ENGINEERING ECO ANALYSIS W/STUDY GUIDE
13th Edition
ISBN: 9780190693053
Author: NEWNAN
Publisher: Oxford University Press
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 5, Problem 30P
To determine
Which of the three alternative refrigerators should be purchased.
Expert Solution & Answer
Answer to Problem 30P
Equipment to be purchased is Foxhill instrument, based on
Explanation of Solution
Given information:
Installation Costs in Year 0:
Foxhill Instrument $35,000
Quicksilver $40,000
Almaden $100,000
Annual Energy costs for Years 1-20:
Foxhill Instrument $8,000
Quicksilver $7,000
Almaden $2,000
Annual Income:
Foxhill Instrument $2,000
Quicksilver $2,200
Almaden $3,500
Salvage Value in year 20:
Foxhill Instrument $20,000
Quicksilver 0
Almaden 0.
Based on the above information, the following tables outlines the net present value calculation of the equipment of Foxhill Instrument, Quicksilver, and Almaden.
Foxhill Instrument:
| Year | Particulars | Cash flow | Present value Factor @10% | Present value |
| 0 | Installation Cost | $35,000.00 | 1 | $35,000.00 |
| 1 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.9091 | $5,454.55 |
| 2 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.8264 | $4,958.68 |
| 3 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.7513 | $4,507.89 |
| 4 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.6830 | $4,098.08 |
| 5 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.6209 | $3,725.53 |
| 6 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.5645 | $3,386.84 |
| 7 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.5132 | $3,078.95 |
| 8 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.4665 | $2,799.04 |
| 9 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.4241 | $2,544.59 |
| 10 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.3855 | $2,313.26 |
| 11 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.3505 | $2,102.96 |
| 12 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.3186 | $1,911.78 |
| 13 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.2897 | $1,737.99 |
| 14 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.2633 | $1,579.99 |
| 15 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.2394 | $1,436.35 |
| 16 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.2176 | $1,305.77 |
| 17 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.1978 | $1,187.07 |
| 18 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.1799 | $1,079.15 |
| 19 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.1635 | $981.05 |
| 20 | Operating costs less Revenue | $6,000.00 | 0.1486 | $891.86 |
| 20 | Salvage Value | ($20,000.00) | 0.1486 | ($2,972.87) |
| Net cash outflow | $83,108.51 |
Quicksilver:
| Year | Particulars | Cash flow | Present value Factor @10% | Present value |
| 0 | Installation Cost | $40,000.00 | 1.0000 | $40,000.00 |
| 1 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.9091 | $4,363.64 |
| 2 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.8264 | $3,966.94 |
| 3 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.7513 | $3,606.31 |
| 4 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.6830 | $3,278.46 |
| 5 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.6209 | $2,980.42 |
| 5 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.6209 | $2,980.42 |
| 6 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.5645 | $2,709.47 |
| 7 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.5132 | $2,463.16 |
| 8 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.4665 | $2,239.24 |
| 9 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.4241 | $2,035.67 |
| 10 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.3855 | $1,850.61 |
| 11 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.3505 | $1,682.37 |
| 12 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.3186 | $1,529.43 |
| 13 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.2897 | $1,390.39 |
| 14 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.2633 | $1,263.99 |
| 15 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.2394 | $1,149.08 |
| 16 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.2176 | $1,044.62 |
| 17 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.1978 | $949.65 |
| 18 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.1799 | $863.32 |
| 19 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.1635 | $784.84 |
| 20 | Operating costs less Revenue | $4,800.00 | 0.1486 | $713.49 |
| 20 | Salvage Value | 0 | 0.1486 | $0.00 |
| Net cash outflow | $83,845.53 |
Almaden:
| Year | Particulars | Cash flow | Present value Factor @10% | Present value |
| 0 | Installation Cost | $100,000.00 | 1.0000 | $100,000.00 |
| 1 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.9091 | ($1,363.64) |
| 2 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.8264 | ($1,239.67) |
| 3 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.7513 | ($1,126.97) |
| 4 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.6830 | ($1,024.52) |
| 5 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.6209 | ($931.38) |
| 5 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.6209 | ($931.38) |
| 6 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.5645 | ($846.71) |
| 7 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.5132 | ($769.74) |
| 8 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.4665 | ($699.76) |
| 9 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.4241 | ($636.15) |
| 10 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.3855 | ($578.31) |
| 11 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.3505 | ($525.74) |
| 12 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.3186 | ($477.95) |
| 13 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.2897 | ($434.50) |
| 14 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.2633 | ($395.00) |
| 15 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.2394 | ($359.09) |
| 16 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.2176 | ($326.44) |
| 17 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.1978 | ($296.77) |
| 18 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.1799 | ($269.79) |
| 19 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.1635 | ($245.26) |
| 20 | Operating costs less Revenue | ($1,500.00) | 0.1486 | ($222.97) |
| 20 | Salvage Value | $ - | 0.1486 | $0.00 |
| Net cash outflow | $86,298.27 |
Net present value is the difference of Sum of Present values of cash inflows and Sum of Present values of cash outflows. If the value is positive then the project may be accepted. While evaluation of two or more alternatives takes place, then the proposal with the higher net present value may be selected since it results in a greater
In the given scenario, Present values are calculated by calculating the present values of cash inflows in the form of salvage value and cash outflows such as installation cost and operating cost.
