Table 29.A Estimated resource use and costs per acre for field operations, Cabbage, hybrid, direct seeded, double drilled, irrigated,
fresh market, six-row equipment, average yield, production parameters specified by Extension Horticulture Specialist, Louisiana, 1997.
OPERATION/ OPERATING INPUT |
SIZE/ UNIT |
TRACTOR PERF SIZE RATE |
TIMES OVER |
MTH |
TRACTOR COST |
EQUIP COST |
ALLOC LABOR |
OPERATING |
INPUT |
TOTAL COST | |||||
DIRECT |
------ FIXED |
-------- DIRECT |
------ FIXED |
HOURS |
COST |
AMOUNT |
PRICE |
COST | |||||||
-------- |
----doll |
ars----- |
------ |
dollars |
------- |
dollars- |
------- | ||||||||
Disk 6R |
20 ft |
143 |
0.100 |
2.00 |
Jul |
2.76 |
2.05 |
1.10 |
1.57 |
0.220 |
1.65 |
9.13 | |||
Disk + pre 6R |
20 ft |
143 |
0.100 |
1.00 |
Aug |
1.38 |
1.02 |
0.66 |
0.94 |
0.110 |
0.83 |
4.83 | |||
Treflan |
pt |
1.0000 |
3.75 |
3.75 |
3.75 | ||||||||||
Fertilizer buggy |
30 ft |
93 |
0.060 |
1.00 |
Aug |
0.27 |
0.37 |
0.00 |
0.066 |
0.50 |
1.14 | ||||
7-21-21 |
lb |
700.0000 |
0.12 |
84.00 |
84.00 | ||||||||||
Hipper 6R |
20 ft |
143 |
0.090 |
2.00 |
Aug |
2.49 |
1.84 |
0.45 |
0.64 |
0.198 |
1.49 |
6.91 | |||
Precision seeder |
4 unit |
68 |
0.600 |
1.00 |
Aug |
4.50 |
2.50 |
1.91 |
2.82 |
0.660 |
4.95 |
16.68 | |||
Cabbage seed |
lb |
0.7500 |
270.00 |
202.50 |
202.50 | ||||||||||
Irrig. Sys. 2 pipe |
acin |
1.00 |
Aug |
3.58 |
27.70 |
0.740 |
5.55 |
2.0000 |
36.83 | ||||||
Other labor |
hour |
1.00 |
Aug |
4.0000 |
7.50 |
30.00 |
30.00 | ||||||||
Fertilizer app (R) |
20 ft |
93 |
0.090 |
1.00 |
Sep |
0.41 |
0.56 |
0.00 |
0.099 |
0.74 |
1.71 | ||||
Ammonium Nitrate |
33% lb |
150.0000 |
0.13 |
19.50 |
19.50 | ||||||||||
Cultivator 6R |
20 ft |
143 |
0.100 |
1.00 |
Sep |
1.38 |
1.02 |
0.26 |
0.38 |
0.110 |
0.83 |
3.87 | |||
Irrig. Sys. 2 pipe |
acin |
1.00 |
Sep |
3.58 |
0.740 |
5.55 |
2.0000 |
9.13 | |||||||
Boom sprayer |
20 ft |
93 |
0.120 |
1.00 |
Sep |
1.10 |
0.74 |
0.22 |
0.24 |
0.132 |
0.99 |
3.29 | |||
Poast |
pt |
1.0000 |
12.56 |
12.56 |
12.56 | ||||||||||
Crop oil |
pt |
2.0000 |
0.78 |
1.56 |
1.56 | ||||||||||
Fertilizer app (R) |
20 ft |
93 |
0.090 |
1.00 |
Sep |
0.41 |
0.56 |
0.00 |
0.099 |
0.74 |
1.71 | ||||
Ammonium Nitrate |
33% lb |
150.0000 |
0.13 |
19.50 |
19.50 | ||||||||||
Cultivator 6R |
20 ft |
143 |
0.100 |
1.00 |
Sep |
1.38 |
1.02 |
0.26 |
0.38 |
0.110 |
0.83 |
3.87 | |||
Irrig. Sys. 2 pipe |
acin |
1.00 |
Sep |
3.58 |
0.740 |
5.55 |
2.0000 |
9.13 | |||||||
Boom sprayer |
20 ft |
93 |
0.120 |
1.00 |
Sep |
1.10 |
0.74 |
0.22 |
0.24 |
0.132 |
0.99 |
3.29 | |||
Ambush |
pt |
0.2500 |
13.88 |
3.47 |
3.47 | ||||||||||
Dipel |
pt |
1.0000 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 | ||||||||||
Penncap M |
pt |
1.0000 |
2.77 |
2.77 |
2.77 | ||||||||||
Buffer |
pt |
1.0000 |
2.00 |
2.00 |
2.00 | ||||||||||
Boom sprayer |
20 ft |
93 |
0.120 |
1.00 |
Oct |
1.10 |
0.74 |
0.22 |
0.24 |
0.132 |
0.99 |
3.29 | |||
Ambush |
pt |
0.2500 |
13.88 |
3.47 |
3.47 | ||||||||||
Dipel |
pt |
1.0000 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 | ||||||||||
Penncap M |
pt |
1.0000 |
2.77 |
2.77 |
2.77 | ||||||||||
Buffer |
pt |
1.0000 |
2.00 |
2.00 |
2.00 | ||||||||||
Fertilizer app (R) |
20 ft |
93 |
