Ino Pfs Energy DSM KLP

Draft Final Report
PROMOTION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY, ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND

GREENHOUSE GAS ABATEMENT (PREGA)
Indonesia
Energy Demand Side Management

to Improve KLP Sinar Rinjani’s
Sustainability
A Pre-Feasibility Study Report1
October 2005
1
Prepared by the National Technical Experts from P.T. Chazaro Gerbang Internasional.
Table of Contents
List of Tables............................................................................................................................iv
List of Figures ..........................................................................................................................iv
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................... 1-1
2. MAP OF THE PROJECT............................................................................................... 2-1
3. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 3-1
4. BACKGROUND............................................................................................................. 4-2
4.1. Sector Description ................................................................................................. 4-2
4.2. Constraints and Issues Related to the Project Sector........................................... 4-3
4.3. Sustainable Development Objectives.................................................................... 4-4
4.4. Government Policy and Strategy Relevant to the Project Sector.......................... 4-4
4.5. Overlap of the Government’s and ADB’s Policies and Strategies in This Sector.. 4-6
4.6. Benefits of the Project ........................................................................................... 4-6
5. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ...................................... 5-7
5.1. About the Project................................................................................................... 5-7
5.2. Project Goal........................................................................................................... 5-7
5.3. Project Objective ................................................................................................... 5-7
5.4. Poverty Reduction ................................................................................................. 5-7
5.5. Technology Transfer ............................................................................................. 5-8
5.6. Project Partners..................................................................................................... 5-8
5.7. Product or Service Generated by the Project........................................................ 5-8
6. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .......................................................................... 6-1
6.1. Time of Use Tariff Discussion ............................................................................... 6-1
6.2. Target Group Identification.................................................................................... 6-1
6.3. Distribution of Energy Efficient Appliances and dual tariff meters......................... 6-2
6.4. Monitoring of Energy Consumption Pattern .......................................................... 6-2
6.5. Summarised Implementation Plan ........................................................................ 6-2
7. CONTRIBUTION TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ............................................... 7-1
7.1. Long-term GHG and Local Pollutants Reduction .................................................. 7-1
7.2. Other Benefits ....................................................................................................... 7-1
8. PROJECT BASELINE AND GHG ABATEMENT CALCULATION ................................ 8-1
8.1. Current Production and Delivery Patterns............................................................. 8-1
8.2. Project Boundary and Monitoring Domain............................................................. 8-3
8.3. Baseline Methodology and Calculation of the Baseline Emission......................... 8-4
8.4. Calculation of Total Project GHG Emissions......................................................... 8-4
ii
8.5. GHG Emission Avoidance Monitoring and Verification ......................................... 8-5
9. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT ................................................................. 9-1
9.1. Estimation of Overall Cost..................................................................................... 9-1
9.2. Project Financial Analyses .................................................................................... 9-1
9.3. Financing Plan....................................................................................................... 9-1
10. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT .............................................................. 10-1
10.1. Project Economic Analysis .................................................................................. 10-1
10.2. Poverty Reduction Impact ................................................................................... 10-1
10.3. Social and Employment Opportunities ................................................................ 10-1
10.4. Environment Impact ............................................................................................ 10-1
10.5. Regional Development ........................................................................................ 10-1
11. STAKEHOLDERS’ COMMENTS................................................................................. 11-2
11.1. Invitation letters to the Stakeholders ................................................................... 11-2
11.2. Comments on the Project by above stakeholders............................................... 11-2
12. KEY FACTORS IMPACTING PROJECT AND BASELINE EMISSION....................... 12-1
12.1. Key Factors ......................................................................................................... 12-1
12.2. Project Uncertainties ........................................................................................... 12-1
13. CONCLUTION AND RECOMMENDATION ................................................................ 13-2
Annexes ........................................................................................................................Annex-1
Annex 1. Electricity Tariff of KLP Sinar Rinjani.....................................................Annex-1
Annex 2. Daily Load .............................................................................................Annex-2
Annex 3. Pre-FS Survey Result............................................................................Annex-5
Annex 4. Percentage of lighting and other load for domestic .............................Annex-10
Annex 5. Load Simulation...................................................................................Annex-11
Annex 6. Financial and Economic Feasibility Calculation...................................Annex-14
Annex 7. Estimation of Overall Cost ...................................................................Annex-16
Annex 8. Financial Analysis................................................................................Annex-17
Annex 9. Economic Analysis ..............................................................................Annex-18
iii
List of Tables
Table 6.1. Lamp Replacement Plan..................................................................................... 6-1

Table 6.2. Summary of Implementation Plan ....................................................................... 6-2
Table 8.1. Summary of Baseline Emission Calculation ....................................................... 8-4
Table 8.2. Summary of Possible Project GHG Emission and GHG Avoidance .................. 8-5
Table 8.3. Required data to monitor and verify GHG Emission ........................................... 8-5
List of Figures
Figure 2.1. Map of the project study .................................................................................... 2-1

Figure 4.1. Green Energy Label launched by the Government ........................................... 4-5
Figure 8.1. Power loss versus network length and number of customer ............................. 8-2
Figure 8.2. Monitoring Domain............................................................................................. 8-3
iv
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Project Rationale
Koperasi Listrik Perdesaan (KLP) Sinar Rinjani is one of the three KLPs in Indonesia. It is
now the only one that is still operating in KLP scheme. The other two KLP Sawa Bintuna in
South Sulawesi and KLP Sinar Siwo Mego in Lampung are not operating anymore. KLP
Sawa Bintuna does not exist anymore. KLP Sinar Siwo Mego has been taken over by
PT.PLN (Persero) although recent info showed that KLP Sinar Siwo Mego would be
managed in KLP scheme once again. KLP Sinar Rinjani suffers from bad financial condition
due to high diesel fuel consumption. High diesel fuel consumption is influenced by high-
energy demand and high power loss (technical and non-technical). Increase of diesel fuel
price created severe financial problem to KLP. Adjusting the tariff to accommodate the fuel
price increase is hardly possible due to limited ability to pay of the customers. The condition
further decreases the service reliability.
Modifying (i.e. decreasing) the demand will improve service reliability and eventually improve
financial condition of KLP Sinar Rinjani. The benefit is not just that. The project will also
improve environmental performance of KLP Sinar Rinjani by decreasing the emission level,
especially green house gasses.
The steadily increasing commercial energy price in Indonesia further increases the need of
demand side management programme, especially at KLP Sinar Rinjani
Objective
Objective of the Energy Demand Side Management at KLP Sinar Rinjani is to demonstrate
the technical viability of DSM programme in Indonesia and at the same time to prove the
economic feasibility that such an approach can be implemented under the current trend of
increasing energy price.
Output of the Project
The project will be able to save energy production up to 4.906.330 kWh per year. The
number equals to 1.486 kilo litres of diesel fuel. This means KLP Sinar Rinjani can save IDR
3.269.233.906 annually. The number is very significant considering the current financial
condition of KLP Sinar Rinjani. Annual financial deficit of KLP Sinar Rinjani in 2003 reached
more than IDR 1.800.000.000.
The avoided energy production equals to 1.471 tons of CO2 that can generate CDM CER
revenue of USD 7.359 per year.
Benefit of the Project
Basically the project will improve service reliability of KLP Sinar Rinjani. Beside that, the
project will also be able to improve the welfare of the community based on income spending
shift.
Environmentally the project will decrease gaseous pollutant emission from power generation
activity and reduce further global warming. Improvement in the service reliability has also
positive effect for the industry sector (small household industry and agricultural industry).
The industries can rely on the service of KLP Sinar Rinjani. Time of use tariff has to be
proven to be the right strategy to attract industries to use more electricity. The operation area
of KLP Sinar Rinjani is an agricultural area. Therefore industry will be related to agriculture.
1-1
The increase of industrial demand might be slow because the experience showed the trend.
Industrial demand should be much lower than energy saving from domestic demand.
Therefore there is still fuel saving and CO2 saving. The effect of both mentioned factors
would be increasing regional economic activity.
Conclusion
The study confirms that the Energy Demand Side Management Programme is technically,
financially and economically viable. Furthermore, the discussions with the KLP Sinar Rinjani
and Provincial Office of Cooperatives revealed interests and commitments to support
programmes that will improve the sustainability of KLP SR.
However, further investigations are needed such as undertake a more detailed feasibility
study to further verify the overall framework conditions of the proposed full project. A
comprehensive survey of the energy demand and the characteristics of the customers must
be carried out.
The detailed design of the project should provide an even more accurate cost estimation and
financial and economic analysis.
1-2
2. MAP OF THE PROJECT
Figure 2.1. Map of the project study
2-1
3. INTRODUCTION
The establishment of Rural Electricity Cooperative was one of much government efforts to
make cooperative as one of the economic pillars. Not just practicing saving-loan services,
cooperative are also allowed to do electricity business especially in rural areas. It was the
Rural Electrification Programme (9 October 1979) who eventually gave birth to Koperasi
Listrik Perdesaan Sinar Rinjani (Rural Electricity Cooperative Sinar Rinjani, KLP SR). KLP
SR is one of the first 3 KLPs in Indonesia. KLP SR is situated in Lombok Island, West Nusa
Tenggara province, Lombok Timur district. The power plant is located at the KLP SR
headquarters, which is situated in Aikmel sub-district.
The historical moments of KLP SR’s birth was started with a Feasibility Study that was
carried out by National Rural Electric Cooperative Administration (NRECA) of United States
of America (USA) and Indonesian partners in the early 1980. The team studied the feasibility
of electric distribution in rural areas outside Java Island.
Directorate General of Cooperative and United States Agency for International

