Bayu Prastyo Adi, Eko (2010) ANALISIS KOMPARASI BIAYA TUNGKU SERBUK GERGAJI KAYU DENGAN KOMPOR MINYAK TANAH (Studi Kasus Pada Rumah Tangga Petani di Desa Precet Kecamatan Dau Kabupaten Malang). Other thesis, University of Muhammadiyah Malang.
Download (55Kb) | Preview
Based on rumors government pulls oil fuel subsidy that causes oil price store be to rise. In order to overcome scarce and the expensive household society oil fuel price returns to use wood fuel. But firewood not correct solution to replace scarce kerosene fuel caused available basic commodity more attenuate. From side other wood processing place obtainable easily wood sawdust as waste bo advantage. More scarceer and the expensive sawdust kerosene can be maked use upon which burn kerosene successor, with modify hearth (burning place) in such a manner. Impractical hearth likes oil stove, also kitchen cleanliness less in comparison with oil stove or gas burner so that sawdust hearth identification relevanter in class economy society under or at village. Condition background as explained on, wishful author to does analysis comparison wood sawdust hearth cost with primus stove. Aim from this watchfulness is as follows: (1) to describe activities cooks wood sawdust hearth user household and oil stove. (2) to detect cost comparison between cook household scale uses wood sawdust hearth with primus stove during ten days. (3) to detect wood sawdust hearth use efficiency is compared with primus stove. Watchfulness is done according to purposive with deliberation that village precet district dau unlucky regency is a large part work knotty the citizen as farmer. Sample taking technique with method quota sampling used when the population is not known surely. Every layer in population must be represented with proportion same like proportion in the population, so total quota to every layer determinable. Hearth respondent determination as big as 10 respondents and 10 respondents for oil stove. From analysis result comparason wood sawdust hearth permanent cost kerage-cost differs from primus stove. from calculation stastistik got t-hitung as big as 9,887 while t-tabel in belief standard level 95% 2,228 (dk: 10) mean t-hitung > t-tabel so refuse ho and h1 accepted. From calculation stastistik that show difference price buys hearth cheaper than price buy stove. From analysis result comparason wood sawdust hearth variable cost kerage-cost differs from primus stove. From calculation stastistik got t-hitung as big as 11,591 while t-tabel in belief standard level 95% 2,228 (dk: 10) mean t-hitung > t-tabel so refuse Ho and H1 accepted, that variable cost between hearth user respondent with stove user respondent differ, because price buys hearth fuel (wood powder) cheaper than kerosene price. From calculation stastistik got t-hitung as big as 0,142 while t-tabel in belief standard level 95% 2,228 (dk: 10) mean t-hitung < t-tabel so refuse H1 and Ho accepted, that average dish total in hearth user respondent and stove user respondent same. From calculation stastistik got t-hitung as big as 0,647 while t-tabel in belief standard level 95% 2,228 (dk: 10) mean t-hitung < t-tabel so refuse H1 and Ho accepted, that average time cooks in hearth user respondent and stove user respondent same. That knowable from dish total at ripe every day, show prosperous level from second hearth respondent and stove not far differ. Because average rice total, vegetable, and fish at ripe much the same to. Clock cooks average hearth user respondent 43 clocks and average stove user respondent 45 clocks in ten days, mean to cook to use hearth or stove there is no time difference. Average hearth use total cost as big as rp 20.200 and for average oil stove as big as rp 32.900, so hearth use total cost difference and stove as big as rp 12.700, during ten days. Average wood sawdust fuel purchasing cost as big as rp 9000 and average kerosene as big as rp 57.150, so hearth fuel purchasing cost difference and stove as big as rp 48.150 in ten days. Hearth use cost efficienter in comparison with use stove. Cost is calculated that is depreciation expense and fuel.
|Item Type:||Thesis (Other)|
|Subjects:||S Agriculture > S Agriculture (General)|
|Divisions:||Faculty of Agriculture & Animal Husbandry > Department of Agribusiness|
|Depositing User:||Rayi Tegar Pamungkas|
|Date Deposited:||05 Apr 2012 02:29|
|Last Modified:||05 Apr 2012 02:29|
Actions (login required)