energies

Article
Unearthing the Dynamics of Indonesia’s Geothermal
Energy Development
Satya Widya Yudha 1 , Benny Tjahjono 2, * and Philip Longhurst 1

1 School of Water, Energy and Environment, Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK;
s.widya-yudha@cranfield.ac.uk (S.W.Y.); p.j.longhurst@cranfield.ac.uk (P.L.)
2 Centre for Business in Society, Coventry University, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK
* Correspondence: benny.tjahjono@coventry.ac.uk

Abstract: Indonesia has one of the world’s biggest geothermal energy reserves, accounting for
28.61 Gigawatts of electric energy (GWe). However, as of 2022, the installed geothermal capacity
in Indonesia was only around 2.175 GWe, just 7.6% of its estimated potential. Geothermal energy
development is required for Indonesia to empower sustainable energy systems and achieve its target
of reaching 7.2 GW of geothermal energy by 2025. The geothermal energy sector is viewed as a
complex dynamic system, with complicated challenges, including technical, financial, infrastructure,
and many other issues. The purpose of this paper is to understand the complex nature of geothermal
systems in Indonesia. To that end, this paper examines the geothermal development from a systematic
and holistic standpoint, employing the interview technique to enable the conceptualization of the
geothermal systems using the system dynamics (SD) approach. The SD model exhibits several
underlying and important factors influencing the development of geothermal energy in Indonesia,
such as capital investment, the collection of upstream data to reduce risk, infrastructure construction,
pricing, incentives, permit procedures, environmental concerns, and public acceptance.

Citation: Yudha, S.W.; Tjahjono, B.;

Keywords: geothermal; Indonesia; interview; system dynamics
Longhurst, P. Unearthing the
Dynamics of Indonesia’s Geothermal
Energy Development. Energies 2022,
15, 5009. https://doi.org/10.3390/
en15145009
1. Introduction
Geothermal energy is one of the types of renewable energy sources produced from the
Academic Editors: Ni An, Fangtian
Earth’s subsurface, which can be conveyed as hot water, hot steam, or a combination of both.
Wang, Meiheriayi Mutailipu, Renato
Geothermal energy has become one of the most vital sources of energy, with a substantial
Zagorscak and Wu Cai
growth potential in recent years [1,2]. Not only does it supply an alternative energy to
Received: 10 June 2022 help replace the demand for conventional fossil energy, geothermal energy also contributes
Accepted: 6 July 2022 to reducing the reliance on fossil fuels. As one of the clean energy sources, geothermal
Published: 8 July 2022 energy serves to mitigate the effects of global warming and the health hazards associated
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with air pollution, such as respiratory-related diseases [3], caused by the usage of fossil
with regard to jurisdictional claims in energy sources. Depending on its qualities, geothermal energy can be utilized for district
published maps and institutional affil- heating, or harnessed to provide sustainable electricity [4]. Lower enthalpy geothermal
iations. energy is frequently useful for direct usage (for example, room heating, tourism, agriculture,
agroindustry, and fisheries) [4–7]. Meanwhile, geothermal energy with medium to high
enthalpy can be utilized to generate electricity [8], which is common in active tectonics
locations [9].
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Indonesia has a wide-range of geothermal energy, from low to high enthalpy, that
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. can be utilized for both district heating and generating electricity [10]. Located along the
This article is an open access article “ring of fire,” which traverses around the Pacific Ocean’s margins [11], and home to the
distributed under the terms and world’s most active volcanoes and earthquakes [11,12], Indonesia has one of the world’s
conditions of the Creative Commons
largest geothermal energy reserves that can potentially be used to generate 28.61 Gigawatts
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
of electric energy (GWe) [13,14]. Despite the potential, Indonesia’s utilization of geother-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
mal energy, particularly for electricity generation, is not yet up to par [15]. As of 2021,
4.0/).

Energies 2022, 15, 5009. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15145009 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies

Energies 2022, 15, 5009 2 of 18

geothermal energy used to generate electricity in Indonesia is at a capacity of 2.175 GWe,

or only 7.6% of its potential [16]. In addition to that, according to Indonesia’s National
Energy Plan (RUEN), Indonesia pledges to achieve 7.2 Gigawatts (GW) of geothermal
energy utilization by 2025, which will increase its contribution to the energy transition
goal of net-zero emission by 2060 [17]. However, the geothermal energy development in
Indonesia is currently hampered by numerous hindrances, such as technical and regulatory
issues, which have significantly slowed the progress of the geothermal sector [18,19].
The development of geothermal energy is a very dynamic and complicated process
that involves stakeholders, policies or regulations, institutions, technologies, and other
interconnected and changing elements [20,21]. Such complexity increases the challenge for
the government to achieve the goal. In order to understand the complex nature of geother-
mal energy development, systematic and holistic approaches are required. Understanding
the relationships between the elements involved in the development of the geothermal
energy sector is becoming increasingly more important and necessary for developing
long-term strategies to boost the development of the geothermal energy sector.
In order to gain a more holistic, dynamic, and comprehensive perspective, it is neces-
sary to solicit and analyze some critical information directly from the stakeholders in the
geothermal sectors in Indonesia. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to analyze Indonesia’s
complex geothermal development structure. In so doing, the following research questions
were subsequently proposed to ensure the achievement of transparent, repeatable, and
credible research outcomes.
RQ1. How can the barriers associated with geothermal energy development in Indonesia
be understood from the perspective of the geothermal stakeholders?
RQ2. What are the key elements within the dynamics of geothermal energy development
in Indonesia, and how are they interrelated?
Such information gathering was primarily accomplished through literary work and
interviews with the primary stakeholders of the geothermal energy sector in Indonesia,
with the ultimate goal of identifying the key elements of the geothermal system. These key
elements (and their interrelationships) were then modeled into a conceptual framework
using the system dynamics (SD) modeling approach.
This paper offers key contributions to the body of knowledge by providing an in-
tegrated and holistic view of Indonesia’s geothermal system and by taking into account
some disparate elements (e.g., infrastructure, permits, incentives, and public acceptance)
that to date have not been well discussed in the extant literature, yet are vitally important
to geothermal system development. As this research incorporates information from all
major geothermal projects operated by major actors or commercially operating companies
in Indonesia to date, the SD model that is developed may act as a reference model that
represents the geothermal system in Indonesia.
This paper is structured as follows: Section 1 provides the background and research
questions for the research. Section 2 lays out the theoretical foundation for this research
by elaborating on the various studies pertinent to this research, so the gaps in the existing
literature can be clearly identified. Section 3 describes how the research was carried out,
including data collection and analysis methods. Sections 4 and 5 discuss the findings and the
analysis of their implications for understanding the problem. Section 6 concludes this research
paper by outlining a set of proposals for Indonesia’s geothermal sector development.