Developments (USAID) carried out the coordination actions with local government and also
PLN to determine the areas where such a cooperative based rural electricity plant would be
technically viable, financially and economically feasible and socially sound. The feasibility
study report was finished in August 1977 and reported that rural electric service area in
Lombok Timur District would cover 32 villages in Aikmel sub-district, Pringgabaya sub-
district, Sukamulia sub-district, Masbagik sub-district, Terara sub-district, and Selong sub-
district. Up to now KLP SR is serving more or less 37 villages in 9 sub-districts. The study
concluded that the power plant should consist of 5 diesel-generating sets with total capacity
of 500 kW. There are hydro resources in the service area of KLP Sinar Rinjani, but as the
diesel fuel price was very low at that time mini hydropower was far less feasible than diesel
generators. Recent utilization of hydropower showed that the generated capacity is very
small compared to the power demand.
Since its establishment, KLP SR has faced many problems. One of the serious problems is
power loss. The voltage drop in the villages not far from power plant showed that technical
loss rate could reach ± 20%. Non-technical loss rate can reach more than 10%. There is no
detail investigation that separates technical and non-technical loss. The increasing number of
consumers and limited improvement of network infrastructure creates huge technical power
loss (See Figure 8.1.). It is often seen that the wires turn burning red when the load is very
high. KLP SR is now practicing load shedding. Power loss means KLP SR has to burn more
diesel fuel to supply the electricity demand. Network infrastructure of KLP SR is already old
now.
The aim of the project is basically to increase the service level of KLP SR so that the power
loss is lower and KLP SR will suffer a reduced financial loss. The project will also affect the
fuel consumption, as lower fuel will be consumed, thus reducing the current level of GHG
emission.
The study was prepared based on data statistical data collected in 2003. The statistical data
includes:
1. Number of consumers
2. Type of lamps mostly used by consumers
3. Daily load of the power plant and
4. Financial condition of KLP SR.
3-1
Some background information of KLP SR is also collected such as reports and annual
statistics.
4. BACKGROUND
4.1. Sector Description
In Indonesia there are 66,215 villages. Out of 66,215 villages, there are 52,000 villages
already electrified (DGEEU, 2003). Out of 52,000 villages, 28,595 villages are in outer
islands and the rests are in Java Island. The increase of electrified villages is very significant
because in December 2000 total village electrified is just 49,155 villages (www.djlpe.go.id,
9/8/04). Most of the newly electrified villages are in outer islands.
The quality of service in each area is also different. In the rural areas, which have grid
extension, the communities might possible to have 24 hours service. Areas that have
decentralised system (small diesel generator or solar home system) in most cases only have
electricity service in the peak hours (6 pm. to 12 pm.). In the case of small diesel generators,
transport of fuel increases the price of diesel fuel cost therefore service time is often limited.
The rural electricity supply strategy for each village might be different. Some villages are
electrified by PLN’s extended grid and some villages are electrified by PLN decentralised
standalone mini grids. The archipelagic nature of Indonesia has forced the government to
use two different strategies for rural electrification. The first is extending the grid and the
second is providing decentralised power system such as Solar Home System (SHS) or
micro-hydropower plants (MHP).
In the case where PLN could not reach the area KLP plays important role. Koperasi Listrik
Perdesaan (Rural Electricity Cooperative, KLP) is the type of cooperative, which has
electricity as the main business. The involvement of cooperative was always considering
local condition such as capability to manage the resource. Based on those considerations
the cooperation between PLN and cooperative in rural electrification can be categorised in
several Polas. Those Polas are: (Pola means pattern or type).
Pola 1. The cooperative does meter reading, billing, network maintenance, and minor
repairing at customer installation
Pola 2. The cooperative does all the Pola 1 cooperatives do plus house wiring installation
and low voltage distribution network construction
Pola 3. The cooperative buys electricity from the mid voltage network of PLN or other private
generators and sells the electricity to the customers
Pola 4. The cooperative does electricity business vertically from generation, transmission,
distribution, house wiring installation, maintenance, billing etc.
KLP Sinar Rinjani (KLP SR) in West Nusa Tenggara province is one of the 3 KLP models in
Indonesia. The other 2 are KLP Sinar Siwomego in the province of Lampung, and KLP Sama
Botuna in the province of South Sulawesi. KLP SR implements Pola 4 for its electricity
business. Pola 3 might be the right option for KLP Sinar Rinjani now but the limitation of
PT.PLN (Persero) prevents this from materialized. Right now the other 2 KLPs are already
not functioning because of many problems they faced. KLP Sawa Bontuna is not operating
anymore. KLP Sinar Siwomego was taken over by PT.PLN (Persero) but now KLP will take
back the management. The debt of KLP Sinar Siwomego reached IDR 23.000.000 and
Government of Lampung will pay the debt to PT.PLN (Persero).
4-2
The government intends to convert the electricity sector from centralised system to a more
competitive system. Law 20 in year 2002 was intended to regulate the new system, but the
Constitutional Court annulled it. It is argued that the law is not in line with the 1945
Constitution. Right now the government is working on a new Electricity Law draft. Most of the
content represents the annulled Law 20 year 2002 minus the competition part.
In the draft law, rural electrification is the responsibility of government (central/local) with a
full support of private involvement. The utilisation of renewable energy sources is fully
supported by the government and also by PLN. PLN itself has the target to increase the
portion of renewable up to 5% by 2007 (PLN, 2005).
4.2. Constraints and Issues Related to the Project Sector
Commercial energy price is relatively very cheap in Indonesia. This condition has made
people tend to use energy not efficiently. Such condition leads to high un-productive energy
demand. The government has finally realised the mistake and now starts reducing the
energy subsidy. This should encourage people to use energy more efficient in long term.
Indonesian engineers basically already master energy efficient technologies. For long time
the demand for such technology is low (due to low energy price) so that Indonesia has only
limited capacity to produce energy efficient technologies. Big CFL producers in Indonesia are
still importing CFL and not selling the locally produced CFL in Indonesia. This policy has
made price for energy efficient technologies high thus even discouraging people to use it.
Low energy price is responsible for the low demand for energy efficient technologies.
Focusing on energy efficient lamps, there are now many low quality imports. There are many
CFL with low quality thus has lower price sold in Indonesia. Although Indonesia has National
Standard for CFL but those imported CFLs mostly do not comply with the standard. Despite
their low quality, those CFLs sell very well because people needs efficient yet cheap lamp.
People’s choice is not always the right one. Their decision to buy cheap CFL has created
troubles for themselves and for utility. Due to high power loss in many systems in Indonesia,
the voltage stability cannot be maintained so that those cheap CFLs can easily break. This
condition is only valid for “brandless” CFL. Top CFL brands stand the voltage fluctuation very
well. This condition has created certain perception in most of the people. People think that
CFL are easily broken or unreliable so that they do not buy CFL anymore and keep relying
on incandescent lamps that are not energy efficient.
Condition above is not valid for higher quality CFL. The high quality CFL usually has wide
voltage range so that it can handle voltage drop easily. The problem with that high quality
CFL is their price. It is not affordable for common people especially in rural areas in
Indonesia.
Indonesia through the ministry of energy and mineral resources has launched DSM
programmes targeted to household consumers, commercial/industrial consumers and also
street lighting customers. Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN, State Electricity Company) and
Directorate General of Electricity and Energy Utilisation (DGEEU) are the main players of the
programme.
The programmes are actually widely disseminated but only made little impact. The DSM
programme for household customers can only claim 295,000 CFL selling by December 2002
(DGEEU). Compared to the number of PLN’s customer the number of CFL sold is small. For
the street lighting programme by end of 2002 there are only 3 cities joined with total 15,000
lamps converted. The recent development for the industrial/commercial sector is that only
around 11industries/commercial building joining the programme and the number is
4-3
decreasing. It seems the genuine commitment from the government/PLN is not there yet to
improve national energy efficiency.
4.3. Sustainable Development Objectives
KLP Sinar Rinjani is now burning diesel fuel to generate power. KP SR is intended to exploit
the micro hydro sites around its premises; however it requires more investment costs and
time for the implementation. Therefore, as a parallel approach KLP-SR intends to implement
the demand side management (DSM) measures. High power loss means KLP SR is burning
fuel more than it should burn. This means more pollutants are released to the air. If the DSM
programme were successfully implemented then the power loss should be lower than today
and less power should be generated. Less power to generate means less pollutant will be
released. This means the project should be able to reduce local pollutants.
Another immediate impact of the project is reduction of fuel consumption. Due to less power
to be generated then the demand for fuel is also less. This will affect the financial condition of
KLP SR. Since the diesel oil price is steadily increasing (because of subsidy reduction and
crude oil price increase), the fuel expenses are the biggest cost component of KLP SR and
the source of financial loss. In order to maintain KLP SR existence, KLP SR carries a
saving/loan programme for its member. Saving/loan programme proves to be very useful in
rural areas and clearly gives positive impact to socio-economic condition of many rural
households. The proposed DSM project should be able to show reduction of fuel
consumption and improvement of financial condition of KLP SR.
Fossil energy source, especially oil, is now depleting. Energy has become a scarce resource
in Indonesia. Oil reserve in Indonesia might last less than 10 years with current consumption
patterns (status 2000). This basically will force the people to use energy more efficiently or
the future generation cannot have the same living quality as today’s generation. One way to
create inter-generational equity is by improving the way we use energy today. Using energy
more efficiently should be able to provide future generation with enough energy sources.
Inter generation equality is another objective of the project.
For the people who consume the electricity produced by KLP SR, the use of energy efficient
lamps will reduce a part of their expenses. This enables them to spend their money in things
that are more important such as health or food or education. The use of energy efficient lamp
also gives them better lighting quality, which will satisfy their lowest expectation or even
better. Children can study better at night. The people via various media can absorb more
information. This means the project should be able to demonstrate improvement of living
quality.
4.4. Government Policy and Strategy Relevant to the Project Sector
Energy conservation programme is one of the oldest energy policies in Indonesia.

