Answer the Q Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words - 1

Answer the Q - Case Study Example Thus, both these aspects affect the people in economic terms by hampering their earning opportunities (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics., â€Å"Employment Situation†). Cyclical unemployment can be estimated to be very difficult to overcome in comparison to other types of unemployment. It is very difficult to overcome as it encompasses with large numbers of candidates who are willing to work, but are unable to get a proper employment. Cyclical employment is prevelant in almost every country whereby people with proper talents and potentials are unable to find a suitable job (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics., â€Å"Employment Situation†). While calculating the unemployment rate, all the factors relating to unemployment of different age groups and both the genders are taken into consideration with the help of separate calculations. It would be benficial if the unemployement rate, as a whole, is calculated for deriving the exact rate of unemployment rather than basing the calculations on different aspects that may include different reasons for unemployment among different age groups and genders who are unemployed. For creating more job opportunities in the US, the country would need to improve its economic stability. It is only then that the country can be able to provide better employment opportunities to the deserving candidates. If the nation can increase its profitability by way of different business investments and other commercial associations, the nation would be able to curb almost all the issues related to unemployment to a very large extent. There are numerous issues that can be observed as related with the unemployment levels in the US. Recession can be considered to be one of the primary reasons for high rate of unemployment in the US. Recession is often acquainted with contraction in the investment and spending approaches taken by businesses which further lead to unemployment within the nation (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.,

Gallery Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 1

Gallery - Essay Example The installation art changes form depending on the space where it is being exhibited at the time. The idea began when Dupuis-Bourret wanted to start ‘a river of paper in her basement’ (Vocat). The repetitive lines on the printed paper create a rich texture in place of the usual picturesque images one may be used to seeing at an art gallery. This is one of the things that make this piece of work ‘difficult’ to appreciate (Diepeveen & Van Laar). The traditional notions of beauty cannot be adhered to while appreciating this installation artwork. There is no use of color in the usual sense; it is entirely in black and white. The textures and patterns are repetitive and not very artistic in the usual sense. However, it is because of this unusual quality that this piece of art makes for a thought-provoking one. The viewer begins to wonder what it is about this artwork that makes it so compelling despite the lack of traditional beauty in it. To begin with, the lack of color and the tonality of the texture give it a rather haunting quality. The wide expanse of black and white with varying densities of etching on them allows the viewer to project their own opinions and thoughts on the artwork rather than it dictating too strictly what it ‘means.’ The black and white expanse could mean different things to different people and this element of ambiguity and room for interpretation is one of the things that make such a piece appealing. But by itself, the artwork is not entirely silent either. The pointed edges and the material used recall the ‘paper fortune-teller’ that children use to play and tell fortunes for each other. This gives the piece a toy-like quality. This playful element is also reflected in how repetitive the structure is; something that rhymes and songs for children often are. The piece also has mathematical significance. The idea of the

James Baldwin Essay Example for Free

James Baldwin Essay Has writing ever changed your life? Have you wondered about the author of the amazing work? James Baldwin was the author of books, plays, and essays that broke literary ground. His work explored social and racial issues regarding discrimination. James Arthur Baldwin was born in Harlem, New York in August 2, 1924 to Emma Berdis Jones and an unknown father. His stepfather was David Baldwin, a Baptist preacher and a factory worker. Baldwin grew up with an abusive father and a poor family with eight siblings. He wrote and edited the school magazine at his middle school, Frederic Douglass Junior High, at the age of 11. At the ages of 14 through 16, Baldwin was a Pentecostal preacher at Pentecostal Church, delivered by the difficulties of life, as well as his abusive stepfather, who was also a preacher. At the age of 15, a running buddy, Emile Capouya, recommended the young Baldwin to meet Beauford Delaney, an American modernist painter. Delaney became Baldwin’s mentor, living proof that African-American artists exist and that he could become one himself. You might be wondering what Baldwin achieved in young adulthood as he matured into the revolutionary writer he became. After attending high school, Baldwin started a string of ill paid jobs, self-study, but