Clickable Inland Waterways

Inland Waterways Master Table

Inland Waterways Master Table

50-State Inland Waterways Infrastructure Profile
ASCE National Inland Waterways Grade: C− 2025 SOURCE
State ↕ Current Inland Waterways
Spending ↕		 % National
Current Spending ↕		 Additional Spending
Needed for B− ↕		 Inland Waterways
Grade ↕
Alabama$0.48B2.500%$0.14BC
Alaska$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Arizona$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Arkansas$0.48B2.500%$0.14BC
California$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Colorado$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Connecticut$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Delaware$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
Florida$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
Georgia$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
Hawaii$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Idaho$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Illinois$0.50B2.600%$0.08BC+
Indiana$0.48B2.500%$0.14BC
Iowa$0.50B2.600%$0.08BC+
Kansas$0.35B1.831%$0.08BC+
Kentucky$0.48B2.500%$0.14BC
Louisiana$0.50B2.600%$0.08BC+
Maine$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Maryland$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
Massachusetts$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Michigan$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
Minnesota$0.43B2.240%$0.14BC
Mississippi$0.46B2.400%$0.21BC-
Missouri$0.50B2.600%$0.08BC+
Montana$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Nebraska$0.45B2.330%$0.08BC+
Nevada$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
New Hampshire$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
New Jersey$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
New Mexico$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
New York$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
North Carolina$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
North Dakota$0.41B2.151%$0.21BC-
Ohio$0.50B2.600%$0.08BC+
Oklahoma$0.48B2.500%$0.14BC
Oregon$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
Pennsylvania$0.45B2.330%$0.08BC+
Rhode Island$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
South Carolina$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
South Dakota$0.41B2.151%$0.21BC-
Tennessee$0.50B2.600%$0.08BC+
Texas$0.50B2.600%$0.08BC+
Utah$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Vermont$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Virginia$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
Washington$0.34B1.760%$0.14BC
West Virginia$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
Wisconsin$0.45B2.330%$0.08BC+
Wyoming$0.32B1.690%$0.21BC-
MODEL DATA NOTICE: ASCE's 2025 national Inland Waterways grade is C−. ASCE's published 2024-33 economic table combines Inland Waterways & Ports into one line: $45B of needs and $32B of funded investment. Because that source does not split the two categories, this populated table uses a clearly identified 60% Inland Waterways / 40% Ports modeling split. State grades and allocation multipliers are also provisional model inputs.
National Infrastructure Amount: $5.41 Trillion  •  ASCE Combined Inland Waterways + Ports Needs: $45B  •  ASCE Combined Funded 2024-33: $32B  •  Modeled Inland Waterways Amount: $19.20B  •  Modeled B Target: $27.00B  •  Modeled Additional Requirement: $7.80B
Variable Category-Specific Allocation Percentage: Each state's Inland Waterways allocation is independently calculated from its Inland Waterways grade weight multiplied by an Inland-Waterways-specific network multiplier, then normalized to 100% of the modeled national Inland Waterways amount. The engine does not copy Transit, Rail, Ports, or Aviation percentages.
INLAND WATERWAYS GRADE
CURRENT INLAND WATERWAYS SPENDING
ADDITIONAL NEEDED FOR B−
NATIONAL SHARE

Comments

New comments are not allowed.

Popular posts from this blog

Storm Shield Strategy Simulation — Official Simulation Engine

Image
Copy Interactive Post -        Paste In Copilot          Copilot permits interactive answers and scoring.    Copy Text.  # 🌊 STORM SHIELD STRATEGY SIMULATION — UNIVERSAL INTERACTIVE ROUND TEMPLATE # (Reusable for ALL PHASES / ROUNDS — no examples, no previous data) # ROUND N — INTERACTIVE ENGINE --- ## STEP 1 — PROJECT ASSIGNMENT Copilot loads the round’s scenario and provides: - Base Score (0–100 master score framework) - Starting Budget (current approved budget level) - Current Cost Estimate - Overrun Percentage - National Impact Context (local vs national economic security) - Phase Context (e.g., Build / Financing / Contracts / Audit / Environment / Port / Real Estate / Climate / Storm Test / Final Construction / Maintenance) **User Action:** None — Copilot initializes the round. --- ## STEP 2 — RISK & COST BASELINE Copilot lists the round’s risk and cost conditions and sets: - Starting Score - Safety / Economic / Cost ...
Read more

Transit Infrastructure Grades (Quality Rankings)

Image
Blog Options – Finding Key Words Full 50‑state Transit Infrastructure Tier System , built in the exact same tier design structure you use for Roads, Bridges, Schools, and Wastewater. This follows your standardized ASCE-style model: C+ / C = Top Tier C‑ = Middle Tier D+ = Lower Tier D = Bottom Tier Transit grades are based on: System age Fleet modernization Rail/bus reliability Funding stability Coverage + accessibility State-level transit investment 🚇 50‑State Transit Infrastructure Tier System (Quality Rankings) (Same structure as your other 18-category tiers) ⭐ Top Tier — C / C+ (Above National Average) States with strong transit systems, modern fleets, and consistent funding. New York New Jersey Massachusetts Maryland Illinois California Washington Oregon Minnesota Colorado 🟡 Middle Tier — C‑ (Slightly Below Average) States with moderate transit systems, partial modernization, and mixed coverage. Virginia Georgia Florida Texas Arizona Hawaii Pennsylvania Connecticut ...
Read more

State Wastewater Infrastructure Grades (Quality Rankings)

Image
Blog Options – Finding Key Words   Most states currently hold D to C‑level wastewater grades , reflecting aging treatment plants, underfunded sewer systems, and rising regulatory demands. ASCE’s national wastewater grade is D+ , and state-level grades follow the same pattern. Below is a clean, state-by-state wastewater quality ranking synthesized from the latest ASCE State Infrastructure Report Cards (2021–2026). These are wastewater-only grades , not overall infrastructure grades. 🧭 State Wastewater Infrastructure Grades (Quality Rankings) (Grouped from strongest → weakest) (ASCE State Report Cards; latest available per state) ⭐ Top Tier (C / C+) — Above National Average Georgia — C Utah — C Minnesota — C Florida — C Texas — C North Dakota — C South Dakota — C Montana — C Kansas — C Arizona — C 🟡 Middle Tier (C‑) — Slightly Below Average California — C‑ Colorado — C‑ Connecticut — C‑ Idaho — C‑ Illinois — C‑ Indiana — C‑ Iowa — C‑ Kentucky — C‑ Main...
Read more