Anecdotally I do not believe the US Civil Engineering profession
opposes metric at all. Of course common practice, working in the US
today, requires use of units that our clients prefer (for most Civil
works in the US that means English). Although the New York State
Department of Transportation is SI (with the distinct possibly of
reconversion to English in the near future) most of our Engineers are
quite comfortable with SI and not opposed to it's use. The bigger
problem is our Contractors and suppliers. I think tough that relates
more to the inconstancy in the industry. No one wants to be first but
suppliers and fabricators really object when they have to work SI for
the NYSDOT and English for a County or private developer.
Of course Civil firms that work internationally design in SI for those
countries. I don't think that is a big deal.
Howard Ressel
Project Design Engineer, Region 4
(585) 272-3372
"Martin Vlietstra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/02/06 1:28 AM >>>
To what extent does the US civil engineering profession and the oil
industry oppose metrication? The civil engineers have a vested
interest as it prevents foreign companies from competing on US soil
while, for projects in developing countries, it is not unknown for
contractors to be selected on grounds other than "best tender".
The oil industry is US dominated. The United Kingdom has a body set
up by Parliament called The Engineering Council. This is an umbrella
organisation for all the engineering organisations in the UK. Members
include the Institution of Civil Engineers, Chartered Institution of
Building Services Engineers, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, The
British Computer Society (of which I am a member) and many others. It
is noteworthy that although there are 34 members, none is specifically
connected with the oil industry. While working in the oil industry, I
looked at publications of the Society of Petroleum Engineers which is
a US organisations that has a chapter in the UK. Given this and the
way in which the oil industry uses imperial units tells me that the US
oil industry is blocking metrication in order to preserve is control
of the industry. It has also been suggested to me that certain US
politicians (who shall be nameless) have received considerable
assistance from t!
he oil industry, particularly from Texas.
----- Original Message -----
From: Phil Chernack
To: U.S. Metric Association
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 12:58 AM
Subject: [USMA:36434] Re: April 1
I disagree. I think it all comes down to marketing and sales.
Metrication has to be marketed correctly. Through education and
thorough explanation of the need to metricate and making sure the
message is indeed received by the masses, we could shorten the time
from 20 or 50 years to 5 to 10. What sounds better: the Metric
Conversion act or the Keep America Competitive act? People have to be
convinced metrication is fairly painless and that their world won't
change drastically. We've stated it before here, people don't fear
metric, they fear change. It's not the conversion per se, but the
cost, both financially and mentally people fear. With the proper
sales and marketing, people need to be convinced that metrication
necessary for us to retain and grow our edge in a global marketplace,
not only in terms of economy, but also in terms of education. We all
know the benefits, we just now have to get the right cheerleaders
(salespeople) on board. Some politicians and bu!
sinesspeople can sell ice cubes to Eskimos; they should be able to
sell metrication to Americans.
Phil
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Millet
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 5:54 PM
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:36431] Re: April 1
Judging from the angry volume of responses they got I don't think
any state would dare EVER switch anything :). They'd have the mob
going for their blood.
It makes me wonder if the only way we'll go fully metric is if we
continue the gradual transition over the next 20 years or so. Phase it
in rather than announcing it and pushing for a quick transition as we
should have done.
Mike
--
"The boy is dangerous, they all sense it why can't you?"
