Monday, October 29, 2007

Remember what I said ...

about using terms that meant something? Like so many Australias instead of square miles? Well, on the radio tonight I heard a man saying that amount of sewage getting into the Thames per year was equivalent to 32 Albert Halls.

Apart from the fact that that is an awful lot, doesn't it give you a clearer image than saying 32,000 cubic metres (or whatever it was)?

7 comments:

Mauigirl said...

My old boss used to tell me whenever I told him how much a new research study would cost, to think about it in terms of what the money would buy. So if a research study was going to cost $25,000, he would say "it's a new car." Or if it was $5,000, "A new computer" (back then they were more expensive). It did put things in perspective.

Anonymous said...

Methinks the Albert Hall is larger than 1000 m3 .

For comparison, people need something with which they are familiar (=m3). Comparing sewage volumes with e.g. Welch Assemblies doesn't help most of us, unless it is of course meant as a political commentary ;-)

Ian Appleby said...

Did he mean overall capacity, or standard discharge from a hall full of concert-goers. And does the Last Night of the Proms, say, produce more than other performances? (If I had to, I would bet yes.) Did you deliberately schedule this post immediately after a chocolate fountain?

Liz Hinds said...

You see, mauigirl, it's a good system!

Stu, I don't think I need to know accurately how big the AH is to appreciate that 32 x AH = a lot!

Overall capacity, Ian. At least I think that's what he meant ...

And, no, but I see your point!

jams o donnell said...

Analogies are useful. 32,000 is a number. 32 Albert Halls is a lot!

jams o donnell said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Welshcakes Limoncello said...

Definitely! Australias and Albert Halls I can visualise: cubic anything I cannot. When the water lorry comes I have to sign that we have received 10 cubic metres, though I have no idea what that amount should look like!