korrents

korrents · piece

Age of Invention: How Coal Really Won

Anton Howes · 12 Feb 2025

A change of mind in this piece

England switched from wood to coal because deforestation had made firewood scarce.

Recalls holdingAs I set out last time, the usual story — that this was caused by deforestation, making firewood so scarce that people resorted to burning an inferior but cheaper fuel — simply does not stack up.

Read the piece on ageofinvention.xyz ↗

3 korrents from this piece · 1 of them a turn ↓

Anton Howes did not write this page.

Every claim below was made in this piece, quoted word for word and numbered in the order the piece makes them, so you can read it there rather than take our word for it. The sentence above each quote is our reading of the claim, not their wording. Each quote was checked against a stored copy of the page at build time; where the two differ, the quote is the fact.

  1. Our reading

    England switched from wood to coal because deforestation had made firewood scarce.

    Recalls holdingAs I set out last time, the usual story — that this was caused by deforestation, making firewood so scarce that people resorted to burning an inferior but cheaper fuel — simply does not stack up.
    Their words nowI had long believed this narrative, and have even helped spread it.

  2. Our reading

    England's deforestation was a consequence of cheap coal rather than its cause.

    Their wordsEngland’s deforestation — along with the draining of its peat-filled fens and marshes, and the clearing of its gorse-growing heaths — was instead itself caused by the arrival of cheap coal.

  3. Our reading

    London did not lead England into coal: coal spread outwards from the Newcastle coalfield, and London was one of the last places to take it up.

    Their wordsFar from being the laboratory that brought coal into the home, then, London was actually a laggard — all the more so given it had been buying coal from Newcastle for centuries.

Keep reading

The other pieces are the ones whose claims are worded most like this one's. That measures language, not agreement: they may argue the opposite.