Pollution, climate change and air quality have grown increasingly important in our everyday lives. The idea of air pollution as a danger to our health is not a new phenomenon, but has developed gradually over time since the industrial revolution. This article will explores the Victorian urge to find resources other than coal as a fuel source and how their awareness of the health, social and environmental impact coal was having on society developed throughout the nineteenth century.
Amy Chandler explains.
A London Fog, from The Illustrated London News in 1847. The fog is the result of pollution.
Internationally, air quality differs depending on temperature, industrial production and seasons. Generally, the advice for countries experiencing bad air quality is to avoid excessive exercise, avoid opening windows and wear masks when travelling outside. As many countries experience extreme weather conditions, the need to tackle the changing climate and find new energy resources is becoming apparent. Throughout history, society has adapted to changes and events such as war, environmental changes and disease that have encouraged the thinkers of the day to find new solutions to old age problems. The impact that industry has on our climate is not a new concern but one that was considered during the nineteenth century too.
The rise and fall of coal
The industrial revolution, 1750-1850, established Great Britain as a major power in Europe during the nineteenth century and allowed the British Empire to expand. The 1851 Great Exhibition held at Crystal Palace demonstrated the latest inventions and innovations in science and technology to showcase to the world Britain’s strength. The exhibition was a political move designed by the Prince Consort Prince Albert, husband to Queen Victoria, to showcase the wealth of natural resources Britain had access to such as coal and iron, industrial design and new inventions that, according to Liza Picard, would lead to improvements in public taste and in technical education, these were areas Britain needed improvement.(1) The exhibition was split into several categories; raw materials, machinery, manufacturers, fines arts and miscellaneous.(2) While this exhibition demonstrated innovation, it did not foresee what the impacts of continual industrial progress would have on the environment and public health.
During the early nineteenth century, the understanding of science and health was still working on the Miasma theory stating that disease was caused by bad smells in the air. Therefore, the idea that smoke created by burning coal was damaging their health and the environment was a difficult concept to understand. Some people felt that pollution was good for their health, with the acids and carbon in smoke filling the air somehow disinfecting the environment.(3) By the late nineteenth century, this idea gradually changed with scientific advancement, cities and towns throughout Britain were becoming filled and covered with thick, dark fog that was hard to ignore as health problems increased, coinciding with terms like smog, and pollution becoming common phrases. In 1859, Robert Angus Smith coined the term acid rain caused by the burning of fossil fuels.(4) The health impacts of the situation became more apparent in 1873 when a fog lasted three days and caused 700 deaths, 1880 and 1892 another fog caused around 2000 deaths from poor air quality.(5) A cartoon published in Punch in 1880 entitled Old King Coal and the Fog Demon illustrated the growing health concerns caused by pollution, where death was personified as a fog demon that spread illnesses throughout London.
Parliamentary concern
The Parliamentary debate for the Smoke Nuisance Abatement (Metropolis) Bill of 1853 explored the growing concern with pollution and the use of coal. The problem of smoke was described in this Parliamentary debate as something that “affected the comfort not only of their Lordships, but of everyone in the metropolis, and every class of society”.(6) The Marquis of Lansdowne stated in this debate the impact of pollution and coal, as one that was visible and inevitable, but the full extent of the impact was not taken as seriously as it should have been. Pollution was described as a “gradual encroachment, not of an invisible enemy, but of an enemy who was perfectly obvious to any one, but whose approaches were so gradual that the whole extent could hardly be appreciated; and that at this moment, and for years past, they had been living, not under the canopy of heaven, but under one of their own creation.”(7)
The Marquis of Lansdowne’s statement emphasised the silent threat that pollution was having on public health and the environment, became more apparent. At a time where the British Empire was growing strong and industrial innovation and strength was being showcased in all industries, the consequences of such progress were being ignored by Parliament and society. The “canopy of heaven, but under one of their own creation” suggests that while many in Parliament, aristocracy and even the working classes found ways to benefit from the industrial revolution, they were living under a canopy that hindered progress and they became trapped in a situation of their own making.