2. Related Work
Geothermal development is complex, as it is surrounded by a plethora of external
factors that frequently create uncertainty and hinder its development. The project scale,
interrelationship, regulation, context, permits, and project stages are some of the factors
that contribute to the complex nature of geothermal development [22]. Due to the dynamic
interactions of various elements within the energy system, including the geothermal energy
sector, many researchers have attempted to identify and understand the complex elements
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 3 of 18

of the energy sector. One of the many popular methods used by researchers to untangle
this complexity is by using the SD modeling technique.
Leaver and Unsworth [23], Lowry et al. [24], and Axelsson [25] have used SD to map
the technical aspects of the geothermal system, using the datasets from a few specific
geothermal fields. However, despite the detailed technical aspects offered, their work
lacked several important non-technical aspects, deeming them as insufficient to fully
elucidate the complexity of geothermal systems. Subsequently, Alfrink [26], Jiang et al. [27],
and Splitter et al. [28] used SD to elaborate other elements of geothermal systems beyond
the technical aspects, including the financial and economic aspects. Aslani et al. [29],
Saavedra et al. [30], and Splitter et al. [31] also used SD to improve the deficiencies of
the previous work by complementing the aspects of the geothermal systems to include
a more holistic view of renewable energy use in different countries. While the aspects of
geothermal systems have been incorporated in the abovementioned models, unfortunately,
the models become too broad, leaving out too many details and aspects that determine the
geothermal system’s complexity.
In the context of Indonesia, SD has been used in the geothermal energy sector by
Aditya [32], who developed a framework that integrates the technical and economic aspects
of the geothermal system using the Mataloko Geothermal Power Plant in Kupang, East
Nusa Tenggara. Akin to this work is a study by Setiawan et al. [33] that complements
Aditya’s work with a more holistic approach by covering more than just the economic and
technical aspects.
Previous work, therefore, clearly demonstrates the paucity of research on renewable
energy system dynamics, including geothermal energy. First of all, the extant work in
geothermal dynamics is currently focused predominantly on the technical and economic
aspects. In particular, the elaboration of the dynamic relationship of the key elements
beyond the technical and economical viewpoints is lacking, and even if it exists, it is poorly
discussed. Secondly, although there are a number of researchers who have also attempted
to develop a more holistic coverage of more aspects of the geothermal system dynamics,
there are gaps between the methodological pathway and the geothermal SD model itself.
For instance, much of the previous work was based on the data originated from a single
case of geothermal energy in a single area as a base model, which may not be representative
of the overall picture, hence decreasing the robustness of the SD model being developed.
Therefore, in this research, the methodological framework of the research will be
provided to bridge the gaps in discussing how the geothermal SD can be developed. This
research will also use vast sources of data from geothermal plants in Indonesia, which
improves the robustness, reliability, and accuracy of the SD models of the Indonesian
geothermal system.

3. Research Design
This research focuses on developing a conceptual framework of the Indonesia’s
geothermal energy system. The overall research design comprises two main stages. In
Stage 1, the semi-structured, in-depth interview method is carried out, involving a large
number of key stakeholders in geothermal energy in Indonesia, to identify the key elements
that play critical roles in the geothermal energy sector. In Stage 2, using SD modeling, these
key elements and their structural interrelationships are mapped and modeled to provide a
holistic understanding of geothermal development complexity in Indonesia, incorporating
technical, economic, political, and social aspects.

3.1. Stage 1—In-Depth Interview

This research employs a qualitative approach based on face-to-face in-depth interviews
as the primary data collection method. This method was chosen due to its ability to allow
the interviewers to probe the stakeholders of the Indonesian geothermal energy sector in a
systematic manner [34] using open-ended questions, while allowing the interviewers to
follow up with other questions that may not necessarily be pre-determined. The qualitative
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 4 of 18

method was deemed suitable, as it allowed for data collection flexibility and for the ability
to obtain direct feedback to explain the complex phenomena, while requiring in-depth
analysis [34]. The in-depth interview, while based on the semi-structured interviews [35,36],
provided data generated in a descriptive and explanatory form [37,38].

3.1.1. Profiles of the Case Companies and Interviewees

The face-to-face, in-depth interviews incorporated the researchers as the interviewers
and several geothermal stakeholders as the interviewees. Each of these stakeholders repre-
sents one of the seven biggest geothermal industry companies that are currently operating
commercially in Indonesia. In addition to the companies, representing the industrial sector,
interviews are also conducted with representatives of a state-owned electricity company,
National Research and Innovation Agency, and the Indonesia Geothermal Association.
These respondents were selected to gain information from the non-industrial perspective.
In order to keep the confidentiality of each interviewee, the name of the companies will be
stated as “Company-X,” and the interviewees’ will be identified by their codes.
Company-1 is a subsidiary of a state-owned oil and gas company in Indonesia. This
company has been engaged in the utilization of geothermal energy since 2007. Company-
1 has been one of the biggest contributors to national geothermal growth. As of 2020,
the company has 672 MW of existing assets and 220 MW of existing projects. Currently,
the company manages 15 geothermal working areas, with a total installed capacity of
1877 MW, which consists of 672 MW from its own operations, and 1205 MW from a JOC
(joint operation contract). The geothermal working areas from its own operations are
located in North Sumatra, South Sumatra, Lampung, West Java, and North Sulawesi.
Company-2 is a geothermal company in Indonesia that has been operating since
2007. The company has three subsidiaries that operate in three different areas of Indonesia.
Subsidiary-1 is located in the South Solok Regency, West Sumatera Province, with initial
synchronization of the 80 MW (nett) geothermal power plant and the 150 kV electricity
network owned by a state-owned national electricity company. Subsidiary-2 is located in
the South Lampung Regency, Lampung Province. This subsidiary is principally located
at the southern end of the Sumatera Island, specifically on the eastern coast of Lampung
Bay on the volcanic cone of Mount Rajabas, with the capacity of a 2 × 110 MW geothermal
project. Subsidiary-3 is located in the Muara Enim, Lahat Regencies, and Pagar Alam City,
South Sumatera Province, with a capacity of 92.1 MW as of 2022.
Company-3 is developing the 110 MW Blawan Ijen Geothermal Power Plant in Blawan
Ijen, East Java, Indonesia (Ijen Project). The company has signed PPA (power purchase
agreement) with a state-owned power company for a 30 years contract. The commercial
operation date starts in 2021, with the capacity of 2 × 55 MW power generation and an
approximately 28 km transmission line to the nearest substation.
Company-4 is an Indonesian state-owned enterprise engaged in geothermal explo-
ration and exploitation since 2002. Initially, the company was established in the form of a
joint venture between a state-owned oil and gas company and a state-owned electricity com-
pany to manage WKP Dieng and Patuha, according to the assignment from the government.
Currently, Company-4 operates the Dieng and Patuha geothermal working areas (WKP)
with a capacity of 55 MW each. In addition, this company also received an assignment
from the government to manage WKP Umbul Telomoyo and WKP Arjuno Welirang.
Company-5 is a geothermal company that has been commercially operated over the
past few years. The company has built one of the biggest geothermal power plant projects
using a single contract, with a capacity of 3 × 110 MW. The geothermal project is located in
the Pahae Julu and Pahae Jae Districts, North Tapanuli Regency, North Sumatra Province.
The first unit was commissioned commercially in March 2017. The second unit started
operating in October 2017. In May 2018, the third unit was established and also started
operating. The geothermal power plants of Company-5 are fueled by brine and steam from
production and injection facilities at the Silangkitang and Namora-l-Langit reservoirs.
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 5 of 18