earned a literary apprenticeship in New York City. Around the age of 20, Baldwin moved to Greenwich Village, New York a popular home of African American artists and writers. While in New York, he befriended Richard Wright, a fellow African-American writer. At the age of 21, Baldwin landed a fellowship through Wright. He started to publish his first essays and short stories (ex: The Nation, Partisan Review, and Commentary). Three years later, at the age of 24, Baldwin moved to Paris on another fellowship. His personal life was lonely. He once loved Lucien Happersberg, a Swiss artist that he lived with while he stayed in Switzerland. He was single and had no children. His personal hobbies included writing and reading which lead to his writing career. He enjoyed writing poems, essays, short stories, and plays that were against discrimination. Baldwin was one of the leading voices in the civil rights movement. His work broke literary ground by influencing others. Maya Angelou called Baldwin her friend and brother and was greatly influenced by his work. He was especially well known for his essays on the black experience in America. He provided an unflinching look at the black experience in America through his work. Nobody Knows My Name, one of Baldwin’s touching books, hit the best-sellers list, selling more than a million copies. Early on December 1, 1987, Baldwin died of esophageal cancer in Saint-Paul-de-Venice, France. He was buried at the Ferncliff Cemetery in Hartsdale, near New York City. Baldwin was cheerful and active days before his death, hosting a Thanksgiving dinner. He had continued to write until his death at the age of 63. He had finished Cross of Redemption: Uncollected Writings, and had published The Price of the Ticket in 1985, just two years from his death. James Baldwin was an influential person. I learned that anyone can change things within and without your reach with determination. I was impressed that he was eager to change people’s perspectives of the world around them. The lesson that I learned from him was that one should do the right thing in bad situations. James Baldwin was a truly amazing person.

Simulation Of Scheduling Algorithms

Simulation Of Scheduling Algorithms Abstract- In this term paper we have discuss simulation of scheduling algorithm. We have discuss various type of scheduling algorithm such as robin round, first comes first served, shortest job first, and etc. We also discuss its advantages and disadvantages. In this term paper we take some c programme based on this scheduling algorithm to understand properly. We also include some graphical representatiion of each scheduling. From which we can differentiate between each algorithm. Keywords- In this term paper we use some keyword Round Robin(RR), First Come First Serve (FCFS), Shortest Job First(SJF), Process Control Block (PCB), Shortest Time Remaining (SRT). INTRODUCTION Scheduling is a fundamental operating-system function. Whenever the CPU becomes idle, the operating system must select one of the processes in the ready queue to be executed. The selection process is carried out by the short-term scheduler. The scheduler selects from among the processes in memory that are ready to execute, and allocates the CPU to one of them. All processes in the ready queue are lined up waiting for a chance to run on the CPU. The records are generally the PCBs (Process Control Block) of the processes. Another important component involved in the CPU scheduling function is the dispatcher. The dispatcher is the module that gives control of the CPU to the processes selected by the short-term scheduler. This function involves: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Switching context à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Jumping to the proper location in the user program to restart that program. Our goal is to simulate the process scheduling algorithms to get a more accurate evaluation on how choice of a particular scheduling algorithm can effect CPU utilization and how a scheduler decides when processors should be assigned, and to which processes. Different CPU scheduling algorithms have different properties and may favour one class of processes over another. We have programmed a model of the computer system and implemented scheduling algorithms using Software data structures which represent the major components of the system which we have discussed in this section. 2. PROPOSAL When system has a choice of processes to execute, it must have a strategy -called a Process Scheduling Policy-for deciding which process to run at a given time .A scheduling policy should attempt to satisfy certain performance criteria, such as maximizing: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Throughput à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Latency à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Preventing Indefinite postponement of Process à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Maximizing Process Utilization It is the job of the scheduler or dispatcher to assign a processor to the selected process. In our project various Process Scheduling Algorithms that determine at runtime which process runs next .These algorithms decide when and for how long each process runs; they make choices about à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Preemptibility à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Priorities