2001-09-09
I see your point and I agree. The tonne per hectare thing must be an
attempt to use units that make things sound bigger. 6000 t/ha sounds like
more compared to 600 kg/m�. Not much more, but to some maybe enough more.
John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene Mechtly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "kilopascal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, 2001-09-09 14:42
Subject: Barley Yields
> On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, kilopascal wrote:
> > ...
> > What is so hard about replacing the term "metric ton" with "tonne"?
>
> John,
>
> A better solution is to replace t with kg as in kg/m^2 rather than t/ha
> for barley yields.
>
> Which is easier for you to visualize kg/m^2 or t/ha?
>
> I prefer to avoid both the tonne and the hectare.
>
> Gene.
>