Company-6 is one of Indonesia’s largest geothermal energy producers. Company-6

partners up with two state-owned companies to convert geothermal energy into electricity
in West Java Province. In Pangalengan, Company-60 s Geothermal Wayang Windu Limited
operates a geothermal facility with a gross installed generation capacity of 227 MW. In
Sukabumi, Company-6 manages one of the largest geothermal fields in the world, with
a gross installed generation capacity of 197 MW and steam sales capacity of 180 MW. In
Garut, Company-6 Limited has a gross installed generation capacity of 216 MW and a
steam sales capacity of 55 MW.
Company-7 is one of the biggest geothermal project development companies in In-
donesia. The company’s project is situated in Mandailing Natal Regency, North Sumatra
Province. Company-7 obtained the majority shares of the company in mid-2016. Since then,
the geothermal project has completed drilling operations for 18 wells, and it has confirmed
at least 55 MW of proven resources. The project is targeted to connect 45 MW of electricity
produced to the grid of a state-owned electricity company by the end of September 2019,
and this target has been exceeded as of 2022.
Company-8 is a state-owned electricity company or enterprise that deals with all
aspects of electricity in Indonesia. The company has a subsidiary that specifically deals
with geothermal energy. This subsidiary was established on 28 January 2009 to carry out the
development of a geothermal system in Indonesia with a function of providing the security
of supply and cost-efficiency. Since its establishment, the company subsidiary managed
to develop several geothermal-related projects and programs in Indonesia to support the
government in increasing the availability of electricity for all Indonesian people, such as
the geothermal working areas of the Tulehu, Lahendong Power Plant, and the Mataloko
Power Plant. In addition, the company has eight geothermal work area projects that have
been developed.
Company-9 is the National Research and Innovation Agency, a non-ministerial gov-
ernment agency that is under the direction of and responsible to the president of Indonesia
through the minister in charge of government affairs in the field of research and technology.
This institution, which was first formed in 2019, is attached to the Ministry of Research and
Technology (MRT). As of 2021, the agency separated from the MRT and became indepen-
dent, becoming directly responsible to the president. Currently, the institution is working
on the development of equipment and technology required for geothermal projects. The
objective is to develop and produce geothermal equipment so that it can be produced on
an industrial scale.
Company-10 is the Indonesia Geothermal Association, a non-profit organization,
which acts as a forum or medium of communication, consultation, and coordination in
order to enhance the members’ understanding, cooperation, capabilities, and responsibility
of the role of geothermal energy development in Indonesia. The organization represents
the geothermal sector and is a forum for professionals, developers, and implementers of
the geothermal sector; it is non-political and has no political affiliation.
Table 1 provides information on the initials of the interviewees, their positions within
their organizations, and their responsibilities to their respective organizations.

Table 1. List of the case companies and interviewees.

Case Code Type of Company; Position of the Interviewee: Job Description

Geothermal company;
Interviewee-1A Director: Making major corporate decisions and managing the company’s overall resources
and geothermal operations.
Geothermal company;
Company-1
Interviewee-1B Director of Exploration and Development: Overseeing the company’s geothermal operations
and maximizing the company’s geothermal operating performance.
Geothermal company;
Interviewee-1C
Corporate Secretary: Planning and implementing corporate governance within the company.
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 6 of 18

Table 1. Cont.

Case Code Type of Company; Position of the Interviewee: Job Description

Geothermal company;
Company-2 Interviewee-2 Director: Making major corporate decisions and managing the company’s overall resources
and geothermal operations.
Geothermal company;
Interviewee-3A Senior Vice President—Geothermal: Overseeing geothermal operations and maximizing the
company’s geothermal operating performance.
Company-3
Geothermal company;
Interviewee-3B Senior Geologist: Overseeing geological operations and site investigations of the geothermal
project area.
Geothermal company;
Company-4 Interviewee-4 Director: Making major corporate decisions and managing the company’s overall resources
and geothermal operations.
Geothermal company;
Interviewee-5A Stakeholder Manager: Managing geothermal stakeholder mapping and coordinating with
other geothermal stakeholders.
Geothermal company;
Company-5
Interviewee-5B Chief Administrator: Providing input for geothermal business and strategic planning for the
company.
Geothermal company;
Interviewee-5C
External Relations Manager: Liaising the company with other geothermal stakeholders.
Geothermal Company;
Interviewee-6A
Deputy Director of Operations: Overseeing geothermal operations in the project area.
Geothermal company;
Director of Strategy and Planning:
Company-6 Interviewee-6B
Overseeing the company’s operations and processes to identify strategic initiatives that will
drive the company in its long-term growth and development.
Geothermal company;
Interviewee-6C
General Asset Manager: Managing and monitoring the company’s geothermal energy assets.
Geothermal/Renewable Energy Company;
Company-7 Interviewee-7 Head of Environmental Operations: Managing stakeholder relations, sustainability, and
business development.
State-owned electricity company;
Executive Vice President of Strategic Planning: Assisting in overseeing the company’s
Company-8 Interviewee-8
operations and processes to identify strategic initiatives that will drive the company in its
long-term growth and development.
A national research institution;
Company-9 Interviewee-9 Deputy of Research and Innovation Utilization: Overseeing, managing, and evaluating
research activities, products, and future developments.
Non-profit organization;
Company-10 Interviewee-10 President: Overseeing policy setting and the strategic direction for the organization, both for
the short-term and the foreseeable future.

3.1.2. Guiding Questions

The semi-structured interviews were carefully designed, so that the interviewer pre-
pared several questions prior to the interviews to help guide the conversation between
the interviewer and the interviewees in regards to geothermal development in Indonesia.
The semi-structured interview method was chosen, as it allowed the interviewer to probe
the interviewees for more in-depth information. In this way, the interviewer can follow
up with questions regarding the reasons behind the answers, allowing the interviewees to
open up about sensitive issues. This format may also provide qualitative data as a basis for
comparison with previous and predicted data [39]. The guided questions were formulated
based on the most common issues found in the geothermal industries in Indonesia, and the
interviewer then took a deep dive into the issues based on, but not limited to, the prepared
questions (see Table 2).
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 7 of 18

Table 2. Guiding questions for the interviews.

Questions
Risk is one of the most important keys in decision making for developing a project. What are your views on the risks associated
with geothermal projects?
The geothermal energy development would depend on locations. How has the location of geothermal prospects affected the
geothermal development?
The economic value of geothermal projects, particularly in revenue generation, seems to depend on how the geothermal is valued
in the pricing mechanism. How is the geothermal pricing mechanism in Indonesia?
Infrastructure is one of the most important aspects of the geothermal energy development. What are your views on the state of
geothermal infrastructure in Indonesia?
What are the other aspects of geothermal energy that need to be considered to enhance its development?

3.2. Stage 2—System Dynamics Modeling

Following the interview stage, SD modeling was chosen as the theoretical lens through
which the data were analyzed. This systems-level method was chosen because it is capa-
ble of providing a befitting theoretical perspective for constructing informative decision
insights for renewable energy development [40]. SD modeling is a technique to identify,
comprehend, and analyze many different complex systems. The behavior of a system’s
complexity normally requires a holistic understanding, for which the complex nature of
the smallest unit, element, or constituent can be sufficiently understood, so better policy
recommendations can be designed and ultimately proposed to improve the system [41,42].
In system dynamics (SD), conceptualization is a primary step needed to provide
an understanding of the system that is being observed or analyzed. The causal loop
diagram (CLD) is a conspicuously useful tool for developing a conceptual SD model. CLD
contributes to the development of the systems’ dynamic hypothesis. CLD enables the
comprehensive depictions of causal relationships between the elements that were included
within the system’s boundary. CLD depicts the interaction of system elements with their
neighboring environments, for example, the problem owner, stakeholders, system goals,
and criteria, and policy instruments used to improve the system. In this research, the
information from the stakeholders’ interviews is analyzed using this approach, which is
very useful in understanding and mapping the important cause and effect interrelationships
among the geothermal system’s elements [43].