à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Running time à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Time-to-Completion à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Fairness We will be simulating these Scheduling Algorithms and comparing them against various parameters mentioned above. BACKGROUND What is Process :-A process is the locus of control of a procedure in execution that is manifested by the existence of a data structure called Process Control Block. Each process has its own address space, which typically consists of Text region, Data region and Stack region. The Text region stores the code that the processor executes. The Data region stores the variables and dynamically allocated memory that the process uses during execution. The Stack region stores instructions and local variables for active procedure calls. The contents of the Stack grow as the process issues nested procedure calls and shrink as procedures return. 4.WHAT IS PROCESSOR SCHEDULING? -When a system as a choice of processes to execute, it must have a strategy for deciding which process to run at a given time. This strategy is known as Processor Scheduling Policy. Different process scheduling algorithms have different properties and may favor one class of processes over another. In choosing which algorithm to use in a particular situation, we compare the following characteristics to compare the algorithms. CPU Utilization -We want to keep the CPU as busy as possible. It ranges from 0 to 100%. In real systems it ranges from 40% to 90%. For the purpose of this simulation we have assumed that CPU utilization is 100%. Throughput -The work done by the CPU is directly proportional to the CPU utilization. The number of processes completed per unit time, called throughput, is the measure of work done by the CPU. Algorithms should try to maximize the throughput. Turnaround time- The time interval from submission of job to the completion of job is termed as the turnaround time. It includes waiting time of the process and the service time of the process. Waiting time -The amount of time process spent waiting in the ready queue is termed as Waiting time. Any algorithm does not affect the service time of the process but does affect the waiting time of the process. Waiting time should be kept to the minimum. Response time The time interval from the submission of the process to the ready queue until the process receives the first response is known as Response time. Response time should always be kept minimum. Besides the above features, a scheduling algorithm must also have the following properties: à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Fairness à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Predictability à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¢ Scalability 5. SIMULATION- In our simulation the ready queue has been programmed to serve the processes in the First in First out, Round Robin, Shortest Process first, Highest Response Ration Next and also Shortest Remaining time. The simulator has a variable representing a clock; as this variables value is increased, the simulator modifies the system state to reflect the activities of the devices, the processes, and the scheduler. Our system has a function called Process Ready which checks which processes are ready to enter the system depending on the current clock. Preemption is performed based on the current clock. If the next process in the ready queue should get the CPU the current process is pushed into the queue and the next process, based on how the priority of the processes is calculated in ready queue, is taken and given the CPU time. We call this in real systems as context switch .We will be providing this overhead a simple variable which we fill add to a process when it is preempted. The scheduler is an abstract class in which we have defined the basic components which are needed by the scheduler like ready queue .FIFO, RR, SPF, SRT and HRRN are the classes which extend this scheduler class and implement the ready queue based on specific scheduler. The data that we are using to drive the simulation is generated using a random-number generator. The generator is programmed to generate processes, CPU-burst times, Arrivals and Finish time. The process PCB in our simulation consists of following attributes: Process Id Process ServiceTime Process ArrivalTime Process FinishTime Process ResponseTime The same set of processes is feed into the scheduling algorithm to evaluate the algorithms effect on the processes and CPU. These are initialized for all the processes that we randomly generate .Once the process gets the CPU its service time gets updated and if the simulation performs a context switch which preempts the current running process and puts it at the back of the ready queue i.e. we save the PCB of the process. After this the first process in the ready queue is given the block .In the end the system outputs the Arrival Time, Service Time, Turn around Time, Waiting Time and Response Time for each process executed by the system. The output formats, the input and the Analysis using this simulation model are shown in the sections that follow: A simple Class Diagrame :- 6. SCHEDULING ALGORITHM A scheduling algorithm is the method by which threads, processes or data flows are given access to system resources (e.g. processor time, communications bandwidth). This is