Presidential Instruction No.8 of 1982 about Energy Conservation guides the implementation
of rational energy use without reducing the level of service. Basically energy policies in
Indonesia are: intensification, diversification, and conservation (energy efficiency). Recent
condition of energy crisis has made the energy conservation gaining popularity and the
government has made the legal level of the regulation higher to Presidential Decree.
Presidential Decree No.43 of 1991 regulates efficient use of energy and national energy
efficiency programme. Most recently there was President’s Instruction No.10 of 2005
concerning energy efficiency programme.
4-4
There are various strategies in improving energy efficiency in different sectors. In the
industrial and commercial sector the government launched a partnership programme. The
programme will give the partner industry/commercial building a free energy audit. Energy
audit is the first step of implementing energy efficiency measures. Right now the government
is focusing on energy intensive industries such as steel industry, pulp and paper and also
textile.
For other sectors the government has also launched DSM Programmes. Those DSM
programmes are:
1. Terang Programme; changing 40 watts incandescent with 8 watts CFL to reduce

peak load and electricity bill. Target group is a PLN’s customer with connection of 900
VA. This programme is already terminated because the government considers the
900 VA customers already have the ability to buy CFL
2. Peduli Programme; changing 40 watts incandescent with 8 watts CFL to reduce peak
load and electricity bill. PLN gives subsidy to the participants of this programme.
Target group is PLN’s customers that have 450 VA connection
3. Penerangan Jalan Umum Programme (Street Lighting Programme); Target group of
this programme is Local Governments. The aim of this programme is to reducing
peak load and also financial deficit of local government. Status in 2003 there are 3
cities participating: Semarang, Medan and Jogjakarta.
To produce maximum result of energy efficiency, the government already has set standards
for energy efficient appliances such as refrigerator, air conditioner, motors, and especially
lamps (CFL). Locally produced electronic equipment such as refrigerators or air conditioner
usually already comply with the standard, but for CFL many cheap imported CFLs do not
comply with the standard (more or less 44% of 100 brands in the market, www.kompas.com,
4 December 2003). Indonesian National Standard (SNI) for CFL lamps is SNI-04-6504-2001.
The government has recently launched a labelling programme for energy efficient
technologies. The label shows “how green” a product is.
Figure 4.1. Green Energy Label launched by the Government
4-5
4.5. Overlap of the Government’s and ADB’s Policies and Strategies in This Sector
ADB’s energy policy 2000’s operational priorities among others are “promoting the use of
renewable energy, demand side management, and energy efficiency”. The statement above
shows that ADB has commitment to improve environment condition by implementing some
strategies and that some of them are explicitly demand side management and energy
efficiency.
The energy policy of the Government of Indonesia also supports the implementation of
demand side management and energy efficiency. Energy efficiency is one of the oldest
energy policies in Indonesia. The government with the involvement of all related stakeholders
recently has implemented the above-mentioned strategies. Programmes such as Green
Energy Labelling and Terang Programme/Peduli Programme shows the commitment of GOI.
It is clear that there is positive overlap of the GOI’s and ADB’s policies in the sector.
4.6. Benefits of the Project
The community can use energy more efficient so that it enables them to save money for
other purposes such as health and education. Using CFL lamps people can get better
lighting quality at lower wattage and this means lower electricity bill. This means the people
can allocate the saved money for other useful activities. West Nusa Tenggara is one of the
least developed areas in Indonesia in the health sector. People can spend their money for
better water supply or better food. This is the benefit of peak clipping concept.
Using the benefit of lower daylight tariff, businessmen can start businesses that use
electricity as the production input. As the electricity tariff is lower in daylight, the production
cost will be lower and they can sell their products at more competitive price. This is the
benefit of valley filling concept.
For KLP SR, the programme will bring some benefits. Most important benefit is the more
balance operation of diesel generator sets that will affect the fuel consumption. At the end
more efficient fuel consumption will make financial condition of KLP SR better. Balance
operation is possible if the daylight and night load were at the same or almost the same level.
It might be very difficult to level night load and day load; therefore KLP can reach efficient
fuel use by applying right diesel generator combination during daytime and night.
Peak load can never be avoided but with DSM programme at least the peak load can be
reduced to a level that is closer to the base load (peak cutting). DSM programme should also
be able to give incentive for more (productive) daytime electricity use so that the base load
can be increased closer to the peak load (valley filling).
Less peak load can reduce the power loss so that KLP SR can increase the service level.
Increasing service level means KLP SR can satisfy more customers and the customers will
be more loyal to KLP SR. More loyal means the rate of unpaid electricity bills is lower than
when the services of KLP SR were not good.
Less power loss means the energy produced will be used more efficiently. This decreases
fossil fuel waste. The power consumption in total might increase, depending on the tariff
incentive, but if not then total power consumption in a day should be lower than before. This
means less fuel is burnt therefore less pollutant is released.
4-6
Tariff incentive in daytime might increase the use of electric power for productive uses such
as for small household industry and rice milling (which are mostly operating with diesel
fuelled engines). This will eventually help the people to improve their economic activity and
improve the regional economy. More jobs opening might be available in the future because
of the emerging small industries. The possibility of schools to use interactive educational
tools will also improve manpower skill and provide skilful manpower in the future that might
help to improve the economy in the area.
5. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
5.1. About the Project
Project Title
Energy Demand Side Management to Improve KLP Sinar Rinjani’s Sustainability
Location
Sub District: Aikmel and the service area of KLP Sinar Rinjani
District: East Lombok
Province: West Nusa Tenggara Province
5.2. Project Goal
The goal of the project is increasing the awareness of domestic customers to utilise energy
more efficient and improving economic activity through better energy utilisation. Other project
goals are:
• Improving the financial and technical sustainability of KLP Sinar Rinjani

• Reducing the peak load of KLP Sinar Rinjani
5.3. Project Objectives
The objectives of the project are:

• Installation of energy efficient lamps
• Installation of dual tariff kWh meter
• Setting up domestic time of use tariff system in KLP Sinar Rinjani
• Disseminating the success to other stakeholders in the country.
5.4. Poverty Reduction
The installation of efficient lamps and also dual tariff kWh meter is expected to influence the
consumption patterns of residential consumers. Efficient lamps should decrease monthly
electricity consumption so that the poor families will pay less. Dual tariff kWh meter will be
able to decrease electricity consumption especially in peak hours. Less electricity
consumption means less payment.
There is likely to be some direct impact on poverty reduction from a shift on income
spending. For example, before DSM energy spending might reach 40% of total expenses
and after DSM energy spending might be less than 40%. This means the people can spend
more on food for example. Implication of this is people can provide their most basic needs
better due to DSM implementation.
5-7
For poor people, energy in the form of primary energy is one of primary needs, but energy in
the form of secondary energy (e.g. light) might be secondary or even tertiary needs. Usually
poor families have illegal connection from their richer neighbour. They have to pay certain
amount of money for one lamp connection (less than 25 watts). They usually pay too much
for such small connection. Such condition worsens the power loss due to bad installation and
connection. With the improvement of electricity service KLP Sinar Rinjani can give “poor
class” service with lower flat tariff. This condition will certainly improve the economy of poor
families and they can spend their money for more important needs.
Introduction of Time of Use Tariff is expected to improve the service reliability of KLP Sinar
Rinjani and also provide incentive for small industries to operate in daylight. The growth of
small industries will eventually open up new employment opportunities. New employment
opportunities will surely reduce poverty in the area.
5.5. Technology Transfer
There is no specific technology transfer in this project unless the lamp producing companies
want to produce energy efficient lamps in Indonesia. Up to now there are only 2 producers
that manufacture and sell locally made CFL lamps in Indonesia namely PT.Sinar Angkasa
Rungkut (Chiyoda Brand) and PT.Matsushita Lighting Indonesia (National Brand). The rest of
the producers (7 other producers) are importing CFLs and selling those CFL in Indonesia
(http://www.djlpe.go.id/, 4 Dec 2003).
Dual tariff kWh meter is not yet produced in Indonesia, so the local meter producers should
learn the technology so that local products can replace the imported kWh meter.
5.6. Project Partners
DGEEU is the main partner in the project because it represents the Department of Energy
and Mineral Resources that sets the energy efficiency policy in Indonesia. Department of
Cooperative as the umbrella institution for cooperatives in Indonesia should also be involved
especially in supporting the financial management of KLP Sinar Rinjani.
KLP Sinar Rinjani is the main actor in this project. Energy Efficient Lamps producers should
also be involved in order to ensure that the project will get better quality assurance so that
the project will be successful. Electric meter producers (kWh meter) should also be involved
especially for the technology transfer purpose of the project.
PLN has the experience in implementing similar DSM programme could give advice to KLP
Sinar Rinjani so that the project will be successful.
5.7. Product or Service Generated by the Project
The project will install quality assured CFL lamps to target groups’ houses using certain
financial mechanism and also installation of dual tariff kWh meter in selected families.
5-8
6. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
6.1. Time of Use Tariff Discussion
This is the very important step because it might take long time to ensure the members of the
cooperative to approve the tariff system. Implementation of the system in the early stage
might be limited. Improvement of energy efficiency – change of energy use habit – should be
disseminated so that more members join the time of use tariff system.
The discussion might take long time because the procedure in KLP Sinar Rinjani needs the
general assembly of members to approve any kind of policies.
6.2. Target Group Identification
The target group will be identified based on the lighting technologies they used. A survey of
lighting technology penetration has been done in 2003 and it is assumed that the result is still
valid. Lamp technologies targeted are incandescent lamps and low efficiency fluorescent
lamps.
All families in the service area of KLP SR are using incandescent lamps with various
wattages. The lowest is 2.5 watts and the highest is 100 watts. Target of replacement is all-
incandescent except the 2.5 and 5 watts incandescent. More than half families in the area
are using fluorescent lamps that have wattage ranging from 10 to 20 watts. All fluorescent
lamps are targets of replacement.
Here is the summary of lamp replacements.
Table 6.1. Lamp Replacement Plan
Closest
Incandescent Lamps Replacement Incandescent
Rating
10 watt 5 watt CFL 25 watt
Fluorescent Lamps
Number of lamp replacement is calculated statistically.
For the dual tariff kWh meter installation, the target group is selected based on their
connection class. Out of 13.088 residential customers, there are 7.436 customers that have
2.200 VA connections. These customers consume more or less 58% of total energy sales.
Customer of 2.200 VA will be the first target of dual tariff kWh meter installation. For the first
stage 3.000 customers of 2.200 VA will be selected based on their monthly energy
consumption. The one that consumes more has the chance to be chosen.
6-1
6.3. Distribution of Energy Efficient Appliances and dual tariff meters
Cooperation with CFL producer will ensure supply of good quality CFL. After the target
groups are identified then the CFL lamps are distributed. The distribution will use centralistic
system i.e. a distribution task force from KLP Sinar Rinjani to ensure the CFLs are handed to
the right group.
Electricity meter (kWh meter) with dual tariff setting will be imported. Tariff setting will be
discussed by internal KLP SR system through member assembly mechanism. Tariff setting
might be the longest process because it involves many parties. There will be random
questionnaire distributed.
Trained installer of KLP Sinar Rinjani will do Setting and installation of dual tariff kWh meter.
6.4. Monitoring of Energy Consumption Pattern
The installation of CFL and also implementation of dual tariff system will surely affect the
consumption pattern. It is expected that the consumption level will decrease. Experiences of
Durban Metro Electricity in South Africa showed that installation of dual tariff kWh meter and
application of “Time of Use Tariff” successfully decrease the electricity consumption to 20%
less (R.F.Wienand, R.C.Reuben; Domestic Time of Use Tariff: The Durban Experience,
1999).
Monitoring can be done by examining electricity bills and the power production records.
Monitoring will be done regularly
6.5. Summarised Implementation Plan
Table 6.2. Summary of Implementation Plan
Activities Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7-Month 12