4. Findings
Indonesia’s geothermal resources, accounting for over 40% of the global potential
(or 28,617 MW) can be used in a power plant where geothermal fluid produced through
production wells will go through a separation and cleaning process before entering the
turbine and being converted into electric power. Despite its huge potential, there are still
many obstacles that hinder the optimal utilization of geothermal energy, from both the
technical and non-technical aspects. In this section, these obstacles will be analyzed based
on the interviews with the geothermal stakeholders.

4.1. High Risk of Geothermal Exploration

One of the biggest obstacles in developing geothermal energy lies in the early stage of
the geothermal upstream project, which is the exploration stage. At this stage, geothermal
potential and economics are highly dependent on the interpretation of geophysical, geo-
chemical, and geological (3G) survey results. The results of this 3G survey can provide a
glimpse into the geothermal system of interest, which includes the reservoir, temperature,
and pressure values of the geothermal location. However, these 3G surveys are not suffi-
cient, and they must be supported by more data. The only way to prove this interpretation
is by performing test drilling. The 3G surveys and test drilling can be very expensive, as
confirmed by Interviewee 1A:
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 8 of 18

“ . . . it is very expensive to start a geothermal project. I will give you an example, the
cost estimate to carry out the exploration stage including drilling with only a total of
3 wells, which was around USD 34.1 million, that included the Geological, Geophysical,
and Geochemical surveys, but it is necessary for the making sure the geothermal area that
we are assessing is promising or not.”—Interviewee 1A
While Interviewees 2 through 7 did not provide the cost estimate of this exploration,
all of the interviewees who represent the geothermal companies agreed that this exploration
phase required hefty costs.
A greater risk of a geothermal project will potentially increase the capital cost due to
project loss, as stated by Interviewee 4:
“ . . . the significant upfront cost of these exploration activities does not guarantee a
significant return because if it turns out that after drilling there is no reservoir as interpreted
in the initial 3G survey, then the large costs paid by the geothermal developer, which is
certainly very detrimental to the company, would fall through.”—Interviewee 4
Interviewees 1 through 7, and interviewee 10, stated that the high risks of geothermal
exploration, as well as the expensive initial costs that must be faced by geothermal devel-
opers to carry out the exploration stage, have made the development of geothermal energy
becomes sluggish. Therefore, according to Interviewee 5A, government intervention in the
upstream data strategy is needed:
“ . . . upstream data strategy, including data integration from all state-owned companies,
or government-funded drilling would be one of the scenarios that not only can make sure
the potential of a geothermal area and increase the certainty during the exploration, but
also increase the geothermal attractiveness.”—Interviewee 5A
Interviewees 1 through 7 concurred that a clear risk of geothermal exploration en-
ables the bankability of a geothermal project and could ease the geothermal investment.
Interviewee 3A, for instance, argued that:
“ . . . a crystal-clear image of geothermal exploration risk is necessary for the bank to
determine whether our project is bankable or not. Lower risk for them would make the
process easier and more attractive.”—Interviewee 3A

4.2. Geothermal Locations within National Parks or Protected Forests

Most potential geothermal drilling sites in Indonesia are located within protected
forest areas, which has caused various problems for decades, as Interviewee 4 expressed:
“ . . . around 80% of the potential sites are in protected forest areas where open-pit mining
is prohibited by Forestry Law No.39/2004. This law is believed to have become a major
barrier to the development of geothermal exploration in Indonesia, particularly during
the permit approval.”—Interviewee 4
For decades, geothermal activities had been classified as mining activities, which has
created further problems because, in conservation forest areas, it is completely forbidden to
carry out geothermal activities, so efforts are needed to determine the types of geothermal
activities that should be allowed. Since geothermal activities are aimed at thermal, and
not materials, extraction, they can be distinguished from mining activities, such as coal or
mineral resource extraction.
The Indonesian government has issued Law No. 14 of 2014, which no longer includes
geothermal activities as mining activities, to allow for geothermal exploration and produc-
tion activities in protected forest areas. However, the regulation still has some loopholes
that have not made it possible to fully carry out exploration and exploitation of geothermal
resources within a national park. In addition to that, land disputes are often complicated by
public resistance towards geothermal projects. Interviewees 1A, 3A, 4, 5A, and 6A agreed
that carrying out drilling activities, building infrastructure, and building geothermal power
plant units, requires the easement of land permits; otherwise, a geothermal developer will
not be able to develop a geothermal working area. As Interviewee 3A mentioned:
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 9 of 18

“ . . . if we want to increase the pace, make the permit process easier, because otherwise,
many geothermal working areas in Indonesia, especially those currently undergoing
the exploration stage, the geothermal utilization target of 7.2 GW in 2025 set by the
government would be very difficult to achieve.”—Interviewee 3A.

4.3. Pricing Mechanism

Geothermal resource development projects in Indonesia can be categorized as public-
private partnerships (PPP), where the business relationship formed between private sector
companies and government institutions aims to carry out projects to provide electricity.
In Indonesia, geothermal developers can only sell the electricity produced to the State
Electricity Company (PLN) as a single buyer or off-taker. As a result, the existence of a
market mechanism does not work, and the government must periodically create tariffs to
anticipate the dynamics of operating costs where the regulated tariff will be difficult to
satisfy both the seller and buyer.
Interviewees 1 through 7, and interviewee 10, mentioned that there are several prob-
lems in the electricity buying and selling scheme for geothermal energy development
projects in Indonesia. The State Electricity Company (PLN), as the only electricity company
in Indonesia, does not directly approve the tender price. As Interviewee 1A stated:
“ . . . we, as developers, have to negotiate with PLN to determine the price of the Power
Purchase Agreement (PPA) after winning the tender where in most cases, the PPA price,
roughly around 7 cents per kWh, is lower than the tender price.”—Interviewee 1A
Interviewee 4 stated that this certainly has the potential to hamper the pace of invest-
ment in geothermal projects because investors find it difficult to determine the economics of
the project, one element of which is determined by the sale and purchase price of electricity.
As a result of this pricing mechanism, another set of problems also occurs during
the bidding system. Interviewees 5A and 7 stated that the geothermal developers have
difficulty determining a reasonable bid price, while the government also has difficulty
finding serious developers. Using the bidding system, the lowest bidder is the winner
of the geothermal prospect area license offered, so some developers try to propose very
low, and often unreasonable, prices. Problems arise when the developer, after winning the
license, does not kickstart the geothermal development project which has been obtained
because it feels that the price offered is not economically attractive.
Interviewee 6A stated that pricing and incentive regulation is needed to increase
geothermal attractiveness:
“ . . . in business, the more revenue we gained, the more attractive the business is,
that’s why we need the pricing mechanism that can attract the appetite for geothermal.
Apart from that, incentives can be an appealing approach to attract the geothermal
investors.”—Interviewee 6A

