Defining Risk within a Business Context: Thomas A. Edison, Elihu Thomson, and the a.c—d.c. Controversy, 1885–1900

Abstract

A sister article to the one by Paul David (reread the one by David), though this one argues that the "battle of the systems" was not entirely due to economic interests but motivated by safety concerns, with Edison genuinely against ac systems for safety reasons and "because he feared that poorly designed and installed ac systems would impede the broad adoption of electric power." Thomson (of the rival Thomson-Houston Electric Company which merged in 1892 with Edison General Electric to form GEC) similarly, for high principles, refused to support his marketing department for ac systems because they ignored his demand that only integrated safer systems be sold. The main interest of the case example is to show that major technology controversies are not new but go back a century, and that the network of interwoven technical, scientific and economic interests is also an old story. Edison's first electrical dc system was installed in 1882 in New York and the first ac system was installed in Buffalo in 1886. What would be more of interest though is if it could be convincingly shown that the controversy over safety actually had a real effect and helped to make the ac system safer. This would fit in well with Rip and others arguments that technology controversies are a good thing because they expose developing technologies to greater public scrutiny. The story unfolds with no legal intervention at the state level, even though Edison lobbied for laws to limit (limits to voltages), prohibit (overhead transmission lines or its use in offices and dwellings), or control (compulsory safety devices) ac distribution systems. Legal controls were only enacted at the municipal level, with New York prohibiting overhead transmission. The case study also supports Wynne's argument that the "rules" for controlling a technology are adjusted ad hoc and that the conditions described by scientists for safe use will often not be met in the real world. In this case, both Edison and Thomson were concerned that workmen would not treat the laying of ac transmission lines with enough care and utilities often did not purchase the needed safety equipment. However, Edison took his case to the public (and pushed for legal control) whereas Thomson believed safety could be instituted by convincing and educating professional organisations. To summarize, this case study from the 1880s highlights several main themes from technology assessment: 1) the role of public versus technical "in-house" participation in controversies, 2) legal intervention versus market forces, 3) translation of rules for safe use from a controlled laboratory environment to the real world, and 4) the role of controversy in spurring safer technologies.