An additional public utility?

The properties of compressed air have been well established for something approaching two centuries. The machinery certainly existed in the earlier half of the 19th century to produce compressed air in bulk, as did pressure vessel technology and piping technology. Thus: could compressed air have become a public utility for such applications as household motors beginning (let's say) about the time of the US Civil War? And would we still have utility compressed air today, or would it have been supplanted decades ago by electricity (with a few older homes, mostly in eastern seaboard US cities, still having the now-disconnected compressed air piping and connection points still in place)?
 
Computing Utility. People pay a monthly rate to connect to a supercomputer via optic fiber that does their computing for them. All such supercomputers form the backbone of a electronic network, so you can network and read mail, etc. Instead of PCs, we all have terminals with varying degree of "smartness"

Very likely in a "No PCs" world. Or a world where Minitel runs wild. Or a world where most computer research is spent on supercomputers rather than small computers.
 
, or would it have been supplanted decades ago by electricity (with a few older homes, mostly in eastern seaboard US cities, still having the now-disconnected compressed air piping and connection points still in place)?

I have heard that this is true in some industrial sectors (or was it cities?).

Steam engines are basically compressed air engines.

A quick Google search tells me that both washing machines and refrigerators were invented prior to and practical by the 1830s-40s. So, i see no bar to compressed air as a utility.

Unless it works better than electricity, ie less maintenance or transfer loss, it would be outdated by the 1960s equivalent ITTL. It would hang on until there were too few users to keep the utilities alive.

Wasn't there a train that ran on compressed air?


Elidor, cool idea. I like it. It stirs the cyberpunk in my soul.
 
I have heard that this is true in some industrial sectors (or was it cities?).

Steam engines are basically compressed air engines.

A quick Google search tells me that both washing machines and refrigerators were invented prior to and practical by the 1830s-40s. So, i see no bar to compressed air as a utility.

Unless it works better than electricity, ie less maintenance or transfer loss, it would be outdated by the 1960s equivalent ITTL. It would hang on until there were too few users to keep the utilities alive.

Wasn't there a train that ran on compressed air?


Elidor, cool idea. I like it. It stirs the cyberpunk in my soul.

If you're saying that a steam engine is similar thermodynamically to a compressed air engine, that's true on a very high level in that both may use a Carnot cycle. The resemblance ends there, however, in the amount of useful work one can derive from the unit mass of working fluid (that is, steam vs. air).

Setting that aside, compressed air motors could have driven home washing machines, vacuum cleaners, and other small appliances (e.g., fans, including furnace blowers) well into the earlier Victorian years, assuming the end use devices were developed sufficiently for consumer use. I take issue, however, with the notion that domestic mechanical refrigeration would have been applied widely: the refrigerants used commonly before the development of CFCs (e.g., sulfur dioxide; ammonia) were immediately hazardous to health. On the other hand, dishwashers were certainly practical by the late 1880s/early 1890s, and pneumatic controls were developed so that at least an automatically sequenced pneumatic dishwasher could have been available.

Yes, there were installations of compressed air-driven streetcars, with varying degrees of success--most of them not particularly successful. And at any rate, they were developed at about the same time that the 600 VDC street railway system became fully practical and economical, thereby relegating this alternate motive power source to the museum.
 
If you're saying that a steam engine is similar thermodynamically to a compressed air engine, that's true on a very high level in that both may use a Carnot cycle. The resemblance ends there, however, in the amount of useful work one can derive from the unit mass of working fluid (that is, steam vs. air).
What i meant was that air pressure drives both. Also, i was making a steam engine in a class (didn't totally finish it, though) and it appears that all model steam engines run off compressed air because making boilers is very legally restricted.

I take issue, however, with the notion that domestic mechanical refrigeration would have been applied widely: the refrigerants used commonly before the development of CFCs (e.g., sulfur dioxide; ammonia) were immediately hazardous to health.
Yeah. But potential danger usually doesn't stop companies from selling products. Even if not widely used in homes, fridges could still be used in hotels and stores. And even in that limited use, accidents would spur development of safer alternatives, making refrigeration safe sooner than OTL.
 