4.4. Underdeveloped Infrastructure Affecting Geothermal Development

The problem of geothermal development in Indonesia is also strongly influenced by
infrastructure conditions, such as road access, transportation modes, and high-voltage
electricity transmission that will be used to the supply electricity produced by geothermal
power plants. Interviewee 2 stated that one of the main problems faced by Indonesia as an
archipelagic country is inter-island connectivity, which directly affects domestic shipping
costs. Interviewee 2 also mentioned that Indonesia’s low level of investment in physical
infrastructures, such as roads and bridges, has contributed significantly to Indonesia’s
connectivity problems. Transportation problems, congestion, and poor road quality are
among the worst business constraints.
Interviewee 1A stated that in geothermal development, Indonesia’s geothermal prospect
locations are generally located in mountainous forest areas, which are far from main access
roads, provincial roads, and district roads, making it difficult to mobilize drilling equipment.
Interviewee 5A explained that the higher the logistics and equipment mobilization costs, the
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 10 of 18

higher the cost of geothermal development projects, which in turn can make the investment
in this sector less attractive. Quoting from Interviewee 5A:
“ . . . when we first started the geothermal project, we needed to build the infrastructure
such as road access, for example, and that cost a lot and it was one of the main factors to
consider that could make the project less attractive.”—Interviewee 5A
As a part of the infrastructure, the facility is also an important factor. Effective and
efficient technology is needed to reduce costs, especially during exploration. Intervie-
wee 9 stated that Indonesia is capable of producing equipment for geothermal projects in
the country; currently, an equipment test project is being carried out by National Research
and Innovation Agency, at the Kamojang geothermal site.

4.5. Power Wheeling

Geothermal companies in Indonesia still have limited options to electrify their facilities
and supply chains using geothermal energy sources. Therefore, it is necessary to consider
a mechanism that can facilitate the transfer of electricity from geothermal energy sources
to the company’s operating facilities directly, or what is known as “power wheeling,” or
shared utilization of the electricity network. According to Interviewee 8, in Indonesia, the
basic rules regarding power wheeling have been established through the Minister of Energy
and Mineral Resources (MEMR) Regulation No. 1 of 2015, concerning cooperation in the
provision of electricity and joint utilization of the electric power network.
First, the business model for this scheme is the transfer of electricity from the holders
of the operating permit for distribution to the company itself. This makes it possible
for companies to build their own power plants, even though they are far from company
facilities. Another business model is the buying and selling of electricity between private
power plants and holders of business permits for the provision of electric power (IUPTL)
in different business areas. However, it is difficult for the private sector to obtain a business
area because most of the business area is owned by PLN (in one location, only one business
area is allowed).
Interviewee 10 stated that the limitations of this business model can have an impact
on the less massive transfer of geothermal energy to electrify private facilities, whereas the
flexibility for the private sector to conduct direct transactions in this scheme can increase
the development of geothermal energy on a large scale, when the private sector can help
ensure electricity supply from geothermal energy sources and maintain electricity supply
and tariffs. As mentioned by Interviewee 4:
“ . . . to overcome this challenge, PLN needs to change the business paradigm so that the
power wheeling scheme can be widely applied, starting from plant development planning,
system operation, to target customers.”—Interviewee 4
Interviewee 10 mentioned that many details of this scheme have not been regulated in the
Energy and Mineral Resources Ministerial Regulation, including the portion of involvement
of each party and technical instructions regarding network rental prices. As a first step
to optimizing the available business model, PLN can start issuing technical instructions
related to the formulation of transmission and distribution network rental prices, as well as
technical standard procedures for implementing joint utilization of the electricity network.
On the other hand, the Ministry of Energy must also actively participate in ensuring
transparency and fairness regarding network rental prices to provide certainty for both the
PLN and the customers.

4.6. Public Resistance

The factors that were least discussed, but certainly not least important, were related to
the public acceptance of geothermal projects. Interviewee 6A stated that the lack of public
understanding of the importance of geothermal projects often leads to resistance, which
eventually ends in the delay of geothermal development projects. This situation especially
occurs when the geothermal project is still in the exploration stage, when local governments,
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 11 of 18

development companies, and local communities are still in the stage of recognizing each
other, and trust has not yet been built between each party. As stated by Interviewee 6A:
“ . . . this is not news to geothermal developers, especially with the many reports in the
mass media about the public’s resistance to geothermal projects in Indonesia. However,
in practice in the field often, companies have not carried out education or counselling
sustainably and comprehensively.”—Interviewee 6A

5. Discussion
This section discusses the development of the SD model that describes the relation-
ships between elements that play a crucial role in geothermal system development in
Indonesia. The causal loop diagram (CLD) is employed to link up the critical elements
of the geothermal system that make up the conceptual framework, as shown in Figure 1.
The loops and their elements were obtained from the interviews with the geothermal
stakeholders (see Table A1 in Appendix A).

Figure 1. CLD of geothermal energy development in Indonesia.

Table 3 lists the structure of the feedback loops within the conceptual framework.
The loops detail multiple factors that can potentially enable and inhibit the growth of
geothermal energy in Indonesia. Understanding these loops subsequently allows further
investigation into the factors that can stabilize (or else strengthen) the regime so as to better
align it with the goals of the geothermal systems being developed.
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 12 of 18

Table 3. Structure of the feedback loops of the conceptual framework.

Loop Type Causal Effect Path

Risk of Geothermal Exploration → Capital Cost of Geothermal Exploration →
Geothermal Investment
Balancing Geothermal Project Attractiveness → Geothermal Investment → Bankability
Loop (B1)
of Geothermal Project → Risk of Geothermal Exploration
Geothermal Infrastructure → Power Wheeling → Capital Cost of Geothermal
Infrastructure Loop (B2) Balancing
Exploration → Geothermal Infrastructure
Upstream Data Integration → 3G Data Acquisition → Certainty of Geothermal
Upstream Data Loop (B3) Balancing
Exploration → Risk of Geothermal Exploration → Upstream Data Integration
Environmental Impacts → Ease of Acquiring Geothermal Permit →
Environmental Loop (B4) Balancing Geothermal Project Development → Public Acceptance →
Environmental Impacts
Governmental Intervention → Incentive Regulation → Geothermal Project
Incentives → Geothermal Project Attractiveness → Geothermal Investment →
Incentive Loop (R1) Reinforcing
Geothermal Project Development → Tax and Non-Tax Income →
Governmental Intervention
Governmental Intervention → Pricing Regulation → Geothermal Selling Price
→ Revenue → Geothermal Project Attractiveness → Geothermal Investment
Pricing Loop (R2) Reinforcing
→ Geothermal Project Development → Tax and Non-Tax Income →
Governmental Intervention
Governmental Intervention → Ease of Acquiring Geothermal Permit →
Permit Loop (R3) Reinforcing Geothermal Project Development → Tax and Non-Tax Income →
Governmental Intervention
Local Socioeconomic Impacts → Public Acceptance → Geothermal Project
Acceptance Loop (R4) Reinforcing
Development → Local Socioeconomic Impacts

5.1. Geothermal Investment Loop (B1)

Geothermal energy development is the primary focus of this research. The geothermal
investment loop illustrates geothermal investment in Indonesia and how its elements are
interconnected. This loop shows the balancing relationship between its dynamic elements.
The lower risk of geothermal exploration will increase the bankability of geothermal
projects, which will eventually lead to the increase in investment in geothermal projects.
More investment directed towards geothermal projects will increase the development of
geothermal projects.
In addition to that, the lower risk of a geothermal project will reduce the capital
cost of geothermal exploration, because when the geothermal risk is lower, its prospect
is higher. Therefore, the risk of paying hefty costs for exploration is also reduced, thus
decreasing the overall capital cost that a geothermal project would require. A lower capital
cost for a geothermal project will increase the attractiveness of the project, inviting more
geothermal investments.

