By the definition I proposed, I don't think it is as high as 50% currently.  
Some industries are metric internally, either totally or in part.  Automotive, 
pharmaceuticals, and electronics are totally or largely metric internally 
(except for display sizes).  However, all offer up supplemental they think 
consumers demand.  Some large firms (P&G) are metric internally because they 
are multinationals, even though their industry generally isn't.  I've seen 
estimates vary from 20-40%.  But it is hard to judge unless you can see 
internal drawings, process sheets, etc.
 
Publically, labelling of net contents is generally dual and the dual is 
required by law, not manufacturer's option, so it violates the third suggested 
point, and none of it can be counted.  Beer and all random-weight goods must be 
marked in Customary, the metric isn't even required (although allowed).
 
All industry could go primarily metric in 2-5 years if they set their minds to 
it.  That would require all new and modified designs to be all-metric, even if 
they have to do some conversions to use inch-based machinery for a while.  It 
would also allow for continuation of service parts for inch-based product.  All 
it requires is a commitment to new design being metric.  That is generally how 
those who have converted converted.  If you whine and cry and lobby Congress 
for special exemptions, you never convert.
 
Some industries would need some regulatory relief however.  Federal 
construction is supposed to be metric, and I think their design rules trump 
local building codes.  However, for private construction, local building codes 
apply, are generally written in Customary, and metric builoders have reported 
inspection hassles.
 
It would also require better teaching of metric in school to crank out young 
workers ready to work in metric.  Right now, metric is not taught so much from 
the point of measuring in metric and working problems in metric but from a 
conversion standpoint or from using metric prefixes in scientific notation 
problems, how many picometers in a kilometer.  Since no one cares, that just 
teaches kids to dislike metric.
 
Finally, I would like to move one comma on your first point
metric (SI, and so forth) measures are either required, or permitted on a 
standalone basis, for all commercial or mandated measurement purposes.
The second point also needs commas

other (customary, inch-pound, and so forth) measures would never be required, 
nor permitted on a standalone basis, for commercial or mandated measurement 
purposes. 


--- On Tue, 6/19/12, Ron Stone <[email protected]> wrote:


From: Ron Stone <[email protected]>
Subject: [USMA:51717] checkpoints for evaluating US metrication (re
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, June 19, 2012, 10:36 PM



John, 


i have paraphrased the three items in [USMA:51713] for evaluating metrication 
in the United States as follows. 




metric (SI, and so forth) measures are either required or permitted, on a 
standalone basis, for all commercial or mandated measurement purposes.


other (customary, inch-pound, and so forth) measures would never be required 
nor permitted on a standalone basis for commercial or mandated measurement 
purposes. 


dual presentation of metric and other measures can be permitted for commercial 
or mandated measurement purposes if the other measures are presented as 
supplementary information.




some good questions would also be


1) how much of the US economy could be considered to be already metric?


2) how much of the US economy could metricate within one or two fiscal cycles?


3) what is the economic value of those areas of the economy that are already 
metric?




i would think that the answers to #1 and #2 are both more than 50%, although i 
am not sure how much more. i would think that the answer to #3 is more than 
70%, although how much more i also couldn't say.


 
SIncerely,


Ron Stone



On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 3:28 AM, John M. Steele <[email protected]> 
wrote:






We are neither 100% metric nor 100% Customary.  We are either "semi-metric" or 
"all screwed up."
 
I would propose the country can't be considered fully metric until the 
following is true.  Metric measure is either required or allowed, on  a 
standalone basis, for all measurement purposes.  Customary is never required 
nor acceptable on a standalone basis.  Dual is allowed, but the Customary is 
only supplemental information.




-- 


-----------------
Ron Stone
----------------------------
on Twitter (at) photonron
---------------------------------------------------------
disclaimers or other restrictions may apply to this message. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply via email to