Andewi Rokhmawati , Agus Sugiyono , Yulia Efni , Rendra Wasnury
{"title":"Quantifying social costs of coal-fired power plant generation","authors":"Andewi Rokhmawati , Agus Sugiyono , Yulia Efni , Rendra Wasnury","doi":"10.1016/j.geosus.2022.12.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Coal has been dominating the electricity supply in Indonesia, especially in long-term power generation from fossil energy. This dominance is due to lower production costs in coal-fired power plant generation. However, this low price is only based on monetary costs and ignores the social costs. Therefore, this study aims to quantify the social costs of coal-fired generation. Using QUERI-AirPacts modeling, the present study quantifies the social costs resulting from the Tenayan Raya coal-fired generation in Riau, Indonesia. It includes the levelized cost of electricity and health costs into the generation costs. After that, this study calculates the net present value, internal rate return, and project payback period. The study found that as much as $50.22/MWh was the levelized cost of electricity. While $15.978/MWh or $0.015978/kWh was the social cost that was not included in the generating cost. At the electricity production level of 1,380,171.69 MWh per year, there is an expected extra cost of $22,052,383.30 uncounted when externalities are included. For instance, the net present value (NPV) is lower and even negative when external costs are included (–$24,062,274.19) compared to $176,108,091.52 when externalities are not considered. The internal rate of return (IRR) is much higher when the social costs are not considered. The payback period is also shorter when the social costs are excluded than when the externalities are included. This global number indicates that the inclusion of external costs would impact NPV, IRR, and the payback period. This result implies that the government should internalize the external cost to stimulate the electricity producers to conduct cost-benefit analyses. The cost-benefit analysis mechanism would lead the producers to be more efficient.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":52374,"journal":{"name":"Geography and Sustainability","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geography and Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266668392200089X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Abstract
Coal has been dominating the electricity supply in Indonesia, especially in long-term power generation from fossil energy. This dominance is due to lower production costs in coal-fired power plant generation. However, this low price is only based on monetary costs and ignores the social costs. Therefore, this study aims to quantify the social costs of coal-fired generation. Using QUERI-AirPacts modeling, the present study quantifies the social costs resulting from the Tenayan Raya coal-fired generation in Riau, Indonesia. It includes the levelized cost of electricity and health costs into the generation costs. After that, this study calculates the net present value, internal rate return, and project payback period. The study found that as much as $50.22/MWh was the levelized cost of electricity. While $15.978/MWh or $0.015978/kWh was the social cost that was not included in the generating cost. At the electricity production level of 1,380,171.69 MWh per year, there is an expected extra cost of $22,052,383.30 uncounted when externalities are included. For instance, the net present value (NPV) is lower and even negative when external costs are included (–$24,062,274.19) compared to $176,108,091.52 when externalities are not considered. The internal rate of return (IRR) is much higher when the social costs are not considered. The payback period is also shorter when the social costs are excluded than when the externalities are included. This global number indicates that the inclusion of external costs would impact NPV, IRR, and the payback period. This result implies that the government should internalize the external cost to stimulate the electricity producers to conduct cost-benefit analyses. The cost-benefit analysis mechanism would lead the producers to be more efficient.
期刊介绍:
Geography and Sustainability serves as a central hub for interdisciplinary research and education aimed at promoting sustainable development from an integrated geography perspective. By bridging natural and human sciences, the journal fosters broader analysis and innovative thinking on global and regional sustainability issues.
Geography and Sustainability welcomes original, high-quality research articles, review articles, short communications, technical comments, perspective articles and editorials on the following themes:
Geographical Processes: Interactions with and between water, soil, atmosphere and the biosphere and their spatio-temporal variations;
Human-Environmental Systems: Interactions between humans and the environment, resilience of socio-ecological systems and vulnerability;
Ecosystem Services and Human Wellbeing: Ecosystem structure, processes, services and their linkages with human wellbeing;
Sustainable Development: Theory, practice and critical challenges in sustainable development.