People still misunderstand units of measurements, percipitation, Al, Ba

Leifer

Senior Member.
(title of video)
My video recorded Barium Aluminium rainwater precipitation official test results test Defra, UK

Here is the 2013 DERFA link.......notice the options in the drop-down menu, "select pollutant".
http://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/data/non...data&network=rm&year=2013&pollutant=1291#view

First.....most of the video's measurements are of "air measurements", not "precipitation" (rainwater). Only later in the (fuzzy) video are precipitation results shown.
I commented on the you tube poster's discrepancy, and the poster seemed fair enough. He acknowledged my "air values" observations of his/her video.
Then I commented on the precipitation values....after he noted I missed the precipitation portion later in the video....
upload_2015-1-5_22-58-42.png

....so far, because I have been polite....the vid poster has been rather sensible.

DERFA's 10,000 ng/L, is equal to 10.0 ug/L.
 
Last edited:

David Fraser

Senior Member.
It's a pity that DEFRA used the same measure but it was done for simplification. However many do not understand the actual measures. How can you visualise a ng? At 0.000 000 0001g it is difficult, but it is about the weight of many grains of pollen. Put that in a cubic metre and many think that is vast when the reality is different.
 
Last edited:

Leifer

Senior Member.
Nanograms (ng/L) may give a more explanatory number.....but only because the results are so small.
If the results were large.....milligrams (mg/L) would be more appropriate.
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
For reference....let's list all these unit values :
First of all......to translate ng/L....to ug/L......simply move the decimal 3 places to the left.
Additionally, to translate ug/L to mg/L.....move the decimal 3 places to the left.

So.....10000.0 ng/L
...is the same as 10.0 ug/L,
...is the same as 0.01 mg/L

nanograms (ng/L) 10000.0
micrograms (ug/L)10.0
milligrams (mg/L) 0.01
 
Last edited:

Whitebeard

Senior Member.
It's a pity that DEFRA used the same measure but it was done for simplification. However many do not understand the actual measures. How can you visualise a ng? At 0.000 000 0001g it is difficult, but it is about the weight of many grains of pollen. Put that in a cubic metre and many think that is vast when the reality is different.
I think thats the problem with any measurement thats either really big or real small. I ve got a system for 'norma'l weights and measure. A bag of sugar is a kilo, or 2 pounds and a couple of odd ounces, there for if someone says 'thats 300 kilos or 400 pounds I can visualize it as 300 or about 175 bags of sugar. I know roughly what an Olympic swimming pool or a 100 metre running track look like so can make a good guess at the distance to the bus stop down the road from me by thinking in terms of pools and running tracks (for the record I estimated 300 metres and when I checked on google earth it was 284m, so close enough for purpose)

However talk nano grams and micro metres, or at the other extreme light years and parsecs I have no reference to refer to, all I can say is the first two are very small and the last two are very big, but still have no idea as to how big or tiny. And I like to think of myself as reasoned and level headed, I can completely understand that anyone of the conspiratorial bent seeing ANY reading showing Al, Ba or any other 'suspicious' substance in their readings is going to go off the deepend and see any tiny amount as 'a lot' and claim it shouldn't be there and must therefore be proof that 'they' put it there.
 

TWCobra

Senior Member.
Maybe a visual representation would help? Google Sketchup is good for that sort of thing. Might give it a try.
 

Related Articles

Top