Powering “Progress”: Regulation and the Development of Michigan's Electricity Landscape

‘Accomplished by methods which are indefensible’: Electric utilities, finance, and the natural barriers to accumulation

“…After years of lobbying, and in concert with the Progressive Movement that was especially strong in Wisconsin and New York, Insull and his collaborators were able to win state regulation and monopoly status in most states between 1907and 1917(McGuire, 1989Hughes, 1983;Howell, 2011). In a speech given to the Engineer's Club of Dayton Ohio in 1914, Insull made clear the importance of state regulation to successful management of the problems associated with the load curve.…”

“…These rates, in turn, were based on the total utility capitalization. As a result, if a utility needed additional investment capital to build new plants or distribution wires, they needed sufficient income to be an attractive investment (Howell, 2011). All of this had the effect of shifting a considerable burden from the electric utility to the state regulators -in effect, the state was now integral to the success of public utilities by ensuring a 'reasonable' profit margin that would assist the utility in attracting financing for expanded service (McGuire, 1989).…”

Electricity capital and accumulation strategies in the U.S. electricity system

“…Hirsh (1989) has termed this arrangement the “utility consensus,” a tacit agreement among electricity capital—that is, between states, finance, and utilities—that enabled the monopoly utility to function as one of the primary energetic building blocks of the U.S. economy. From the start, utilities have been adept at making their case to regulators and were successful in building infrastructure that could be added into the capital expenditures on which their “fair return” was based, called the rate base (Howell, 2011). The incentive for utilities has been to find capital projects that could be added to the rate base, and to make sure those projects were ever larger and “gold-plated.” By the 1980s many utilities had overbuilt, and had reserve margins (the percentage of electricity generation capacity above the peak electricity demand) exceeding 25%, far above what most utility engineers deemed necessary for system reliability and balance (Hirsh, 1999).…”

Infrastructures of liberal life: From modernity and progress to resilience and ruins

“…112–129; Patterson, ). For Maria Kaika and Erik Swyngedouw (), infrastructures became “urban fetishes,” seemingly autonomous entities with the promise of “a better society and a happier life” (p. 31; Howell, ). Playing on these attachments, domestic design objects key “soft” weapons in the United States' effort to promote the fruits of the capitalist mode of life against the austere communist life (Castillo, ).…”