“Mount Fuji from Lake Yamanaka” Takahashi Shōtei (1871-1945) | Los Angeles County Museum of Art
The Japanese Standards Association is the Global Secretariat for a standardization project devoted to the discovery and promulgation of common methods and guidelines for coordinated lifetime management of network assets in power systems to support good asset management. In addition, this may include the development of new methods and guidelines required to keep pace with development of electrotechnologies excluding generation assets; covered by other IEC standards.
There has, and will continue to be significant investment in electricity assets which will require ongoing management to realise value for the organizations. In the last 5 years, there has been USD 718 billion investment for electricity, spending on electricity networks and storage continued, reaching an all-time high of USD 277 billion in 2016. In the United States (17% of the total) and Europe (13%), a growing share is going to the replacement of ageing transmission and distribution assets. A more fully dimensioned backgrounder on the business environment that drives the market for this title is available in the link below:
It is early in this project’s lifecycle; far too early to find it referenced in public safety and energy laws in the United States where it would affect #TotalCostofOwnership. Where we should, we follow the lead of the USNC/IEC for the United States, while still mindful that many of our IEEE colleagues follow the lead of their own national standards body.
Because this project fills an obvious gap in good practice literature we maintain this project on our 4 times monthly electrotechnology colloquium that we co-host with the IEEE Education & Healthcare Facilities Committee. See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.
US K-12 schools (public school districts) spend approximately $8 billion annually on energy costs, including electricity, which ranks as the second-largest operating expense after teacher salaries. This figure, cited by the U.S. Department of Energy and EPA, reflects nationwide totals, with much of it electricity-related due to lighting, HVAC, and other needs; efficiency improvements could save 10-30%.
For colleges and universities, specific nationwide electricity or total energy cost aggregates are less uniformly reported in recent sources, but higher education institutions face substantial utility bills—often over $100,000 per large building annually—with campuses consuming significant power for 24/7 operations, research labs, and facilities.
US healthcare systems, particularly hospitals, incur high electricity costs due to continuous operation and intensive equipment use. Individual hospitals often pay $600,000 to over $2 million yearly on electricity alone, with average energy costs around $3-4 per square foot; inpatient facilities consume nearly twice the electricity per square foot of average commercial buildings.These sectors represent major institutional energy consumers, where efficiency upgrades yield significant savings.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is an independent agency within the U.S. federal government that regulates interstate transmission of electricity, natural gas, and oil. It oversees wholesale energy markets, pipeline infrastructure, and hydroelectric projects, ensuring fair rates and reliability. While independent, FERC operates under the Department of Energy’s umbrella but does not take direct orders from the executive branch.
FERC enforces energy laws, approves infrastructure projects, and regulates market competition. FERC plays a crucial role in balancing economic, environmental, and energy security concerns, aiming to maintain a stable and efficient energy system across the United States. Since the U.S. shares interconnected electricity grids with Canada and Mexico, FERC’s decisions on transmission rules and pricing affect energy flows and grid reliability in both countries.
Our interest lies in closing a technical gap that exists upstream from the building service point and downstream from the utility supply point. Some, not all of it, can be accomplished with titles in the IEEE catalog.
Given the dominance of vertical incumbents in the electric power domain, we have submitted a tranche of reliability concepts into the ASHRAE, NFPA and ICC catalogs — not so much with the expectation that they will be gratefully received — but that our proposals will unleash competitive energies among developers of voluntary consensus standards.
One of our proposals was heard at the April-May and October meetings of the International Code Council. We are happy to discuss the outcome of that proposal any day at the usual hour.
In power system engineering, availability and reliability are two important concepts, but they refer to different aspects of the system’s performance.
Reliability:
Reliability refers to the ability of a power system to perform its intended function without failure for a specified period under given operating conditions. It is essentially a measure of how dependable the system is.
Reliability metrics often include indices such as the frequency and duration of outages, failure rates, mean time between failures (MTBF), and similar measures.
Reliability analysis focuses on identifying potential failure modes, predicting failure probabilities, and implementing measures to mitigate risks and improve system resilience.Availability:
Availability, on the other hand, refers to the proportion of time that a power system is operational and able to deliver power when needed, considering both scheduled and unscheduled downtime.
Availability is influenced by factors such as maintenance schedules, repair times, and system design redundancies.
Availability is typically expressed as a percentage and can be calculated using the ratio of the uptime to the total time (uptime plus downtime).
Availability analysis aims to maximize the operational readiness of the system by minimizing downtime and optimizing maintenance strategies.
