"John Kane" > wrote in message
...
On Jul 12, 4:55 pm, "graham" > wrote:
> "Omelet" > wrote in message
>
> news > >,
> > "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote:
>
> >> I don't see any changes coming to the US kitchen in my
> >> lifetime. Too many people just won't change.
>
> > The only way for that to start is for them to start putting BOTH on
> > containers and price tags.
> > --
>
> No, No, No!!
> An example: When I left the UK for Australia in 1971, the weather
> forecasters announced that they were going to change to Celsius. First
> they
> would give the temp in F then in C. A while later they would give it in C
> then in F and finally they would drop the F. When I visited 25 years later
> they were still quoting both!
> Shortly after arriving in Australia, it was announced that as from the
> following Monday, Celsius would be used. No transition, just "cold
> turkey".
> Most, except the elderly, adapted very quickly. The only residue was 38C
> was still referred to as a century.
> Graham

I grew up with F but now-a-days I have real trouble trying to remember
what something like 75F means.
------------------------------------------
Same with me but in cookery it's a different matter. Despite Canada using
celsius, the ovens are still graduated in foreignheit.
Graham

"Janet Baraclough" wrote
cshenk" wrote these words:

>> Sure you can cheat with a kitchen scale if you also have how much the
>> item
>> should weigh, but hate to tell you how 'chiklit small' their kitchens
>> out in
>> town can be. Room for a weigh scale? You gotta be kidding!
>
> Modern electronic domestic kitchen scales are smaller than a slim
> paperback cookbook.
> At the touch of a button you can select either metric or imperial . I
> put the mixing bowl, saucepan etc
> on top (the scales zero their weight) and weigh ingredients straight
> into them.

Um, Janet, if i needed to dry dishes, the crockpot moved to the floor
because a small dishdrainer filled all but a 4 inch span on the fridge side
of the sink, and the strainer covered part of the stove side by 2 inches.
THATS how small.

No room to waste on a scale. Folks just learned.

"brooklyn1" > wrote in message
> . Adding insulation is the single most important thing one can do to save
> energy dollars

Absolutely. My house wat built in 1978 so it was good, but I added and made
it even better.

>
> Most homes more than 20 years old really need new more efficient
> systems, but at least have the existing systems properly tuned up
> regularly.

I had a new oil fired hot water boiler installed last December. Too soon to
tell the total savings, but on my frst delivery it was 32% less than the
previous tiem period, based on degree days. I did a lot of research and put
in a System 2000 by Energy Kietics. Made in the USA too.

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:37:04 -0600, graham wrote:

> Same with me but in cookery it's a different matter. Despite Canada using
> celsius, the ovens are still graduated in foreignheit.
> Graham

if 'foreignheit' was a joke, it's a pretty good one.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:34:01 -0600, graham wrote:

> "John Kane" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> I've only been here a bit over fifty years and I still have not
> adapted! On the other hand a British friend told me that it took her
> about 3-4 years to realise that one had to dress properly for the
> winter and once she realised that and bought some decent winter
> clothes and boots she actually started to enjoy winter.
>
> __________________________________________
>
> About the only sensible thing said by Freud was: "There is no bad weather,
> only bad clothes!"

i thought he said 'sometimes a parka is only a parka.'

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:34:01 -0600, graham wrote:
>
>> "John Kane" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> I've only been here a bit over fifty years and I still have not
>> adapted! On the other hand a British friend told me that it took her
>> about 3-4 years to realise that one had to dress properly for the
>> winter and once she realised that and bought some decent winter
>> clothes and boots she actually started to enjoy winter.
>>
>> __________________________________________
>>
>> About the only sensible thing said by Freud was: "There is no bad
>> weather,
>> only bad clothes!"
>
> i thought he said 'sometimes a parka is only a parka.'
>
and Dorothy Parker said: "A rose is a rose is a rose"!
Graham

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
. ..
> On Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:37:04 -0600, graham wrote:
>
>> Same with me but in cookery it's a different matter. Despite Canada
>> using
>> celsius, the ovens are still graduated in foreignheit.
>> Graham
>
> if 'foreignheit' was a joke, it's a pretty good one.
>
Thanks! Ithought it time to lighten up!

