Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T05:56:18.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Greenhouse Energy Conservation: Analysis of Alternative Glass Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

John W. White ,
James G. Beierlein  and
Peter A. Dalke
John W. White
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
James G. Beierlein
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
Peter A. Dalke
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
Get access

Abstract

The economic viability of nine representative energy conservation options for Pennsylvania greenhouse operators is examined. The analysis is done using an Internal Rate of Return procedure for four major fuels under three price escalator assumptions. The minimum energy savings per square foot per year is also calculated for each option. Wide variation is found in the economic feasibility of these options with the ones with the lowest installation costs generally providing the greatest IRR and the lowest required minimum savings per year. The results clearly indicate the need to evaluate carefully the econcmic viability of such investments beforehand.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , Spring 1983 , pp. 27 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beierlein, James G. and Campbell, Robert J., “The Feasibility of Lowering Energy Costs Through Reduced Delivery Frequency.” JNAEC. 9: 1 (1980), 13–15.Google Scholar
Dhillon, Pritam S. and Rossi, Daniel. “Economic Feasibility of Using Solar Energy in the Production of Greenhouse Tomatoes.” JNAEC. 11: 2 (1982), 127–132.Google Scholar
Dunn, James W. “The Effect of Higher Energy Prices on the Competitive Position of Northeastern Agriculture.” JNAEC. 10: 2 (1981), 83–86.Google Scholar