PENGARUH NILAI CADANGAN PANAS BUMI TERHADAP KELAYAKAN PROYEK PENGEBORAN SUMUR EKSPLORASI OLEH PEMERINTAH BERDASARKAN PERBANDINGAN BIAYA DAN PENDAPATAN NEGARA: STUDI KASUS PROYEK NAGE, KABUPATEN NGADA, PROVINSI NUSA TENGGARA TIMUR

GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES EFFECTS ON PROJECT FEASIBILITY OF EXPLORATION WELL DRILLING BY THE GOVERNMENT BASED ON STATE COST AND REVENUE COMPARISON: A STUDY CASE OF NAGE PROJECT, NGADA REGENCY, EAST NUSA TENGGARA PROVINCE

  • Evi Octavia Universitas Widyatama
  • Iman K Sinulingga Direktorat Jenderal Mineral Batubara
  • Fitri Purnamasari Liveta Pusat Sumber Daya Mineral Batubara dan Panas Bumi
  • Husin Setia Nugraha Pusat Sumber Daya Mineral Batubara dan Panas Bumi
Keywords: Government drilling, Benefit Cost RatIndonesia Nage, geothermal economics, state revenue

Abstract

The three main problems in Indonesia's geothermal development include selling price issues, working area tenders, and high upstream risks. These three will lead to one condition: geothermal projects cannot reach their economic level. The Government of Indonesia (GoI) has initiated the Government Drilling Program to reduce high upstream risks. In addition to the main objective of reducing geothermal upstream risk, this program can indirectly generate state revenue. It is necessary to evaluate the program not only from a technical perspective but also from a financial point of view. Stakeholders could consider the evaluation results when making decisions about the continuity of this program. This financial evaluation will assess whether the costs incurred as an investment generate the desired rate of return. In this case, it compares the costs incurred by the GoI from the state budget (APBN) and the revenues obtained by the GoI from tax and non-tax. The Indonesiaost ratio (BCR) value is a parameter indicator of its assessment. The study results show that the BCR value of the government's cash flow from the Nage Project is 2.1. This value indicates that every rupiah of costs incurred by the government in the project will generate more than twice as much state revenue. Using the rate of return parameter, namely the Internal rate of Return (IRR), this project produces a value almost double the rate of return determined if the project uses the state budget. In addition, the Nage Project's valuation based on the Net Present Value (NPV) shows a positive value (NPV> 0). Based on those three indicators, the Government Drilling Program, especially the Nage Project, is feasible to continue. However, when viewed from the developer's cash flow perspective, the Nage Project of 30 MWe is still not attractive to private developers in Indonesia because the value of the project feasibility indicator is negative or –the rate of return is still below the desired value (IRR < MARR - Minimum Attractive Rate of Return ). The project is still feasible to be continued by developers from state-owned enterprises (SOE), which usually have lower MARR values. In addition, SOE has privileges in loan and depreciation parameters compared to private developers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Allen, M., Avato, P. A., Gehringer, M., Harding-Newman, T., Levin, J., Loksha, V. B., Meng, Z., Moin, S., Morrow, J., & Oduolowu, A. O. (2013). Success of geothermal wells: A global study.

Andreas Wibowo, Josep Bely Utarja, & Eko Nur Surachman. (2020). Panduan Penyusunan Studi Pendahuluan Proyek Infrastruktur Publik. PT Penjaminan Infrastruktur Indonesia (Persero).

Anonim, 2022, Laporan Akhir: Pengeboran Slimhole NGE-01A di Wilayah Panas Bumi Nage, Kabupaten Ngada, Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Timur. Pusat Sumber Daya Mineral, Batubara, dan Panas Bumi, Badan Geologi, Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral. Bandung.

Anonim, 2022, Laporan Akhir: Pengeboran Slimhole NGE-02 di Wilayah Panas Bumi Nage, Kabupaten Ngada, Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Timur. Pusat Sumber Daya Mineral, Batubara, dan Panas Bumi, Badan Geologi, Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral. Bandung.

Badan Standardisasi Nasional. (2015). SNI 7985:2015 tentang Kriteria Sumur Panas Bumi.

Brent, R. J. (2006). Applied cost-benefit analysis. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Danar, A. (2010). Keputusan Investasi Panas Bumi Di Indonesia. Dalam Energi Panas Bumi Di Indonesia (hlm. 61–179). Badan Geologi.

Direktorat Panas Bumi. (2016). Proposed Methodology for Determining Fixed Tariffs for Geothermal Power Projects in Indonesia.

Direktorat Panas Bumi. (2017). Recommendations for a Geothermal Tariff System.

Direktorat Panas Bumi. (2023). Pengembangan Panas Bumi di Indonesia.

Ditjen EBTKE. (2023). Pengumuman Pelelangan Wilayah Kerja Panas Bumi Di Daerah Nage.

Gehringer, M., & Loksha, V. (2012). Geothermal handbook: planning and financing power generation. Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP). The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The World Bank Group, Washington DC, United States, Energy Sector Management Assistance Program Technical Report, 2(12), 164.

Nugraha, H., Saefulhak, Y., & Pangaribuan, B. (2017). A Study on the Impacts of Incentives to the Geothermal Energy Electricity Price in Indonesia using Production-based Cost Approach. The 5th Indonesia International Geothermal Convention & Exhibition (IIGCE).

Pemerintah Indonesia. (2003). Undang-Undang Nomor 17 Tahun 2003 tentang Keuangan Negara.

Pemerintah Indonesia. (2016). Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 28 Tahun 2016 tentang Besaran dan Tata Cara Pemberian Bonus Produksi Panas Bumi.

Pemerintah Indonesia. (2018). Undang-Undang Nomor 9 Tahun 2018 tentang Penerimaan Negara Bukan Pajak.

Pemerintah Indonesia. (2021). Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2021 tentang Harmonisasi Peraturan Perpajakan.

Pemerintah Indonesia. (2022a). Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 26 Tahun 2022 tentang Jenis dan Tarif atas Jenis Penerimaan Negara Bukan Pajak yang Berlaku pada Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral.

Pemerintah Indonesia. (2022b). Peraturan Presiden Nomor 112 Tahun 2022 tentang Percepatan Pengembangan Energi Terbarukan untuk Penyediaan Tenaga Listrik.

PT PLN. (2021). Rencana Usaha Penyediaan Tenaga Listrik (RUPTL) PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara (Persero) Tahun 2021 sampai dengan Tahun 2030.

Sanyal, S. K., Morrow, J. W., Jayawardena, M. S., & Berrah, N. (2014). Geothermal Resource Risk in Indonesia: A Statistical Inquiry.

SKM. (2013). Geothermal Tariff Study.

West Japan Engineering Consultants. (2019). Application of Input-Output analysis to Energy Policy.

World Bank. (2008). Project Appraisal Document on a Proposed Global Environment Facility (GEF) Grant of US$4 Million to The Republic of Indonesia for a Geothermal Power Generation Development Project.

Published
2023-11-20
Section
Buletin Sumber Daya Geologi