On 2009/02/22, at 4:12 AM, <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rejection of exports from the US in a global trade war could make
Congress more interested in metrication, to more completely promote
global measurement standards (i.e. SI).
This, of course, does concern the wealth of corporations and nations
(money as you put it).
---- Original message ----
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 19:26:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Jeremiah MacGregor <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:43114] Re: Action: Economic Stimulus Package
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
...
What other then money would make the US Congress interested in
metric conversion now if they haven't shown an interest in 200 years?
Dear Gene and All,
Here are some extracts from a NIST paper. While they give the figures
for the number of jobs attached to '$1 billion in merchandise exports'
they don't give an estimate of how much not being metric costs the USA
each year. As far as I know my estimate is the only one that I have
been able to find, see http://www.metricationmatters.com/docs/CostOfNonMetrication.pdf
A Question-and-Answer
and Thematic Discussion
(NISTIR 5463)
June 1994
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Technology Administration
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Metric Program
Technology Services
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
Gary P. Carver
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Ronald H. Brown, Secretary
TECHNOLOGY ADMINISTRATION
Mary L. Good, Under Secretary for Technology
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY
Arati Prabhakar, Director
ABSTRACT
The logic for use of the metric system in the United States is
strongest when metric use is viewed as an element of our national
economic infrastructure, as an investment in efficiency, and as a
necessity for international competitiveness.
KEYWORDS
Exports, global markets, international trade, metric, metric
conversion, metric system, metric transition, metrication, standards,
trade.
Why use the metric system?
By encouraging use of the metric system in U.S. trade and commerce,
the Federal Government is helping U.S. industry gain advantages that
will benefit the entire Nation. Exports have been responsible for most
of our domestic economic growth in recent years. Exports are important
for U.S. workers because each $1 billion in merchandise exports
supports almost 20,000 jobs, over seventy million Americans work in
export-related jobs, and export-related jobs have higher than average
pay. U.S. exports must compete in foreign markets where quality, cost
effectiveness, and reliability are defined by international standards,
including the metric system—which is the international standard for
measurement. By converting to use of the metric system in trade and
commerce, U.S. industry can make its products more acceptable to
foreign customers. Our metric products will sell more easily in export
markets, and that will lead to greater economic growth and more jobs
in the United States.
What are the advantages of metric use for U.S. industry?
U.S. industry will gain increased access to growing world markets and
a resulting increased ability to export, and it will benefit from
improved efficiency and greater competitiveness, by using the metric
system. Improvements in efficiency and competitiveness can result from
the use of the same product standards for both domestic and foreign
markets, the standardization of parts and part sizes, the ability to
maintain smaller inventories, and the inherent simplicity of the
metric system. These advantages will help U.S. industry to gain an
even larger share of world markets and create even more new high-
quality jobs.
What are the national benefits of metric use?
The entire Nation will benefit from the metric-driven economic
expansion of U.S. industry, as well as from the creation of new jobs.
In addition, the Nation will benefit from eliminating inefficiency in
business and daily life that is caused by use of two different systems
of measurement units. By adopting the metric system as the preferred
system, education and training can be improved, especially mathematics
and science education. This is one of the President's goals.
What has been the experience of U.S. firms that have converted?
Business enterprises that converted to the metric system usually ended
up saving money. Frequently, metric conversion has been a means of
standardizing and reducing the number of sizes of supplies and parts.
Some U.S. companies that converted experienced increases in sales to
unexpected new customers, particularly foreign-owned companies
operating in the United States. Some companies reported lower costs
from fewer mistakes and less rework because switching to decimal
metric units simplified their work.
Why can't domestic industries stay non-metric?
Domestic industries that ignore global realities and continue to use
non-metric measures will find that they risk increasing their costs.
They risk limiting themselves to a smaller pool of non-metric supplier
firms, paying more for nonstandard parts and materials, and having to
readjust or recalibrate metric equipment from other industries to non-
metric specifications. Non-metric modular products and those that
interface with outside-industry products are especially vulnerable to
the added costs of adapting to a metric environment. Even in non-
metric domestic-only industries, metric standards are beginning to
appear because national standards are being "harmonized" or brought
into agreement with metric international standards.
What is influencing U.S. industries to be metric?
Most U.S. industries that do business abroad are already predominantly
metric due to global sourcing of parts, service, components, and
production. The remaining non-metric U.S. industries are increasing
their metric use for selected products and activities, or are being
influenced by metrication in other industries. Also, federal agency
use of the metric system is encouraging firms that do business with
the government to use the metric system.
How would education benefit with the metric system?
The biggest benefit would come in mathematics. Because there would be
no need to spend as much classroom time on cumbersome conversions
among units and on manipulating fractions, students could spend more
time on learning mathematics. Converting to metric use will also
provide an opportunity to improve the entire mathematics curriculum
and to use a simpler system of units throughout the educational
program. Upon entering the work force, graduates would be better
prepared to make metric products for the global marketplace and to
provide metric services that can be more easily exported.
Why can't we keep using two measurement systems?
It is much more efficient for business enterprises, industries, and
nations to use a single measurement system instead of two. For firms,
using two measurement systems usually means two sets of tools, parts,
and product specifications, as well as repeated conversions among
units. It leads to higher overhead costs, such as when separate
catalogs and package labels with metric units must be used for
products sold overseas. Using two measurement systems industry-wide
multiplies the inefficiencies suffered by individual firms. It adds
uncertainty and potential confusion to industry standards and
marketing, and it may lead to habitual unit conversions. Nationally,
consumers face added difficulties in comparison shopping because of
the variety of units. Also, many people, businesses, and organizations
need two sets of tools.
