Nature's Evil [calibre 5.27.0]
- Автор: Эткинд Александр Маркович
- Год: 2022
- Язык: английский
- Год: Wiley
- Переводчик: Sara Jolly
- Жанр: История
Электронная книга - «Nature's Evil [calibre 5.27.0]». Краткое содержание книги:
Waterwheels could not be stopped. This was a big advantage of steam engines: they could be stopped and then started again at will. But these steam engines were equally dependent on the river flow, which supplied water for their boilers. During the course of one whole century, factories used steam engines merely to supplement waterwheels: engines maintained the water level in the dry season by pumping water back to the mill pond, while the machines were still driven by waterwheels. Right on the eve of the transition to steam, the Scottish hydraulic engineer Robert Thom created radically new projects which could have increased the power of water-driven factories by an order of magnitude. His designs were intended to hold water in huge reservoirs in the upper reaches of major rivers and channel it by aqueducts to man-made storage ponds; dozens of factories would have been built lower downstream. These dams and aqueducts did not constitute an alternative to coal energy; in fact, they were feasible only thanks to local coal – it could fire an unlimited number of bricks. Thom intended to change the course of the Clyde and planned several other large dams. His projects were discussed in Parliament and in the London newspapers, but there was no appetite for them. These projects presupposed a profound reworking of the property laws. * Reservoirs and aqueducts were conceived as corporate possessions under government control, leasing water and land to private producers. 3
The ‘invisible hand’ which led to the development of capitalism was of another breed. Industrial capitalism was not created for such experiments; on the contrary, it strived to free itself from the control of both nature and the state. The factory owners preferred steam engines. They were expensive and unreliable sources of energy, but they were in private ownership. As happened with other resource shifts, the victory of steam engines over watermills came for political – not economic – reasons. By the middle of the nineteenth century steam engines had displaced obsolete waterwheels in the production of all important commodities, from coal to textile to metals, and the goods made from them.
Ghost acres
By 1700, more than 2 million tons of coal had been extracted in England, Scotland and Wales, and coal provided half of all the energy consumed in the country. By 1850, coal extraction was thirty times higher, and its share in the energy balance reached 90 per cent. This exponential growth was comparable to similar explosions in the consumption of sugar and cotton. Brought from either underground or overseas, these new commodities created millions of ‘ghost acres’, as Pomeranz called these – virtual but vital – land appropriations. The energy output of a mine per square foot of its surface area is hundreds of times greater than the output of the best farm or plantation. With unprecedented efficiency, coal-fired, coke-smelted products of British industry were traded for food, timber, metals and oil, and also for foreign labour and knowledge. In 1865 Jevons wrote: ‘Coal in truth stands not beside but entirely above all other commodities. It is the material energy of the country – the universal aid – the factor in everything we do. With coal almost any feat is possible or easy; without it we are thrown back into the laborious poverty of early times.’ 4
Coal was the real bedrock of the Industrial Revolution; it could still have happened without coal, but it would have been very different. Coal is a topical resource that required little land but much labour and capital. Thanks to them, a limited number of mines, concentrated in only a few counties, allowed two-thirds of the British Isles to be used for agriculture and the growth of towns. If all the heating energy expended in 1750 had been provided by firewood, it would have used up 4.3 million acres of coppiced woods, or 13 per cent of British territory; in 1850, it would have required firewood from 150 per cent of this territory. 5 It is possible, of course, that some of the firewood could have been brought from across the North Sea. But then England would have been very different. Instead of controlling the price of grain and encouraging manufacture, the efforts of the state would have been focused on the protection of forests, at home and overseas, and probably on nationalising them. The growth of the population and, in particular, the growth of towns would have been checked in just the way Malthus foresaw. Colonial efforts and imperial wars would have been conducted not in the southern seas but in the near north – in Scandinavia, Prussia and Russia. This would have been a different empire – not mercantile but cameral. Protecting the forests from its own and foreign subjects, it would have relied not on the invisible hand of the market but on a police state, similar to the governments in those German princely states which depended mainly on their forests. Coal played an indirect but decisive role both in the deforestation of land and in the emancipation of labour. Coppicing is very laborious: without coal, millions of people would have been busy collecting brushwood and cutting wood, and thousands with guarding or replanting trees. Without coal, the increasing British dependency on imported grain would have been unaffordable.
But there was coal. Extraction was increasing, but the proven reserves were increasing even more rapidly. Jevons, who knew all about coal, got one thing wrong: coal did not run out – in fact, it never will run out. Coal-powered engines changed life on five continents. The railways played the same role for coal as sailing ships played for sugar and tankers play for oiclass="underline" they were the defining element of a mono-resource economy. All sectors of industry that processed raw material into goods – metal, textiles, pottery, chemicals, food – went over to steam. Powered by coal, new locomotives and ships carried coal and goods that were produced thanks to coal. Machines became increasingly efficient, but they consumed increasing quantities of coal; Jevons’s paradox was working at full strength. The next breakthrough was the production of electricity from coal-fuelled power stations. One of the last victories of man over nature, this liberated his energy from any dependency on location. Another victory was the switch back from deep mines to modern quarries – open cast mining – which made the extraction of coal cheaper and safer for men but even more costly for nature. With coal, capitalism scored some of its biggest wins but also created its most thorny problems, social and ecological.
Coal-powered steam engines brought about a military revolution on the railways and the high seas. Bloody wars in the coal era raged for many reasons, and not necessarily for coalfields themselves; but the preponderance of steam-driven ships was equivalent to possessing superiority of firearms in medieval times. Although bigger and faster, steamships did not have the same autonomy as sailing ships. The British Royal Navy possessed coaling stations for refuelling their steamships everywhere from Ceylon to Florida. This imperial solution created new problems. Coaling stations were vulnerable to attacks from the mainland. Coal deliveries were at risk from protest action in mining towns. The strategic decision to switch the Royal Navy to oil was taken by Winston Churchill when he was first lord of the Admiralty. Oil gave more speed and autonomy to ships but meant they had to rely on oil supplies from Persia, Pennsylvania or Baku. On the eve of the First World War, the Germans were building new destroyers with four engines, two powered by coal and two by oil. The British approach was simply to add oil to coal, mixing the two fuels in the firebox. Either way, it was a tricky balance between exotic oil, supplied by foreign lands, and domestic coal, which was in the hands of the unreliable miners. Neither fuel was guaranteed; but the risks were different, and hedging bets was a winning strategy.