Indonesia 213
Collective
management
issues in the case
of a larger biogas
system
Accessibility and
sustainability of
feedstock
Poor
maintenance and
infrastructure
Lengthy and
bureaucratic
process to apply
for governmental
biogas
programmes
Shifting on
household gender
division of labour
Varied monitoring
practices in different
programmes
Subsidy on
fossil fuels
Lack of long-term
incentives for
biogas use
Initial
investment
needs
Unsuitable technology
choice for local
conditions
Unfiltered hydrogen
sulphide (H 2 S) in
biogas installations
Methane leakage
Reliability on
electricity generation
Increased electricity
tariff
Small-scale household biogas
Large-scale biogas for electricity
Figure 12.2 Risks on both pathways: household biogas and large-scale biogas for
electricity.
recommended three potential solutions: (i) utilisation of a smart grid; (ii) a cogeneration/hybrid system; and (iii) the biogas system for off- grid or isolated areas.
Comparison of pathways
Both pathways aim to assist the government of Indonesia in meeting its emission reduction targets while providing energy access. Against these targets, this
section will apply a cross- analysis by classifying each risk under each pathway.
The interest in risks on the biogas- to-electricity pathway were stated by the
policymakers after the detailed investigation on the household biogas had been
delivered to them. Therefore, the risks on large- scale biogas were not identified
in depth. Nevertheless, we obtained at least higher- level perceptions on this
pathway. The risks from both pathways were either identified as exclusive or
overlapping to each other (Figure 12.2).
Risks associated with both pathways
Chief among the risks associated with both pathways is the high initial investment needs (Figure 12.2). This was particularly on the minds of policymaker
stakeholders. A representative of Bappenas suggested that the investment cost is
a risk to both the small- scale household pathway or the large- scale electrification pathway as limited financial or monetary reliability (with the possibility of
Collective
management
issues in the case
of a larger biogas
system
Accessibility and
sustainability of
feedstock
Poor
maintenance and
infrastructure
Lengthy and
bureaucratic
process to apply
for governmental
biogas
programmes
Shifting on
household gender
division of labour
Varied monitoring
practices in different
programmes
Subsidy on
fossil fuels
Lack of long-term
incentives for
biogas use
Initial
investment
needs
Unsuitable technology
choice for local
conditions
Unfiltered hydrogen
sulphide (H 2 S) in
biogas installations
Methane leakage
Reliability on
electricity generation
Increased electricity
tariff
Small-scale household biogas
Large-scale biogas for electricity
Figure 12.2 Risks on both pathways: household biogas and large-scale biogas for
electricity.
recommended three potential solutions: (i) utilisation of a smart grid; (ii) a cogeneration/hybrid system; and (iii) the biogas system for off- grid or isolated areas.
Comparison of pathways
Both pathways aim to assist the government of Indonesia in meeting its emission reduction targets while providing energy access. Against these targets, this
section will apply a cross- analysis by classifying each risk under each pathway.
The interest in risks on the biogas- to-electricity pathway were stated by the
policymakers after the detailed investigation on the household biogas had been
delivered to them. Therefore, the risks on large- scale biogas were not identified
in depth. Nevertheless, we obtained at least higher- level perceptions on this
pathway. The risks from both pathways were either identified as exclusive or
overlapping to each other (Figure 12.2).
Risks associated with both pathways
Chief among the risks associated with both pathways is the high initial investment needs (Figure 12.2). This was particularly on the minds of policymaker
stakeholders. A representative of Bappenas suggested that the investment cost is
a risk to both the small- scale household pathway or the large- scale electrification pathway as limited financial or monetary reliability (with the possibility of