5.2. Infrastructure Loop (B2)

The infrastructure loop shows how the infrastructure elements are involved within the
geothermal project, and the loop shows the balancing relationship between its elements.
The majority of the geothermal prospect areas in Indonesia are located in fairly remote,
mountainous areas, which are often far from the main access roads. Therefore, sometimes
the developer has to build the road or other infrastructure once they decide to continue
with geothermal project development. However, this also increases the capital cost of the
geothermal project and subsequently reduces the attractiveness of the project. In addition
to this, shared utilization of the electricity transmission, or power wheeling, can reduce
the capital costs, which include building a transmission system. Lower capital costs could
potentially increase the attractiveness of the geothermal project.
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 13 of 18

5.3. Upstream Data Loop (B3)

The upstream data loop shows the balancing relationship between its elements; it
mainly plays a role during the exploration stage as a part of the upstream activity. Upstream
data integration, which includes government drilling and existing data from the state-
owned companies, can be combined and integrated as part of the keys to increasing the
certainty of geothermal projects.
Following the data integration, to complete the missing information, geology, geo-
physics, and geochemistry (3G) surveys, including the drilling test, are required to obtain
the information and prospect of geothermal potential in an area during the exploration
stage. The greater the amount and the better of the quality of data, the more stability can be
obtained, which can then be used during decision making for the continuity of geothermal
projects. To lower the risk of the geothermal projects will require further data integration,
with more detailed resolution and quality.

5.4. Environmental Loop (B4)

The environmental loop shows a balancing relationship that consists of several inte-
gral elements. Despite geothermal energy being one of the renewable and eco-friendly
energy sources, environmental concerns still exist, such as minor earthquakes, air and
water pollution, thermal pollution, and land subsidence. However, these possible risks
are manageable with the right mitigation plan and standardized technology. The more
manageable the risks regarding the impact that a geothermal project has on the local en-
vironments, complemented by the right counselling, education, and communication, the
more likely the public will be to accept the development of the geothermal project.
In addition, environmental risk assessment is one of the crucial parts of gaining the
operational permit for a geothermal project. A high-quality environmental risk assessment
and mitigation plan will ease the process of obtaining the project permit.

5.5. Incentive Loop (R1)

Geothermal projects have a very high risk in terms of the cost for their projects, which
can be discouraging for geothermal investors and developers. As part of the financing
aspect, incentives can be an appealing factor for the geothermal developer. Formulating
an incentive scheme, which could be a fiscal incentive (e.g., tax holiday, exploration re-
imbursement), will make the geothermal projects in Indonesia more attractive and could
invite more geothermal investments. As a result, more geothermal investments would
result in more geothermal project developments that could generate both tax and non-tax
income (such as profit from electricity sales through the state-owned electricity company)
for the government.
There are a few fiscal incentives that can be applied for the case geothermal develop-
ment [44], which include:
1. Tax allowance: a reduced income tax for 6 years.
2. Import duty facilitation: a 2-year exemption from import duty for machinery and
equipment, and also an additional 2-year exemption for the duty on raw materials for
companies that use local machinery and equipment at a rate of at least 30%.
3. Tax holiday: tax easement provided for 5 to 20 years, with a maximum 100% reduction
in income tax for a minimum investment of IDR 500 billion.
4. Mini tax holiday: 5 years tax relief, with a maximum income tax reduction of 50% for
an investment of IDR 100–500 billion.

5.6. Pricing Loop (R2)

The pricing loop is one of the main keys in geothermal development. A suitable
pricing mechanism, or regulations that take into account the geothermal developers’ input,
such as feed-in tariffs, could result in a better geothermal selling price. A better selling
price results in a revenue increase for the geothermal developers, which would make a
geothermal project more attractive. Similar to the incentive loop (R1), increasing geothermal
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 14 of 18

attractiveness could invite more geothermal investments and thus, more geothermal project
developments. Eventually, that could potentially generate both tax and non-tax income for
the government.
The situation where the PLN is the sole buyer or off-taker of electrical energy in
Indonesia must be balanced with government intervention to implement regulations that
can produce tariff schemes that are attractive to investors, but still profitable for the PLN.
Further and more detailed studies on the most suitable method to reduce exploration and
production costs should be carried out by the government, practitioners, and academics
so that the baseline cost of a geothermal energy development project in Indonesia can
be determined.

5.7. Permit Loop (R3)

A geothermal system can vary depending on many aspects, such as geographical
situation, politics, market, etc. The geothermal system in Indonesia is different from that in
the Philippines [45], New Zealand [46], Iceland [47], the United States [48], and some other
countries [49]. In Indonesia, geothermal projects are often located in forested areas that
can sometimes result in disputes and complicate the process of obtaining an operational
permit. Land-use permission procedures for infrastructure projects in Indonesia are still
complex, and have significantly hampered geothermal development in Indonesia. Creating
a reformed, less complicated mechanism for obtaining the operating permit could be one
of the factors that will increase the development of geothermal projects. The more easily
these geothermal projects could be executed, the more tax and non-tax income would be
available for the Government.
Obtaining land issue permits is a problem that cannot be ignored in developing
geothermal energy in Indonesia. Therefore, multi-sectoral coordination and communication
between ministries, local governments, and companies must be improved regarding this
particular issue.

5.8. Acceptance Loop (R4)

The acceptance loop depicts the importance of public acceptance from the local com-
munity for geothermal development. More resistance coming from the public would hinder
advancement and result in a delay of geothermal development.
Various methods of community approach must be studied and implemented, including
the use of the local community within the geothermal project environment during all phases,
including exploration, construction, and geothermal production activities to minimize
the risk of rejection by the community located near the project site. There have been
many studies that offer various alternative approaches, one of which is the direct use of
geothermal resources for tourism, drying of agricultural products, etc. which are expected
to help develop the economy around the geothermal project area and involve the local
community on an ongoing basis. In addition to this, incorporating the socioeconomic factor
that could benefit the local community could also increase the public acceptance of the
geothermal development project.

6. Conclusions
This paper illustrates the complex nature of geothermal development in Indonesia
through model conceptualization by employing the SD modeling technique. The research
employed semi-structured qualitative interviews of several important stakeholders of the
geothermal energy sector in Indonesia. The information obtained was used as a basis for
building the SD model.
The interviews highlight several aspects in the geothermal energy sector in Indonesia,
including the high risk of geothermal exploration, restrictions for geothermal locations
within national parks or protected forests, pricing mechanisms, underdeveloped infrastruc-
ture, power wheeling, and public resistance towards geothermal projects.
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 15 of 18

The SD diagram visualized the entire process, the elements, and the stakeholders
incorporated within the geothermal system. The relationship between these elements is
illustrated in the causal loop diagram forming four balancing loops, namely the geothermal
investment loop, infrastructure loop, upstream data loop, and environmental loop, as well
as four reinforcing loops, which include the incentive loop, pricing loop, permit loop, and
acceptance loop. These loops highlighted the behavior and the dynamics of the systems
that influence the output of the system.

