Show simple item record

dc.creatorDutton, Lindsi Rain
dc.creatorRister, M. Edward
dc.creatorLacewell, Ronald D.
dc.creatorSturdivant, Allen W.
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-04T18:10:36Z
dc.date.available2020-12-04T18:10:36Z
dc.date.issued2015-02
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1969.1/191391
dc.description.abstractWith increasing population and global economic growth, the pressure on natural resources becomes more intense. Water is a prime example of increasing demand among many users, including environmental priorities. A typical approach for increasing water availability is to look to conservation and/or alternative technological developments for water supply. These strategies involve issues with investment, recurring costs, and a temporal evaluation. Capital budgeting methodology of discounting future streams of costs and benefits to estimate a present value is well established. Applying capital budgeting techniques to water management strategies is an effective method to account for and compare alternative annual water saving levels and expected useful lives. This methodology includes ‘normalizing’ such flows by calculating the respective alternative projects’ net present values and associated annuity equivalents using a discount rate. The issue of “appropriate discount” rate is not the point of this paper, but rather, if dollars are discounted, what are the perspectives on discounting future water savings to a present value. The issue does not lend itself to a consensus, but rather, provides interesting implications, particularly when prioritizing alternative projects. Presented herein are attitudes across resource specialists with arguments related to what to include in a discount rate, private sector versus public sector, and the impact of also discounting physical units such as water on the priority of alternative projects. A case study of three alternative water conservation projects and how the ranking is impacted by alternative assumptions in financial and physical water discounting is presented.en
dc.description.sponsorshipThis research was supported in part by the Rio Grande Basin Initiative, which is administered by the Texas Water Resources Institute of Texas A&M AgriLife of the Texas A&M University System with funds provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture – National Institute of Food and Agriculture (USDA–NIFA)en
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherTexas Water Resources Institute
dc.relation.ispartofseriesTR;473
dc.titleA Review of Discounting Natural Resourcesen
dc.typeTechnical Reporten
local.departmentOtheren


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record