Time of Use Tariff Discussion
Questionnaire Distribution
Identification of Targets
CFL Procurement
Dual Tariff kWh Meter Procurement
Distribution of CFL Lamps
Installation of Dual Tariff kWh Meters
Monitoring
6-2
7. CONTRIBUTION TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
7.1. Long-term GHG and Local Pollutants Reduction
The current electricity supply system at KLP Sinar Rinjani is utilising several diesel
generators. Some of the “peakers” are already old thus consuming more fuel than they
should be. The “base loaders” are relatively new generators so they consume fuel at normal
fuel consumption range (± 0.3 litre/kWh).
The possibly lower energy consumption will affect the percentage of technical loss and also
non-technical loss. The percentage of technical and non-technical loss should be lower. The
final impact will be lower energy production and this means lower CO2 emission and also
other pollutants (NOx, SOx, particulate etc.).
Incentive to use electricity at daylight is expected to increase productive load (for the
reliability also increases). Increasing daylight load will improve the daily load pattern thus
also improve the diesel generators operation pattern. The “base loaders” will work at their
optimum point so it will consume fuel more efficient. More efficient fuel consumption will
decrease CO2 emission and also other air pollutants.
7.2. Other Benefits
The Time of Use tariff will provide incentives for productive usage in daylight. Small house
hold industries or other medium industries (rice milling for example) are expected to grow.
This will eventually improve the regional economy (in the area of KLP Sinar Rinjani) and also
improve financial condition of KLP.
The development of new productive activities will also improve the condition of job market
and indirectly reducing poverty in the area. Balance of operation of the diesel generators will
affect the fuel consumption. As the base load is expected to increase, the generators
operated as “peaker” can be shifted as “base loader” and operate at optimum point thus
improving fuel efficiency. Fuel efficiency is surely improving financial condition of KLP Sinar
Rinjani.
The experience of KLP Sinar Rinjani in implementing Time of Use Tariff will be an important
experience in the energy sector in Indonesia. Although PLN already implements Industrial
Time of Use Tariff, but the domestic tariff is still based on blocks of consumption. There is
little incentive to make efficient use of electricity. Implementation of Domestic Time of Use
Tariff will surely improve the load condition especially in Java-Bali system if adopted there.
8. PROJECT BASELINE AND GHG ABATEMENT CALCULATION
8.1. Current Production and Delivery Patterns
Currently KLP Sinar Rinjani has production capacity of 4.5 MW and peak load is 4 MW
(implementing load shedding). Base load is more or less 1 MW. Power loss at KLP Sinar
Rinjani is calculated as total energy production and deducted by paid energy, street lighting,
and own use. Based on the latest data, the total power loss is more or less 25%. The loss is
not 100% technical loss because there are many electricity theft and also unpaid energy.
Average energy production is reaching 46,000 kWh per day.
8-1
The technical power loss can reach 20% considering the voltage drop in villages not far from
the power plant. Voltage in the villages in the radius of 2 kilometres from power plant varies
from 180 Volt to 200 Volt. Non-technical loss varies each time because it is closely related to
unpaid bills. The highest recorded of technical and non-technical loss more than 50% in
1990. Below is the graph of power loss development.
60% 40000
35000
50%
30000
Network Length (10 m) and Members

40%
25000
Losses (%)
30% 20000
15000
20%
10000
10%
5000
0% 0
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Year
% losses Network Length Members
Figure 8.1. Power loss versus network length and number of customer
8-2
8.2. Project Boundary and Monitoring Domain
Figure 8.2. Monitoring Domain
The boundary of the project is more or less the PLN’s service area. This is because the
project implementation will involve as many customers of KLP as possible and this means
service area of KLP Sinar Rinjani is the project domain. Service area of KLP is bordered by
service area of PLN and the sea.
Lombok Area is one of energy deficit areas in Indonesia (ASEAN Centre for Energy). One of
the deficit energy sectors is electricity. PT.PLN (Persero) Nusa Tenggara Barat is not able to
provide 24-hour service to all areas in Lombok. PT.PLN (Persero) Nusa Tenggara Barat
relies on diesel generators. Generating capacity from diesel generator is 147 MW. PT.PLN
(Persero) Nusa Tenggara Barat operates at loss. Monthly financial deficit is more than IDR
1.000.000.000.
Considering the limited generating capacity of PT.PLN (Persero), the option to buy power
from PT.PLN (Persero) is hard to happen. PT.PLN (Persero) is now receiving very small
subsidy from the government. PT.PLN (Persero) has to survive financially. It is very hard for
PT.PLN (Persero) to suffer more financial loss in Lombok. This condition also explains the
reason why the second option is hard to be materialized. PT.PLN (Persero) has no intention
to take over KLP Sinar Rinjani.
It is the local government (provincial and district level) that supports KLP Sinar Rinjani. Local
government gives direct fuel subsidy to KLP Sinar Rinjani. Considering the options above,
the proposed project boundary is still a valid option.
Monitoring domain consists of two main components: generator area and office area. The
generators will provide technical data such as fuel consumption and energy production.
Energy production will be measured at the controller and before it is distributed to customers.
8-3
Office area will provide accounting data that shows non-technical losses and related
consumption pattern of the customers.
8.3. Baseline Methodology and Calculation of the Baseline Emission
Baseline methodology used here is based on the small scale CDM project methodology for
small hydropower. In this case “the energy produced by small hydropower” is the avoided
energy production of diesel power plant. Total energy production is energy production at bus
bar before it is distributed to customers.
Total energy production is then multiplied with the appropriate emission factor for generators
bigger than 200 kW (0,3 kg/kWh) to get baseline emission. Here is the summarised
calculation of baseline emission.
Table 8.1. Summary of Baseline Emission Calculation
No Calculation Factor Unit Value

1 Daily Average Energy Production kWh 46.803,0
2 Emission Factor kg/kWh 0,3
3 Daily Baseline Emission kg/day 14.040,9
4 Annual Baseline Emission kg/year 5.124.928,5
8.4. Calculation of Total Project GHG Emissions
Calculation of total project GHG emission will be based on total energy production before
DSM and total energy production after DSM. There is possibility of base load increase after
the implementation of time of use tariff. The increase will be included in the after DSM load.
The calculation in this study does not include base load increase because of lack of
information.
Avoided Energy Production = ∑ Energy Production before DSM - ∑ Energy Production after
DSM
Total project GHG emission is multiplication of total energy production after DSM and
appropriate emission factor for generators bigger than 200 kW. Avoided CO2 emission is the
result of avoided energy production multiplied by emission factor. Below is the summary of
project GHG emission and emission avoidance.
8-4
Table 8.2. Summary of Possible Project GHG Emission and GHG Avoidance 2
No Calculation Items Value Unit

