your answers to two decimal places.

NPV: $

million

IRR:

$\%$

Round your answers to two decimal places.

NPV: $

million

IRR:

$\%$

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

have been considered in the original analysis.

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

III. 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.

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

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

c$.$ Should this project be undertaken?

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

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

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

without concern for the environmental impacts.

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