Create using Spreadshoot with formulas and a summary report that must include a basic explanation of what you are analyzing and how the results were obtained (imagine you are presenting a report to a group of people that do not know anything about the projects or the way you are estimating and analyzing the alternatives). The report must include a graphical representation of the net cash flows of each project and a ranking of the projects based on each methodology used (each method should have their own graph or table with the ranking). Based on the analysis the final decision should be clearly stated. This decision should be explained in economic terms.

Project

The Organization for Basic Electricity Distribution (OBED) has committed to building a solar power plant. An engineer from the University of New Orleans has offered to conduct the analysis that will evaluate the feasibility of the four (4) designs for this company. The engineer is going to evaluate these options using:

Net present value or net present worth analysis (NPV)

Annual cash flow analysis (EUAW)

Rate of return analysis (IRR)

Benefit-cost ratio analysis (B/C ratio)

Currently, the organization only has enough money to execute one of the projects. OBED uses an interest rate of 10% and a 20-year horizon. To keep up with regulation, before starting construction OBED's engineering group conducted an analysis to determine if there were any endangered animals in the land where the organization intends to build the solar plant. The cost of this analysis was $4 million, and the results gave the organization the green light to build in this property.

The four designs are the following:

Design A

A field of "flat" solar panels angled to best catch the sun will yield 2.6 MW of power and will cost $87 million initially with first-year operating costs at $2 million, which will be growing $250,000 annually. It will produce electricity worth $6.9 million the first year and will increase by 10% each year thereafter.

Design B

A field of mechanized solar panels rotates from side to side so that they are always positioned parallel to the sun's rays, maximizing the production of electricity. The design will yield 3.1 MW of power and will cost $95 million initially with first-year operating costs at $3.5 million, which will grow $200,000 annually. It will produce electricity worth $9.4 million the first year and will increase 12% each year thereafter.

Design C

This design uses a field of mirrors to focus the sun's rays onto a boiler mounted in a tower. The boiler then produces steam and generates electricity the same way a coal-fired plan operates. This system yields 3.3 MW of power and will cost $91 million initially with first-year operating costs at $3 million, which will grow $350,000 annually. It will produce electricity worth $7.9 million the first year and will increase 8% each year.

Design D

The last design uses the same techniques as design C (uses a field of mirrors to focus the sun's rays onto a boiler mounted in a tower where the boiler then produces steam and generates electricity the same way a coal-fired plan operates). However, this system yields 5.3 MW of power and will cost $86 million initially with first-year operating costs at $2.5 million, which will grow $450,000 annually. It will produce electricity worth $7.1 million the first year and will increase 12.5% each year.