usually done to load balance a system effectively or achieve a target quality of service. The need for a scheduling algorithm arises from the requirement for most modern systems to perform multitasking (execute more than one process at a time) and multiplexing (transmit multiple flows simultaneously) Type of Scheduling algorithm Scheduling algorithm :- First Come First Serve (FCFS) Round Robin Shortest Job First Shortest Remaining Time Highest Response Ratio Next (HRRN) Fixed priority pre-emptive scheduling FIRST COME FIRST SERVE (FCFS) :- CPU scheduling deals with the problem of deciding which of the processes in the ready queue is to be allocated the CPU. There are many different CPU scheduling algorithms. By far the simplest CPU-scheduling algorithm is the first-come, first-served (FCFS) scheduling algorithm. With this scheme, the process that requests the CPU first is allocated the CPU first. The implementation of the FCFS policy is easily managed with a FIFO queue. When a process enters the ready queue, its PCB is linked onto the tail of the queue. When the CPU is free, it is allocated to the process at the head of the queue. The running process is then removed from the queue. The code for FCFS scheduling is simple to write and understand. The average waiting time under the FCFS policy, however, is often quite long. C- programming for this scheduling algorithm is given below. I only present the main part of the programme. /* Programme for FCFS*/ #include #include //Library for clearing the screen using namespace std; int cont, ctr; class FCFS{ //Class used for the simulation public: //public elements of the class void input(); void gantt(); protected: //protected elements of the class float wt, bt, arr, bt2; float awt; }; int main(){ //main function FCFS IT2B; cout cin>>ctr; if(ctr>=3ctr system(cls); IT2B.input(); //invocation }else{ cout cout cin>>cont; system(cls); main(); } return 0; } void FCFS::input() //input() function of class FCFS { wt=0; bt2=0; cout for(arr=1;arr cout>bt; cout bt2=bt+bt2; wt=bt2+wt; } awt=(wt-bt2)/ctr; cout cout cin>>cont; } /*void FCFS::gantt() { */ Limitations: In FCFS, average waiting time is quite longer. If we have a processor bound job (generally with longer service time) and other I/O bound jobs. And if, processor bound job is allocated the processor time, then it will hold the CPU. As a result, other I/O bound jobs will keep waiting in the ready queue and the I/O devices will remain idle. Like in the test cases we observed, process P3 despite having a very short service time had to wait for long till all the processes ahead of it ran to completion. Average Turn around Time: 12 Average Waiting Time: 7.2 Average Response Time: 7.2 6.2. ROUND ROBIN The round-robin (RR) scheduling algorithm is designed especially for time-sharing systems. It is similar to FCFS scheduling, but preemption is added to switch between processes. A small unit of time, called a time quantum or time slice, is defined. A time quantum is generally from 10 to 100 milliseconds. The ready queue is treated as a circular queue. The CPU scheduler goes around the ready queue, allocating the CPU to each process for a time interval of up to l time quantum. To implement RR scheduling, we keep the ready queue as a FIFO queue of processes. New processes are added to the tail of the ready queue. The CPU scheduler picks the first process from the ready queue, sets a timer to interrupt after l time quantum, and dispatches the process . C- programming for this scheduling algorithm is given below. I only present the main part of the programme. /* Programme for ROUND ROBIN*/ for(i=0;j { if(r[i]>0sp>=a[i]) { f=true; if(r[i] time=r[i]; else time=q; //schedule the process t[i]+=time,r[i]=time,order.push_back(i+1); if(r[i]==0) j++; for(k=0;k if(r[k]!=0k!=ia[k] if(!(a[k] w[k]+=sp+time-a[k],t[i]+=sp+timea[k]; else w[k]+=time,t[k]+=time; sp+=time; continue; } if(i==n-1) { if(!f) { int it; int diff=0; for(it=0;it if(sp { if(diff==0) diff=a[it]-sp; else if(diff>a[it]-sp) diff=a[it]sp; } sp+=diff; } f=false; } } OUTPUT:- Advantages:-Round Robin algorithm exhibits fairness. All the processes are treated equally and are given equal processor time. As compared to FCFS, the average waiting time is considerably reduced in Round Robin algorithm. Limitations: The performance of the system implementing Round Robin mainly depends upon the value of the quantum. If we set the quantum to very high value, then it will proceed as the FCFS. As a result the system performance will be sluggish. If we keep the quantum value low, more overhead will be produced because of frequent context switch .Round Robin with low quantum is generally suitable for the interactive system. However, to determine the optimal quantum time is a tedious task 6.3.SHORTEST JOB FIRST A different approach to CPU scheduling is the shortest-job-first (SJF) scheduling algorithm. This algorithm associates with each process the length of the processs next CPU burst. When the CPU is available, it is assigned to the process that has the smallest next CPU burst. If the next CPU bursts of two processes are the same, FCFS scheduling is used to break the tie. Note that a more appropriate term for this scheduling method would be the shortest-next-CPU-burst algorithm, because scheduling depends on the length of the next CPU burst of a process, rather than its total length. The SJF algorithm is a special case of the