Government Facilities and Electricity – Freedom to Electrify
In the first edition of this blog, I noted that “the electric sector underpins every other essential industry sector, and it also relies on many of them. I…think of the overlaps like the Olympic rings – all interlinked, with some overlapping more than others.”
For the next two editions (just one more edition after this!), I’ll continue to focus on each critical infrastructure sector in relation to the electric sector because electricity – which began to be deployed as a service close to 150 years ago – has enabled the progress, convenience and abundance that are hallmarks of modern life. Thereafter, I’ll get into the overlapping policy issues in more detail.
For this edition, I’ll look at the Government Facilities Sector. The Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency defines this sector as follows:
“The Government Facilities Sector includes a wide variety of buildings, located in the United States and overseas, that are owned or leased by federal, state, local, and tribal governments. Many government facilities are open to the public for business activities, commercial transactions, or recreational activities while others that are not open to the public contain highly sensitive information, materials, processes, and equipment. These facilities include general-use office buildings and special-use military installations, embassies, courthouses, national laboratories, and structures that may house critical equipment, systems, networks, and functions. In addition to physical structures, the sector includes cyber elements that contribute to the protection of sector assets (e.g., access control systems and closed-circuit television systems) as well as individuals who perform essential functions or possess tactical, operational, or strategic knowledge.”
I deliberately left this sector for close-to-last because I thought it would be “easy,” which I knew would be appealing as I headed into the homestretch of this series. But, of course, I was wrong, as I have been all along when it comes to the rich history of these industries. I belatedly realized that, to discuss the government facilities sector, I had to contextualize it with why we have those facilities in the first instance -- not really possible without talking about government itself.
If you’ve been reading this series since the beginning, you can imagine that researching the history of government since ancient times is daunting. The good news is that I studied such history extensively in both high school and college and have kept studying it in the decades since my formal education ended. Still daunting, but at least I’m not starting from scratch for this one. Much of what I have laid out below is from my head, so I haven’t provided as many citations as I normally do.
History of Government and Its Locations
Until that crucial time around 6,000 years ago when several major developments in critical infrastructure sectors encouraged population centers to form (water systems/irrigation being key), formal government was unknown. People formed familial groups and tribes with loose hierarchies. Subsistence was a full-time job for all members of the family/tribe – hunting, gathering, cooking, fending off predators or aggressive humans, caring for the young and the old, etc. – leaving little time for formalized government.
Because of those advances, which I’ve discussed in detail in prior editions of this newsletter, population centers started to form in Mesopotamia (present day Iraq), about 6,000 years ago. According to oldest.org,
“Sumer was divided into many city-states which were ruled by a priestly governor or king. The Sumerians are also responsible for the oldest known law code found today, the Code of Ur-Nammu.
The Sumerian government ran several public programs including the use of an agricultural specialized labor force and a massive irrigation and canal system. All Sumerians, excluding the rich, were required by the government to work on the canals in a corvee (intermittent, unpaid labor).”
While records are less clear outside of the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe, formal governments were also established in China, Japan, other parts of the Far East, and the Americas as population centers grew there after similar infrastructure breakthroughs. Such governments were formed to keep the peace within the designated cities or territories (including protecting merchants engaged in trade internally and externally), to defend those territories, and to oversee infrastructure development. The expense associated with these activities led to early forms of taxation and monetary policy (as discussed in the financial services edition of this newsletter) as well as laws.
Back in the Middle East, subsequent to the Sumerians, the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, and numerous other groups formed monarchies of sorts (although the concept was not formalized until the Greeks), some of which considered their leaders to be godlike and all-powerful. About 3,800 years ago, the Babylonian King Hammurabi instituted The Code of Hammurabi, which was a set of 282 laws written in stone that greatly influenced other cultures, according to worldhistory.com.
In terms of government buildings/houses/palaces, none were unearthed until the Royal Palace of Ebla in Syria, approximately 4,400 years ago (according to Wikipedia). Such places existed – kings/pharaohs transacted government business at their homes or at nearby courtyards or dwellings or even places of worship. In fact, the term “pharaoh,” which came into being about 3,400 years ago, means “great house” – a reference to the king’s dwelling rather than lineage.
As an aside, I cannot emphasize enough how military capabilities have underpinned governments from Sumer to now -- the constant struggle for resources and riches has shaped all forms of government. As people gathered in greater numbers for economic reasons, better access to water and food, and to gain some free time, they also inevitably gave up some of their freedoms.
