other country uses hectares, it is only sensible that the UK should fall into line.

UKMA believes that it would be better if acres WERE abolished for all remaining legal, trade and official purposes. Once it is understood that a hectare is equivalent to a square 100 m by 100 m, it is very easy to work with. (The Mail and Telegraph articles illustrate the dysfunctional nature of acres by including the helpful information that an acre is 4840 square yards!) It is also highly inconvenient to have to work in hectares for some purposes and acres for others, with all the problems of conversion errors and incomprehension that result.

So the Mail and the Telegraph got it wrong. The EU has not abolished the acre. If only the UK Government would.

Seventh UK scientist honoured by CGPM

The contribution of British engineers and scientists to the development of the international metric system is well known.  What is less well known is that, in addition to the six SI units that are named after British scientists and engineers, there is a seventh unit approved for use with SI. (Article based on contributions by Martin Vlietstra).

Continue reading “Seventh UK scientist honoured by CGPM”

All distances on London pedestrian signs to be shown in “minutes”

According to Legible London, an initiative led by Transport for London, all existing pedestrian direction signs in London will be replaced by 2015 with new wayfinding signs. The enamelled monolith-style signs will have maps as well as directions and distances in “minutes”.

Continue reading “All distances on London pedestrian signs to be shown in “minutes””

Metric, a truly natural system

At the time of writing NASA scientists are eagerly awaiting the results of soil sampling from their latest Martian probe Phoenix. Crucial to that experiment is confirmation of the presence of water. That precious substance essential to all life both here on Earth and maybe elsewhere. It also plays a big part in shaping the world geologically and meteorologically both here and possibly on Mars. What more natural a substance to choose for defining a unit of mass as was the case originally with the metric system.

Continue reading “Metric, a truly natural system”

No Olympic games without measurement

Accurate and consistent measurement is fundamental to modern life, and in few branches of human activity is it more important than in sport – including, of course, the Olympic Games. This is the message given by Andrew Wallard, the President of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) to mark World Metrology Day (article suggested by Martin Vlietstra).

In his message Professor Wallard argues that “Our motto for 2008, “No Games without Measurement,” may be stating the obvious but we all know that measurement is important to nearly all aspects of society. So let us use [World Measurement Day] to press our message home to a particular group of people with whom we may normally have little contact, in the hope that they will appreciate what we do for them! Let us all hope they may go on to appreciate the importance of good measurement in its broadest contexts in our world.” If only.

Unfortunately, many British people (including many journalists) are non-numerate when it comes to measurement. Probably the most important reason for this is the fact that we try to muddle through with two incompatible systems of measurement, often making inaccurate conversions and failing to grasp the meaning of reported dimensions. Thus, journalists measure height in “double decker buses”, length in “football pitches”, and use “the size of Wales” as a unit of area. Meanwhile the NHS has invented a new unit of measurement for alcohol imaginatively called … the “unit”!

This reluctance to use the obvious measurement units (in these examples, metres, square kilometres and centilitres) is partly the result of the Government’s policy of teaching metric units in school maths and science lessons while maintaining imperial units for much of everyday life outside the school gate. In practice, in order to function effectively in modern Britain, people need to understand both metric and imperial units – yet many do not have a secure grasp of either. Hence the resort to physical comparisons and disguising metric units with new names.
Professor Wallard’s message can be read in full on the BIPM website at this link.

Also of interest on the BIPM website are the links to the following factsheets issued on World Metrology Day:

Distance
Height
Mass
Pressure
Speed
Substance
Time
Traceability

(NB: Copyright on these factsheets rests with BIPM and its partners)
Notes:

  1. World Metrology Day was 20 May – the anniversary of the signing of the Metre Convention in 1875, which the UK signed up to (late, of course) in 1884. The official text of the Convention is in French, but an English translation can be read on the US Metric Association website at this link.
  2. Andrew Wallard, Director of the International Bureau of Weights and Measures (BIPM) studied Natural Philosophy (Physics) at St Andrews University where he was awarded his PhD. He subsequently worked at the National Physical Laboratory and at Whitehall in the Department for Trade and Industry before taking up the deputy directorship of the BIPM under fellow-Briton, Prof Quinn. After Prof. Quinn retired, Wallard was appointed director of the BIPM.

Are Imperial units based on 12s?

It is often claimed that imperial is based on 12s (duodecimal) and that this has advantages over decimal. But is this truth or myth?

Of course it makes more sense to use the same number system for measurement, money and other practical uses. But let’s look at whether imperial is duodecimal.

Consider length:
One foot = 12 inches
One yard = 3 feet
One rod = 5.5 yards
One chain = 4 rods
One furlong = 10 chains
One mile = 8 furlongs
Only the foot uses a base of 12.

Consider volume:
One pint = 20 fluid ounces
One gallon = 8 pints
No duodecimal units

Consider avoirdupois weight:
One pound = 16 ounces
One stone = 14 pounds
One hundredweight = 8 stones
One imperial ton = 20 hundredweight
Again no duodecimal units

A disadvantage of imperial is that it does not have any consistent number system but uses a hodgepodge of bases.