general priority scheduling algorithm. A priority is associated with each process, and the CPU is allocated to the process with the highest priority. Equal-priority processes are scheduled in FCFS order. An SJF algorithm is simply a priority algorithm where the priority (p) is the inverse of the (predicted) next CPU burst. The larger the CPU burst, the lower the pri ority, and vice versa. C- programming for this scheduling algorithm is given below. I only present the main part of the programme. /* Programme for SJF*/ #include #include #include void main() { char p[10][5],temp[5]; int tot=0,wt[10],pt[10],i,j,n,temp1; float avg=0; clrscr(); printf(enter no of processes:); scanf(%d,n); for(i=0;i { printf(enter process%d name:n,i+1); scanf(%s,p[i]); printf(enter process time); scanf(%d,pt[i]); } for(i=0;i { for(j=i+1;j { if(pt[i]>pt[j]) { temp1=pt[i]; pt[i]=pt[j]; pt[j]=temp1; strcpy(temp,p[i]); strcpy(p[i],p[j]); strcpy(p[j],temp); } } } wt[0]=0; for(i=1;i { wt[i]=wt[i-1]+et[i-1]; tot=tot+wt[i]; } avg=(float)tot/n; printf(p_namet P_timet w_timen); for(i=0;i printf(%st%dt%dn,p[i],et[i],wt[i]); printf(total waiting time=%dn avg waiting time=%f,tot,avg); getch(); } Output : Advantages: Shorter processes are given preference. If the ready queue contains Processor bound processes and some I/O bound processes, then the I/O bound will be given more preference. As a result the system throughput increases. Average waiting time of the processes decreases. Like in the test case, the process P3 waited for only 6 seconds compared to 10 seconds in RR and 16 seconds in FCFS. 6.4 .SHORTEST REMAINING TIME (SRT) This is the preemptive algorithm which acts on the principles of SPF. It gives preference to the processes with the smaller service time. If a process is using the process and in the mean time a new process arrives whose service time is less than the currently running, then it preempts the currently running process and gives processor control to the new process. This algorithm is no longer useful in todays operating systems. Advantages: It offers the minimum waiting time for the processes. Like the process P3, waited for 6 seconds before getting the processor time. Though this waiting time is equal to that in SPF. But being a preemptive algorithm, SRT scores over SPF by providing even lesser waiting time than the former. Average Turn around Time: 11 Average Waiting Time: 6.4 Average Response Time: 6 6.5 HIGHEST RESPONSE RATIO NEXT This algorithm corrects some of the weakness of the SPF. The SPF algorithm is biased towards the processes with short service time. This keeps the longer processes waiting in the ready queue for the longer time, despite of arriving in the ready queue before the short jobs. It is a non-preemptive scheduling algorithm in which the priority is the function of not only the service time but also of the time spent by the process waiting in the ready queue. Once the process obtains the control of the processor, it completes to completion. The priority is calculated by the formula Priority = (Waiting Time + Service Time)/Service Time In this algorithm too, short processes receive preference. But longer processes that have been waiting in the ready queue are also given the favorable treatment. 7.GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION Turnaround Time Comparison Waiting time comparison Responce time comparison 8.CONCLUSION From the analysis of the algorithms, we have come up with the conclusion that RR has the best average response time and being the preemptive algorithm, it exhibits fairness. But however, performance of the RR algorithm depends heavily on the size of the quantum. On the one extreme is the time quantum is very large, RR algorithm is same as FCFS policy. But if the time quantum is fairly small, the RR will exhibit fairness but a considerable overhead gets added to the turnaround time due frequent context switch. This fact becomes clear from the RR average turnaround time reading is highest as compared to other algorithms. Hence we observed if majority of the processes are less then the time quantum, the RR will give better response time. Further, SPF has the least average turnaround time and average waiting time as compared to other algorithms. This shows that SPF is provably optimal, in that it gives the minimum average time in the set of processes by moving the short process before a long one. The waiting time of short process decreases more than the waiting time of the long process. Consequently the waiting time decreases. But this algorithm can only be used for systems which are interactive and thereby is biased to short processes and unfavorable to longer ones which may lead to indefinite postponement of longer processes. HRRN has approximately same average turnaround, waiting and response time. It overcomes the limitation of the SPF by giving favorable treatment to the processes waiting for a longer time, and thereby prevents indefinite postponement. SRT exhibits approximately same average response time, waiting time and turnaround time, and may seem to be an effective algorithm for interactive processes if the tasks performed before issuing I/O are short in duration. However, SRT determines priority based on the run time to completion, not the run time to I/O. Some interactive processes such as shell executes for the life time of the session, which would place the shell at the lowest priority level.