0.090 |
1.00 |
Oct |
0.41 |
0.56 |
0.00 |
0.099 |
0.74 |
1.71 | ||||
Ammonium Nitrate |
33% lb |
150.0000 |
0.13 |
19.50 |
19.50 | ||||||||||
Cultivator 6R |
20 ft |
143 |
0.100 |
1.00 |
Oct |
1.38 |
1.02 |
0.26 |
0.38 |
0.110 |
0.83 |
3.87 | |||
Irrig. Sys. 2 pipe |
acin |
1.00 |
Oct |
3.58 |
0.740 |
5.55 |
2.0000 |
9.13 | |||||||
Boom sprayer |
20 ft |
93 |
0.120 |
2.00 |
Oct |
2.20 |
1.49 |
0.44 |
0.47 |
0.264 |
1.98 |
6.58 | |||
Ambush |
pt |
0.5000 |
13.88 |
6.94 |
6.94 | ||||||||||
Dipel |
pt |
2.0000 |
3.00 |
6.00 |
6.00 | ||||||||||
Penncap M |
pt |
2.0000 |
2.77 |
5.54 |
5.54 | ||||||||||
Bravo |
pt |
1.5000 |
6.38 |
9.57 |
9.57 | ||||||||||
Buffer |
pt |
2.0000 |
2.00 |
4.00 |
4.00 | ||||||||||
Irrig. Sys. 2 pipe |
acin |
1.00 |
Oct |
3.58 |
0.740 |
5.55 |
2.0000 |
9.13 | |||||||
Boom sprayer |
20 ft |
93 |
0.120 |
1.00 |
Nov |
1.10 |
0.74 |
0.22 |
0.24 |
0.132 |
0.99 |
3.29 | |||
Ambush |
pt |
0.2500 |
13.88 |
3.47 |
3.47 | ||||||||||
Dipel |
pt |
1.0000 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 | ||||||||||
Penncap M |
pt |
1.0000 |
2.77 |
2.77 |
2.77 | ||||||||||
Bravo |
pt |
0.7500 |
6.38 |
4.79 |
4.79 | ||||||||||
Buffer |
pt |
1.0000 |
2.00 |
2.00 |
2.00 | ||||||||||
Irrig. Sys. 2 pipe |
acin |
1.00 |
Nov |
3.58 |
0.740 |
5.55 |
2.0000 |
9.13 | |||||||
Boom sprayer |
20 ft |
93 |
0.120 |
1.00 |
Nov |
1.10 |
0.74 |
0.22 |
0.24 |
0.132 |
0.99 |
3.29 | |||
Ambush |
pt |
0.2500 |
13.88 |
3.47 |
3.47 | ||||||||||
Dipel |
pt |
1.0000 |
3.00 |
3.00 |
3.00 | ||||||||||
Buffer |
pt |
1.0000 |
2.00 |
2.00 |
2.00 | ||||||||||
Trailer utility |
10 ft |
23 |
1.000 |
1.00 |
Nov |
3.68 |
1.65 |
0.40 |
1.43 |
1.100 |
8.25 |
15.41 | |||
Harvest labor |
hour |
12.0000 |
7.50 |
90.00 |
90.00 | ||||||||||
Packing sacks |
each |
700.0000 |
0.50 |
350.00 |
350.00 | ||||||||||
Packing labor |
hour |
5.0000 |
7.50 |
37.50 |
37.50 | ||||||||||
Trailer utility |
10 ft |
23 |
1.000 |
2.00 |
Dec |
7.36 |
3.31 |
0.80 |
2.86 |
2.200 |
16.50 |
30.82 | |||
Harvest labor |
hour |
1.00 |
Dec |
36.0000 |
7.50 |
270.00 |
270.00 | ||||||||
Packing labor |
hour |
15.0000 |
7.50 |
112.50 |
112.50 | ||||||||||
Disk 6R |
20 ft |
143 |
0.100 |
1.00 |
Dec |
1.38 |
1.02 |
0.55 |
0.78 |
0.110 |
0.83 |
4.56 | |||
TOTALS INTEREST ON OPERATING CAPITAL UNALLOCATED LABOR TOTAL SPECIFIED COST |
- |
------- 36.90 |
23.72 |
29.67 |
------ 41.51 |
10.655 |
------- 79.91 |
1331.90 |
1543.61 32.47 0.00 1576.07 |
H-60
More intriguing information
1. Problems of operationalizing the concept of a cost-of-living index2. Do the Largest Firms Grow the Fastest? The Case of U.S. Dairies
3. Tastes, castes, and culture: The influence of society on preferences
4. Foreign Direct Investment and Unequal Regional Economic Growth in China
5. Portuguese Women in Science and Technology (S&T): Some Gender Features Behind MSc. and PhD. Achievement
6. The name is absent
7. Distortions in a multi-level co-financing system: the case of the agri-environmental programme of Saxony-Anhalt
8. Evaluation of the Development Potential of Russian Cities
9. Feature type effects in semantic memory: An event related potentials study
10. Barriers and Limitations in the Development of Industrial Innovation in the Region