In case of Foxhill, Installation Cost is $35,000, Operating costs less Revenue is $6,000 i.e. Operating costs of $8,000 less Revenues of $2,000 and Salvage value is $20,000. In case of Quicksilver, Installation Cost is $40,000, Operating costs less Revenue is $4,800 i.e. Operating costs of $7,000 less Revenues of $2,200 and Salvage value is $0. In case of Almaden, Installation Cost is $100,000, Operating costs less Revenue is ($1,500) i.e. Operating costs of $2,000 less Revenues of $3,500 and Salvage value is $0.
Present value factor is calculated as 1/1.10 ^ N where N is the year of operation of the equipment.
Conclusion:
Hence the equipment with the lowest cash outflows over a period of 20 years is selected.
Want to see more full solutions like this?
Subscribe now to access step-by-step solutions to millions of textbook problems written by subject matter experts!
Students have asked these similar questions
1. Suppose that the two nations face the following benefits of pollution, B, and costs of
abatement, C: BN = 10, Bs = 7; CN = 5, Cs = 4. Further assume that if the nation chooses to
abate pollution, it still receives the benefits of pollution but now must pay the cost of
abatement as well.
a. Identify the payoffs that accrue to each nation under the four different possible
outcomes of the game and present these payoffs in the normal form of the game.
b. Recall that the term dominant strategy defines the condition that a player in a game
would prefer to play that strategy (in this case either pollute or abate) regardless of
the strategy chosen by the other player in the game. Does either nation have a
dominant strategy in this game? If so, what is it?
c. Identify the Nash equilibria, or non-cooperative equilibria, of this game.
agrody calming Inted 001 and me
2. A homeowner is concerned about the various air pollutants (e.g., benzene and methane)
released in her house when she cooks with natural gas. She is considering replacing her gas
oven and stove with an electric stove comprising an induction cooktop and convection oven.
The new appliance costs $900 to purchase and install. Capping the old gas line costs an
additional $150 (a one-time fee). The old line must be inspected for leaks each year after
capping, at a cost of $35 for each inspection.
a. If the homeowner plans to remain in the house for four more years and the discount
rate is 4%, what is the minimum present value of the benefits that the homeowner
would need to experience for this purchase to be justified based on its private net
sub present value?
b. While trying to understand how she might express the value of reduced exposure to
indoor air pollutants in dollar terms, the homeowner consulted the EPA website and
found estimates provided by…
After the ban is imposed, Joe’s firm switches to the more expensive biodegradable disposable cups. This increases the cost associated with each cup of coffee it produces.
Which cost curve(s) will be impacted by the use of the more expensive biodegradable disposable cups? Why? Which cost curve(s) will not shift, and why not? Please use the table below to answer this question. For the second column (“Impacted? If so, how?”), please use one of the following three choices: No shift; Shifts up (i.e., increases: at nearly any given quantity, the cost goes up); or Shifts down (i.e., decreases: at nearly any given quantity, the cost goes down). $
Cost Curve
Impacted? If so, how?
Explanation of the Shift: Why or Why Not
AFC
No shift.