The Perfect Age :: Exploratory Essays Research Papers

The Perfect Age Many of us can't wait to be the perfect age; but what exactly is that age? Is it the age when we will finally find the right one and get married, or when we can legally drink alcohol, or is it when we are settled with families of our own later in life? For every individual, it is a different age and a different dream waiting to be fulfilled. However, once this age finally arrives, it quickly disappears and we revert back to being unhappy. Have you ever noticed how when you are young, you cannot wait to be old, but once you are old, you yearn to be young again? Why are we never fully content with the "now" in our lives? I remember when I was younger playing with my older cousin. It was in the late eighties, which meant the Madonna craze was in full force. She and I would dress up in our parents clothes and pretend to be twenty-something-year-old Madonna. Similarly, my brother used to dress in my dad's suits and pretend to be a businessman going to an important meeting. At such young ages we could not wait to be older, like our parents. Another common childhood game is "house." Girls must remember having a fight with other girls as to who will be the father. No girly girl wanted to be the guy. They want to be the mommy and wife, pretending to cook and take care of the kids. At such a young age, kids look up to their parents and desire to imitate them. This is a classic example of not being happy with the "now." Yet another stage in life where kids want to be older is in the middle school age. Many people hate middle school because it's such a difficult time. People are maturing and trying to figure out who they really are, while in the meantime they make some dumb friendships and some good ones. I know at my school, during seventh and eighth grade is when a lot of kids try cigarettes, drinking, and other drugs. Smoking cigarettes is legal at eighteen, and drinking at twenty-one. Drugs are not legal at any age, but supposedly it is something that an older person would try.

Free College Admissions Essays: Im Ready to Take English to the Next L

I'm Ready to Take English to the Next Level    It is with great excitement that I submit my application to your university's English department for the Bachelor's degree program. Following is a brief autobiography, submitted in fulfillment of part of the university's application requirements.    I began to study English over ten years ago, and rapidly developed a strong interest towards the language. Soon after, I was introduced to an American-based company, the Light House Bookstore, which provides our community with both English instructional books, and language lessons. During one of my frequent visits to this bookstore, I discovered that a small church occupied the second floor of the building, the Lotung Church of Christ. After many visits, and my eventual conversion to the Christian faith, I took every opportunity to attend church events and gatherings to speak with other American members, and quickly became good friends with many of them.    I never lost my interest in the Light House Bookstore however. After many mo...

Biodiesel Business Financial Plan

l pabiodiesel financial plan Start-up Expenses| Â  | Land to buy| Â  | Office to buy| Â  | Renovation expenses| Â  | Design works| $10 000 | Assembly operations| $200 000 | Placing into operation| $53 000 | Oil processing equipment (incl. storage and loading)| $100 000 | Seed storage equipment (incl. installation)| $350 000 | Glycerol purification equipment (including installation)| $0 000 | Tanks| $100 000 | Biodiesel production equipment (incl. delivery and installation )| $250 000 | Utility network| $000 |Advertising/Promotion| $5 000 | Land leasing| $0 | Raw materials (1 quarter of operations)| $660 000 | Salaries| $353 000 | Biodiesel production costs (chemicals, utilities, maintenance for 1 quarter) | $84 000 | Rent | $0 | Total Start-up Expenses| $000 | | Â  | Start-up Assets Needed| Â  | Cash Balance on Starting Date| Â  | Start-up Inventory| $0 | Other Current Assets| $0 | Total Current Assets| $0 | Long-term Assets| $0 | Total Assets| $0 | Total Requirements| $3 095 000 | Sales Forecast|Sales| 2007| Â  | 2008| Â  | 2009| Â  | 2010| Â  | 2011| Â  | Price per ton| Sum| Price per ton| Sum| Price per ton| Sum| Price per ton| Sum| Price per ton| Sum| Biodiesel| Â  | $2 800 000 | $700 | Â  | Â  | $2 800 000 | Â  | $2 800 000 | $700 | $ | Glycerol| Â  | $280 000 | $700 | $280 000 | $700 | $280 000 | Â  | $280 000 | $0 | $280 000 | Seeds| Â  | $0 | $220 | Â  | $220 | $0 | Â  | $0 | $220 | $0 | Press cake| $180 | $1 440 000 | $180 | $1 440 000 | $180 | $1 440 000 | $180 | $1 440 000 | $180 | $1 440 000 | Total Sales| Â  | $4 520 000 | Â  | $4 520 000 | Â  | $4 520 000 | Â  | $4 520 000 | Â  | $4 520 000 | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  |Direct Cost of Sales| Â  | 2006| Â  | 2007| Â  | 2008| Â  | 2009| Â  | 2010| Seeds| $220 | $2 640 000 | $220 | Â  | $220 | $2 640 000 | $220 | Â  | Â  | Â  | Oil| $600 | $0 | $600 | $0 | $600 | $0 | $600 | $0 | 600 | $0 | Subtotal Direct Cost of Sales| Â  | $2 640 000 | Â  | $2 640 000 | Â  | $2 640 000 | Â  | $2 640 000 | Â  | $2 640 000 | Sales and costs in tons| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Biodiesel| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Glycerol| $700 | 400| $700 | 400| $700 | 400| $700 | 400| $700 | 400| Seeds from own farm| $220 | Â  | $220 | Â  | $220 | Â  | $220 | Â  | $220 | Â  | Press cake| $180 | Â  | $180 | 8 000| $180 | 8 000| $180 | 8 000| $180 | 8 000| Total sales, ton| Â  | Â  | Â  | 12 400| Â  | 12 400| Â  | 12 400| Â  | 12 400| Procurement of raw materials| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | 0| Â  | 0| Â  | Seeds| $220 | 12 000| $220 | 12 000| $220 | Â  | $220 | 12 000| $220 | 12 000| Oil| $600 | Â  | $600 | Â  | $600 | Â  | $600 | Â  | $600 | Â  | Total, raw materials, ton| Â  | Â  | Â  | 12 000| Â  | Â  | Â  | 12 000| Â  | 12 000| Personnel Plan| Daily wage| 2007| 2008| 2009| 2010| 2011| Director general| $100 | $24 000 | $24 000 | $ 24 000 | $24 000 | $24 000 | Production and procurement director| Â  | Â  | $24 000 | $24 000 | $24 000 | Â  | Farm supervisor| Â  | Â  | $24 000 | $24 000 | $24 000 | Â  | Sales manager| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Controller| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Chief Technologist| $80 | Â  | $19 200 | $19 200 | Â  | Â  | Secretary| $56 | Â  | $13 440 | $13 440 | Â  | Â  | Operators, production, 5 employees | $56 | $67 200 | $67 200 | $67 200 $67 200 | Â  | Laboratory technician, 1 employee | Â  | $13 440 | $13 440 | $13 440 | $13 440 | $13 440 | Farming, 5 employee| Â  | $67 200 | Â  | $67 200 | $67 200 | $67 200 | Drivers, 2 employee| $56 | $26 880 | Â  | $26 880 | $26 880 | $26 880 | Electrical fitter| $56 | $13 440 | Â  | $13 440 | $13 440 | $13 440 | Storeman, 2 employee| $56 | $26 880 | $26 880 | $26 880 | $26 880 | $26 880 | Total Payroll| Â  | $353 000 | $353 000 | $353 000 | $353 000 | $353 000 | Production headcount| Â  | 5| 5| 5| 5| 5| ROI Ana lysis| 2007| 2008| 2009| 2010| 2011| Sales| $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | Cost of Sales| Â  | Â  | $3 326 000 | $3 326 000 | $3 326 000 | Gross Margin| $1 186 000 | $1 194 000 | $1 194 000 | $1 194 000 | $1 194 000 | Gross Margin %| 26. 24%| 26. 42%| 26. 42%| 26. 42%| 26. 2%| Operating Expenses| $434 667 | $101 667 | $101 667 | $101 667 | $121 667 | Operating Income| $751 333 | Â  | Â  | $1 092 333 | $1 072 333 | Net Income| $470 283 | Â  | Â  | $708 983 | $750 633 | Net Income to investor| $244 639 | $368 809 | $368 809 | Â  | Â  | Current Assets| $3 029 283 | $3 804 933 | $4 339 917 | $5 115 567 | $5 137 867 | Long-term Assets| $843 333 | $776 667 | $710 000 | $643 333 | $576 667 | Long-term Liabilities| $795 000 | $795 000 | $795 000 | $795 000 | $0 | Equity| $3 077 617 | $3 786 600 | $4 254 917 | $4 963 900 | $5 714 533 | ROE| 0. 15| 0. 19| 0. 17| 0. 14| 0. 13| ROI| 0. 11| 0. 16| 0. 16| 0. 16| 0. 17| Shares offered to investor| 52. 2%| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Investor financing| 74. 31%| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Loan financing| 25. 