6.1. Theoretical Contributions

This paper provides theoretical implications in several ways. Firstly, the geothermal
business is a complex system with complex elements. There are a number of researchers
that have identified the barriers to geothermal energy development, but most of the research
has been focused on two major aspects, namely the technical and economic aspects. This
paper provides a more holistic view and takes into account some other aspects or elements
that are still poorly discussed, but which are vital to geothermal development, such as
infrastructure, permits, incentives, and public acceptance.
Secondly, this research complemented the work of Aditya [32] and Setiawan et al. [33],
who identified the key elements of the geothermal SD models. This research addressed the
shortcoming in their work, in particular the lack of robustness of the models’ references in
representing geothermal development in Indonesia. This research incorporates information
from all major geothermal projects that exist in Indonesia to date, either operated by major
actors or commercially operating companies. Therefore, the framework may serve as a
reference model that represents the comprehensive geothermal system in Indonesia.
Finally, this paper provides a novel way of identifying the complex elements of geother-
mal energy businesses by employing qualitative, semi-structured interviews involving
major stakeholders with diverse cases regarding a geothermal system. The information
obtained from the interviews was used to develop the framework.

6.2. Practical Implications

In terms of practical implications, the proposed framework can explain the causal
structure and interconnections of every aspect of the geothermal energy sector, which is
vital in enabling geothermal energy development. The proposed framework could be used
to guide policy-level scenario planning by facilitating dynamic analyses of geothermal
energy sectors.
A geothermal system can vary depending on many aspects, such as geographical
situation, politics, market, etc. The proposed framework could be adopted by the govern-
mental institutions and organizations to advance decision making in the countries where
geothermal energy can be developed. This is done by taking into account several key
factors, such as geothermal potential and settings, current policies, market conditions,
and stakeholders.

6.3. Limitations and Future Work

The future work will focus on formulating a quantitative SD model for geothermal
development in Indonesia. Thus, it is envisaged to employ the model to explore several
scenarios when proposing and implementing policies to accelerate and boost geothermal
energy development.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.W.Y. and B.T.; methodology, S.W.Y., B.T. and P.L.; valida-
tion, S.W.Y., B.T. and P.L.; formal analysis, S.W.Y., B.T. and P.L.; investigation, S.W.Y.; writing, S.W.Y.
and B.T.; writing—review and editing, B.T. and P.L.; supervision, B.T. and P.L.; project administration,
S.W.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 16 of 18

Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration
of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the National Energy Council of the
Republic of Indonesia (1087.Und/EK.03/SJD/2021, approved on 3 December 2021).
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Summary of quotes from the interviewees and their associated loops

Statements Source (Interviewee) Loop

1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
More certainty of geothermal exploration will reduce the risk of geothermal exploration B1, B3
6B, 6C, 7, 10
To obtain more detailed information and data resolution, a geothermal area with lower risk would 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
B3
require further study and data integration. 6B, 6C, 7, 10
1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
The more risk of a geothermal project will potentially increase the capital cost due to project loss. B1, B3
6B, 6C, 7, 10
1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
Clear risk of geothermal exploration enables the bankability of a geothermal project. B1, B3
6B, 6C
1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
The capital cost of geothermal exploration determines the attractiveness. B1
6B, 6C, 7, 10
Geothermal investment depends on the geothermal attractiveness and its bankability. 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 10 B1
Geological, geophysical, and geochemical (3G) surveys are important for determining certainty 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 1B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
B3
in exploration 6B, 6C
Government-funded exploration can reduce the capital cost and increase the attractiveness. 2, 3A, 3B, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A, 6B, 6C, 7 B1
Upstream data integration is needed to solve the issues about the certainty of 1A, 1B, 1C, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
B3
geothermal exploration. 6B, 6C
1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
Geothermal investment depends on the bankability and attractiveness of geothermal projects. B1
6B, 6C, 7, 10
1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
Building geothermal infrastructures costs a lot. B2
6B, 6C, 10
Power wheeling is one of the key points in reducing the capital cost of geothermal energy. 1A, 1B, 1C, 3A, 3B, 5A, 5B, 5C, 8 B2
1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
Government regulations and interventions are needed in terms of solving the geothermal issues. R1, R2, R3
6B, 6C, 7, 8, 9, 10
1A, 1B, 1C, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
Easier permit regulation will lead to increasing geothermal development. R3
6B, 6C
More developed geothermal projects could potentially generate income as tax and non-tax income 1A, 1B, 1C, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
R1, R2, R3
that would be beneficial for supporting the government. 6B, 6C, 7
1A, 1B, 1C, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
Pricing regulation is needed to increase geothermal attractiveness. R2
6B, 6C, 7
1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C,
Incentives will increase geothermal attractiveness. R1
6A, 6B, 6C, 7
1A, 1B, 1C, 3A, 3B, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A,
Better environmental risk assessment and mitigation plans will ease the permit processing. B4, R3
6B, 6C, 7
Incorporating socioeconomic factors with the right communication, education, and counseling
4, 6A, 6B, 6C B4, R4
could increase public acceptance of the geothermal projects.
Public acceptance of geothermal projects can ease development. 4, 6A, 6B, 6C B4, R4
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 17 of 18

