HISTORY Lecture Notes - Lecture 27: Jacob Bjerknes, Norman Lockyer, Gilbert Walker

7 views1 pages

yoosufvalakkulam

8 Dec 2021

School

Mahatma Gandhi University - Kerala

Department

Humanities

Course

HISTORY

Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Enso conditions have happened at two-to seven-year spans for at minimum the beyond 300 years, however the vast majority of them have been powerless. Proof is additionally solid for el ni o occasions during the early holocene age 10,000 years prior. El ni o might have prompted the destruction of the moche and other pre-columbian peruvian societies. A new report proposes a solid el ni o impact somewhere in the range of 1789 and 1793 caused helpless harvest yields in europe, which thusly assisted touch with offing the french. The super climate created by el ni o in 1876 77 led to the most dangerous starvations of the nineteenth century. the 1876 starvation alone in northern china killed up to 13 million individuals. The peculiarity had for some time been of interest in light of its consequences for the guano business and different ventures that rely upon natural efficiency of the ocean.

Related Questions

Capital budgeting criteria: ethical considerations

An electric utility is considering a new power plant in northern Arizona. Power from the plant would be sold in the Phoenix area, where it is badly needed. Because the firm has received a permit, the plant would be legal; but it would cause some air pollution. The company could spend an additional $40 million at Year 0 to mitigate the environmental Problem, but it would not be required to do so. The plant without mitigation would cost $210.27 million, and the expected cash inflows would be $70 million per year for 5 years. If the firm does invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $75.69 million. Unemployment in the area where the plant would be built is high, and the plant would provide about 350 good jobs. The risk adjusted WACC is 18%.

A.Calculate the NPV and IRR with mitigation. Round your answers to two decimal places. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55.
NPV $ million
IRR %

Calculate the NPV and IRR without mitigation. Round your answers to two decimal places. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55.
NPV $ million
IRR %

B. How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project?

I.The environmental effects should be treated as a remote possibility and should only be considered at the time in which they actually occur.

II.The environmental effects if not mitigated would result in additional cash flows. Therefore, since the plant is legal without mitigation, there are no benefits to performing a "no mitigation" analysis.

III.The environmental effects should be ignored since the plant is legal without mitigation.

IV.The environmental effects should be treated as a sunk cost and therefore ignored.

V.If the utility mitigates for the environmental effects, the project is not acceptable. However, before the company chooses to do the project without mitigation, it needs to make sure that any costs of "ill will" for not mitigating for the environmental effects have been considered in that analysis.

C. Should this project be undertaken?

I. The project should be undertaken only if they do not mitigate for the environmental effects. However, they want to make sure that they've done the analysis properly due to any "ill will" that might result from undertaking the project without concern for the environmental impacts.

II.The project should be undertaken only under the "mitigation" assumption.

III.The project should be undertaken since the IRR is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions.

IV.The project should be undertaken since the NPV is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions.

V.Even when no mitigation is considered the project has a negative NPV, so it should not be undertaken.

Problem 11-9
Capital budgeting criteria: ethical considerations

An electric utility is considering a new power plant in northern Arizona. Power from the plant would be sold in the Phoenix area, where it is badly needed. Because the firm has received a permit, the plant would be legal; but it would cause some air pollution. The company could spend an additional $40 million at Year 0 to mitigate the environmental problem, but it would not be required to do so. The plant without mitigation would cost $239.99 million, and the expected cash inflows would be $80 million per year for 5 years. If the firm does invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $83.96 million. Unemployment in the area where the plant would be built is high, and the plant would provide about 350 good jobs. The risk adjusted WACC is 16%.

Calculate the NPV and IRR with mitigation. Round your answers to two decimal places. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. Do not round your intermediate calculations. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative value should be indicated by a minus sign.
NPV $ _______ million
IRR % _______%

Calculate the NPV and IRR without mitigation. Round your answers to two decimal places. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. Do not round your intermediate calculations. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55.
NPV $ _______ million
IRR _________ %

How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project?

1. The environmental effects should be ignored since the plant is legal without mitigation.

2. The environmental effects should be treated as a sunk cost and therefore ignored.

3. If the utility mitigates for the environmental effects, the project is not acceptable. However, before the company chooses to do the project without mitigation, it needs to make sure that any costs of "ill will" for not mitigating for the environmental effects have been considered in that analysis.

4. The environmental effects should be treated as a remote possibility and should only be considered at the time in which they actually occur.

5. The environmental effects if not mitigated would result in additional cash flows. Therefore, since the plant is legal without mitigation, there are no benefits to performing a "no mitigation" analysis.

Answer __________

Should this project be undertaken?

1. The project should be undertaken only under the "mitigation" assumption.

2. The project should be undertaken since the IRR is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions.

3. The project should be undertaken since the NPV is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions.

4. Even when no mitigation is considered the project has a negative NPV, so it should not be undertaken.

5. The project should be undertaken only if they do not mitigate for the environmental effects. However, they want to make sure that they've done the analysis properly due to any "ill will" and additional "costs" that might result from undertaking the project without concern for the environmental impacts.

Answer __________

raspberrybeaver682

Capital budgeting criteria: ethical considerations

An electric utility is considering a new power plant in northern Arizona. Power from the plant would be sold in the Phoenix area, where it is badly needed. Because the firm has received a permit, the plant would be legal; but it would cause some air pollution. The company could spend an additional $40 million at Year 0 to mitigate the environmental problem, but it would not be required to do so. The plant without mitigation would cost $239.99 million, and the expected cash inflows would be $80 million per year for 5 years. If the firm does invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $84.40 million. Unemployment in the area where the plant would be built is high, and the plant would provide about 350 good jobs. The risk adjusted WACC is 19%.

a. Calculate the NPV and IRR with mitigation. Round your answers to two decimal places. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55.
NPV $ _____ million
IRR _____ %

b. How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project?

1. The environmental effects should be treated as a sunk cost and therefore ignored.

2. If the utility mitigates for the environmental effects, the project is not acceptable. However, before the company chooses to do the project without mitigation, it needs to make sure that any costs of "ill will" for not mitigating for the environmental effects have been considered in that analysis.

3. The environmental effects should be treated as a remote possibility and should only be considered at the time in which they actually occur.

4. The environmental effects if not mitigated would result in additional cash flows. Therefore, since the plant is legal without mitigation, there are no benefits to performing a "no mitigation" analysis.

5. The environmental effects should be ignored since the plant is legal without mitigation.

c. Should this project be undertaken?

1. The project should be undertaken since the NPV is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions.

2. Even when no mitigation is considered the project has a negative NPV, so it should not be undertaken.

3. The project should be undertaken only if they do not mitigate for the environmental effects. However, they want to make sure that they've done the analysis properly due to any "ill will" that might result from undertaking the project without concern for the environmental impacts.

4. The project should be undertaken only under the "mitigation" assumption.

5. The project should be undertaken since the IRR is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions.

ceruleangerbil733

HISTORY Lecture Notes - Lecture 27: Jacob Bjerknes, Norman Lockyer, Gilbert Walker

Document Summary

Get access

Related Questions