Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'd also like to know if the corresponding LIFE TOLL was ever calculated. How many people survived the winters because affordable coal was made available for heating? How many people survived because food was properly cooked using coal stoves? How many people survived because of improvements in agriculture, medicine, and transportation that were made possible by technological advances in the 19th century?
Food was "properly" cooked in UK as elsewhere in Europe for centuries before what would be modern coal fired ranges of 19th and 20th centuries. Be it over open fires, fireplaces, various stoves or whatever.
What revolutionized using solid fuel for cooking (wood, coal, coke) was invention of heat storage type of ranges. To wit famous "AGA" ranges and similar cookers.
Back in 1999 British television did a documentary called "The 1900 House". A modern family was sent back in time to live in Edwardian London, complete with no mod cons other than what was available then. The wife/mother was at once faced with something her grandmother or maybe even mother likely knew well about; how to keep that coal range going.
Imagine 600,000 homes in London with fireplaces, belching out bituminous smoke in the winter time, and add to that the belching smoke of manufacturing plants? They actually thought the smoke was a benefit during the Wars as it hindered pilots from finding any landmarks, but on the other hand they couldn't find the planes in the air to shoot at.
They did find 2 trees that could withstand the pollution, Plane and Tulip trees, because they shed their bark every year.
Even with gas being introduced, there was nothing like seeing the coal embers in the fireplace.
Was the death toll ever calculated?
By 1800's yes, British government began to investigate, regulate and take other actions in aid of lowering air pollution caused by burning of coal. Also yes statisticians were hard at work tabulating mortality rates including those attributed to respiratory illnesses.
"Not only did air pollution incur a severe economic price, it also resulted in significant health costs. Air pollution deaths throughout this period rose steeply; in London, mortality from bronchitis increased from 25 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants in 1840 to 300 deaths per 100,000 in 1890. At its peak, 1-in-350 people died from bronchitis"
Food was "properly" cooked in UK as elsewhere in Europe for centuries before what would be modern coal fired ranges of 19th and 20th centuries. Be it over open fires, fireplaces, various stoves or whatever.
...
OK, so nobody has calculated what I am calling the "Life Toll" -- opposite of the OP's Death Toll? I mean, people burned coal because it was better than what they burned before (wood, maybe peat?). If coal was worse they wouldn't have used it.
You could store more BTU's in a smaller space, keep warmer longer, that kind of thing.
By 1800's yes, British government began to investigate, regulate and take other actions in aid of lowering air pollution caused by burning of coal. Also yes statisticians were hard at work tabulating mortality rates including those attributed to respiratory illnesses.
"Not only did air pollution incur a severe economic price, it also resulted in significant health costs. Air pollution deaths throughout this period rose steeply; in London, mortality from bronchitis increased from 25 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants in 1840 to 300 deaths per 100,000 in 1890. At its peak, 1-in-350 people died from bronchitis"
Life expectancy was radically different during Victorian times and not just in London but throughout the UK and thoughout the world.
The average citizens lived to around 40, whilst some industrial cities such as Liverpool had a male life expectancy of around 26 years old, and in terms of some labourers it was much shorter at around 21 years old.
It was just very different back in that period of time and not just in Britain bit across the entire world.
London also had different city limits back then, and counties such as Middlesex existed, however such areas were later absorbed in to greater London.
London has always been a fairly green city, and a city that was often very different according to certain areas such as the more industrial areas of the East End and parts of South East London when compared to parts of the West End and North London.
London today has over 3,000 parks and public spaces amounting to some 35,000 acres of green space, and there are also over 300 Garden Squares. In all nearly half of London or 47% is green space, and on top of this London has an outer green belt to stop urban sprawl, and is therefore one of the greenest cities of it's size in the entire world and London in recent years even became designated as a city national park.
Until the 60s we had big chimneys covering Glasgows with dirty smoke spewing out day and night.. the buildings were black with soot.. asthma chest infections. heart disease , cancers were rife.. but its left a legacy of poor health in the city that wont go away... People had to survive with factories joined on to tenement housing... so there were no complaints as it was a way of life and peope knew no better.... they just got on with trying to survive...
Until the 60s we had big chimneys covering Glasgows with dirty smoke spewing out day and night.. the buildings were black with soot.. asthma chest infections. heart disease , cancers were rife.. but its left a legacy of poor health in the city that wont go away... People had to survive with factories joined on to tenement housing... so there were no complaints as it was a way of life and peope knew no better.... they just got on with trying to survive...
In France, they situated the dirtiest manufacturing plants out side the city, and then when the locals complained, the owner of the plant asked the residents: If I close down this polluting plant, it will put 5,000 people out of work, and they could starve, you want that on your conscience? I'm sure it was no different in England.
Or Chicago. The novel The Jungle by Upton Sinclair comes to mind. Though a work of fiction, it fairly accurately portrayed urban life around the turn of the century (1900). Didn't paint a pretty picture of life 125 yrs ago.
I know this was already touched on, but pollution was a problem in most industrial areas before environmental protections were put in place. Below is a link to a photo taken in a suburb of Pittsburgh. https://explorepahistory.com/display...p?imgId=1-2-DD
I'd also like to make a note about life expectancies. Of course people did die much younger than today. But the life expectancy numbers were skewed by a high child mortality rate. If you survived childhood, it probably wasn't that unusual to live into your 30s/40s, or even 50s. People weren't typically dying in their 20s.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