Why do U.S. exports have to be metric?
Many of our products that are still not metric are not readily
exportable. In effect, we are imposing a trade barrier on our own
goods. International standards and the regulations of regional trading
blocs require metric units for measurements because the metric system
is the international standard of measurement. More importantly,
customers in other nations have grown up with the metric system of
measurement. Foreign customers are familiar with and expect—usually
prefer—products made to metric measures. They are neither familiar
nor comfortable with U.S. pints and ounces and inches and pounds. On
the shelves of shops in other nations, our inch-pound products are at
a disadvantage. In today's highly competitive world markets, any
disadvantage quickly translates to lost sales and fewer exports. This
inevitably leads to less domestic economic growth, fewer new jobs, and
a lower standard of living than we could otherwise enjoy.
Why is the Federal Government involved?
The 1988 amendments to the Metric Conversion Act direct federal
agencies to convert programs relating to trade, industry, and commerce
to the metric system. The strategy is to use federal procurement,
financial assistance, and other business-related activities to
encourage and help U.S. firms to convert voluntarily to the metric
system. The Act allows exceptions to federal metric use to avoid
unintended harm to U.S. firms. For example, federal agencies are not
required to use the metric system if it is "impractical or likely to
cause significant inefficiencies or loss of markets to United States
firms."
Another reason for government involvement is that just like energy,
transportation, and telecommunications, our national measurement
system is an important element of our economic infrastructure.
Therefore, it is appropriate that the Federal Government has the
Constitutional power to "fix the standards of weights and measures."
When it amended the Metric Conversion Act, Congress declared as U.S.
policy that the metric system is the preferred system of weights and
measures for trade and commerce.
What can Government leadership accomplish?
Federal Government leadership and commitment can remove the remaining
uncertainties about metric conversion and bring the “big picture”
national benefits into focus. Many non-metric firms are willing to
convert. However, they are looking to the Government to make it clear
to their suppliers, customers, and competitors that the time has come
to convert the entire Nation to metric usage. When the Government
makes metric conversion a national priority, the business community
will see the long-term benefits in efficiency and international trade
deriving from metric conversion as economic issues it can support.
Similarly, when the Government makes a visible commitment to metric
conversion and explains the economic necessity, the public will
understand the educational, economic, and competitive benefits, and
will accept an orderly adoption of the metric system.
If metric conversion is good for business, why don't we let the free
enterprise system decide?
By working with industry on metrication, federal agencies found no
major barriers to the conversion of non-metric U.S. industries.
However, the federal agencies also found that some firms believe that
U.S. customers may be unwilling to use the metric system. In actual
experience, U.S. customers readily accepted metric beverage
containers, automobiles, nutrition labeling, vitamins, and track and
field events.
Some firms responded to a federal survey that they are unable to
justify upfront investments in metric conversion because the benefits
are diffuse and not immediate. Some said that they do not plan to
convert because their current customers are not demanding metric
products. Companies that do not export say that there is no need for
them to change to metric units.
Although such views may appropriately reflect individual firms'
assessments of their business environment, they do not reflect the
national 'big picture" economic benefits that can be gained from
metric conversion. Also, such views do not reflect the hidden costs of
using two measurement systems. Besides eliminating the costs of two
measurement systems, the national benefits include removing the self-
imposed trade barrier caused by a nonstandard measurement system.
Based upon the positive experiences of firms and industries that have
converted, the federal agencies have concluded that widespread metric
use will yield long-term benefits that are beyond any one-time costs
or inconveniences.
If the federal agencies are converting to metric, isn't that enough?
No matter how broad their national vision, the federal agencies cannot
by themselves establish the metric system as the preferred system in
trade and commerce. They ultimately need the support of private
industry and the public. It may be time for additional steps to move
the Nation out of its dual-system comfort zone and to continue
national progress toward preferred metric use.
What are some of the next steps we could take?
Some possible next steps might include:
Greater Federal Government leadership and public
articulation of the national vision.
Actions to encourage a broad national exchange on
metric conversion.
Public forums to consider the interrelated
interests and views of government, industry, and the public.
A broadly based campaign to increase awareness of
the economic issues related to metric use and the application of
metric measures in daily life.
Review and revision of existing non-metric
regulations, standards, and legislation.
Actions to identify and remove any impediments to
metric use in industry and to minimize any potential adverse economic
effects.
Why do we need any next steps?
Industry and the public may have reached a stable dependence on two
measurement systems. The stability may be due to the perception that
for the remaining non-metric activities, temporary costs for changing
to predominant metric use exceed expected benefits. The perception
arises partly because the continuing costs of inch-pound use are
invisibly absorbed by current accounting methods and partly because
our existing dual-measurement-system economy is passively accepted by
the public. If the economic baseline were a more efficient single-
system metric economy, then industry would see that short-term metric
conversion costs are an investment that will reduce current costs and
eventually provide a large return. Cultural attitudes will have to
change to eliminate the inch-pound measurement system from our economy.
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
PO Box 305 Belmont 3216,
Geelong, Australia
Phone: 61 3 5241 2008
Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has
helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the
modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they
now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for
their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many
different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial
and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA.
Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST,
and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com
for more metrication information, contact Pat at [email protected]
or to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter
to subscribe.
