4 ms·
I'm curious at the use of acres in this article, or even otherwise. This is about 6070 km square kilometers, which is a square of about 77 kilometer.
by billfruit 7y ago
I'm curious at the use of acres in this article, or even otherwise. This is about 6070 km square kilometers, which is a square of about 77 kilometer.
- polemic 7y agoWikipedia says Brighton is 82.79 km2. So this is about 70x larger.
- mrb 7y agoHere is what a 6070 km² square looks like: https://i.imgur.com/kEFBxZg.jpg https://i.imgur.com/kEFBxZg.jpg
- ddevault 7y agoAbout two Rhode Islands, or one Delaware.
- KuhlMensch 7y agoA nice series of visualisations for those looking for more context https://graphics.reuters.com/AUSTRALIA-BUSHFIRES-SCALE/0100B4VK2PN/index.html https://graphics.reuters.com/AUSTRALIA-BUSHFIRES-SCALE/0100B...
- forwhomst 7y agoNobody in NPR's audience knows how big a kilometer or square km is.
- gerdesj 7y agoYou'll need this: https://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/page/reg-standards-converter.html https://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/page/reg-standards-conv... I suspect that acres were chosen because it is a reasonably familiar unit, given the organ is NPR, and makes for a huge number. If you are aware of an acre, you will know it is a fair sized bit of land and 1.5M of them is absolutely huge. For us European types (lol - UK) 0.3 Wales or 0.2 Belgiums gives an idea as to absolutely awful these fires are.