Such context makes it interesting, and seemingly contradictory, that the next major evolution in government was that of the Greek city-state, at its height about 2,500 years ago. Greek geography dictated the formation of isolated towns and cities that were, by necessity, independent and capable of defending themselves. In the case of the Greeks, their relatively small and isolated cities meant that every able-bodied male had to learn to fight, and the entire population had to contribute to ensure the overall success of the city-state. Athens and Sparta, among the most well-known of the Greek city-states, often warred with each other and other major rivals in the region as well.
Their unique geographic isolation combined with denser populations and constant vigilance required by these Greek communities lent itself to a novel combination of ideas about government – in Athens, all males had the right to vote, creating the first democracy. In other city-states, two monarchs ruled. They all shared a desire to limit the power of potential tyrants, with the aristocracy working collectively to prevent such tyrannical leaders from gaining power, according to National Geographic.
In terms of government buildings, the Greeks undertook major innovations, also dictated by their needs and geography. They clustered their temples, government buildings, and commercial areas together, usually on a hilltop, in an area known as an acropolis. The most famous of which was in Athens where one of its temples, the Parthenon, still stands today (on my bucket list to see, for sure, although there is an impressive replica of it across from my alma mater, Vanderbilt, in Nashville, near which I spent many hours studying when the weather was good). As discussed in the commercial facilities edition of this newsletter, the Athenians also established the custom of public discourse in gathering places in the Acropolis, a precursor to the formalized debates candidates for elected office now undertake as a matter of course.
Onward to the Romans, who expanded, both literally and figuratively, upon the Greek ideas of democracy. As Greek dominance waned through a series of military defeats, the Romans gained power with their focus on military might, enabled by robust trade, and superior infrastructure, as discussed in all previous editions of this newsletter. The need to finance the military, feed their citizens, and accumulate wealth, drove the Romans to continuously expand their territory. Contrasting with the Greeks’ distinct city-states, the Romans acquired multiple cities and all the rural areas in-between, as their power increased about 2,200 years ago. According to Brittanica, which has a fantastic overview of the evolution of government on its website,
“The Greeks did not know how to classify Rome. The Greek historian Polybius, who chronicled Rome’s rise, suggested that its constitution was such a success because it was a judicious blend of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. The Romans, a conservative, practical people, showed what they thought of such abstractions by speaking only of an unanalyzed “public thing”—res publica -- and thus gave a new word, republic, to politics.”
Eventually, the monarchical tendencies dominated, with the rise of hegemonic Roman Emperors like Julius Caesar, although the aristocracy and people were not comfortable with tyrants and wrested power away from them when needed. During the Republic, the Romans expanded upon the Greek ideas of public discourse and established their own process of competing for public office, an essential component of modern democracies. During both the Roman Republic-era and the later Empire-era, the governors and emperors built both elaborate palaces and more modest government buildings in its outlying territories for its bureaucrats to collect taxes, manage infrastructure, and enable other public works.
Upon Rome’s demise in about 400 A.D., a result of financial overextension, neither Europe nor the Middle East saw a successful, long-term, reconsolidation of power into one overarching entity. Several tried over the years, including Napoleon, Stalin, and Hitler, but failed to replicate the Roman rule. The Middle Ages saw a retrenchment into smaller spheres of influence governed by feudal lords who were expected to protect the people of their lands in return for financial support/labor. While kings rose and fell during this era, their powers were limited because of the lords’ capability to defend themselves in fortified castles – it wasn’t worth the kings’ efforts to take on the lords, so a balance of power was established. In some ways, this era was a mix of the Greek city-state concept and the Roman Republic, with the former characterized by self-contained feudal lords and the latter characterized by kings ruling which eventually became nation-states in the later Middle Ages and Renaissance.
During this era, government buildings were the castles/great houses of the lords and kings, with halls devoted to conducting business with citizens and the lords/kings also acting as de-facto judges to settle disputes. In England, the balance between the lords and king was formalized in parliament, a place where the lords would convene as a body to consider and modify the laws, in coordination with the king. The first parliament in England was called in 1290 A.D., and thereafter met in a church – Westminster Abbey – for centuries.
The Middle Ages were a time of great migrations and upheaval. Vikings and barbarians from the East constantly invaded the West to gain access to resources, and then often assimilated into the places they conquered, including England. These wars and resettlements were not all bad, as they brought with them new trading routes and ideas. Gunpowder was one of the innovations brought from the East, having been discovered in China (and discussed in the defense industrial base version of this newsletter). The weapons developed from gunpowder – cannons, in particular, gave kings the military might to overcome the feudal lords’ defenses and to herald in the era of the nation-state, an era that exists today, albeit in a different form.
