Dear John,
Interspersed response.
On 2010/06/11, at 04:55 , John M. Steele wrote:
It is defined as 42 US gallons or 9702 in³. From the latter
definition it can be converted to 0.158 987 295 m³.
For the lousy leak estimates 0.16 m³ is more than adequate.
When you say, 'It is defined' you fail to mention by whom.
I saw an article today in which the leak team gave a rough
estimate of 19000 - 43000 barrels per day or 3 to 7 dam³/day.
(How do you sensibly round a number with NO significant figures and
debatable order of magnitude?)
In Australia, we would be inclined to use 3 megalitre - 7 megalitres
for this range of estimates. I think that you might be happy with this
order of magnitude.
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, see
http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html
Hear Pat speak at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lshRAPvPZY
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.
From: Phil Hall <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, June 10, 2010 2:08:34 PM
Subject: [USMA:47652] Re: Oil Spill Technical Team Using SI
A search of the internet seems to suggest that a barrel of crude oil
is widely regarded as 42 "US gallon"
It may be used in the international markets but it is fair to say it
is probably of US origin and largely the result of thier commercial
dominance.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Vlietstra" <[email protected]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, 10 June, 2010 6:47:21 PM
Subject: [USMA:47651] Re: Oil Spill Technical Team Using SI
Barrels are the unit of measure used in the international oil markets.
The oil industry is one of the least metric industries that I know.
One of their units of measure is to express oil reserves in a
reservoir in barrels per acre-foot. In metric parlance, this would
be expressed as a percentage (or decimal fraction).
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Stephen Humphreys
Sent: 10 June 2010 18:41
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:47650] Re: Oil Spill Technical Team Using SI
I was of the understanding that 'barrels' was an international thing
used only by the oil companies.
Interesting that this international company has stirred up a bit of
anti-brit feeling in the US (not on this list though) where BP is
truly an international company like Ford.
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 08:26:35 -0700
From: [email protected]
Subject: [USMA:47641] Re: Oil Spill Technical Team Using SI
To: [email protected]
I hope that is a joke, as I KNOW you understand precision and
sensible rounding.
However, we have some "decimal dusters" who might not get it.
The 1000 m is of course one of "those" numbers where you ask how
many of those digits are significant.
Given a vertical plume, and general lack of precision in
measurements at sea, I'm guessing 1 or 2, although clearly it is a
guess.
However, I do wonder why British Petroleum measures the leak in
American "barrels." Do they think they are aidding or hindering
understanding? Given the range, that figure has no significant
figures and the order of magnitude seems debatable.
From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, June 10, 2010 11:00:56 AM
Subject: [USMA:47640] Re: Oil Spill Technical Team Using SI
Pat,
In my local newspaper I read that an oil plume was located at a
depth of "3 300 feet" which was probably reported at 1 000 meters.
i.e. 3 300 x 0.3048 = 1 005.84 meters. Note the discrepancy of 5.84
meters between the value reported and the numbed down value
disseminated by the Associated Press.
Shame on the AP distortion!
Gene,
Censor of Deviations from SI
---- Original message ----
>Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:29:29 +1000
>From: Pat Naughtin < [email protected] >
>Subject: [USMA:47625] Re: Oil Spill Technical Team Using SI
>To: "U.S. Metric Association" < [email protected] >
>
> Dear Gene,
> You might be interested in this article in our local
> newspaper, 'The
> Age':
http://www.theage.com.au/world/experts-at-loggerheads-over-oil-leak-rate-20100608-xtlj.html
> Since each of the sources has their own
> 'down-dumber' I don't suppose we can have any
> confidence whether the original data (kilograms,
> litres, cubic metres, metres per minute, metres per
> hour, gallons UK, gallons USA, feet per minute, etc,
> ) is being reported reliable given the possibility
> of multiple conversion errors.
> Cheers,
>
> Pat Naughtin
>...
Get a new e-mail account with Hotmail - Free. Sign-up now.