1 Daily Energy Production
Before DSM 46.803,0 kWh
After DSM 33.361,0 kWh
2 Avoided Produced Energy 13.442,0 kWh
3 Emission Factor 0,3 kg/kWh
4 Baseline Emission 14.040,9 kg
5 Project Emission 10.008,3 kg
6 Avoided Emission 4.032,6 kg
7 Annual Avoided CO2 1.471.899,0 kg
Emission 1.471,9 tons
Detail calculation and load simulation and method of load simulation can be found in the
Annexes.
8.5. GHG Emission Avoidance Monitoring and Verification
GHG emission avoidance monitoring can be done using two different sources: generator and
administration. The generator will provide produced energy in total. Up to now there is no
meter to record energy production. The operator usually records the load regularly every 30
minutes in peak times. In base load times the operator records the load hourly. Should there
will be energy meter, it should be installed before bus bar. The records from both the meter
and the operator should be collected as cross check information.
Administration data such as consumption of fuel and recorded energy consumption (from
customer’s meter) will be used to verify the emission calculation. Below is the required data
to monitor and verify GHG emission.
Table 8.3. Required data to monitor and verify GHG Emission
No Data Source Function

1 Load Records Operator Monitor Energy Production
2 Produced Energy Meter Monitor Energy Production
3 Fuel Consumption Administration Verify Information
4 kWh Reading Record Administration Verify Information
2
Value is maximum possible GHG avoidance based only on lamp changing to CFL lamps
8-5
9. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT
9.1. Estimation of Overall Cost
Financial analysis is prepared to provide a clear picture about the profitability of the project.
The detailed technical and financial parameters are summarized in the Annexes of the
report. As presented, the total project cost (consisting of investment cost) is IDR
1,800,000,000. It equals to USD 189,474 (for the exchange rate of USD 1 = IDR 9,500).
Total annual OM cost is IDR 9,682,235,325 that consists of generation, network
maintenance, billing and selling and administration costs. The number equals to USD
1,019,183 (USD 1=IDR 9,500). From electricity sales, the project can generate annual
income IDR 10,228,482,600 (about USD 1,076,682) and CER annual revenue IDR
69,915,203 (about USD 7,359).
9.2. Project Financial Analyses
The financial analysis on the Annex shows the value of FIRR and FNPV based on 12%
discount factor. The FIRR with CER revenue is 20,03 % and FNPV with 12% discount factor
will be IDR 1.433 million and the FIRR without CER revenue is 18% and FNPV will be IDR
967 million.
From the description above the value of FIRR is bigger than the discount factor at 12%. The
value of FNPV is also positive and this means that the project is financially feasible.
9.3. Financing Plan
Local Foreign Total %

IDR'000 IDR'000 IDR'000
FUND REQUIRED
Proposed Project
Capital Expenditure 753.000 2.259.000 3.012.000 23,73%
Operating Expenditure 9.682.239 - 9.682.239 76,27%
Financial charges during development - - - 0,00%
TOTAL PROJECT REQUIREMENT 10.435.239 2.259.000 12.694.239 100,00%
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Proposed ADB loan - 2.259.000 2.259.000 17,80%
Other loan - - -
Equity or capital contributions -
Government 600.000 600.000 4,73%
Internal Source 153.000 153.000 1,21%
Subsidies for operation - -
Internal cash generation 9.682.239 - 9.682.239 76,27%
TOTAL SOURCES 10.435.239 2.259.000 12.694.239 100,00%
9-1
10. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT
10.1. Project Economic Analysis
The detailed calculation is presented in the Annexes. The economic analysis shows that at
12% discount factor the EIRR with- and without CER revenues is 52,04% and 50%,
respectively. While, the ENPV with- and without CER revenue at 12% discount factor is
respectively found IDR 7.097 million and IDR 6.747 million.
From the description above results, it can conclude that the DSM project is economically
feasible.
10.2. Poverty Reduction Impact
The project will benefit the community of Lombok Timur because they can use their money
for more urgent needs such as health, quality food etc. The shift of income spending will
surely improve living condition of people in Lombok Timur, especially because they have
very low human development index compared to other area in Indonesia (World Bank, 2002).
This basically will reduce poverty.
10.3. Social and Employment Opportunities
The work to replace old kWh meter with the new dual tariff kWh meter and installation of CFL
lamps will need lots of manpower due to large number of KLP SR’s customer. Skilled
workers from KLP Sinar Rinjani will do the installation and local non-skilled workers can
support the installation. The installation team might consist of 1 skilled worker and 2 helpers.
Two teams will have the responsibility to install kWh meter and CFL in one village.
There are at least 40 villages in the service area of KLP SR so at least there are 80
installation teams with 80 skilled workers and 160 non-skilled workers. This is a quite
significant number of jobs. Indirectly the temporary workers will improve the social condition
in the area.
10.4. Environment Impact
Avoiding burning diesel fuel will certainly improve the emission from the diesel generators.
Less pollutant will be emitted. Pollutant such as CO2, NOx, SOx, Hydrocarbons and also
particulate will experience declining concentration in the ambient air. This condition will
surely improve local environment, especially air quality.
Less fuel used will affect the volume of fuel transport to KLP SR. This practice affects the
possibilities of fuel spill during transport and during loading and unloading. Less oil spill will
decrease the possibility of soil and shallow ground water contamination.
Basically less fuel consumption will improve environment condition.
10.5. Regional Development
The programme intends to improve the service reliability of KLP Sinar Rinjani. Better service
reliability means KLP can produce enough energy and deliver high quality electric power.
Higher reliability is an important decisive factor for commercial/industrial customer. If KLP
were able to produce reliable power then more commercial/industrial customer can be
attracted.
10-1
More industrial activities in the area will develop the region. It means there will be more
economic activities that eventually affect the economy of the region.
Reliable electric power can also improve the service of government institutions so that they
can work smoothly and faster. Better civil service is certainly improving development process
in the area.
11. STAKEHOLDERS’ COMMENTS
11.1. Invitation letters to the Stakeholders
The related institutions and/or organizations have been contacted personally, by fax and
letters, where the project was introduced and outlined including the explanation about the
risks and benefits. Up to now still only KLP Sinar Rinjani that has been asked for their
comments or no objection regarding the technical, environmental and social issues.
The stakeholders identified for the project are as follows:
• Directorate General for Electricity and Energy Utilization (DGEEU)

• Provincial Office of Cooperative
• Provincial Office of Mines and Energy
• District Government of East Lombok through the District Planning and
Development Board
• Koperasi Listrik Sinar Rinjani (Sinar Rinjani Rural Electricity Cooperative)
11.2. Comments on the Project by above stakeholders
Up to now, not all organisations have shown their comments on the project.
Most important comments are coming from KLP SR. The management board of KLP Sinar
Rinjani is basically in favour of such DSM Programme. The management has to do anything
to save KLP from bankruptcy and one of the strategies in the plan is DSM programme. They
support the idea and will have full commitment to carry out the programme. The one little
problem is their financial position.
The provincial office of cooperative basically always supports any strategies that will improve
the sustainability of KLP Sinar Rinjani. KLP Sinar Rinjani is their pride because it is the only
KLP (out of 3 pilot KLPs in Indonesia) that is still running and operating. It is the obligation of
the office to support KLP SR in any ways.
DGEEU supports any kind of energy efficiency programme implementation. DGEEU as

government’s representative in power sector has all the interest to secure energy supply in
such sustainable way.
11-2
12. KEY FACTORS IMPACTING PROJECT AND BASELINE EMISSIONS
12.1. Key Factors
Key factors impacting project emission are:
• Willingness of the cooperative member to switch the current tariff structure to dual
tariff structure. Dual tariff were set to encourage customers to use energy more
efficient. If there were no agreement then there is no encouraging factor. People will
tend to use energy more rationally
• Price of diesel fuel. Higher price will certainly reduce energy production due to current
financial condition of KLP SR. This has close relationship with KLP’s financial
condition. Right now KLP’s financial condition is not in good shape and limits the
capability of KLP SR to purchase diesel fuel. Less diesel fuel in the stock then less
energy will be produced
• Price of dual tariff kWh meter or production of local dual tariff kWh meter. Higher price
will tend to affect the purchasing capability of KLP SR and further will affect the
number of customers having dual tariff kWh meter installation
• Electricity theft practice/ability of KLP SR to provide electricity for poor customers. Un-
metered electricity usage will increase the volume of diesel fuel burned
• Engine condition/maintenance of the engines. Bad engine condition, in term high
Specific Fuel Consumption (SFC), will certainly increase the volume of diesel fuel
burned per kWh produced. Maintenance that is carried out regularly should be able to
maintain engine condition at its peak
• Change of energy usage habit. There is possibility that at peak time people use
energy at the same level (regardless higher price) and significantly reduce the use at
daytime to compensate the financial aspect of energy consumption.
Key factors impacting baseline emission are:

