I ski in Whistler, British Columbia every chance I get. I've noticed that in weather conversations with Canadians, Celsius is used exclusively. What is interesting is that when speaking with Americans, they usually follow with "I'm sorry, I don't know what that is in Fahrenheit".
On Jun 26, 2011, at 11:28 , Bill Hooper wrote: > I just came back from a trip to Canada; Edmonton, Alberta to be exact. > I came across a few metric items that some of you may find interesting. > > I have found, on earlier trips as well as this one, that Canada is very > metric and that the people are quite comfortable with it and use it. The > following examples are the exception rather than the rule. They show a > misunderstanding of some SI details more than to any resistance to metric > measures. > > Weather forecasts on TV were consistently and properly metric, with just a > couple exceptions. > > Air pressure was given in kilopascals using the correct symbol (kPa). The > values were given to five digits, however, and I wonder whether that is > beyonf the usefulness of the measurement to most people. (Values like 101.56 > kPa.) > > Temperatures were consistently in Celsius although often, when a series or > set of temperatures were shown, the unit symbol was omitted in part or in its > entirety. When this was the case, there was always at least one main > temperature that had the unit correctly shown, then the others were listed as > pure numbers with no unit, or with the degrees symbol ( ˚ ) but no "C" for > Celsius. > > Surprisingly, amidst all this nice metric stuff, the so-called "ceiling" was > consistently reported in FEET! I know the airline people continue to use feet > for the ceiling, but it seems to be that, for the general public the TV > stations could omit it entirely, or, if given, could give it in units with > which the general public is quite comfortable. > > Meat was sold by the kilogram but I often saw signs that gave the price as > "... per Kg", rather than the correct "kg". > > Official highway signs seemed to be consistently proper metric, especially > the permanent ones. However, some temporary signs (e.g. road construction > signs) use the wrong symbol for metres, "500 M" instead of "500 m". > > One of the most curious examples, I thought, was in an elevator of a high > rise building. The capacity was listed as "2500 LBS or 1134 KG". > Clearly, the kilogram symbol should have been "kg", not "KG". > In this case they could not use the lame (but nevertheless incorrect) excuse > that "our equipment could only print capital letters" because the word "or" > between the two values was clearly in lower case. > On top of that, the kilogram value of 1134 was clearly a misapplication of > the conversion from 2500 pounds. Surely the capacity of an elevator need not > be stated precisely to four digits. The 2500 lb figure was probably just a > round number, perhaps just stated to the nearest 100 lbs, so the value could > probably have been reasonably rounded to 1200 kg. (of course local laws need > to be considered and they might require rounding to a different value, but > nonetheless one with only two significant digits would be more reasonable.) > > Generally, I think Canada gets an A, eh? > > > Regards, > Bill Hooper > Fernandina Beach, Florida, USA > > ========================== > Make It Simple; Make It Metric! > ========================== > > > > > >
