Table 17.A Estim |
ated resource use |
and costs per acre for field |
operat |
ions, Potato (I |
rish), |
fresh mar |
ket, one-row equipment, |
average | |||||||
TRACTOR COST |
_____E_Q_U_I_P__C_O_S_T_ |
ALLOC LABOR |
OPERATING |
INPUT | |||||||||||
OPERATION/ |
SIZE/ |
TRACTOR |
PERF |
TIMES |
TOTAL | ||||||||||
--------- |
----- |
------ |
-------- |
------ |
------- |
-------- |
------- | ||||||||
OPERATING INPUT |
UNIT |
SIZE |
RATE |
OVER |
MT H |
DIRECT |
FIXED |
DIRECT |
FIXED |
HOURS |
COST |
AMOUNT |
--P-RI-C-E-- |
COST |
COST |
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- |
_-_-_-d_o_l__l |
_a_rs_-__-_- |
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ |
__d_o_l_l_a_r_s_ |
_-_-_--_-_-__- |
_d_o_l_la__rs__- |
_-_-_--_-_-__- | ||||||||
Disk 2R |
6 ft |
43 |
0.570 |
3.00 |
Jan |
8.68 |
4.38 |
1.13 |
1.61 |
1.881 |
14.11 |
29.90 | |||
Hip1p3e-r1-3f-e1r3t 1R |
3 ft |
23 |
1.550 |
1.00 |
Jan |
5.71 |
2.56 |
0.91 |
1.29 |
1.705 |
12.79 |
23.26 | |||
lb |
800.000 0 |
0.12 |
96.00 |
96.00 | |||||||||||
Hipper 1R |
3 ft |
2 3 |
1.530 |
1.0 0 |
Feb |
5.63 |
2.53 |
0.5 0 |
0.7 2 |
1.683 |
12.6 2 |
22.01 | |||
Row conditioner 1R |
6 ft |
23 |
0.410 |
1.00 |
Feb |
1.51 |
0.68 |
0.08 |
0.12 |
0.451 |
3.38 |
5.77 | |||
10 ft |
23 |
1.000 |
1.00 |
Feb |
3.68 |
1.65 |
0.40 |
1.43 |
1.100 |
8.25 |
15.41 | ||||
Planting labor |
hour |
14.000 0 |
7.50 |
105.00 |
105.00 | ||||||||||
cwt |
11.0000 |
15.00 |
165.00 |
165.00 | |||||||||||
Boom sprayer |
12 ft |
2 3 |
0.190 |
1.0 0 |
Fe b |
0.7 0 |
0.31 |
0.2 6 |
0.2 8 |
0.209 |
1.5 7 |
3.12 | |||
Dual Sencor 4L |
pt |
21..000000 00 |
177..87 53 |
15.70 17.73 |
15.70 17.73 | ||||||||||
Boom sprayer |
12 ft |
2 3 |
0.19 0 |
1.0 0 |
Ma r |
0.7 0 |
0.31 |
0.2 6 |
0.2 8 |
0.209 |
1.5 7 |
3.12 | |||
Pounce |
3 pftt 3% lb |
0.500 0 |
21.00 |
10.50 |
10.50 | ||||||||||
Cult-fert 1R |
2 3 |
1.610 |
1.0 0 |
Ma r |
5.9 3 |
2.66 |
0.5 7 |
0.8 1 |
1.771 |
13.2 8 |
23.24 | ||||
Ammonium Nitrate 3 |
100.000 0 |
0.13 |
13.00 |
13.00 | |||||||||||
Boom sprayer |
12 ft |
2 3 |
0.190 |
1.0 0 |
Apr |
0.7 0 |
0.31 |
0.2 6 |
0.2 8 |
0.209 |
1.5 7 |
3.12 | |||
CuBlrtaivvoator 1R |
3 pftt |
0.750 0 |
6.38 |
4.79 |
4.79 | ||||||||||
2 3 |
1.530 |
1.0 0 |
Apr |
5.6 3 |
2.53 |
0.4 0 |
0.5 7 |
1.683 |
12.6 2 |
21.76 | |||||
Boom sprayer |
12 ft |
23 |
0.190 |
1.00 |
May |
0.70 |
0.31 |
0.26 |
0.28 |
0.209 |
1.57 |
3.12 | |||
Pounce |
pt |
0.500 0 |
21.00 |
10.50 |
10.50 | ||||||||||
lb |
0.7500 |
2.95 |
2.21 |
2.21 | |||||||||||
Cultivator 1R |
3 ft |
2 3 |
1.530 |
1.0 0 |
May |
5.6 3 |
2.53 |
0.4 0 |
0.5 7 |
1.683 |
12.6 2 |
21.76 | |||
Shredder 1R |
5 ft |
23 |
0.740 |
1.00 |
Jun |
2.72 |
1.22 |
0.28 |
0.74 |
0.814 |
6.11 |
11.08 | |||
Potato digger, chain |
1 row |
23 |
1.500 |
1.00 |
Jun |
5.52 |
2.48 |
2.77 |
3.94 |
1.650 |
12.38 |
27.09 | |||
Trailer utility |
10 ft |
23 |
1.000 |
1.00 |
Jun |
3.68 |
1.65 |
0.40 |
1.43 |
1.100 |
8.25 |
15.41 | |||
Harvest labor |
hour |
28.000 0 |
7.50 |
210.00 |
210.00 | ||||||||||
Harvest crate |
each |
30.0000 |
1.90 |
57.00 |
57.00 | ||||||||||
Packing labor |
hour |
22.0000 |
7.50 |
165.00 |
165.00 | ||||||||||
Packing sacks |
each |
300.0000 |
0.50 |
150.00 |
150.00 | ||||||||||
Pickup truck |
½ ton |
01..507000 |
7.0 0 |
Jun |
29.0 9 |
23.5 4 |
71..2005 04 |
52.5 0 |
105.13 | ||||||
Disk 2R |
6 ft |
4 3 |
2.00 |
Jun |
5.7 9 |
2.92 |
0.75 |
1.07 |
9.40 |
19.94 | |||||
TOTALS |
- -6-2--.-9-1 -- |
-2-9-.0-6- - |
------ 38.75 |
---3-8-.-9-6 |
-2-4-.6-1-1- |
--1-8-4-.-5-8 |
-1-0-2-2.--43- |
-1-3-76-.-6--9 | |||||||
INTEREST ON OPERATING CAPITAL |
29.97 | ||||||||||||||
UNALLOCATED LABOR |
0.00 | ||||||||||||||
1406.66 |
H-36
More intriguing information
1. Peer Reviewed, Open Access, Free2. WP 36 - Women's Preferences or Delineated Policies? The development or part-time work in the Netherlands, Germany and the United Kingdom
3. Tax systems and tax reforms in Europe: Rationale and open issue for more radical reforms
4. Firm Closure, Financial Losses and the Consequences for an Entrepreneurial Restart
5. The name is absent
6. THE DIGITAL DIVIDE: COMPUTER USE, BASIC SKILLS AND EMPLOYMENT
7. The Integration Order of Vector Autoregressive Processes
8. The name is absent
9. TECHNOLOGY AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT: THE CASE OF PATENTS AND FIRM LOCATION IN THE SPANISH MEDICAL INSTRUMENTS INDUSTRY.
10. THE CO-EVOLUTION OF MATTER AND CONSCIOUSNESS1