For many, the infrastructure of the city is taken for granted. In order for modern societies to function, we need miles of pipes and cables, interconnected networks, raw materials for fuel, over capacity and safeguards, all of which require expertise, political will and financial capital. How those facets of urban life were put in place and maintained can provide a lot of information about the city. In exploring the socio-technical history of Berlin, Timothy Moss chooses a city that underwent profound political and social upheaval. Though Berlin was undoubtedly an exceptional case, Moss's excellent monograph also points the way for further studies of urban infrastructure in more mundane settings. As he points out in his concluding chapter, much of the upheaval to Berlin's infrastructure occurred during times of political calm – the municipal socialism of the 1920s and the liberalized reunification of the 1990s – rather than the eras of totalitarianism and urban divide.

Moss takes a long-term view of infrastructural processes in Berlin, beginning in the 1920s with the creation of Greater Berlin. This was a period of municipal socialism, with utility companies for water, gas, electricity and waste created and maintained by municipal government. He then surveys the changes and, importantly, continuities with the coming of Nazi rule in the 1930s, and how the city's infrastructure was modified for World War II. Thereafter, he moves to look at how infrastructure was used in the divided city, as an arm of state socialism in East Berlin and an important facet of self-sufficiency in isolated West Berlin. Moss finishes by examining the role of infrastructure in the globalized city following the fall of the Berlin Wall and reunification, pointing to instances where utility companies expanded beyond Berlin to provide services in other countries, as well as privatization and subsequent efforts to re-municipalize the city's silver. One of the key themes that comes across from this in-depth chronological survey is the efforts of different authorities to impose their own image of the urban landscape onto Berlin, what Maria Kaika has termed urban ‘phantasmagoria’.Footnote ¹ For the city governments of the 1920s, utilities were to provide for urban citizens; for the Nazi regime, Berlin's infrastructure was to serve national goals; and for the Socialists of East Berlin, urban infrastructure was subordinate to state planning. Unsurprisingly, some of these urban images were more successful than others.

Moss’ work also makes two other important contributions. The first is how he successfully highlights the political aspects of socio-technologies. Going beyond engineering accounts, he shows that infrastructure is not just pipes and pumps, but networks influenced by political, social and cultural ideas. The second is his emphasis on the scale of Berlin's urban metabolism, the ways in which the city affected hinterlands near and far. The chapter on West Berlin, where Moss highlights how urban metabolic functions can become incredibly vulnerable to geopolitical pressures, provides one good example. The isolation of West Berlin from West Germany, as well as the separation from utilities located in East Berlin, had repercussions for the occupied territory. To achieve a level of urban autarky, a number of initiatives were undertaken to increase energy production, which in turn led to an increase in localized pollution. In highlighting this, Moss shows the importance of examining urban metabolic processes on a localized as well as a larger scale. As such, his work is an excellent addition to urban-environmental history, building on key works in environmental studies and historical geography.

There are a small number of issues to note. Remaking Berlin is an incredibly detailed monograph with meticulous archival research, and it is an impressive feat that Moss has been able to order years of work into a coherent narrative. At times, however, the monograph is a little too detailed, particularly as one of the stated audiences is non-academic professionals working in infrastructure. The second chapter, which outlines the theoretical underpinnings of the book, will be more helpful to academic specialists than practitioners. Another minor criticism is the lack of comment on industrial heritage. The monograph contains a number of photographs of abandoned or former energy production sites, but there is no word on whether these sites have been targeted for regeneration or heritage preservation – another aspect of urban political decision-making. It feels like an unfortunate omission given that German cities have been at the forefront of reusing former industrial sites (such as Landschaftspark in Duisburg). Nevertheless, these are minor criticisms of a rich and detailed monograph that adds much to our understanding of Berlin itself and the importance of infrastructural urban histories.