Nuclear Engineering and Technology

  • 제53권1호
  • /
  • Pages.314-321
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1738-5733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-358X(eISSN)
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Determinants of nuclear power expansion in Indonesia

  • Cho, Inkyung (Environmental Regulation Compliance Office, Korea Institute of Industrial Technology) ;
  • Oh, Surim (Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Soohyeon (Overseas Energy Information Analysis Team, Korea Energy Economics Institute) ;
  • Ardin, Fadolly (Directorate General of Electricity, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources) ;
  • Heo, Eunnyeong (Department of Energy Systems Engineering, Seoul National University)
  • 투고 : 2020.03.02
  • 심사 : 2020.06.05
  • 발행 : 2021.01.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

As Indonesia is rich in natural resources, nuclear power remains a low priority among energy alternatives. However, Indonesia needs to introduce nuclear power to improve the atmospheric environment and to support sustainable economic growth. This study conducted a two-stage survey of logit-probit and analytic hierarchy process to analyze the perception of Indonesian energy policymakers regarding the introduction of nuclear power, the potential for change, and key decision factors. The analysis confirms that the perception of nuclear power is positive and that the willingness to expand nuclear power can improve if negative conditions, such as underdeveloped technology level, foreign aid and assistance, and safety issues are addressed. In addition, it is confirmed that the policy makers consider political/social and environmental factors to be more important for decision-making. The results of this study can give inplications and be used as a key reference for Indonesia's nuclear power policy

키워드

과제정보

The authors would like to thank our anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on this paper.