Fix costs stay the same, regardless of quantity. Fixed cost is calculated as Fixed Cost/Quantity. Since fixed costs remain unchanged, AFC stays the same for each quantity.
MC
Shifts up.
Since the biodegradable cups are more expensive, the…
Chapter 5 Solutions
ENGINEERING ECO ANALYSIS W/STUDY GUIDE
Ch. 5 - Prob. 1QTCCh. 5 - Prob. 2QTCCh. 5 - Prob. 3QTCCh. 5 - Prob. 1PCh. 5 - Prob. 2PCh. 5 - Prob. 3PCh. 5 - Prob. 4PCh. 5 - Prob. 5PCh. 5 - Prob. 6PCh. 5 - Prob. 7P
Ch. 5 - Prob. 8PCh. 5 - Prob. 9PCh. 5 - Prob. 10PCh. 5 - Prob. 11PCh. 5 - Prob. 12PCh. 5 - Prob. 13PCh. 5 - Prob. 14PCh. 5 - Prob. 15PCh. 5 - Prob. 16PCh. 5 - Prob. 17PCh. 5 - Prob. 18PCh. 5 - Prob. 19PCh. 5 - Prob. 20PCh. 5 - Prob. 21PCh. 5 - Prob. 22PCh. 5 - Prob. 23PCh. 5 - Prob. 24PCh. 5 - Prob. 25PCh. 5 - Prob. 26PCh. 5 - Prob. 27PCh. 5 - Prob. 28PCh. 5 - Prob. 29PCh. 5 - Prob. 30PCh. 5 - Prob. 31PCh. 5 - Prob. 32PCh. 5 - Prob. 33PCh. 5 - Prob. 34PCh. 5 - Prob. 35PCh. 5 - Prob. 36PCh. 5 - Prob. 37PCh. 5 - Prob. 38PCh. 5 - Prob. 39PCh. 5 - Prob. 40PCh. 5 - Prob. 41PCh. 5 - Prob. 42PCh. 5 - Prob. 43PCh. 5 - Prob. 44PCh. 5 - Prob. 45PCh. 5 - Prob. 46PCh. 5 - Prob. 47PCh. 5 - Prob. 48PCh. 5 - Prob. 49PCh. 5 - Prob. 50PCh. 5 - Prob. 51PCh. 5 - Prob. 52PCh. 5 - Prob. 53PCh. 5 - Prob. 54PCh. 5 - Prob. 55PCh. 5 - Prob. 56PCh. 5 - Prob. 57PCh. 5 - Prob. 58PCh. 5 - Prob. 59PCh. 5 - Prob. 60PCh. 5 - Prob. 61PCh. 5 - Prob. 62PCh. 5 - Prob. 63PCh. 5 - Prob. 64PCh. 5 - Prob. 65PCh. 5 - Prob. 66PCh. 5 - Prob. 67PCh. 5 - Prob. 68PCh. 5 - Prob. 69PCh. 5 - Prob. 70PCh. 5 - Prob. 71PCh. 5 - Prob. 72PCh. 5 - Prob. 73PCh. 5 - Prob. 74PCh. 5 - Prob. 75PCh. 5 - Prob. 76PCh. 5 - Prob. 77PCh. 5 - Prob. 78PCh. 5 - Prob. 79PCh. 5 - Prob. 80PCh. 5 - Prob. 81PCh. 5 - Prob. 82PCh. 5 - Prob. 83PCh. 5 - Prob. 84PCh. 5 - Prob. 85PCh. 5 - Prob. 86PCh. 5 - Prob. 87PCh. 5 - Prob. 88PCh. 5 - Prob. 89PCh. 5 - Prob. 90PCh. 5 - Prob. 91PCh. 5 - Prob. 92PCh. 5 - Prob. 93PCh. 5 - Prob. 94PCh. 5 - Prob. 95PCh. 5 - Prob. 96PCh. 5 - Prob. 97PCh. 5 - Prob. 98PCh. 5 - Prob. 99PCh. 5 - Prob. 100PCh. 5 - Prob. 101P
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Styrofoam is non-biodegradable and is not easily recyclable. Many cities and at least one state have enacted laws that ban the use of polystyrene containers. These locales understand that banning these containers will force many businesses to turn to other more expensive forms of packaging and cups, but argue the ban is environmentally important. Shane owns a firm with a conventional production function resulting in U-shaped ATC, AVC, and MC curves. Shane's business sells takeout food and drinks that are currently packaged in styrofoam containers and cups. Graph the short-run AFC0, AVC0, ATC0, and MC0 curves for Shane's firm before the ban on using styrofoam containers.arrow_forwardd-farrow_forwarda-c pleasearrow_forward
- d-farrow_forwardPART II: Multipart Problems wood or solem of triflussd aidi 1. Assume that a society has a polluting industry comprising two firms, where the industry-level marginal abatement cost curve is given by: MAC = 24 - ()E and the marginal damage function is given by: MDF = 2E. What is the efficient level of emissions? b. What constant per-unit emissions tax could achieve the efficient emissions level? points) c. What is the net benefit to society of moving from the unregulated emissions level to the efficient level? In response to industry complaints about the costs of the tax, a cap-and-trade program is proposed. The marginal abatement cost curves for the two firms are given by: MAC=24-E and MAC2 = 24-2E2. d. How could a cap-and-trade program that achieves the same level of emissions as the tax be designed to reduce the costs of regulation to the two firms?arrow_forwardOnly #4 please, Use a graph please if needed to help provearrow_forward