On Jul 12, 12:03*pm, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

> Among other things, if you cook and use cookbooks, you'd be constantly
> converting forever...unless you threw them all out and replaced them. *Most
> of my US cookbooks do not contain metric measurements.

Or, you could do what I do when I modify a recipe. Write in the book.

Cindy Hamilton

On Tue 14 Jul 2009 01:45:57p, Stu told us...

> On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 11:30:14 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> > wrote:
>
>>On Jul 12, 12:03*pm, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:
>>
>>> Among other things, if you cook and use cookbooks, you'd be constantly
>>> converting forever...unless you threw them all out and replaced them.
>>> *Most of my US cookbooks do not contain metric measurements.
>>
>>Or, you could do what I do when I modify a recipe. Write in the book.
>>
>>Cindy Hamilton
>
>
> That would be too much exertion for poor old Wayne.
>

What's your problem, Stu? Since I have measuring implements for both
systems what would be the point?

--
Wayne Boatwright
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for butter versus margarine, I trust cows more than chemists.
~Joan Gussow

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> Among other things, if you cook and use cookbooks, you'd be constantly
> converting forever...unless you threw them all out and replaced them. Most
> of my US cookbooks do not contain metric measurements.
>
> Having said that, I have quite a few cookbooks from the UK and Europe. I
> made a point of buying measuring equipment for that purpose, as well as a
> scale that weighs in both ounces and grams.


I am not that precise with cooking, except with baking. There isn't that
much to conversion. Off the top of my head.... a cup is 250 ml, a Tsp.
is 5 ml, so a Tbsp is 15 ml. A pound is roughly a half kilo. Temperature
is a little tricker, but still just a matter of conversion, and it isn't
a major deal to get a chart with the most frequently used temperature,
like 325, 350 and 375.

On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 19:17:41 -0400, Dave Smith wrote:

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>> Among other things, if you cook and use cookbooks, you'd be constantly
>> converting forever...unless you threw them all out and replaced them. Most
>> of my US cookbooks do not contain metric measurements.
>>
>> Having said that, I have quite a few cookbooks from the UK and Europe. I
>> made a point of buying measuring equipment for that purpose, as well as a
>> scale that weighs in both ounces and grams.
>
> I am not that precise with cooking, except with baking. There isn't that
> much to conversion. Off the top of my head.... a cup is 250 ml, a Tsp.
> is 5 ml, so a Tbsp is 15 ml. A pound is roughly a half kilo. Temperature
> is a little tricker, but still just a matter of conversion, and it isn't
> a major deal to get a chart with the most frequently used temperature,
> like 325, 350 and 375.

but still, there is a little mental step where you do the conversion. it's
not like you 'think' in metric.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
>>US Federal law (the FPLA, for example) forbids metric-only labels
>i think it's more that they require imperial measurements, not that they're
>forbidding metric.

Yes. Mandating something has the effect as forbidding the absence of
it.

Omelet wrote:
>The only way for that to start is for them to start putting BOTH on
>containers and price tags.

The FPLA has mandated both on most containers in the supermarket since
1992. That's why metric-only labels are illegal. Global companies are
lobbying for a change to the FPLA to permit, but not mandate, metric-
only labels. That would end the requirement to pay for relabeling just
because the Federal government doesn't want Americans to see "2
liters" on its own.

On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 09:59:39 -0700 (PDT), pat wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>>>US Federal law (the FPLA, for example) forbids metric-only labels
>>i think it's more that they require imperial measurements, not that they're
>>forbidding metric.
>
> Yes. Mandating something has the effect as forbidding the absence of
> it.

since when? i just looked at a half-dozen random items in my fridge and
they had both imperial and metric units on them.

(liquor and wine seem to be exclusively labeled in liters, but god knows
the rationale for that.)

