Showing posts sorted by relevance for query infrastructure. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query infrastructure. Sort by date Show all posts

Saturday, September 5, 2015

Public Utility Depreciation by NARUC

I don’t usually read reference books, or textbooks, all the way through like I did with Public Utility Depreciation Practices. Because of my new job as a “depreciation engineer,” I undertook reading this guide from the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC).

The title describes the content of the book. It includes some historical and legal background, but the bulk of the book is aimed at the practicalities of determining depreciation expenses.

The main elements going into depreciation rate determination are depreciation base, service life, net salvage, and depreciation computation methods. Depreciation base is the starting point; it represents the initial investment of capital that is to be recovered as a cost through depreciation. Generally it is the book cost (original cost of the infrastructure including materials, equipment, labor and related costs).

Most methods of computing depreciation are referred to as age-life methods. These methods spread the cost of the expected life of a piece of infrastructure. The preferred method is straight line depreciation. To apply these methods, one will need to know or estimate the life of the infrastructure under consideration and the net salvage value. The depreciation rate is the difference between the base and the net salvage, divided by the life of the infrastructure. With the exception of unique pieces, like types of infrastructure are lumped together because they are expected to have a similar life (wooden poles, steel poles, copper wire, conduit, etc.).

Life expectancy can be estimated by several methods. Survivor curves are developed from statistical studies of the life of particular types of infrastructure, though other methods may be used depending on the type and quality of data available.

Net salvage is estimated based on experience. The gross salvage is the price received for the equipment or materials retired. The cost of removal is subtracted from this to calculate the net salvage. Sometimes it can cost more to remove infrastructure than the value of the retired equipment and materials, so net salvage can be negative.

Calculating depreciation is more art than science. Projections of future values are inherently tricky. Growth can cause infrastructure to become inadequate before it is expected, or slower than expected growth can extend the life infrastructure. New regulations can make infrastructure obsolete in an instant, as can new technologies. In addition, utilities are constantly adding and retiring infrastructure. Amidst this uncertainty, regulators must balance the level of service needed by utility customers with the returns needed by utility investors in a complex environment.

Admittedly, a book from 1968 may seem dated. However, many of the practices described are still in use. Government regulation of monopoly utility rates in the United States has been occurring for more than a century, and the practices to not change rapidly. Even so, some of the practices described were considered obsolete, or near obsolescence, at the time of publication, and are not likely to be encountered now unless you’re a financial historian combing through moldy account books.


National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners. Public Utility Depreciation Practices. 1968. Washington, DC: Author, 1974.

Saturday, July 29, 2017

Move by Rosabeth Moss Canter

The major elements of America’s transportation infrastructure and policy frameworks are six decades old (or older in the case rail). We haven’t even kept up with the maintenance since then. In addition to taking care of what we have, we need to adapt to the changes in technology, culture and the economy that have occurred. Our policies haven’t been keeping up.

In Move, Harvard business professor Rosabeth Moss Kanter explores how we got here and how we can move forward. We got here by adopting a defense-oriented policy that emphasized cars (especially interstate highways) and air travel, largely ignoring rail, public transit and intermodal development.

The path forward has several elements. First is a focus on mobility. Transportation infrastructure is a technical, bureaucratic realm of deep silos. Mobility changes the focus to moving people and products around communities and the nation in whatever ways make sense. Physical mobility and economic mobility are tied, and if we want to strengthen our economic leadership on the world stage, we need to break down internal policy barriers to advancing the way people move.

That means developing a national strategy. Of course, a rigid approach won’t work because we have varied nation. However, national priorities and frameworks can make room for regional priorities, adaption and leadership.

Money is always in issue. There are potentials in public-private partnership (PPP), and that can be arranged in many ways. America has a world-leading freight rail system that has very limited public investment. Airports are generally owned by governments, and attempts to privatize them have meet a cool response from possible investors. However, there are examples of successful PPPs in which there is something for everybody.

I already mentioned that technology has come a long way in the past several decades, especially in the realm of communication and data analysis. Some transportation industries, such as airlines, are taking advantage of the opportunities in new technology, while other are lagging. There are many ways our transportation system can be smarter, and we need sensible ways of incorporating technology in ways that are safe without losing out on the benefits through unnecessary delays.

This requires leadership and vision, especially in government. Politicians are often motivated by short-term wins, but mobility is a long-term investment. We need leaders who can see passed the next election and the boundaries of party.

Finally, citizen engagement is important. Plans can quickly fail if the people who are going to use, pay for and otherwise feel the ultimate effects of new transportation policies and infrastructure are not informed, involved and empowered to take action that works for them.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in


Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. Move: Putting America’s Infrastructure Back in the Lead. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2015.

Friday, April 17, 2009

What's New April 17, 2009

Action Packed (10)

Alternative Fuels and Energy Resources Articles and Links (Updated)

Asset Management Presentation Available

Bill Would Limit Greenhouse Gas Considerations in Endangered Species Decisions

Bridge Bill Could Require States to Address Corrosion


The busy googleganger: Keenan Patterson - Silicon Valley, CA Facebook
, Widgetbox › Keenan Patterson commented on the group 'Website Owners', April Fools Day Around The Web Keenan's Blog, New Theme » Keenan Patterson’s Blog, Keenan Patterson (keenanpatterson) on Twitter

Congress Considers Dam Safety Bills

Economic Stimulus Funds 2000 Transportation Projects (Infrastructure Watch, Apr. 14, 2009)

Infrastructure Watch can now be reached at www.infrastructurewatch.net

Infrastructure Watch has a New URL

Missouri Gets Economics Stimulus Fund for Clean Diesel Projects

More Federal Environment and Infrastructure Appointees Announced

Missouri Selects Transportation Projects for Economic Stimulus Funding

Missouri to Hold Public Meeting on Economic Stimulus for Weatherization Program

New Chief of Natural Resources Conservation Service Named

New Commissioner Appointed to Missouri Highways & Transportation Commission

Pharmaceuticals in Water (Updated)

Progress ReportProposed House Resolution Supports National Public Works Week

Transportation Headlines for Wednesday, March 18, 2009

What I Read

What's New March 27, 2009

www.keenanpatterson.net now redirects to Keenan’s Book Reviews