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 require an initial outlay of $269.75 million, and the expected cash inflows would be $90 million per year for 5 years. If the firm does invest in mitigation, the annual inflows would be $93.85 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 17%. Calculate the NPV and IRR with mitigation. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative values, if any, should be indicated by a minus sign. Do not round intermediate calculations. Round your answers to two decimal places. NPV: $ ______ million IRR: ________ % Calculate the NPV and IRR without mitigation. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative values, if any, should be indicated by a minus sign. Do not round intermediate calculations. Round your answers to two decimal places. NPV: $____________ million IRR: __________ % How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project? 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. The environmental effects should be ignored since the plant is legal without mitigation. The environmental effects should be treated as a sunk cost and therefore ignored. 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 the original analysis. The environmental effects should be treated as a remote possibility and should only be considered at the time in which they actually occur. Should this project be undertaken? Even when no mitigation is considered the project has a negative NPV, so it should not be undertaken. The project should be undertaken only if they do not mitigate for the environmental effects. However, they have to make sure that they've done the analysis properly to avoid any "ill will" and additional "costs" that might result from undertaking the project without concern for the environmental impacts. The project should be undertaken only under the "mitigation" assumption. The project should be undertaken since the IRR is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions. The project should be undertaken since the NPV is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions.
Net Present Value
Net present value is the most important concept of finance. It is used to evaluate the investment and financing decisions that involve cash flows occurring over multiple periods. The difference between the present value of cash inflow and cash outflow is termed as net present value (NPV). It is used for capital budgeting and investment planning. It is also used to compare similar investment alternatives.
Investment Decision
The term investment refers to allocating money with the intention of getting positive returns in the future period. For example, an asset would be acquired with the motive of generating income by selling the asset when there is a price increase.
Factors That Complicate Capital Investment Analysis
Capital investment analysis is a way of the budgeting process that companies and the government use to evaluate the profitability of the investment that has been done for the long term. This can include the evaluation of fixed assets such as machinery, equipment, etc.
Capital Budgeting
Capital budgeting is a decision-making process whereby long-term investments is evaluated and selected based on whether such investment is worth pursuing in future or not. It plays an important role in financial decision-making as it impacts the profitability of the business in the long term. The benefits of capital budgeting may be in the form of increased revenue or reduction in cost. The capital budgeting decisions include replacing or rebuilding of the fixed assets, addition of an asset. These long-term investment decisions involve a large number of funds and are irreversible because the market for the second-hand asset may be difficult to find and will have an effect over long-time spam. A right decision can yield favorable returns on the other hand a wrong decision may have an effect on the sustainability of the firm. Capital budgeting helps businesses to understand risks that are involved in undertaking capital investment. It also enables them to choose the option which generates the best return by applying the various capital budgeting techniques.
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 require an initial outlay of $269.75 million, and the expected
-
Calculate the
NPV andIRR with mitigation. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative values, if any, should be indicated by a minus sign. Do not round intermediate calculations. Round your answers to two decimal places.NPV: $ ______ million
IRR: ________ %
Calculate the NPV and IRR without mitigation. Enter your answer for NPV in millions. For example, an answer of $10,550,000 should be entered as 10.55. Negative values, if any, should be indicated by a minus sign. Do not round intermediate calculations. Round your answers to two decimal places.
NPV: $____________ million
IRR: __________ %
-
How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project?
- 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.
- The environmental effects should be ignored since the plant is legal without mitigation.
- The environmental effects should be treated as a sunk cost and therefore ignored.
- 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 the original analysis.
- The environmental effects should be treated as a remote possibility and should only be considered at the time in which they actually occur.
-
Should this project be undertaken?
- Even when no mitigation is considered the project has a negative NPV, so it should not be undertaken.
- The project should be undertaken only if they do not mitigate for the environmental effects. However, they have to make sure that they've done the analysis properly to avoid any "ill will" and additional "costs" that might result from undertaking the project without concern for the environmental impacts.
- The project should be undertaken only under the "mitigation" assumption.
- The project should be undertaken since the IRR is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions.
- The project should be undertaken since the NPV is positive under both the "mitigation" and "no mitigation" assumptions.
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 5 steps with 2 images
