I can see where such a situation may arise from. There’s an asset you’re no longer using and you’re more than likely to either sell it to the scrap yard or if that’s not an option, just get rid of it. It’s no longer usable, requires enhancements, repairs or whatever for it to be usable and as such, it’s not generating any cash flows for your company.

The question is just in the sense that you need to do something with the asset and not bluntly continue depreciating it as you’ve been doing up to this point. 

Question is however, how to continue. If the carrying value is in a considerable amount, writing it fully to expenses may create a one-time loss for the company for the period and show the results of the company not as good as they could be. On the opposite however, spreading the expense by depreciating the asset into expenses over a shorter period compared to what was the remaining useful life, wouldn’t create such an one-off major expense to the statements.

I have to be honest, whilst they’re both valid options and normally, if happening within the same reporting period (i.e. during the financial year) it’s not such an issue, the right approach would be to write it down in one go. It would give a more true view of the results for the company period per period (if you compare months let’s say). When you think about the subject matter, the asset is no longer in use, it’s no longer generating cash flows and as such, it should be expensed.

Note that what the considerable carrying value for the asset also suggests is that if the asset was used under normal conditions and it didn’t break down because of a malfunction, it could be determined that the useful life initially measured for the asset was actually far off from the reality and in future, similar assets should be depreciated into expenses over a shorter period. Reconsider the useful lives for all similar assets.