References
1. Barbier, E. Geothermal energy technology and current status: An overview. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2002, 6, 3–65. [CrossRef]
2. Huenges, E.; Ledru, P. Geothermal Energy Systems: Exploration, Development, and Utilization; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ,
USA, 2011.
3. Fridleifsson, I.B.; Bertani, R.; Huenges, E.; Lund, J.W.; Ragnarsson, A.; Rybach, L. The possible role and contribution of geothermal
energy to the mitigation of climate change. In Proceedings of the IPCC scoping meeting on renewable energy sources, Luebeck,
Germany, 20 January 2008; pp. 59–80.
4. Fridleifsson, I.B. Geothermal energy for the benefit of the people. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2001, 5, 299–312. [CrossRef]
5. Chu, Z.; Dong, K.; Gao, P.; Wang, Y.; Sun, Q. Mine-oriented low-enthalpy geothermal exploitation: A review from spatio-temporal
perspective. Energy Convers. Manag. 2021, 237, 114123. [CrossRef]
6. Van Nguyen, M.A.S.; Gissurarson, M.; Pálsson, P.G. Uses of Geothermal Energy in Food and Agriculture. Opportunities for Developing
Countries; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2015.
7. Popovski, K.; Popovska Vasilevska, S. Prospects and problems for geothermal use in agriculture in Europe. Geothermics 2003, 32,
545–555. [CrossRef]
8. Kabeyi, M.J.B. Geothermal electricity generation, challenges, opportunities and recommendations. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Res. Eng. 2019,
5, 53–95.
9. Nasruddin; Idrus Alhamid, M.; Daud, Y.; Surachman, A.; Sugiyono, A.; Aditya, H.B.; Mahlia, T.M.I. Potential of geothermal
energy for electricity generation in Indonesia: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 53, 733–740. [CrossRef]
10. Darma, S.; Hadyanto, S.; Setiawan, B.; Sukhyar, R.; Soedibjo, A.W.; Ganefianto, N.; Stimac, J. Geothermal energy update:
Geothermal energy development and utilization in Indonesia. In Proceedings of the World Geothermal Congress 2010, Bali,
Indonesia, 25–29 April 2010.
11. Mogg, R. The ring of fire: The use of geothermal energy in Indonesia. Refocus 2001, 2, 12–17. [CrossRef]
12. Pambudi, N.A. Geothermal power generation in Indonesia, a country within the ring of fire: Current status, future development
and policy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 81, 2893–2901. [CrossRef]
13. Hamilton, W.B. Tectonics of the Indonesian Region; US Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 1979; Volume 1078.
14. Darma, S. Indonesia: Vast geothermal potential, modest but growing exploitation. In Geothermal Power Generation; DiPippo, R., Ed.;
Woodhead Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2016; pp. 609–643.
15. Fan, K.; Nam, S. Accelerating Geothermal Development in Indonesia: A Case Study in the Underutilization of Geothermal Energy.
Consilience 2018, 19, 103–129.
16. (Persero), P.P. Rencana Usaha Penyediaan Tenaga Listrik (RUPTL) PT PLN (Persero) 2021–2030. Available online: https://web.pln.co.
id/statics/uploads/2021/10/ruptl-2021-2030.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2022).
17. Widyaningsih, G.A. Peraturan Presiden Nomor 22 Tahun 2017 tentang Rencana Umum Energi Nasional. J. Huk. Lingkung. Indones.
2017, 4, 139–152. [CrossRef]
18. Yanti, W.; Prakoso, S.; Kasmungin, S.; Hamid, A. Geothermal energy development in Indonesia and its obstacles. AIP Conf. Proc.
2021, 2363, 20014.
19. Winters, M.S.; Cawvey, M. Governance Obstacles to Geothermal Energy Development in Indonesia. J. Curr. Southeast Asian Aff.
2015, 34, 27–56. [CrossRef]
20. Yudha, S.W.; Tjahjono, B. Stakeholder Mapping and Analysis of the Renewable Energy Industry in Indonesia. Energies 2019,
12, 602. [CrossRef]
21. Yudha, S.W.; Tjahjono, B.; Longhurst, P. Stakeholders’ Recount on the Dynamics of Indonesia’s Renewable Energy Sector. Energies
2021, 14, 2762. [CrossRef]
22. Vidal, L.A.; Marle, F. Understanding project complexity: Implications on project management. Kybernetes 2008, 37, 1094–1110.
[CrossRef]
23. Leaver, J.D.; Unsworth, C.P. System dynamics modelling of spring behaviour in the Orakeikorako geothermal field, New Zealand.
Geothermics 2007, 36, 101–114. [CrossRef]
24. Lowry, T.S.; Kalinina, E.; Hadgu, T.; McKenna, S.A. Using system dynamics for uncertainty analysis and integrated risk assessment
in geothermal energy development. In Proceedings of the International System Dynamics Conference, St. Gallen, Switzerland,
22–26 July 2012.
25. Axelsson, G. Dynamic modelling of geothermal systems. In Proceedings of the Short Course V on Conceptual Modelling of
Geothermal Systems, Santa Tecla, El Salvador, 24 February–2 March 2013; pp. 1–20.
26. Alfrink, E. The value of geothermal energy under scenarios: Exploring the potential of geothermal energy in Eindhoven. Exploring
Energy Neutral Development for Brainport Eindhoven: Part 2; 2011, pp. 17–26. Available online: https://pure.tue.nl/ws/files/
47023352/718902-1.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2022).
27. Jiang, Y.; Lei, Y.; Li, L.; Ge, J. Mechanism of Fiscal and Taxation Policies in the Geothermal Industry in China. Energies 2016, 9, 709.
[CrossRef]
28. Spittler, N.; Shafiei, E.; Davidsdottir, B.; Juliusson, E. Modelling geothermal resource utilization by incorporating resource
dynamics, capacity expansion, and development costs. Energy 2020, 190, 116407. [CrossRef]
29. Aslani, A.; Helo, P.; Naaranoja, M. Role of renewable energy policies in energy dependency in Finland: System dynamics
approach. Appl. Energy 2014, 113, 758–765. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022, 15, 5009 18 of 18

30. Saavedra, M.M.R.; de Fontes, C.H.O.; Freires, F.G.M. Sustainable and renewable energy supply chain: A system dynamics
overview. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 82, 247–259. [CrossRef]
31. Spittler, N.; Davidsdottir, B.; Shafiei, E.; Diemer, A. Implications of renewable resource dynamics for energy system planning: The
case of geothermal and hydropower in Kenya. Energy Policy 2021, 150, 111985. [CrossRef]
32. Aditya, A. Mataloko Geothermal Power Plant Development Strategy In Order To Maintain The Sustainability Of Supply And
Demand Electric Energy In Kupang, East Nusa Tenggara (A System Dynamics Framework). J. Geosci. Eng. Environ. Technol. 2017,
2, 224–229. [CrossRef]
33. Setiawan, A.D.; Shaddam Muzaki, M.; PDewi, M.; Rahman, I. A Conceptual System Dynamics Model of Geothermal Development
in Indonesia. In Proceedings of the 2020 The 6th International Conference on Industrial and Business Engineerin, Macau, Macao,
27–29 September 2020; pp. 118–121.
34. Glass, G.V. Primary, Secondary, and Meta-Analysis of Research. Educ. Res. 1976, 5, 3–8. [CrossRef]
35. Kvale, S. Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1996; p. 326.
36. Gill, P.; Stewart, K.; Treasure, E.; Chadwick, B. Methods of data collection in qualitative research: Interviews and focus groups.
Br. Dent. J. 2008, 204, 291–295. [CrossRef]
37. Miles, M.B.; Huberman, A.M. Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded Sourcebook; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1994; p. 352.
38. Galanis, P. Methods of data collection in qualitative research. Arch. Hell. Med. 2018, 25, 268–277.
39. Dearnley, C. A reflection on the use of semi-structured interviews. Nurse Res. 2005, 13, 19–28. [CrossRef]
40. Govindan, R.; Al-Ansari, T. Computational decision framework for enhancing resilience of the energy, water and food nexus in
risky environments. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 112, 653–668. [CrossRef]
41. Sterman, J.D. System Dynamics Modeling: Tools for Learning in a Complex World. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2001, 43, 8–25. [CrossRef]
42. Vitanov, V.; Tjahjono, B.; Marghalany, I. A decision support tool to facilitate the design of cellular manufacturing layouts. Comput.
Ind. Eng. 2007, 52, 380–403. [CrossRef]
43. Randers, J. Elements of the System Dynamics Method; Pegasus Communications: Waltham, MA, USA, 1980.
44. Prihandito, D.T. Financial Feasibility and Fiscal Policy Analysis toward Geothermal Power Plant Project in Indonesia through
Financial Modeling (Case Study: Field XYZ). Undergraduate Thesis, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia,
2021. Available online: https://repository.its.ac.id/88542/ (accessed on 10 April 2022).
45. Ratio, M.; Gabo-Ratio, J.A.; Tabios-Hillebrecht, A. The Philippine Experience in Geothermal Energy Development. In Geothermal
Energy and Society; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 217–238.
46. Kelly, G. History and potential of renewable energy development in New Zealand. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 2501–2509.
[CrossRef]
47. Ragnarsson, Á. Utilization of geothermal energy in Iceland. In Proceedings of the International Geothermal Conference IGC-2003,
Debrecen, Hungary, 30–31 October 2008; pp. 39–45.
48. Tester, J.W.; Beckers, K.F.; Hawkins, A.J.; Lukawski, M.Z. The evolving role of geothermal energy for decarbonizing the United
States. Energy Environ. Sci. 2021, 14, 6211–6241. [CrossRef]
49. Chamorro, C.R.; Mondéjar, M.E.; Ramos, R.; Segovia, J.J.; Martín, M.C.; Villamañán, M.A. World geothermal power production
status: Energy, environmental and economic study of high enthalpy technologies. Energy 2012, 42, 10–18. [CrossRef]