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
>i just looked at a half-dozen random items in my fridge and
>they had both imperial and metric units on them.

Yes. If you pick up a prepacked product at random in a US supermarket,
it is likely to be covered by the FPLA. The FPLA requires both non-
metric and metric.

Beer is one of the products outside the scope of the FPLA. But there
is no shortage of laws. Beer is covered by another law that requires
non-metric units. The manufacturer has a choice to use metric units
and some do.


>(liquor and wine seem to be exclusively labeled in liters, but god knows the rationale for that.)

It isn't just god that knows, you'll know it when you finish reading
this post. Federal law mandates metric units for liquor/wine. The
manufacturer has a choice to use non-metric units but few do.

pat wrote on Fri, 24 Jul 2009 06:57:50 -0700 (PDT):

> blake murphy wrote:
>> i just looked at a half-dozen random items in my fridge and
>> they had both imperial and metric units on them.

> Yes. If you pick up a prepacked product at random in a US
> supermarket, it is likely to be covered by the FPLA. The FPLA
> requires both non- metric and metric.

> Beer is one of the products outside the scope of the FPLA. But
> there is no shortage of laws. Beer is covered by another law
> that requires non-metric units. The manufacturer has a choice
> to use metric units and some do.

>> (liquor and wine seem to be exclusively labeled in liters,
>> but god knows the rationale for that.)


By the way, US units differ from Imperial ones of the same name. The
Canadians once used Imperial but the only identical units between the US
and Imperial are those of length since the inches were equalized some
years ago.
--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 06:57:50 -0700 (PDT), pat wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>>i just looked at a half-dozen random items in my fridge and
>>they had both imperial and metric units on them.
>
> Yes. If you pick up a prepacked product at random in a US supermarket,
> it is likely to be covered by the FPLA. The FPLA requires both non-
> metric and metric.
>
> Beer is one of the products outside the scope of the FPLA. But there
> is no shortage of laws. Beer is covered by another law that requires
> non-metric units. The manufacturer has a choice to use metric units
> and some do.
>
>>(liquor and wine seem to be exclusively labeled in liters, but god knows the rationale for that.)
>
> It isn't just god that knows, you'll know it when you finish reading
> this post. Federal law mandates metric units for liquor/wine. The
> manufacturer has a choice to use non-metric units but few do.

well, yes, i figured it was the law. but what is the rationale behind the
law? usually you can figure out who profits by it, but in this case it's
opaque to me.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
>i figured it was the law. but what is the rationale behind the law?
>usually you can figure out who profits by it, but in this case it's opaque to me.

There are cost savings for trade if you eliminate the requirement to
have a US version and a non-US version. Do a web search for "technical
barrier to trade".

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 03:18:15 -0700 (PDT), pat wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>>i figured it was the law. but what is the rationale behind the law?
>>usually you can figure out who profits by it, but in this case it's opaque to me.
>
> There are cost savings for trade if you eliminate the requirement to
> have a US version and a non-US version. Do a web search for "technical
> barrier to trade".

o.k., that sorta makes sense. but i doubt that, say, crystal palace vodka,
has much of an overseas market.

maybe i'm just used to the u.s. tail wagging the world dog.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
>o.k., that sorta makes sense. *but i doubt that, say, crystal palace vodka,
>has much of an overseas market.

But it competes in the liquor store against foreign products.

Incidentally, the producer of Crystal Palace vodka is Sazerac and they
have lots of brands and imports/exports. So they have a financial
interest in eliminating technical barriers to trade.

Consumers in America and elsewhere want to buy French brandy, Scottish
whisky, Italian Amaretto, and American bourbon. They may well want to
choose between a local liquor and a foreign (to them) one.


>maybe i'm just used to the u.s. tail wagging the world dog.

The interesting thing for me is that some people say metric units
would be too difficult in the shops. But liquor and wine has been
metric for decades. Nobody seems to worry. I think it shows that
there's a difference between what people think about change and how
they behave after change.