WyldCard4

Banned
Maybe another world would consider TV a utility and provide it free to the people either as a service to provide information or as a mass opium.
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
I think nail guns would have become a much more widespread thing much earlier.

Is there some way it could provide light and/or heat? It would be much safer than gas if it could and might last to the present on that basis.
 
What i meant was that air pressure drives both. Also, i was making a steam engine in a class (didn't totally finish it, though) and it appears that all model steam engines run off compressed air because making boilers is very legally restricted.

I'm kidding around here, but comparing a model steam engine to the real thing is like comparing a lightning bug to lightning. You're right about the safety/legal restrictions on boilers, though: in industrial applications, the design and construction of boilers and pressure vessels is governed in the US by a design code authored by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (specifically, Section VIII, division 1 for unfired vessels) to prevent accidents. PM me for more information on the thermodynamics of steam engines if you're curious--but in no way does compressed air drive a true steam engine: it's water vapor, most commonly referred to as steam.


Yeah. But potential danger usually doesn't stop companies from selling products. Even if not widely used in homes, fridges could still be used in hotels and stores. And even in that limited use, accidents would spur development of safer alternatives, making refrigeration safe sooner than OTL.

I'd agree that a commercial application of refrigeration could be more prevalent: certainly ammonia-based mechanical refrigeration was used widely in meat-packing and ice plants over a century ago, decades before home use was remotely common.
 
I think nail guns would have become a much more widespread thing much earlier.

Is there some way it could provide light and/or heat? It would be much safer than gas if it could and might last to the present on that basis.

Compressed air power tools are certainly possible earlier on, especially for consumer applications. On the other hand, forget it insofar as producing light or heat, apart from perhaps driving a small local generator. And in that case the inefficiencies make it not particularly practical.
 
I'm kidding around here, but comparing a model steam engine to the real thing is like comparing a lightning bug to lightning.
The engines that i've seen are in fractional horsepowers which, while certainly not comparable to train or industrial engines, would be sufficient for driving a washing machine or the like.

Most of these are the "lighning bugs", only useful for science class fun.
http://npmccabe.tripod.com/steam.htm

And the one i was building, 5/8" bore,
http://npmccabe.tripod.com/husky.htm

http://www.vintageprojects.com/machine-shop/steam-engine-hobby.html
http://www.john-tom.com/html/SteamPlans.html

but in no way does compressed air drive a true steam engine: it's water vapor, most commonly referred to as steam.
It's the expansion of the steam, which makes the pressure. Regardless of the source, compressor or boiler, it's the pressure that drives the engine.

I'd agree that a commercial application of refrigeration could be more prevalent: certainly ammonia-based mechanical refrigeration was used widely in meat-packing and ice plants over a century ago, decades before home use was remotely common.
Really? Ice plants, hmmm? Can you recommend any sources for that kind of stuff?
 
I'm kidding around here, but comparing a model steam engine to the real thing is like comparing a lightning bug to lightning.
The engines that i've seen are in fractional horsepowers which, while certainly not comparable to train or industrial engines, would be sufficient for driving a washing machine or the like.

Most of these are the "lighning bugs", only useful for science class fun.
http://npmccabe.tripod.com/steam.htm

And the one i was building, 5/8" bore,
http://npmccabe.tripod.com/husky.htm

http://www.vintageprojects.com/machine-shop/steam-engine-hobby.html
http://www.john-tom.com/html/SteamPlans.html

but in no way does compressed air drive a true steam engine: it's water vapor, most commonly referred to as steam.
It's the expansion of the steam, which makes the pressure. Regardless of the source, compressor or boiler, it's the pressure that drives the engine.

I'd agree that a commercial application of refrigeration could be more prevalent: certainly ammonia-based mechanical refrigeration was used widely in meat-packing and ice plants over a century ago, decades before home use was remotely common.
Really? Ice plants, hmmm? Can you recommend any sources for that kind of stuff?
 
Top