Reliability focuses on the likelihood of failure and the ability of the system to sustain operations over time, while availability concerns the actual uptime and downtime of the system, reflecting its readiness to deliver power when required. Both concepts are crucial for assessing and improving the performance of power systems, but they address different aspects of system behavior.
Comment:These 1-hour sessions tend to be administrative in substance, meeting the minimum requirements of the Sunshine Act. This meeting was no exception. Access to the substance of the docket is linked here.
On Monday June 13th, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission commissioners informed the House Committee on Energy and Commerce that the “environmental justice” agenda prohibits reliable dispatchable electric power needed for national power security. One megawatt of natural gas generation does not equal one megawatt of renewable generation. The minority party on the committee — the oldest standing legislative committee in the House of Representatives (established 1795) — appears indifferent to the reliability consequences of its policy.
“Our nation’s continued energy transition requires the efficient development of new transmission infrastructure. Federal and state regulators must address numerous transmission-related issues, including how to plan and pay for new transmission infrastructure and how to navigate shared federal-state regulatory authority and processes. As a result, the time is ripe for greater federal-state coordination and cooperation.”
At the July 20th meeting of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Tristan Kessler explained the technical basis for a Draft Final Rule for Improvements to Generator Interconnection Procedures and Agreements, On August 16th the Commission posted a video reflecting changes in national energy policy since August 14, 2003; the largest blackout in American history.
Today is an “off-year” federal election but there are many appeals to voters for more money to build new, or expand or maintain educational settlements. We may have to pick through a few bond offerings. We maintain an ongoing concern for the security of polling places; many which are located in schools, colleges and universities.
In the United States, polling places can be located in a variety of public and private facilities, not just in public schools. While public schools are commonly used as polling places due to their widespread distribution and accessibility, they are not necessarily the largest proportion of polling places nationwide. The specific locations of polling places can vary by jurisdiction and are determined by local election officials. Other common polling place locations include community centers, churches, libraries, government buildings, and private residences.
The selection of polling places is based on factors like accessibility, convenience, and the need to accommodate a specific number of voters within a given precinct or district. The goal is to ensure that voters have reasonable access to cast their ballots on election day. The use of public schools as polling places is widespread but not universal, and the distribution of polling places across various types of facilities can vary from one region to another.
The political party that claims that “democracy is at stake” today’s election is the same political party that seeks to federalize state election laws, pack the Supreme Court, remove the Electoral College, remove US national borders and abolish voter identification will be voting in today’s off-year elections. In other words: it wants to abolish democracy. Its partisans have long since metastasized in education communities where polling places for students, faculty, staff and nearby residents are hosted.
Join us in post-irony America today when we focus only on the safety and environmental condition of these polling places. Where there is closer agreement. Catalogs, titles, chapters, sections and passages that inform best practice on this topic:
The largest school bond referendum on ballots in November 2025 is the $1.4 billion package for Richardson Independent School District (ISD) in Texas.
University of Michigan’s 2025 $2 billion general revenue bonds
New York University’s 2025 $2.18 billion bonds through the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York
The largest school bond referendum on ballots in November 2024 was Measure US for the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) in California, totaling $9 billion.
In the November 2022 elections, a significant number of school bond referenda were presented to voters across the United States. For example, in Wisconsin alone, there were 57 successful capital referenda amounting to nearly $2.1 billion in authorized debt (Wisconsin Policy Forum)
In Texas, Central Texas schools had a total of $4.24 billion in bonds on the ballot, covering various propositions for school facilities, technology improvements, and athletic facilities (Fox 7 Austin)
In California and Arkansas, bond measures totaling $74 million — including school choice — were aimed at addressing school facility improvements (The74Million)
Voters in 16 North Carolina counties approved bond issues totaling $4.27 billion, with $3.08 billion dedicated to K-12 public school construction and improvements (EducationNC)
“The cure for high prices, is high prices” — They say.
Today we explore fiscal runaway in the US education “industry” with particular interest in the financing instruments for building the real assets that are the beating heart of culture in neighborhoods, cities, counties and states. We steer clear of social and political issues. The marketing of these projects — and how the loans are paid off — provides insight into the costs and benefits of this $100+ billion industry; the largest non-residential building construction market in the United States.
We cannot do much to stop the hyperbolically rising cost of administrative functionaries but we can force the incumbents we describe in our ABOUT to work a little harder to reduce un-used (or un-useable) space and reduce maintenance cost. Sometimes simple questions result in obvious answers that result in significant savings.