• Price of diesel fuel. Higher price will certainly reduce energy production due to current
financial condition of KLP SR. This has close relationship with KLP’s financial
condition. Right now KLP’s financial condition is not in good shape and limits the
capability of KLP SR to purchase diesel fuel. Less diesel fuel in the stock then less
energy will be produced
• Engine condition/maintenance of the engines. Bad engine condition, in term high
Specific Fuel Consumption (SFC), will certainly increase the volume of diesel fuel
burned per kWh produced. Maintenance that is carried out regularly should be able to
maintain engine condition at its peak
• Load shedding implemented by KLP SR. Load shedding is implemented because the
peak load exceeds the generating capacity. Limited generating capacity is influenced
by engine condition (most engines are already old)
12.2. Project Uncertainties
• Natural disaster. Location of the power plant is right at the foot of Mount Rinjani that
is an active volcano. Possibility of eruption is high, therefore there is a chance that
the power plant will be destroyed
• Energy usage habit. People usually hard to change habits, especially energy usage
habit. Higher peak time price will surely force them to change energy usage habit.
Changing habit might take long time and there is no guarantee of success. People
might still use the same amount of energy despite higher price at peak time and same
volume of energy is still produced by KLP
12-1
• Financial condition of KLP and potential energy demand in East Lombok Regency
attract many investors. There is possibility of utility acquisition by private investor.
Acquisition by private sector will be followed with the installation of more efficient
power plant such as coal fired plant and improvement of network. A China consortium
seeks the potential to install an 80 MW coal fired plant in Lombok. Recent update
shows that there are no further actions from the consortium.
13. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
The study confirms that the Energy Demand Side Management Programme is technically,
financially and economically viable. Furthermore, the discussions with the KLP Sinar Rinjani
and Provincial Office of Cooperative revealed interests and commitments to support the
programme and improve the sustainability of KLP SR.
However, further investigation are needed such as undertake a more detailed feasibility
study to further verify the overall frame conditions of the project. A comprehensive survey of
the energy demand and the characteristic of the customers must be carried out.
The detailed design of the project should provide an even more accurate cost estimation and
financial and economic analysis.
13-2
Annexes
Annex 1. Electricity Tariff of KLP Sinar Rinjani
Fuel Component
Classes VA Blok I up to Blok II 20-60 Blok III more Price
Connection Fee 20 kWh kWh than 60 kWh Normal Increase
Household R1/TR 450 Rp 9.000 Rp 600 Rp 625 Rp 650 Rp 300 Rp 300
R1/TR 900 Rp 13.500 Rp 600 Rp 625 Rp 650 Rp 300 Rp 300
R2/TR >2200 Rp. 20000/KVA Rp 625 Rp 300 Rp 300
Industry I1/TR 0-200 KVA 27582/KVA 600 Rp 300 Rp 300

I2/TR >200 KVA 24522/KVA 600 Rp 300 Rp 300
Commercial U1/TR 0-200 KVA 27582/KVA 600 Rp 300 Rp 300

U2/TR >200 KVA 25488/KVA 600 Rp 300 Rp 300
Social S1/TR 450 7650 0-30=600 >30=650 Rp 300 Rp 300

S1/TR 900 12600 0-20=600 21-60=625 >60=650 Rp 300 Rp 300
S1/TR 1300 18200 0-20=600 21-60=625 >60=650 Rp 300 Rp 300
S1/TR 2200 24200 0-20=600 21-60=625 >60=650 Rp 300 Rp 300
>2200 18500/KVA
Steet Lighting P3/TR 510 Rp 300 Rp 300
PREGA Phase 2 - ADB TA REG 5972 Annex-1

Annex 2. Daily Load
wed thu fri sat sun mon tue wed thu fri sat sun
Hour 01. Okt 02. Okt 03. Okt 04. Okt 05. Okt 06. Okt 07. Okt 08. Okt 09. Okt 10. Okt 11. Okt 12. Okt
1700 1107 1070 1123 776 1138 1118 1106 1230 1068 329 1224 1219
1730 1154 972 1313 1010 1355 1284 1213 1344 1215 996 1248 1259
1800 1504 1352 1544 1353 1515 1553 946 2064 1355 1469 1440 1586
1830 1642 1776 1817 1697 1724 1955 1982 3253 3210 2695 2873 3365
1900 3504 3733 3633 3575 3697 3852 3897 3681 3864 3238 3549 3142
1930 3609 3822 3634 3646 3772 3937 3954 3712 3872 3323 3634 1450
2000 3562 3777 3601 3605 3699 3948 3926 3749 3935 3325 3606 3439
2030 3591 3847 3538 3508 3685 3820 3834 3695 3817 3264 3519 3540
2100 3534 3370 3360 3343 3566 3639 3664 3594 3645 3078 3366 3507
2130 3295 3389 3202 3609 3295 3590 3359 3485 3359 3369 3522 3692
2200 3334 3205 3196 3443 3268 3414 3354 3457 3401 3191 3308 3356
2230 3118 2899 2736 2899 2888 3048 2850 3094 2990 2729 2897 2863
2300 2512 2352 2499 2404 2423 2508 2414 2558 2506 2314 2470 2433
2330 2199 2151 2328 2250 2122 2250 2233 2256 2259 2091 2334 2282
2400 2052 2017 2076 2110 1968 2100 2108 2084 2130 1973 2076 2144
0100 1875 1925 1925 1910 1931 1942 1909 1499 1907 1820 1833 1933
0200 1821 1842 1799 1855 1869 1841 1821 1850 1849 1736 1835 1849
0300 1826 1818 1814 1831 1825 1847 1778 1834 1838 1713 1837 1853
0400 1850 1834 1847 1847 1865 1853 1825 1843 1830 1724 1855 1892
0430 1419 1942 1930 1937 1983 2000 2008 1957 2008 1876 1987 2143
0500 2374 2471 2358 2420 2458 2622 2347 2393 2482 2279 2418 2462
0530 2253 2707 3104 2918 2902 2894 2749 2818 2825 2578 2735 2571
0600 2414 2558 2687 2628 2706 2516 2449 2500 2239 2110 2163 2401
0630 1295 1834 1894 1851 1869 1873 1672 1717 1727 1480 1536 1753
0700 1384 1500 1480 1627 1464 1448 1489 1428 1424 1304 1432 1480
0800 1144 1224 1136 1288 1212 1256 1144 1212 1208 1072 1326 1208
0900 1034 1212 1080 1267 1104 800 1142 1120 1152 0 1805 1168
1000 1104 1192 1064 1271 872 1418 0 2169 272 897 2254 1184
1100 1128 1272 1120 1344 896 1465 256 1966 304 986 2342 304
1200 1128 1256 768 1296 1264 1256 240 2109 304 935 2375 1248
1300 992 1080 958 1200 1128 1064 256 1993 1120 1120 2234 0
1400 1088 1040 312 1168 1128 1064 240 2074 1160 1160 2192 0
1500 0 982 1010 1023 1106 1076 1072 1036 529 1160 2331 0
1600 1031 1005 1058 1051 1088 921 1050 1136 437 1067 1084 1133

mon tue wed thu fri sat sun mon tue wed thu fri sat average
13. Okt 14. Okt 15. Okt 16. Okt 17. Okt 18. Okt 19. Okt 20. Okt 21. Okt 22. Okt 23. Okt 24. Okt 25. Okt kW
1079 1097 1102 1160 1086 1114 1160 1179 1085 1148 1129 1130,57
1565 1141 1223 1340 1167 1347 1276 1231 1237 1399 1224 1224 1270 1240,28
2253 1291 1627 1779 1526 1617 1492 1482 1541 1595 1090 1157 1342 1521,96
3636 3491 3303 3600 3760 2974 3391 3416 3476 3431 3311 3100 3230 2884,32
3919 3913 3900 4024 3959 3770 3784 0 4005 3949 3949 3724 3872 3755,54
3977 3878 4006 4057 4052 3798 3942 3339 4073 3680 4077 3808 3878 3717,20
3930 4007 3951 3991 3988 3752 4038 3453 4079 3450 4028 3772 3751 3774,48
3816 3774 3845 3947 3855 3640 3937 3669 3996 3359 3990 3699 3648 3713,32
3582 3577 3663 3943 3694 3935 3668 3598 3913 3379 3791 3563 3471 3577,72
3443 3575 3508 3492 3762 3675 3504 3458 3367 3510 3589 3779 3852 3507,20
3273 3257 3408 3558 3615 3522 3258 3301 3081 3484 3605 3601 3590 3379,20
2930 2989 3173 3230 3238 2902 2991 3124 2392 3170 3096 3143 3067 2978,24
2727 2573 2572 2547 2793 2610 2564 2878 2335 2608 2678 2712 2894 2555,36
2235 2346 2299 2281 2472 2407 2265 2391 2230 2348 2343 2362 2522 2290,24
2167 2194 2171 2113 2194 2227 1994 2280 2092 2189 2127 2234 2197 2120,68
1886 1986 1979 1979 2053 2049 1968 2064 1938 1953 1959 1776 2060 1922,36
1822 1920 1878 2053 2232 1954 1872 1953 1874 1947 1918 2469 1972 1913,24
1809 1581 1874 1870 1864 1928 1872 1904 1852 1933 1900 1888 1968 1842,28
1836 1890 1893 1915 1864 1923 1888 1881 1879 1934 1953 1916 1932 1870,76
1948 2371 2139 2142 2194 2144 2197 2009 2202 2191 2199 2182 2202 2052,40
2492 2510 2557 2615 2614 2668 2618 2552 2619 2502 2516 2713 2507 2502,68
2795 2741 2902 2889 2889 2988 2826 2820 2791 2877 2686 2940 2867 2802,60
1481 2322 2553 2601 2544 2108 2153 2183 2099 2177 2254 2229 2256 2368,75
0 1666 1908 1704 1840 1568 1768 1693 1827 1626 1745 1680 1702 1736,22
0 1386 1504 1432 1616 1433 1400 1396 1392 1392 1476 1464 0 1450,04
0 1184 1176 1200 1216 1288 1144 1192 1152 1296 1224 1240 1104 1201,92
0 1185 1180 1176 1096 1216 1120 1136 1152 1176 1216 1208 1008 1149,90
0 1564 1032 1184 680 1288 1120 1072 1192 1080 1248 1136 944 1181,94
1304 1576 1088 1320 1088 1264 1128 1136 1230 1082 1368 1160 960 1216,17
608 2164 1144 1216 1128 1264 1064 1184 1094 1240 1352 1200 960 1179,39
960 1102 1417 1144 1128 1150 1128 1064 1192 1152 1252 1064 1272 1127,95
1216 890 1411 1144 1128 1174 1212 1080 1144 1152 1176 1072 1208 1127,95
1296 280 806 2223 0 982 2246 1160 1192 1112 1208 1072 1240 1174,88
1200 288 798 1065 1109 958 1137 565 1079 1086 339 1150 2313 1074,11

