In: Economics
(a)
(1) Interest rate = 3%
Present value of costs ($) = 500,000 x P/F(3%, 1) + 20,000 x P/A(3%, 9) x P/F(3%, 1)
= 500,000 x 0.9709** + 20,000 x 7.7861** x 0.9709**
= 485,450 + 151,190
= 636,640
Present value of benefit ($) = 80,000 x P/A(3%, 10)
= 80,000 x 8.5302**
= 682,416
(2) Interest rate = 10%
Present value of costs ($) = 500,000 x P/F(10%, 1) + 20,000 x P/A(10%, 9) x P/F(10%, 1)
= 500,000 x 0.9091** + 20,000 x 5.7590** x 0.9091**
= 454,550 + 104,710
= 559,260
Present value of benefit ($) = 80,000 x P/A(10%, 10)
= 80,000 x 6.1446**
= 491,568
(b)
Net present value (NPV) = Present value of benefits - Present value of costs
NPV with 3% interest rate ($) = 682,416 - 636,640 = 45,776
NPV with 10% interest rate ($) = 491,568 - 559,260 = -67,692
Since NPV > 0 with 3% interest rate, I should recommend to proceed. But since NPV < 0 with 10% interest rate, I should recommend not to proceed.
(c)
As an economist with EPA, I would consider a higher interest (discount) rate (10%) to include the risks of environmental damage caused by the project, which gets reflected in a higher interest rate. But as an economist to DuPont I would not concern myself with any costs and risks to environment, therefore I would consider a lower interest (discount) rate (3%) to project a higher positive NPV.