Like the Romans centuries before, the kings of Europe needed cash for their militaries and infrastructures during this era – Brittanica notes that the modern era of nation-states started with Henry VIII of England in the early 1500s. Most European kingdoms sought that cash elsewhere by funding explorations throughout the globe and acquiring territories rich in resources. Similar to the Romans, these vast territories became costly to manage and they overextended themselves eventually. Also like the Romans, European kingdoms such as France, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Denmark, and England, treated their citizens differently than the people in the territories they acquired. In these nation-states, democratic ideas were evolving and freedoms expanding for citizens. While in the territories the conquered peoples were considered inferior – this perspective could have meant outright enslavement all the way to taxation without representation.
This hypocrisy was evident because the written word had been democratized with Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press in 1440. While the Chinese had, separately, invented similar mechanisms for reproducing text prior to Gutenberg’s innovation, the specifics of his machine changed the world for the better. The American revolutionaries' use of printed pamphlets on freedom and reproductions of important documents were key to garnering widespread support of the ideals that spurred the American Revolution and sustained the Americans through eight years of war before defeating the British. The Americans heralded a new form of constitutional democracy, building on that of the British parliamentary government, but with new features and no monarch, of course (and we never “came back” to that idea, King George). This concept, applied in various forms throughout the world today, is intended to balance the freedom of individuals with the need for order, military protection and stability provided by government.
Unfortunately, other ideas about government have proliferated in the last 200 years as well – professing to be for the good of the people, but instead imposing totalitarianism, terror, and death on their populations as well as others. The histories and actions of the U.S.S.R. and Nazi Germany are abject lessons in what not to do as governments.
Back to the democracies. In the U.S., the “trifurcation” of power between local (municipal and county) governments, states, and the federal government has meant the proliferation of government buildings to house these functions. So much so that the courthouse is the most majestic building in most towns across America. In Washington, D.C., the Capitol Building, White House, Supreme Court, and their annexes are the headquarters of the legislative, executive, and judicial parts of the federal government, respectively. They’re also symbols of democracy throughout the world.
Alas, the visibility of these government buildings at all levels makes them targets for nefarious people – whether domestic or international terrorists or disturbed individuals with a grievance. A modern example is the horrific devastation caused by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols when they bombed the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995 killing 168 people, including children. Hence, the need to protect these edifices from attack.
Nexus with the Electric Sector
Arguably, the constitutional democracy version of government in the U.S. and other versions of democracy left room for innovation and competition. Hence, the commercialization of electricity began in the U.S. with Thomas Edison’s lightbulb and electric distribution system at Pearl Street in 1882. Today, utilities provide electricity to federal, state, and local buildings, including military installations. As mentioned in the defense industrial base edition of this newsletter, utilities work closely with key customers who might need additional power redundancy. They also might need to provide security background checks on personnel providing operation and maintenance to electric infrastructure at federal, state, or local facilities.
In the case of local government facilities, not-for-profit public power utilities (often called “munis”) are units of local government themselves and so their facilities are, themselves, part of this sector. They also can easily provision additional services to the other local government facilities in their footprint.
Other Ways the Sectors Overlap
Here are some other ways that government facilities and electric utilities overlap:
Reliance on transportation. Government facilities rely on various avenues to reach their facilities, but also to evacuate in times of crisis, while electric utilities rely on transportation for both the day-to-day deliveries as well as in crises.
Reliance on critical manufacturing. Both sectors rely on steel and steel products, poles, beams, concrete, etc., for their basic infrastructure and to ensure structural safety and integrity where applicable.
Environmental regulation/climate change. Depending on their function, government facilities are often required to meet environmental regulations and requirements and will work with their electric utilities to manage their footprint to meet such regulations.
Reliance on natural gas and other fuels. There is a direct relationship here to government facilities related to their back-up, onsite, power needs, while the electric sector uses these fuels to provide day-to-day power to the government facilities sector.
Reliance on water. Like every other critical infrastructure sector, government facilities need access to water – various amounts depending on their function.
Workforce challenges and the knowledge drain that has resulted from retirements in recent years impact both industries’ regular operations.
Supply chain constraints that impact every aspect of infrastructure deployment and maintenance.
How to best use technology to create efficiencies and minimize expenses.
How to manage the cybersecurity risk that comes with those technology deployments. Both industries are acutely focused on this and could work even more collaboratively in the future, particularly with the need for governments to use and protect data centers that are, in turn, powered by utilities.