Average Load Curve (1-25 October 2003) of KLP Sinar Rinjani
4000,00
3500,00
3000,00
2500,00
Kilo Watt
2000,00
1500,00
1000,00
500,00
0,00
1900
1930
2000
2030
2100
2130
0200
0300
0400
0430
0500
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1700
1730
1800
1830
2200
2230
2300
2330
2400
0100
0530
0600
0630
0700
0800
0900
1600
Hour
Average Load

Annex 3. Pre-FS Survey Result
Lighting technology
Lighting respondent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Bulbs 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2,5 watt 1
5 watt 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 watt 1 1 1 1 1
15 watt 1
25 watt 1 1 1 1 1
40 watt
60 watt 1
75 watt
100 watt
Fluorescent 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 watt 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 watt 1 1 1 1
CFL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
18 watt 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
11 watt 1 1 1 1
5 watt
how many type of lighting 1 1 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1
3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 2 1 1

28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1
1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1
1
1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1
2 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 1 2 1 2 2 2

43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1
1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 1 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 2

58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 67 99%
5 7%
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 48 72%
1 19 28%
1 1 13 19%
1 20 30%
6 9%
5 7%
1 1%
2 3%
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 50 74%
1 1 1 1 1 1 37 74%
1 1 1 1 1 1 23 46%
0 0%
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 45 66%
1 19 42%
1 1 1 1 1 1 26 58%
1 1 1 14 31%
2 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 1 3 3

Annex 4. Percentage of lighting and other load for domestic
Percentage of load
hour Lighting Appliances Total % lighting % non-light
1 1137 2845 3982 28,55% 71,45%
2 1137 2845 3982 28,55% 71,45%
3 1137 2845 3982 28,55% 71,45%
4 2520,5 2870 5390,5 46,76% 53,24%
5 3911,5 3135 7046,5 55,51% 44,49%
6 1971 3675 5646 34,91% 65,09%
7 5 3835 3840 0,13% 99,87%
8 5 3955 3960 0,13% 99,87%
9 5 4235 4240 0,12% 99,88%
10 5 4820 4825 0,10% 99,90%
11 5 4685 4690 0,11% 99,89%
12 5 4445 4450 0,11% 99,89%
13 5 3985 3990 0,13% 99,87%
14 5 3955 3960 0,13% 99,87%
15 5 4270 4275 0,12% 99,88%
16 45 4295 4340 1,04% 98,96%
17 76 4275 4351 1,75% 98,25%
18 6079 4145 10224 59,46% 40,54%
19 6781 5035 11816 57,39% 42,61%
20 6656 6310 12966 51,33% 48,67%
21 6007 6380 12387 48,49% 51,51%
22 5388,5 6090 11478,5 46,94% 53,06%
23 3185 4545 7730 41,20% 58,80%
24 1547 3360 4907 31,53% 68,47%

Annex 5. Load Simulation
watt watt watt survey load average from engine load records kW
industry+c
ommercial street
hour Lighting Other Total % lighting % non-light load (kW) loss 100% load load lighting own use
a b c d e f g h i j k
a+b (a/c)*100% (b/c)*100% f-(f*g)
1 1137 2845 3982 29% 71% 1922,36 36% 1238,854 139,9108 4,697685
2 1137 2845 3982 29% 71% 1913,24 36% 1232,977 139,9108 4,697685
3 1137 2845 3982 29% 71% 1842,28 36% 1187,247 139,9108 4,697685
4 2520,5 2870 5390,5 47% 53% 1870,76 36% 1205,601 139,9108 4,697685
5 3911,5 3135 7046,5 56% 44% 2502,68 36% 1612,838 139,9108 4,697685
6 1971 3675 5646 35% 65% 2368,75 36% 1526,528 139,9108 4,697685
7 5 3835 3840 0% 100% 1450,043 36% 934,4725 4,697685
8 5 3955 3960 0% 100% 1201,917 36% 774,5685 103,69167 4,697685
9 5 4235 4240 0% 100% 1149,905 36% 741,0497 103,69167 4,697685
10 5 4820 4825 0% 100% 1181,941 36% 761,6954 103,69167 4,697685
11 5 4685 4690 0% 100% 1216,167 36% 783,7519 103,69167 4,697685
12 5 4445 4450 0% 100% 1179,389 36% 760,0506 103,69167 4,697685
13 5 3985 3990 0% 100% 1127,952 36% 726,9026 4,697685
14 5 3955 3960 0% 100% 1127,952 36% 726,9026 103,69167 4,697685
15 5 4270 4275 0% 100% 1174,882 36% 757,1464 103,69167 4,697685
16 45 4295 4340 1% 99% 1074,105 36% 692,2012 103,69167 4,697685
17 76 4275 4351 2% 98% 1130,571 36% 728,5905 4,697685
18 6079 4145 10224 59% 41% 1521,958 36% 980,8176 4,697685
19 6781 5035 11816 57% 43% 3755,542 36% 2420,238 139,9108 4,697685
20 6656 6310 12966 51% 49% 3774,48 36% 2432,443 139,9108 4,697685
21 6007 6380 12387 48% 52% 3577,72 36% 2305,642 139,9108 4,697685
22 5388,5 6090 11478,5 47% 53% 3379,2 36% 2177,707 139,9108 4,697685
23 3185 4545 7730 41% 59% 2555,36 36% 1646,788 139,9108 4,697685
24 1547 3360 4907 32% 68% 2120,68 36% 1366,66 139,9108 4,697685
46119,84 1678,93

kW kW watt watt watt kW kW kW kW kW
percentag
lighting e of improved improved load from load from
remaining lighting load lighting load differe survey lighting remaining improved RMU high RMU low
load 1 load 1 survey simulation nce load load load load 1 season season
l m n o p (p/ )q 00 r s t u v
h-(i+j+k) i*d % m-(m*q) r+(l-m) s+i+j+k
1094,246 312,4454 1137 638 499 43,89% 175,3211 957,1215 1101,73
1088,368 310,7672 1137 638 499 43,89% 174,3795 951,9807 1096,589
1042,639 297,7097 1137 638 499 43,89% 167,0526 911,9815 1056,59
1060,992 496,1008 2520,5 1272,5 1248 49,51% 250,4615 815,3531 959,9616
1468,23 815,0118 3911,5 1887,5 2024 51,74% 393,2851 1046,503 1191,112
1381,919 482,4235 1971 1129 842 42,72% 276,3349 1175,831 1320,439
929,7748 1,210644 5 5 0 0,00% 1,210644 929,7748 934,4725
666,1792 0,841135 5 5 0 0,00% 0,841135 666,1792 774,5685 94,01
632,6604 0,746062 5 5 0 0,00% 0,746062 632,6604 741,0497 94,01
653,3061 0,677001 5 5 0 0,00% 0,677001 653,3061 761,6954 94,01
675,3625 0,720003 5 5 0 0,00% 0,720003 675,3625 783,7519 94,01
651,6613 0,732204 5 5 0 0,00% 0,732204 651,6613 760,0506 94,01
722,205 0,905019 5 5 0 0,00% 0,905019 722,205 726,9026
618,5133 0,780951 5 5 0 0,00% 0,780951 618,5133 726,9026
648,7571 0,75878 5 5 0 0,00% 0,75878 648,7571 757,1464 94,01 94,01
583,8118 6,053348 45 15 30 66,67% 2,017783 579,7763 688,1656 94,01
723,8928 12,64442 76 36 40 52,63% 5,98946 717,2378 721,9355 94,01
976,1199 580,3827 6079 2825 3254 53,53% 269,7123 665,4495 670,1472 94,01
2275,629 1305,945 6781 3156 3625 53,46% 607,8103 1577,495 1722,103
2287,834 1174,443 6656 3129 3527 52,99% 552,1081 1665,5 1810,108
2161,033 1047,98 6007 2914 3093 51,49% 508,3758 1621,429 1766,038
2033,098 954,4234 5388,5 2676,5 2712 50,33% 474,0678 1552,743 1697,351
1502,179 618,9444 3185 1485 1700 53,38% 288,5816 1171,816 1316,425
1222,052 385,2689 1547 912 635 41,05% 227,1268 1063,91 1208,518
846,09