In 1872 the East London Observer published an account of a meeting of the Committee of Bakers to discuss the negative impact and injustice Parliament’s smoke abatement acts were having on their businesses as it “was preposterous to call a baker’s oven a furnace”.(8) The members attending the meeting built a case that their work did not create nuisances as other industries did e.g continual smoke, and they felt it was a “great oppression” since 1864 to suffer heavy fines or even imprisonment.(9) While the bakers tried to find solutions to create fires that consumed their smoke, they ultimately failed. The act outlined measures to “prevent a continuous of smoke” instead of smoke created from lighting a fire to bake bread.(10) The baking trade was seen as integral to daily life and many bakers felt that if they closed their shops in the morning and did not serve the public it would cause “great inconvenience and distress”. This meeting is an example of how Parliament legislation was not thought through in how each industry created smoke and how much of a ‘nuisance’ it was to society as a whole.
Smoke abatement societies
Towards the end of the late nineteenth century, many social reformers and environmental activists became increasingly aware of the issues surrounding coal. Many social reform activists worked within existing voluntary societies, such as the National Association for the Promotion of Social Science (abbreviated to Social Science Association), established in 1857. This group focused on educating the public about sanitation through sponsored exhibitions throughout Britain in the 1870s.(11) Furthermore, specific groups were set up that wanted to reform the problem of smoke in various cities throughout Britain. One society called the Manchester and Salford Noxious Vapours Abatement Association (MSNVAA) 1876, focused on reducing coal smoke and chemical emissions in the local area. The smoke problem was caused by a combination of smoke produced by industry and domestic hearths (a place were the fire is kept and used as a source of heat). By the 1860s, a moral concern emerged where many Victorians considered how long coal would last, and if they did not reduce the amount they used, Britain would cease to be a strong nation in the empire.(12)
During the 1870s and 1880s, concerns around the use of coal and the impact of smoke were starting to gain substantial momentum, the MSNVAA organised public lectures, classes and publications intending to educate the public on the benefits of clean air and the promotion of gas cooking and appliances instead of coal fires.(13) The majority of smoke was created from domestic hearths and the roaring coal fire of the “homely hearth” was a symbol of safety, warmth and integral to the familial life as a source of light, heat, food and boiled water.(14) For many, the move towards alternatives to coal was uneasy as the market dictated the price of coal as a cheaper option than wood. Coal created a lot of wealth for many, causing the move toward less polluting fuels to be difficult, especially as coal was also seen as a source of Britain’s industrial and economic strength.
Towards the end of the nineteenth century, a cleaner alternative to coal emerged as a smokeless version of coal called coke. Although coke had been used for centuries, it was difficult to use and ignite in domestic houses.(15) Furthermore, many Victorians disliked the colour that coke caused their fires to turn, as it was not aesthetically appealing to the stereotypical roaring hearth.(16) Gas was commonly used for street lighting from 1809, but this type of resource was expensive and not accessible to the majority of society. By 1880, gas production changed from its focus on generating light to creating heat. This gave fuel to the fire for smoke abatement societies to encourage an alternative to coal and improve public health. MSNVAA established campaigns aimed at local councils cutting gas rates and smoke abatement societies soon received funding from gas and electricity companies.(17) These partnerships attempted to promote a cleaner way of living in a smokeless city.
The Exhibition of Smoke Abating Appliances, 1881
On 30 November 1881 – February 1882, an exhibition at the Royal Albert Hall curated by the Fog and Smoke Committee (1880) decided to organise an exhibition dedicated to educating the general public on the impact of smoke from coal emitted from private houses and industry. The leaders and frontrunners of the committee were environmental activists and reformers Ernest Hart and Octavia Hill. The exhibition focused on smoke preventing cooking and heating appliances as an alternative to coal and smoke-powered items. The organisation received backing from the Lord Mayor of London, Sir William McArthur and received a great deal of press coverage before, during and after the exhibition. Hart and Hill had two clear aims for the exhibition to increase public awareness and education on air pollution and demonstrate smoke-preventative appliances.(18) Hart’s view remained that industry combined with kitchens on domestic premises were the cause of the smoke problem.