참고문헌

  1. S. Soentono, F. Aziz, Expected role of nuclear science and technology to support the sustainable supply of energy in Indonesia, Prog. Nucl. Energy 50 (2008) 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2007.10.021
  2. N. Bravo, C. Gillispie, M.E. Herberg, H. Nugroho, A. Stuart, T. Nikos, Indonesia: A Regional Energy Leader in Transition, The National Bureau of Asian Research, Washington, 2015.
  3. S. Hong, C.J.A. Bradshaw, B.W. Brook, Nuclear power can reduce emissions and maintain a strong economy: rating Australia's optimal future electricity-generation mix by technologies and policies, Appl. Energy 136 (C) (2014) 712-725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.09.062
  4. H. Iwata, K. Okada, S. Samreth, Empirical study on the environmental Kuznets curve for CO2 in France: the role of nuclear energy, Energy Pol. 38 (2010) 4057-4063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.031
  5. Y.E. Lee, Y.B. Jung, Reliable role of nuclear power generation under CO2 emission constraint, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 39 (2007) 655-662. https://doi.org/10.5516/NET.2007.39.5.655
  6. IEA (International Energy Agency), World Energy Balance 2018, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2018.
  7. S.N. Koplitz, D.J. Jacob, M.P. Sulprizio, L. Myllyvirta, C. Reid, Burden of disease from rising coal-fired power plant emissions in southeast Asia, Environ. Sci. Technol. 51 (2017) 1467-1476. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b03731
  8. A. Alonso, B.W. Brook, D.A. Meneley, J. Misak, T. Blees, J.B. van Erp, Why nuclear energy is essential to reduce anthropogenic greenhouse gas emission rates, EPJ Nucl. Sci. Technol. 1 (2015).
  9. J. McVeigh, D. Burtraw, J. Darmstadter, K. Palmer, loser Winner, Or innocent victim? has renewable energy performed as expected? Sol. Energy 68 (2000) 237-255. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-092X(99)00073-0
  10. K. Huda, B. Rohman, A.N. Lasman, Challenges for Indonesia in embarking to nuclear power, J. Energy Power Eng. 5 (2011) 379-384.
  11. WNN (World Nuclear News), Progress with Indonesian SMR project. http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Progress-with-Indonesian-SMR-project, 2018. (Accessed 16 March 2018).
  12. TASS (Telegraph Agency of the Soviet Union), Russia offers cooperating in construction of floating NPP to Indonesia. http://tass.com/economy/1028097, 2018. (Accessed 28 September 2018).
  13. WNN (World Nuclear News), Russia, Indonesia to cooperate on nuclear regulation. http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Russia,-Indonesia-to-cooperate-on-nuclear-regulati, 2017. (Accessed 5 April 2017).
  14. WNN (World Nuclear News), Indonesia extends nuclear cooperation with China. http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Indonesia-extends-nuclear-cooperation-with-China, 2018. (Accessed 31 August 2018).
  15. WNN (World Nuclear News), Indonesia and IAEA strengthen cooperation. http://world-nuclear-news.org/NP-Indonesia-and-IAEA-strengthen-cooperation-0602185.html, 2018. (Accessed 6 February 2018).
  16. S. Suyudi, Public acceptance of nuclear energy in Indonesia. A traditional puppet show for NPP in Java, in: 7th International Workshop on Nuclear Public Information in Practice, 1995. Switzerland.
  17. Y. Kim, W. Kim, M. Kim, An international comparative analysis of public acceptance of nuclear energy, Energy Pol. 66 (2014) 475-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.039
  18. Y. Sugiawan, S. Managi, Public acceptance of nuclear power plants in Indonesia: portraying the role of a multilevel governance system, Energy Strat. Rev. 26 (2019) 100427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.100427
  19. WNA (World Nuclear Association), Nuclear power in Indonesia. http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-g-n/ indonesia.aspx, 2019. (Accessed 12 November 2019).
  20. P. Devine-Wright, Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy, Wind Energy 8 (2005) 125-139. https://doi.org/10.1002/we.124
  21. D. Toke, Explaining wind power planning outcomes: some findings from a study in England and Wales, Energy Pol. 33 (2005) 1527-1539. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(04)00017-5
  22. N.T. Nguyen, M. Ha-Duong, T.C. Tran, R.M. Shrestha, F. Nadaud, Barriers to the adoption of renewable and energy-efficient technologies in the Vietnamese power sector, GMSARN Int. J. 4 (2010) 89-104.
  23. S. Reddy, J.P. Painuly, Diffusion of renewable energy technologies - barriers and stakeholders' perspectives, Renew. Energy 29 (2004) 1431-1447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2003.12.003
  24. J.P. Painuly, Barriers to renewable energy penetration: a framework for analysis, Renew. Energy 24 (2001) 73-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(00)00186-5
  25. G. Richards, B. Noble, K. Belcher, Barriers to renewable energy development: a case study of large-scale wind energy in Saskatchewan, Canada, Energy Pol. 42 (2012) 691-698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.12.049
  26. L. Pingkuo, C. Penghao, H. Jianchao, Accommodation issue of nuclear power in China: status quo, barriers and solutions, Energy Strat. Rev. 22 (2018) 166-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2018.08.005
  27. C. Greenhalgh, A. Azapagic, Review of drivers and barriers for nuclear power in th UK, Environ. Sci. Pol. 12 (2009) 1052-1067. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.07.006
  28. A. Adamantiades, I. Kessides, Nuclear power for sustainable development: current status and future prospects, Energy Pol. 37 (2009) 5149-5166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.052
  29. W. Poortinga, N. Pidgeon, I. Lorenzoni, Public Perceptions of Nuclear Power, Climate Change and Energy Options in Britain: Summary Findings of a Survey Conducted during October and November 2005, Technical Report (Understanding Risk Working Paper 06-02), Centre for Environmental Risk, Norwich, 2006.
  30. R.P. Hamalainen, A decision aid in the public debate on nuclear power, Eur. J. Oper. Res. 48 (1990) 66-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90062-G
  31. D.K. Bird, K. Haynes, Katharine, R. van den Honert, J. McAneney, W. Poortinga, Nuclear power in Australia: a comparative analysis of public opinion regarding climate change and the Fukushima disaster, Energy Pol. 65 (2014) 644-653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.09.047
  32. M.J. Goodfellow, H.R. Williams, A. Azapagic, Nuclear Renaissance, public perception and design criteria: an exploratory review, Energy Pol. 39 (2011) 6199-6210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.068
  33. J.B. Park, A Study on the Change of Acceptance for Nuclear Industry between Public Opinion and Nuclear Workers after Fukushima Nuclear Accident, Master's thesis, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 2012.
  34. B.A. Akash, R. Mamlook, M.S. Mohsen, Multi-criteria selection of electric power plants using analytical hierarchy process, Elec. Power Syst. Res. 52 (1999) 29-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7796(99)00004-8
  35. A.I. Chatzimouratidis, P.A. Pilavachi, Technological, economic and sustainability evaluation of power plants using the analytic hierarchy process, Energy Pol. 37 (2009) 778-787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.10.009
  36. O. Erol, B. Kilkis, An Energy source policy assessment using analytical hierarchy process, Energy Convers. Manag. 3 (2012) 245-252.
  37. T. Kaya, C. Kahraman, Multicriteria renewable energy planning using an integrated fuzzy VIKOR & AHP methodology: the case of Istanbul, Energy 35 (2010) 2517-2527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.02.051
  38. T. Suhaemi, A. Syaukat, The acceptance strategy for nuclear power plant in Indonesia, in: AIP Conference Proceedings, vol. 1244, American Institute of Physics, 2010, pp. 326-2010.
  39. K. Ek, Public and private attitudes towards "green" electricity: the case of Swedish wind power, Energy Pol. 33 (2005) 1677-1689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2004.02.005
  40. P. Ertor-Akyazi, F. Adaman, B. Ozkaynak, U. Zenginobuz, Citizens' preferences on nuclear and renewable energy sources: evidence from Turkey, Energy Pol. 47 (2012) 309-320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.04.072
  41. M. Greenberg, Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: analysis of US National and site-specific data, Energy Pol. 37 (2009) 3242-3249.
  42. M. Greenberg, H. Truelove, Right answers and right-wrong answers: sources of information influencing knowledge of nuclear-related information, Socio-Econ, Plan. Sci. 44 (2010) 130-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2010.04.001
  43. E. Heo, J. Kim, K.J. Boo, Analysis of the assessment factors for renewable energy dissemination program evaluation using fuzzy AHP, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14 (2010) 2214-2220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.01.020
  44. S. Meyers, Improving Energy Efficiency: Strategies for Supporting Sustained Market Evolution in Developing and Transitioning Countries, Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 1998.
  45. J.S. Shim, Trust in Nuclear power plant, perceived risk and benefit, and acceptance, Kor. Pol. Stud. Rev. 18 (2009) 93-123. https://doi.org/10.38084/2019.18.1.4
  46. T.L. Saaty, The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1980.
  47. S.K. Yi, H.Y. Sin, E. Heo, Selecting sustainable renewable energy source for energy assistance to North Korea, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 15 (1) (2011) 554-563, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.08.021.
  48. S. Cho, J. Kim, E. Heo, Application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to select the optimal heating facility for Korean horticulture and stockbreeding sectors, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 49 (2015) 1075-1083, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.105.

피인용 문헌

  1. Exploring the Factors Influencing Expansion of Nuclear Energy in Croatia vol.14, pp.23, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/en14238022
  2. Technological solutions for long-term storage of partially used nuclear waste: A critical review vol.166, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2021.108736