kW kW kW kW kW kW kW kW kW
improved improved
improved load improved load improved average load average load 30% loss 25% loss
2 (RMU high 3 (RMU low average load 1 1 (RMU High) 2 (RMU Low) 30% loss lighting + 25% loss lighting +
season) season) (only lighting) (kW) (kW) lighting RMU lighting RMU
w x y z aa ab ac ad ae
t+u t+v t/(1-g) w/(1-g) x/(1-g) t/(1-30%) w/(1-30%) t/(1-25%) w/(1-25%)
1101,73 1101,73 1709,58 1709,58 1709,58 1573,9 1573,9 1468,973 1468,973
1096,59 1096,59 1701,60 1701,60 1701,60 1566,556 1566,556 1462,119 1462,119
1056,59 1056,59 1639,54 1639,54 1639,54 1509,414 1509,414 1408,787 1408,787
959,96 959,96 1489,60 1489,60 1489,60 1371,374 1371,374 1279,949 1279,949
1191,11 1191,11 1848,28 1848,28 1848,28 1701,588 1701,588 1588,149 1588,149
1320,44 1320,44 2048,96 2048,96 2048,96 1886,342 1886,342 1760,586 1760,586
934,47 934,47 1450,04 1450,04 1450,04 1334,961 1334,961 1245,963 1245,963
892,08 774,57 1201,92 1384,26 1201,92 1106,526 1274,398 1032,758 1189,438
858,56 741,05 1149,90 1332,25 1149,90 1058,642 1226,514 988,0663 1144,746
879,21 761,70 1181,94 1364,28 1181,94 1088,136 1256,008 1015,594 1172,274
901,26 783,75 1216,17 1398,51 1216,17 1119,646 1287,517 1045,002 1201,682
877,56 760,05 1179,39 1361,73 1179,39 1085,787 1253,658 1013,401 1170,081
726,90 726,90 1127,95 1127,95 1127,95 1038,432 1038,432 969,2035 969,2035
726,90 726,90 1127,95 1127,95 1127,95 1038,432 1038,432 969,2035 969,2035
874,66 874,66 1174,88 1357,23 1357,23 1081,638 1249,509 1009,529 1166,209
805,68 688,17 1067,84 1250,19 1067,84 983,0937 1150,965 917,5541 1074,234
839,45 721,94 1120,24 1302,59 1120,24 1031,336 1199,208 962,5807 1119,261
787,66 670,15 1039,88 1222,23 1039,88 957,3531 1125,225 893,5296 1050,21
1722,10 1722,10 2672,23 2672,23 2672,23 2460,148 2460,148 2296,138 2296,138
1810,11 1810,11 2808,79 2808,79 2808,79 2585,869 2585,869 2413,477 2413,477
1766,04 1766,04 2740,40 2740,40 2740,40 2522,911 2522,911 2354,717 2354,717
1697,35 1697,35 2633,82 2633,82 2633,82 2424,787 2424,787 2263,135 2263,135
1316,42 1316,42 2042,73 2042,73 2042,73 1880,607 1880,607 1755,233 1755,233
1208,52 1208,52 1875,29 1875,29 1875,29 1726,455 1726,455 1611,358 1611,358
39248,93 40890,02 39431,27 36133,93 37644,78 33725,00 35135,12

Annex 6. Financial and Economic Feasibility Calculation
Project Financial Summary
Technical Information
Annual Generation kWh 12.176.765
Transmission Losses % 25
Grid Availability % 95
Annual Sales kWh 8.523.736
Life Span years 20
Residential Customers HH 13.088
Revenue
Power Sales
Average Sales Price IDR/kWh 1.200
Annual Price Increase % 3
Annual Revenue IDR 10.228.482.600
CER Revenue
Baseline Emission tons 5.125
Project Emission tons 3.653
Annual Emission Reduction tons 1.472
Emission Factor kg/kWh 0,30
GHG Abatement Price $/ton 5
Annual CER Revenue $ 7.359
Total Revenue IDR 10.299.133.752
Project Cost
Survey IDR 15.000.000
Meters and CFL

Dual Tariff kWh Meter $ 225.000
CFL Lamps IDR 754.500.000
Installation
Training for Installer IDR 10.000.000
Meter Installation Material IDR 30.000.000
Labour IDR 40.000.000
Contingency IDR 25.000.000
Total Project Cost IDR 2.997.000.000
Annual Operation and Maintenance

Generation
Fuel IDR 8.089.911.285
Lubricants IDR 130.416.000
Maintenance IDR 192.222.000

Network
Transformer Maintenance IDR 82.831.404
Poles Maintenance IDR 28.931.148
Task Force IDR 12.150.000
Billing and Selling

Wages IDR 37.224.996
Bill Collection IDR 165.864.000
Meter and Installation Checking IDR 19.080.000
Administration
Wages IDR 734.559.492
Office Stationary IDR 74.789.004
General Expenditures IDR 114.255.996
Total OM Cost IDR 9.682.235.325
Others
Exchange Rate 1 USD IDR 9.500
Inflation Rate % 7
Discount Rate % 12

Annex 7. Estimation of Overall Cost
Estimation of Overall Cost
Financial Economic
price Financial price Adjusment* price
USD (IDR'000) (IDR'000)
Revenue
Power Sales 1.076.682 10.228.483 1,000 10.228.483
CER Revenue 7.359 69.915 0,749 52.366
1.084.042 10.298.398 10.280.849

Investment
Survey 1.579 15.000 0,914 13.708
Meters and CFL 304.421 2.892.000 0,914 2.642.872
Installation 8.421 80.000 0,914 73.108
Contingencies 2.632 25.000 0,914 22.846
317.053 3.012.000 2.752.535

Annual operation and
maintenance
Generation 885.532 8.412.554 0,914 7.687.865
Network 13.043 123.909 0,914 113.235
Billing and Selling 23.386 222.167 0,914 203.029

Administration and
overhead 97.222 923.609 0,914 844.046
1.019.183 9.682.239 8.848.174
Total cost 1.336.236 12.694.239 11.600.709

Annex 8. Financial Analysis
Financial Analysis
Revenue Cost
Net
Power
Net Benefits
Year sales Power CER Total Investment O&M Total Benefits without
with CER CER
Mil Mil Mil
MWh IDR IDR Mil IDR Mil IDR Mil IDR IDR Mil IDR Mil IDR
0 2006 - - - 2.997 - 2.997 (2.997) (2.997)
1 2007 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
2 2008 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
3 2009 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
4 2010 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
5 2011 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
6 2012 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
7 2013 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
8 2014 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
9 2015 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
10 2016 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
11 2017 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
12 2018 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
13 2019 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
14 2020 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
15 2021 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
16 2022 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
17 2023 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
18 2024 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
19 2025 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
20 2026 8.524 10.228 70 10.298 9.682 9.682 616 546
PV
@ 12,00% 170.475 68.215 466 68.682 2.676 64.572 67.248 1.433 967
Per unit
(IDR/kWh) 400,15 2,74 402,88 15,70 378,78 394,48 8,41 5,67
With Without
CER CER
revenue revenue
FIRR 20,03% 18%
FNPV
@ 20,03% 0 (283)
FNPV
@ 12,00% 1.433 967

Annex 9. Economic Analysis
Economic Analysis
Benefit Cost Net Net

Power Benefits Benefits
sales Power Total O&M Total with without
Year CER Investment
CER CER
Mil Mil
GWh IDR IDR Mil IDR Mil IDR Mil IDR Mil IDR Mil IDR Mil IDR
0 2006 - - - 2.753 - 2.753 (2.753) (2.753)
1 2007 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
2 2008 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
3 2009 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
4 2010 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
5 2011 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
6 2012 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
7 2013 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
8 2014 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
9 2015 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
10 2016 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
11 2017 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
12 2018 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
13 2019 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
14 2020 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
15 2021 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
16 2022 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
17 2023 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
18 2024 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
19 2025 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
20 2026 8.524 10.228 52 10.281 - 8.848 8.848 1.433 1.380
PV
@ 12,00% 170.475 68.215 349 68.564 2.458 59.010 61.467 7.097 6.748
Per unit
(IDR/kWh) 400,15 2,05 402,20 14,42 346,15 360,57 41,63 39,58
Without
With CER CER
revenue revenue
EIRR 52,04% 50%
ENPV
@ 52,04% 0 (66)
ENPV
@ 12,00% 7.097 6.748

Ino Pfs Energy DSM KLP

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Ino Pfs Energy DSM KLP

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Draft Final Report

PROMOTION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY, ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND

Energy Demand Side Management

Table 6.1. Lamp Replacement Plan..................................................................................... 6-1

Figure 2.1. Map of the project study .................................................................................... 2-1

Output of the Project

Benefit of the Project

Figure 2.1. Map of the project study

Directorate General of Cooperative and United States Agency for International

4.1. Sector Description

4.2. Constraints and Issues Related to the Project Sector

4.3. Sustainable Development Objectives

4.4. Government Policy and Strategy Relevant to the Project Sector

Energy conservation programme is one of the oldest energy policies in Indonesia.

1. Terang Programme; changing 40 watts incandescent with 8 watts CFL to reduce

Figure 4.1. Green Energy Label launched by the Government

4.6. Benefits of the Project

5. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

5.1. About the Project

5.2. Project Goal

• Improving the financial and technical sustainability of KLP Sinar Rinjani

5.3. Project Objectives

The objectives of the project are:

5.4. Poverty Reduction

5.5. Technology Transfer

5.6. Project Partners

5.7. Product or Service Generated by the Project

6.1. Time of Use Tariff Discussion

6.2. Target Group Identification

Here is the summary of lamp replacements.

Table 6.1. Lamp Replacement Plan

Number of lamp replacement is calculated statistically.

6.4. Monitoring of Energy Consumption Pattern

6.5. Summarised Implementation Plan

Table 6.2. Summary of Implementation Plan

Activities Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7-Month 12

7.1. Long-term GHG and Local Pollutants Reduction

7.2. Other Benefits

8. PROJECT BASELINE AND GHG ABATEMENT CALCULATION

8.1. Current Production and Delivery Patterns

Network Length (10 m) and Members

% losses Network Length Members

Figure 8.2. Monitoring Domain

8.3. Baseline Methodology and Calculation of the Baseline Emission

Table 8.1. Summary of Baseline Emission Calculation

No Calculation Factor Unit Value

8.4. Calculation of Total Project GHG Emissions

No Calculation Items Value Unit

8.5. GHG Emission Avoidance Monitoring and Verification

Table 8.3. Required data to monitor and verify GHG Emission

No Data Source Function

9.1. Estimation of Overall Cost

9.2. Project Financial Analyses

9.3. Financing Plan

Local Foreign Total %

TOTAL PROJECT REQUIREMENT 10.435.239 2.259.000 12.694.239 100,00%

TOTAL SOURCES 10.435.239 2.259.000 12.694.239 100,00%

10.1. Project Economic Analysis

10.2. Poverty Reduction Impact

10.3. Social and Employment Opportunities

10.4. Environment Impact

10.5. Regional Development