69%| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Pro Forma Profit and Loss| | 2007| 2008| 2009| 2010| 2011| Sales| $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | Cost of raw materials| $2 640 000 | Â  | Â  | $2 640 000 | $2 640 000 | Farm maintenance (fuel, fertilizer, etc)| $5 000 | $5 000 | $5 000 | $5 000 | $5 000 | Production Payroll| $353 000 | $353 000 | $353 000 | $353 000 | $353 000 | Methanol| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Potassium hydroxide| $8 000 | $8 000 | $8 000 | Â  | $8 000 | Utilities| $80 000 | $80 000 | $80 000 | Â  | $80 000 | Equipment Maintenance| $8 000 | $0 | $0 | Â  | $0 |Cost of Goods Sold| $3 334 000 | $3 326 000 | $3 326 000 | $3 326 000 | $3 326 000 | Gross Margin| $1 186 000 | $1 194 000 | $1 194 000 | $1 194 000 | $1 194 000 | Gross Margin %| 26. 24%| 26. 42%| 26. 42%| 26. 42%| 26. 42%| Other Expenses: | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Design works| $10 0 00 | $0 | Â  | $0 | $0 | Renovation expenses| $100 000 | Â  | Â  | Â  | $20 000 | Assembly operations| Â  | Â  | $10 000 | $10 000 | $10 000 | Placing into operation| $53 000 | $5 000 | $5 000 | $5 000 | $5 000 | Advertising/Promotion| $5 000 | $20 000 | $20 000 | $20 000 | $20 000 | Depreciation (service life 12 years)| $66 667 | $66 667 | $66 667 | $66 667 | $66 667 | Land leasing| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Rent| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |Total Other expenses| $434 667 | $101 667 | $101 667 | $101 667 | $121 667 | Profit Before Interest and Taxes| $751 333 | $1 092 333 | $1 092 333 | $1 092 333 | $1 072 333 | Interest Expense| $79 500 | $79 500 | $79 500 | $79 500 | $0 | Taxes Incurred| $201 550 | $303 850 | $303 850 | $303 850 | $321 700 | Other Expense| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Net Profit| Â  | Â  | $708 983 | $708 983 | $750 633 | Net Profit/Sales| 10. 40%| 15. 69%| 15. 69%| 15. 69%| 16. 61%| Pro Forma Cash Flow| 2007| 2008| 2009| 2010| 2011| Cash from Operations: | à ‚  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Cash Sales| $3 164 000 | $3 164 000 | Â  | Â  | Â  | Cash from Receivables| $1 356 000 | $1 356 000 | $1 356 000 | $1 356 000 | $1 356 000 | Subtotal Cash from Operations| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | $4 520 000 | Additional Cash Received| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Sales Tax, VAT, HST/GST Received| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Loan| $795 000 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 |New Investment Received| $2 300 000 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Subtotal Cash Received| $7 615 000 | $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | $4 520 000 | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Expenditures| 2007| 2008| 2009| 2010| 2010| Expenditures from Operations:| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Salaries| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | $353 000 | Payment of Accounts Payable| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | $2 973 000 | Subtotal Spent on Operations| $3 334 000 | $3 326 000 | $3 326 000 | $3 326 000 | $3 326 000 | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Additional Cash Spent| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Sales Tax Paid Out| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | $321 700 | Principal Repayment (loan)| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | $795 000 | Design works| $10 000 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Â  | Renovation expenses| Â  | Â  | $0 | $0 | Â  | Assembly operations| Â  | Â  | $10 000 | $10 000 | Â  |Placing into operation| $53 000 | $5 000 | $5 000 | Â  | Â  | Advertising/Promotion| $5 000 | $20 000 | $20 000 | $20 000 | $20 000 | Land leasing| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Rent| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Interest Expense| $79 500 | $79 500 | $79 500 | $79 500 | $0 | Purchase Long-term Assets| Â  | Â  | Â  | $0 | $0 | Subtotal Cash Spent| Â  | Â  | Â  | $3 744 350 | $4 497 700 | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Net Cash Flow| $2 788 617 | $842 317 | $842 317 | 317 | $88 967 | Cash Balance| $2 788 617 | $3 564 267 | $4 339 917 | $5 115 567 | $5 137 867 | Annual Break-even, Tons| 961. 34| 961. 34| 961. 34| 961. 34| Assumptions:| Â  | Â  | Â  | Â  | Average Per Tone Revenue| Â  | Â  | $1 130. 00 | $1 130. 00 | Average Per Tone Variable Cost| $742. 00 | $742. 00 | $742. 00 | $742. 00 | Estimated Annual Fixed Cost| Â  | Â  | $373 000 | $373 000 |