4 ms·

Anyone who has read Moby Dick knows that this passage: > And since whaling technology had come along so much since the 19th century - with powerful diesel engi

by _2d30 2y ago

Anyone who has read Moby Dick knows that this passage: > And since whaling technology had come along so much since the 19th century - with powerful diesel engined vessels equipped with ever more lethal harpoons and even onboard processing plants, allowing sailors to drain the spermaceti out of their catches at sea rather than having to bring them back to land - sperm whale populations were ravaged long, long after the discovery of kerosene. contains a distinct factual error. The whalers were processing their catch at sea even in the 1800s. Probably not as efficiently, but still they were not dragging their catch back to land for processing.

potato3732842 2y ago
The bit about the usefulness for lubrication is fairly wrong. To put it simply, it's useful because it's a corrosion inhibitor. And while it works it degrades pretty rapidly in a hot gearbox. Synthetic alternatives were simply better. And they were developed and gaining traction before the ban, because they were better. Industrial machinery mostly doesn't need those properties. Whale oil is a poor lubricant by itself though it can look decent if your frame of reference is what's available in the 1860s. Between what you found and what I found I think the whole thing is kinda sus. Edit: To clarify, Whale oil is hydroscopic-ish but in a weird way, not like glycol (I'm not a chemist so IDK). My understanding is that it makes some sort of film that's protective against condensation. Gearboxes operated outdoors don't generally need this corrosion inhibitor. It has to do with the glues used on or in automatic transmission friction material and how very sensitive they are to water. You can't have water building up from ambient conditions and short trips or they'll delaminate. Your alternatives without something like this are rivets or different glue, both of which perform worse and cost more.
- timdiggerm 2y ago
  His overall point, that it happened later, after different technological innovations, and required government regulation is correct though
  - potato3732842 2y ago
    I think government regulation probably only advanced the inevitable. Synthetic substitutes were developed for performance (temperature tolerance and service life). It was likely only a matter of time until said substitutes made their way back into older specifications for oil due to natural economic incentives. Perhaps there would still be some niche whaling if not for the ban, but it would be for a niche use, not because literally every automatic transmission in the country needs a cup of the stuff.
    - wat10000 2y ago
      There is stil some niche whaling. It's all done for meat, but if there was any industrial value for some parts of the whale, I imagine that would be extracted and sold. I don't think there's anything like that.
    - bluGill 2y ago
      Often when there is government regulations it is because those regulated approve. Not always, but often. Oil refineries are attacked in the press by government, but when they want a permit to do something it is always quietly granted.
    - lostlogin 2y ago
      > Perhaps there would still be some niche whaling if not for the ban There is still whaling. Iceland, Japan, Norway, North American indigenous peoples and the Danish dependencies of the Faroe Islands and Greenland continue to hunt in the 21st century. Worse, Iceland, Japan and Norway still engage in and supporting commercial hunting. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling
    - xorcist 2y ago
      There is no "only" in advancing the inevitable. A century may be a blip on the geological timescale but it makes an enourmous difference for civilization. A century from now, global warming will be "solved", one way or another. The open question is what civilization looks like.
  - 2y ago
- kmt-lnh 2y ago
