3 ms·

Relevant recent ACOUP (Brett Deveraux) post: https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/ https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collect

• macintux 4y ago
  That was a compelling read, and to my untutored eye raises more important points than this one. Economics trumps ingenuity.
  • bsder 4y ago
    Agreed. I never really thought about how you needed a compelling usage of the "crappy" versions of steam engines before you would spend the time and resources to engineer better ones.
• throwawayffffas 4y ago
  Just came here to link this. Tldr: There was no use case for low power steam engines in the ancient/roman world. There was no know-how on building high pressure vessels that would allow higher power steam engines (this know-how was gained by work on cannons). The key use case for the first practical engines was draining coal mines, in the ancient/roman world this was not a big problem because most of their energy was from wood not coal.
  • baking 4y ago
    Also, transportation of fuel by animal power was inefficient so basing the steam engine at the source of the fuel (a coal mine) was the only practical first application. It wasn't until the steam engine was perfected that it made sense to transport fuel.