On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 12:40:27 -0700 (PDT), pat wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
>>o.k., that sorta makes sense. *but i doubt that, say, crystal palace vodka,
>>has much of an overseas market.
>
> But it competes in the liquor store against foreign products.
>
> Incidentally, the producer of Crystal Palace vodka is Sazerac and they
> have lots of brands and imports/exports. So they have a financial
> interest in eliminating technical barriers to trade.

i just wanted to pick a ridiculous exampe. mad dog 20/20?

> Consumers in America and elsewhere want to buy French brandy, Scottish
> whisky, Italian Amaretto, and American bourbon. They may well want to
> choose between a local liquor and a foreign (to them) one.
>
>>maybe i'm just used to the u.s. tail wagging the world dog.
>
> The interesting thing for me is that some people say metric units
> would be too difficult in the shops. But liquor and wine has been
> metric for decades. Nobody seems to worry. I think it shows that
> there's a difference between what people think about change and how
> they behave after change.

sure. you just do a (in my case, fuzzy) calculation in your head, or say
'1.75 liters is a big-ass jug.'

your pal,
blake

On Jul 26, 2:06*pm, blake murphy > wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 12:40:27 -0700 (PDT), pat wrote:
> > blake murphy wrote:
> >>o.k., that sorta makes sense. *but i doubt that, say, crystal palace vodka,
> >>has much of an overseas market.
>
> > But it competes in the liquor store against foreign products.
>
> > Incidentally, the producer of Crystal Palace vodka is Sazerac and they
> > have lots of brands and imports/exports. So they have a financial
> > interest in eliminating technical barriers to trade.
>
> i just wanted to pick a ridiculous exampe. *mad dog 20/20?
>
> > Consumers in America and elsewhere want to buy French brandy, Scottish
> > whisky, Italian Amaretto, and American bourbon. They may well want to
> > choose between a local liquor and a foreign (to them) one.
>
> >>maybe i'm just used to the u.s. tail wagging the world dog.
>
> > The interesting thing for me is that some people say metric units
> > would be too difficult in the shops. But liquor and wine has been
> > metric for decades. Nobody seems to worry. I think it shows that
> > there's a difference between what people think about change and how
> > they behave after change.
>
> sure. *you just do a (in my case, fuzzy) calculation in your head, or say
> '1.75 liters is a big-ass jug.'
>
> your pal,
> blake

If you live in Canada it makes life a lot simpler since you don't have
to check on any number of items to see if the volume is in US or
Imperial gallons.

And, as you say, it really does not take long to figure out rough
sizes which for shopping is all that one uses weights and measure for
anyway.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

blake murphy wrote:
>i just wanted to pick a ridiculous exampe. *mad dog 20/20?

Yes, there are US-only suppliers.


>>sure. *you just do a (in my case, fuzzy) calculation in your head, or say
>>'1.75 liters is a big-ass jug.'

Quite. No drama.


>If you live in Canada it makes life a lot simpler since you don't have
>to check on any number of items to see if the volume is in US or
>Imperial gallons.

Quite. The only units that the British commonwealth and the USA agree
on are metric.


Proctor & Gamble gave a presentation on why they support the proposed
change to the FPLA so that it is no longer illegal to use metric-only
labels:
http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasure...guaypg1102.pdf

On Jul 26, 2:06*pm, blake murphy > wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 12:40:27 -0700 (PDT), pat wrote:
> > blake murphy wrote:
> >>o.k., that sorta makes sense. *but i doubt that, say, crystal palace vodka,
> >>has much of an overseas market.
>
> > But it competes in the liquor store against foreign products.
>
> > Incidentally, the producer of Crystal Palace vodka is Sazerac and they
> > have lots of brands and imports/exports. So they have a financial
> > interest in eliminating technical barriers to trade.
>
> i just wanted to pick a ridiculous exampe. *mad dog 20/20?

You know, I think I might buy tickets to see what would happen in
France
with Mad Dog.

Cindy Hamilton