  The synthetic alternatives became better only much later. A blast from the past, from the old web, wher e competence meets ugly web design: "It was true that increased heat load destroyed the modified sperm oil in the ATF faster. The problem was that its freshly developed synthetic analogs were performing even worse. Only in the 1980s, a chemical solution to this problem was found, and I highly doubt that it could have been found earlier. Now we have the pieces of the story: Sperm whales use unusual rheological properties of wax esters in order to control buoyancy, and these properties also make such chemicals an ideal lubricant for extreme pressure applications. When the world relied on whales as a source of hydrocarbons, these were too expensive to use as fuels, and the demand was self-limiting. When the whales were “saved” by petrochemical industry, it was only a short respite. Petrol-powered machinery required new types of lubricants that increased rather than decreased the reliance on sperm oil. Petroleum was plentiful, the cars filled the world, and it is at that point that the whales began to disappear. Literally nothing was done to save these whales until the cars evolved to the point when the engines started to operate at a higher temperature; the latter was caused by the concern about human health and efficiency rather than the well being of these whales." https://shkrobius.livejournal.com/347646.html https://shkrobius.livejournal.com/347646.html (2011)
giraffe_lady 2y ago
Moby Dick itself contains a ton of factual errors (even accounting for the state of knowledge contemporary to its writing) about whales and whaling. I think in this case it still points you in the right direction but that's mostly just luck. And it is mostly focused on the habits of one particular whale fishery. Others are discussed but not in depth and the bias of the narrator in regard to them is itself an important part of the story. I don't know either way but it's plausible to me that other fisheries, positioned closer to their whaling grounds, would have dragged them back for processing.
- _2d30 2y ago
  Many of the factual errors are there on purpose. The lengthy discussion of whether or not whales are fish for example is not intended to be scientific. Melville himself served on a whaler and AFAIK the descriptions of actual whaling and processing of whales at sea are basically accurate with some embellishment. Open to being wrong about that though as I am by no means an 1800s whaling expert.
  - giraffe_lady 2y ago
    The whale is a fish thing isn't what I had in mind, iirc that's a solid argument that still mostly holds up. It's been a long time, I read it right after reading the Eric Dolin book about american whaling and coming out of that some of the details about nantucket and its fleet & practices at that time were off but I'm not going to be able to come up with citations on anything. He also messes with some of the shipboard social dynamics for the sake of the story, uses names for some of the positions that were not used in the american whaling fleet, shifts responsibility for certain things around so they'll land on named characters, standard literary moves like that. It's probable that all of these were intentional to serve the story. And I'm not an expert either which makes simple embellishment hard to spot. I'm mostly just pointing out that asserting what anyone "knows" about whales from reading moby dick is tricky.
    - _2d30 2y ago
      > The whale is a fish thing isn't what I had in mind, iirc that's a solid argument that still mostly holds up. You're also of the opinion that whales are fish?
hinkley 2y ago
Recall that sea shanty business a few years ago with the talk of the Weller Brothers, a NZ outfit that delivered supplies to whaling vessels so they did not have to return to harbor as frequently. The implication of the song is that the Weller Brothers would provide supplies on credit based on the progress of the whaling expedition. The sailers are singing about capturing a whale that leads to hopes of resupply coming soon. Less time traveling back and forth to hunting grounds is more time for violence, and that’s the calculus of the whole sordid business.
- davidw 2y ago
  One version of that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP-7GNoDJ5c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP-7GNoDJ5c https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellerman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellerman
gosub100 2y ago
We don't let the facts get in the way of a "government regulation good" story.
cenamus 2y ago
I've found Matt Lakemans essay really interesting, goes quite deeply into the processing (just how disgusting it is). https://mattlakeman.org/2021/06/01/everything-you-might-want-to-know-about-whaling/ https://mattlakeman.org/2021/06/01/everything-you-might-want...
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
moralestapia 2y ago
>contains a distinct factual error It doesn't, as it's not claiming it never happened before. The colloquial interpretation of that sentence is that it became increasingly commonplace.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

