Suppose that a credit card holder transfers ownership of his cell phone to his sister, who soon thereafter drops the phone in water and destroys it. Even if the credit card holder has credit card-related cell phone replacement insurance, he would most likely not be able to recover the value of the phone, since he did not have a(n) interest in the phone.

How should the environmental effects be dealt with when evaluating this project? the environmental effects should be ignored since the plant is legal without mitigation. the environmental effects should be treated as a sunk cost and therefore ignored. if the utility mitigates for the environmental effects, the project is not acceptable. however, before the company chooses to do the project without mitigation, it needs to make sure that any costs of "ill will" for not mitigating for the environmental effects have been considered in the original analysis. the environmental effects should be treated as a remote possibility and should only be considered at the time in which they actually occur. the environmental effects if not mitigated would result in additional cash flows. therefore, since the plant is legal without mitigation, there are no benefits to performing a "no mitigation" analysis.