The exhibition allowed many inventors and manufacturers to create and display a variety of smokeless appliances for visitors to test and use. The exhibition was not designed to indoctrinate the visitor to use gas products, but to educate them to make their own rational decision to choose the least polluting appliances. In the first week, the exhibition had 13,000 visitors, and opening hours were extended to allow more attendance. The committee were successful in demonstrating the alternative of gas appliances, despite the gas appliances emitting a bad smell that was off putting to many visitors.
Many years later, the committee’s work and activity slowed down and differed in opinion on how to proceed after their successes in 1881. Members differed on whether the committee spent too much time focused on education and not enough pressure on governmental reform. Therefore, the committee’s exhibition highlighted the need to educate the general public to better inform their judgements and ideas on gas instead of coal. However, if legislative reform does not keep pace with the change in popular opinion, there will always be limitations to progress.
Conclusion
This event in history illustrates how we need to continually find new solutions to old problems as the world changes around us. As science and technology advance, we need to use this information to adapt how we live and operate to acclimatize to an advancing and changing environment through continual education on other alternative ways of conducting our daily lives. While the 1881 committee failed to think laterally and encourage legislative reform, rather than focusing on the education of the general public, they still managed to change popular belief towards coal and focus on gas cooking and appliances. Across the world, there is a desire and urgency to find better, cleaner and cheaper energy sources that protect our green spaces, health and future proof how we adapt and live in the future.
What do you think of the article? Let us know below.
Now read Amy’s article on the Great Stench in 19th century London here.
Bibliography
Basdeo, S. ‘Old King Coal’, 4 September 2019, The Victorian Web < https://victorianweb.org/science/environment/basdeo.html >.
HL Deb 16 August 1853, vol 129, col 1752.
Hudson, J. ‘Acid rain and the rise of the environmental chemist in 19th century Britain’, 22 August 2014, Chemistry World < https://www.chemistryworld.com/culture/acid-rain-and-the-rise-of-the-environmental-chemist-in-19th-century-britain/7670.article >.
Old King Coal and the Fog Demon. John Tenniel, artist. Swain, engraver. Punch, 13 November 1880, Internet Archive online version of a copy in the University of Michigan Library < https://victorianweb.org/periodicals/punch/publichealth/5.html >.
Picard,L. Victorian London: The life of a city 1840 – 1870 (London,Phoenix,2006).
The London Bakers and the Smoke Nuisance Abatement Act, 13 April 1872, East London Observer.
Thorsheim, P. Inventing Pollution: Coal, Smoke, and Culture in Britain since 1800 (USA, Ohio University Press, 2017).
References
1 L.Picard, Victorian London: The life of a city 1840 – 1870 (London,Phoenix,2006),p263.
2 Ibid.
3 P. Thorsheim, Inventing Pollution: Coal, Smoke, and Culture in Britain since 1800 (USA, Ohio University Press, 2017), ch.1.
4 J. Hudson, ‘Acid rain and the rise of the environmental chemist in 19th century Britain’, 22 August 2014, Chemistry World < https://www.chemistryworld.com/culture/acid-rain-and-the-rise-of-the-environmental-chemist-in-19th-century-britain/7670.article > [accessed 15 Aug 2022].
5 S. Basdeo, ‘Old King Coal’, 4 September 2019, The Victorian Web < https://victorianweb.org/science/environment/basdeo.html >[accessed 15 Aug 2022].
6 HL Deb 16 August 1853, vol 129, col 1752.
7 HL Deb 16 August 1853, vol 129, col 1752.
8 The London Bakers and the Smoke Nuisance Abatement Act, 13 April 1872, East London Observer.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
11 Thorsheim, op.cit., ch.7.
12 Basdeo, op.cit.
13 Ibid.
14 Basdeo, op.cit.
15 Ibid.
16 Ibid.
17 Ibid.
18 Thorsheim, op.cit., ch. 7.