More recently hybrid teaching and learning space, owing the the circumstances of the pandemic, opens new possibilities for placing downward pressure on cost.
After Architect-Engineers and Building Construction Contractors (many of whom finance election advocacy enterprises) the following organizations are involved in placing a bond on the open market:
School Districts: Individual school districts issue bonds to fund construction or renovation of school facilities, purchase equipment, or cover other educational expenses. Each school district is responsible for managing its own bond issuances.
Colleges and Universities: Higher education institutions, such as universities and colleges, issue bonds to finance campus expansions, construction of new academic buildings, dormitories, research facilities, and other capital projects.
State-Level Agencies: Many states have agencies responsible for overseeing and coordinating bond issuances for schools and universities. These agencies may facilitate bond sales, help ensure compliance with state regulations, and provide financial assistance to educational institutions.
Municipal Finance Authorities: Municipal finance authorities at the state or local level often play a role in facilitating bond transactions for educational entities. They may act as intermediaries in the bond issuance process.
Investment Banks and Underwriters: Investment banks and underwriters assist educational institutions in structuring and selling their bonds to investors. They help determine bond terms, market the bonds, and manage the offering.
Bond Counsel: Bond counsel, typically law firms, provide legal advice to educational institutions on bond issuances. They help ensure that the bond issuance complies with all legal requirements and regulations.
Rating Agencies: Rating agencies, such as Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s, and Fitch Ratings, assess the creditworthiness of the bonds and assign credit ratings. These ratings influence the interest rates at which the bonds can be issued.
Investors: Various institutional and individual investors, including mutual funds, pension funds, and individual bond buyers, purchase school and university bonds as part of their investment portfolios.
Financial Advisors: Financial advisory firms provide guidance to educational institutions on bond issuances, helping them make informed financial decisions related to borrowing and debt management.
Regulatory Authorities: Federal and state regulatory authorities, such as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and state-specific agencies, oversee and regulate the issuance of bonds to ensure compliance with securities laws and financial regulations.
These organizations collectively contribute to the process of issuing, selling, and managing school and university bonds in the United States, allowing educational institutions to raise the necessary funds for their capital projects and operations. The specific entities involved may vary depending on the size and location of the educational institution and the nature of the bond issuance.
Salutariness (Cleanliness) standards follow culture (which follows the science which follows water and chemical management systems). What is considered clean or hygienic in one culture may differ from what is considered clean or hygienic in another culture. In some cultures, it is customary to remove shoes before entering a home, as it is considered unclean to wear shoes indoors. In Japan, it is customary to take a bath or shower before entering a public bathhouse or hot spring, as it is considered unclean to enter a communal bath without washing first. Most public swimming pools in the United States conform to a similar standard.
In some cultures, it is customary to eat with one’s hands, while in others, using utensils is the norm. Similarly, in some cultures, it is customary to clean one’s hands and face before eating, while in others, it is not considered necessary. Cleanliness standards can also vary depending on the level of economic development, access to clean water and sanitation facilities, and public health policies in different countries. Mahatma Gandhi believed that promoting cleanliness and hygiene could help in building a strong and self-sufficient nation.
“Harlem school custodian to retire, gets cafeteria dedicated to him” | Rockford Register Star
At 15:00 UTC today we review best practice literature for hygiene in education community interior spaces; including related accessory technologies. Owing to the circumstances of the pandemic we have rewritten our past coverage of this topic for 2022.
Among the standards setting organizations active in this domain: (Short List)
We place public consultation deadlines at top priority in the time available and will schedule a separate break-out session to write and send comments.
Open to everyone. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
We honor Día de los Muertos, a cherished tradition that celebrates the lives of those who have passed. 💐
Through colorful altars, marigolds, and memories, families come together to remember loved ones and teach new generations about love, legacy, and culture — honoring… pic.twitter.com/SVER8G2t3X
Abstract: The author’s description of the Halloween Problem demonstrates the role of cautionary tales in the history of computing. The Halloween Problem emerged in the context of structured query language optimization in relational database research. Normally, a query optimizer works by measuring system calls and paging requests and applying heuristics to the entire access path tree. Query optimization was one of the most challenging tasks facing System R researchers at IBM. These experiments with query optimization form the milieu in which the Halloween Problem emerged.
We hosted a meet & greet for our newly hired teachers and their mentors at DES this morning. We are excited for these new Vikings to join our team! 💙🤍 pic.twitter.com/nWX0CF70iq
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwBpic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
