4 ms·
Churchill's role in expanding the role of oil was in fact profound. It's another fact I'd learned in Yergin's The Prize (mentioned elsewhere in this thread).
by dredmorbius 1y ago
Churchill's role in expanding the role of oil was in fact profound. It's another fact I'd learned in Yergin's The Prize (mentioned elsewhere in this thread).
Britain was a naval power, and in the early 20th century was rich in several factors that served as a basis for that, including iron and coal, as well as access (through trade) to the essentials of munitions manufacture (saltpetre, an ingredient in gunpowder and other propellants, was abundant in India).
But coal-fired ships were cumbersome to manage: solid coal had to be physically handled when fueling ships initially, in re-bunkering coal as it was consumed in transit, and of course, being shoveled into the boilers themselves.
Petroleum, by contrast, flowed through pipes, by gravity or with the assistance of pumps. Fueling, bunkering, and operational procedures were streamlined remarkably. Ships also gained vastly greater performance flexibility: direct-combustion engines (diesel or turbine) could be powered up or down in seconds, rather than the many minutes or hours to increase steam-based output. And of course petroleum enabled the two great 20th century advances in naval power: submarines and aircraft, of which the technological history of coal-fired variants is brief.
(Not non-existant, however. The British Navy deployed K-Class submarines, coal powered, in WWI, and the Germans experimented with a coal-dust burning airplane in WWII, see <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_K-class_submarine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_K-class_submarine> and <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lippisch_P.13a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lippisch_P.13a>.)
Britain's problem in 1913 however was that the country had no domestic oil production capacity. (The North Sea oil fields wouldn't be proven and developed until the 1960s.) Switching from (domestic) coal to (foreign) oil was a tremendous gamble, and required sea-lane control to the Middle East, as well as control of the Suez Canal for greatly-reduced shipping costs.
The story of oil in both World Wars is probably the most fascinating aspect of Yergin's book. WWI in particular started with cavalry charges and horsecarts, and ended with tanks, submarines, and bombers. During WWII, a critical element in the Allied invasion of mainland Europe was the establishment of an oil pipeline, in Operation Pluto, initially consisting of a single two inch diameter cross-channel pipe. Through those two inches flowed the material which made mechanised invasion possible.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pluto https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pluto>
(Appropriation of German "Jerry Cans" --- Wehrmacht-Einheitskanister to its creators --- was also a huge strategic gain. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerrycan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerrycan>)
- Hilift 1y agoThe UK was in a really interesting position. The British empire was the largest in history, and it occurred during a time of great advancement during the industrial revolution. Liquid fuel wasn't new. The owner of two of the three ships holding 90k lbs of tea in the Boston Tea Party, Joseph Rotch (1704–1784), held a monopoly on whale oil. His existence was probably illustrative and educational for those who followed in railroads and petroleum. Churchill did not know it at the time, but he was the peak of the empire. Physically the empire was untenable, but in business there was a new world of influence. I sometimes compare early Churchill to the business adventures of Averill Harriman and Prescott Bush. https://nha.org/research/nantucket-history/history-topics/rotch-family/ https://nha.org/research/nantucket-history/history-topics/ro...
- dredmorbius 1y agoLiquid fuel wasn't new (the etymology of "oil" is olive oil, in use for literally thousands of years <https://www.etymonline.com/word/oil https://www.etymonline.com/word/oil>), but cheap, abundant, geologically-sourced liquid fuels were. Whale oil may have been big business in the 18th century, but the entire history of whale-hunting produced the equivalent of a few days of present petroleum extraction in terms of fuel. Oh, and Whale hunting did in fact continue through the 20th century, petroleum didn't save the whales, as has been discussed here: <https://edconway.substack.com/p/no-kerosene-did-not-save-the-sperm https://edconway.substack.com/p/no-kerosene-did-not-save-the...> <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43584303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43584303> (April 2025). Aristotle Onasis, whom I've already mentioned in this thread, not only owned oil tankers and supertankers, but built some of the largest whaling ships ever commissioned, specifically to hunt blue whales: <https://www.greece.org/poseidon/work/modern-times/onassis.html#Whale%20Hunting https://www.greece.org/poseidon/work/modern-times/onassis.ht...> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle_Onassis#Whaling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle_Onassis#Whaling> I'm not entirely sure what Churhill knew or when, but the British Empire was already creaking (along with much of the rest of the 19th-century European political establishment) even before the onset of WWI (and was in fact a major contributing factor to that war), and was obviously weakened and foundering prior to WWII, which was the coup de grâce.