Naval innovation: from coal to oil - Cover Story

Joint Force Quarterly, Winter, 2000 by Erik J. Dahl

Technology is often cited as a key aspect of the revolution in military affairs and a decisive factor in military operations today. A study of the transition by the Royal Navy from coal to oil, stimulated by First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill and Admiral Sir John (Jacky) Fisher, reveals a more complex story. Although technological change was a great success--every navy soon switched to oil--it did not constitute a strategic advance for Britain. It was an achievement that represented a grave risk to a nation which possessed large coal reserves but no oil. This example suggests how technological innovations alone do not spark a revolution in military affairs.

Twilight of a Technology

When Churchill went to Whitehall in 1911, coal was still the primary source of power for naval vessels. The Royal Navy had adopted oil for submarines and destroyers, and in most ships it was sprayed on coal to increase its combustion. But coal remained the principal fuel, especially for larger vessels like battleships. It was widely available, especially in Britain, where Cardiff coal mined in Wales was preferred by navies worldwide. Coal was accepted by marine engineers, and Britain had a global network of coaling stations. In addition, coal was inert and thus supplemented armor by reducing damage from shells exploding in coal storage bins.

But coal also had disadvantages. Moving it from shore to ship, and aboard ship, was dirty and strenuous work that required extensive manpower. As Churchill noted, "the ordeal of coaling ship exhausted the whole ship's company. In wartime it robbed them of their brief period of rest; it subjected everyone to extreme discomfort." (1) It was virtually impossible to refuel at sea, meaning that a quarter of the fleet might be forced to put into harbor coaling at any one time. Providing the fleet with coal was the greatest logistical headache of the age.

Oil offered many benefits. It had double the thermal content of coal so that boilers could be smaller and ships could travel twice as far. Greater speed was possible and oil burned with less smoke so the fleet would not reveal its presence as quickly. Oil could be stored in tanks anywhere, allowing more efficient design of ships, and it could be transferred through pipes without reliance on stokers, reducing manning. Refueling at sea was feasible, which provided greater flexibility.

Oil erased the drawbacks of a solid fuel. As Churchill noted, "the advantages conferred by liquid fuel were inestimable." But he also recognized that a switch would be difficult to implement: "To change the foundation of the navy from British coal to foreign oil was a formidable decision in itself." Finding and securing sources of oil threatened to be the most difficult part of the venture:

   The oil supplies of the world were in the hands of vast
   oil trusts under foreign control. To commit the navy irrevocably
   to oil was indeed to take arms against a sea
   of troubles.... If we overcame the difficulties and surmounted
   the risks, we should be able to raise the
   whole power and efficiency of the navy to a definitely
   higher level; better ships, better crews, higher
   economies, more intense forms of war power--in a
   word, mastery itself was the prize of the venture. (2)

Opposing the transition was the weight of naval tradition, magnified by loss of the strategic advantage of large coal supplies in Britain. This position was voiced in 1904 by Lord Selborne, the First Lord of the Admiralty: "The substitution of oil for coal is impossible, because oil does not exist in this world in sufficient quantities. It must be reckoned only as a most valuable adjunct." (3)

Supporting change was Admiral Fisher, the First Sea Lord from 1904 to 1910, and friend and advisor to Churchill during his tenure as First Lord of the

Admiralty. Fisher, who dominated the Royal Navy in his day, was renowned for many innovations in administration and engineering, including Dreadnought-class battleships. An early supporter of oil as fuel, he wrote in 1902, "It is a gospel fact ... that a fleet with oil fuel will have an overwhelming strategic advantage over a coal fleet." (4) Fisher admitted with pride that he was known as an "oil maniac" as early as 1886. (5)

Fisher described such advantages as the ability to replenish at sea and the smaller amount needed to produce the same amount of energy as coal. He reported that a new Russian battleship burned oil alone and that "at one stroke, oil fuel settles half our manning difficulties! We should require 50 percent less stokers." (6) Personnel savings were also critical to the Royal Navy, which regarded the shortage of trained sailors as its worst long-term problem.

Although Fisher was unable to push the senior service over the precipice during his tenure as First Sea Lord, he found Churchill an important ally since their first meeting in 1907. When Churchill became First Lord, Fisher wrote to a friend describing Churchill in the extravagant terms common in his correspondence: "So far every step he contemplates is good, and he is brave, which is everything! Napoleonic in audacity, Cromwellian in thoroughness." (7) Fisher regularly peppered Churchill with advice on a variety of naval matters. (8)