by _2d30 2y ago

potato3732842 2y ago

The bit about the usefulness for lubrication is fairly wrong. To put it simply, it's useful because it's a corrosion inhibitor. And while it works it degrades pretty rapidly in a hot gearbox. Synthetic alternatives were simply better. And they were developed and gaining traction before the ban, because they were better. Industrial machinery mostly doesn't need those properties. Whale oil is a poor lubricant by itself though it can look decent if your frame of reference is what's available in the 1860s. Between what you found and what I found I think the whole thing is kinda sus. Edit: To clarify, Whale oil is hydroscopic-ish but in a weird way, not like glycol (I'm not a chemist so IDK). My understanding is that it makes some sort of film that's protective against condensation. Gearboxes operated outdoors don't generally need this corrosion inhibitor. It has to do with the glues used on or in automatic transmission friction material and how very sensitive they are to water. You can't have water building up from ambient conditions and short trips or they'll delaminate. Your alternatives without something like this are rivets or different glue, both of which perform worse and cost more.

timdiggerm 2y ago
His overall point, that it happened later, after different technological innovations, and required government regulation is correct though
- potato3732842 2y ago
  I think government regulation probably only advanced the inevitable. Synthetic substitutes were developed for performance (temperature tolerance and service life). It was likely only a matter of time until said substitutes made their way back into older specifications for oil due to natural economic incentives. Perhaps there would still be some niche whaling if not for the ban, but it would be for a niche use, not because literally every automatic transmission in the country needs a cup of the stuff.
  - wat10000 2y ago
    There is stil some niche whaling. It's all done for meat, but if there was any industrial value for some parts of the whale, I imagine that would be extracted and sold. I don't think there's anything like that.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    Often when there is government regulations it is because those regulated approve. Not always, but often. Oil refineries are attacked in the press by government, but when they want a permit to do something it is always quietly granted.
  - lostlogin 2y ago
    > Perhaps there would still be some niche whaling if not for the ban There is still whaling. Iceland, Japan, Norway, North American indigenous peoples and the Danish dependencies of the Faroe Islands and Greenland continue to hunt in the 21st century. Worse, Iceland, Japan and Norway still engage in and supporting commercial hunting. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whaling
  - xorcist 2y ago
    There is no "only" in advancing the inevitable. A century may be a blip on the geological timescale but it makes an enourmous difference for civilization. A century from now, global warming will be "solved", one way or another. The open question is what civilization looks like.
- 2y ago
kmt-lnh 2y ago
The synthetic alternatives became better only much later. A blast from the past, from the old web, wher e competence meets ugly web design: "It was true that increased heat load destroyed the modified sperm oil in the ATF faster. The problem was that its freshly developed synthetic analogs were performing even worse. Only in the 1980s, a chemical solution to this problem was found, and I highly doubt that it could have been found earlier. Now we have the pieces of the story: Sperm whales use unusual rheological properties of wax esters in order to control buoyancy, and these properties also make such chemicals an ideal lubricant for extreme pressure applications. When the world relied on whales as a source of hydrocarbons, these were too expensive to use as fuels, and the demand was self-limiting. When the whales were “saved” by petrochemical industry, it was only a short respite. Petrol-powered machinery required new types of lubricants that increased rather than decreased the reliance on sperm oil. Petroleum was plentiful, the cars filled the world, and it is at that point that the whales began to disappear. Literally nothing was done to save these whales until the cars evolved to the point when the engines started to operate at a higher temperature; the latter was caused by the concern about human health and efficiency rather than the well being of these whales." https://shkrobius.livejournal.com/347646.html https://shkrobius.livejournal.com/347646.html (2011)

giraffe_lady 2y ago

Moby Dick itself contains a ton of factual errors (even accounting for the state of knowledge contemporary to its writing) about whales and whaling. I think in this case it still points you in the right direction but that's mostly just luck. And it is mostly focused on the habits of one particular whale fishery. Others are discussed but not in depth and the bias of the narrator in regard to them is itself an important part of the story. I don't know either way but it's plausible to me that other fisheries, positioned closer to their whaling grounds, would have dragged them back for processing.

_2d30 2y ago
Many of the factual errors are there on purpose. The lengthy discussion of whether or not whales are fish for example is not intended to be scientific. Melville himself served on a whaler and AFAIK the descriptions of actual whaling and processing of whales at sea are basically accurate with some embellishment. Open to being wrong about that though as I am by no means an 1800s whaling expert.
- giraffe_lady 2y ago
  The whale is a fish thing isn't what I had in mind, iirc that's a solid argument that still mostly holds up. It's been a long time, I read it right after reading the Eric Dolin book about american whaling and coming out of that some of the details about nantucket and its fleet & practices at that time were off but I'm not going to be able to come up with citations on anything. He also messes with some of the shipboard social dynamics for the sake of the story, uses names for some of the positions that were not used in the american whaling fleet, shifts responsibility for certain things around so they'll land on named characters, standard literary moves like that. It's probable that all of these were intentional to serve the story. And I'm not an expert either which makes simple embellishment hard to spot. I'm mostly just pointing out that asserting what anyone "knows" about whales from reading moby dick is tricky.
  - _2d30 2y ago
    > The whale is a fish thing isn't what I had in mind, iirc that's a solid argument that still mostly holds up. You're also of the opinion that whales are fish?

hinkley 2y ago

Recall that sea shanty business a few years ago with the talk of the Weller Brothers, a NZ outfit that delivered supplies to whaling vessels so they did not have to return to harbor as frequently. The implication of the song is that the Weller Brothers would provide supplies on credit based on the progress of the whaling expedition. The sailers are singing about capturing a whale that leads to hopes of resupply coming soon. Less time traveling back and forth to hunting grounds is more time for violence, and that’s the calculus of the whole sordid business.

davidw 2y ago
One version of that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP-7GNoDJ5c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP-7GNoDJ5c https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellerman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellerman

gosub100 2y ago

We don't let the facts get in the way of a "government regulation good" story.

cenamus 2y ago

I've found Matt Lakemans essay really interesting, goes quite deeply into the processing (just how disgusting it is). https://mattlakeman.org/2021/06/01/everything-you-might-want-to-know-about-whaling/ https://mattlakeman.org/2021/06/01/everything-you-might-want...

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

moralestapia 2y ago

>contains a distinct factual error It doesn't, as it's not claiming it never happened before. The colloquial interpretation of that sentence is that it became increasingly commonplace.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]