- a-carrow_forwardFor these questions, you must state "true," "false," or "uncertain" and argue your case (roughly 3 to 5 sentences). When appropriate, the use of graphs will make for stronger answers. Credit will depend entirely on the quality of your explanation. 1. If the industry facing regulation for its pollutant emissions has a lot of political capital, direct regulatory intervention will be more viable than an emissions tax to address this market failure. 2. A stated-preference method will provide a measure of the value of Komodo dragons that is more accurate than the value estimated through application of the travel cost model to visitation data for Komodo National Park in Indonesia. 3. A correlation between community demographics and the present location of polluting facilities is sufficient to claim a violation of distributive justice. olsvrc Q 4. When the damages from pollution are uncertain, a price-based mechanism is best equipped to manage the costs of the regulator's imperfect…arrow_forwardFor environmental economics, question number 2 only please-- thank you!arrow_forward
- For these questions, you must state "true," "false," or "uncertain" and argue your case (roughly 3 to 5 sentences). When appropriate, the use of graphs will make for stronger answers. Credit will depend entirely on the quality of your explanation. 1. If the industry facing regulation for its pollutant emissions has a lot of political capital, direct regulatory intervention will be more viable than an emissions tax to address this market failure. cullog iba linevoz ve bubivorearrow_forwardExercise 3 The production function of a firm is described by the following equation Q=10,000-3L2 where L stands for the units of labour. a) Draw a graph for this equation. Use the quantity produced in the y-axis, and the units of labour in the x-axis. b) What is the maximum production level? c) How many units of labour are needed at that point? d) Provide one reference with you answer.arrow_forwardExercise 1 Consider the market supply curve which passes through the intercept and from which the market equilibrium data is known, this is, the price and quantity of equilibrium PE=50 and QE=2000. Considering those two points, find the equation of the supply. Draw a graph of this line. Provide one reference with your answer. Exercise 2 Considering the previous supply line, determine if the following demand function corresponds to the market demand equilibrium stated above. QD=3000-2p.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)EconomicsISBN:9780134078779Author:Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. OsterPublisher:PEARSON
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)EconomicsISBN:9780134870069Author:William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick KoellingPublisher:PEARSON
Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781305585126Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving ApproachEconomicsISBN:9781337106665Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike ShorPublisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-...EconomicsISBN:9781259290619Author:Michael Baye, Jeff PrincePublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
Principles of Economics (12th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:9780134078779
Author:Karl E. Case, Ray C. Fair, Sharon E. Oster
Publisher:PEARSON
Engineering Economy (17th Edition)
Economics
ISBN:9780134870069
Author:William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick Koelling
Publisher:PEARSON
Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:9781305585126
Author:N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Economics
ISBN:9781337106665
Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Managerial Economics & Business Strategy (Mcgraw-...
Economics
ISBN:9781259290619
Author:Michael Baye, Jeff Prince
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education