Indonesian roadmap

and scenario to
achieve net zero
carbon in 2060

May 2022
Emissions in Indonesia may grow to 928 million tCO2e by 2060, in a
momentum case scenario

Emissions RES Oil and other Non-RES Gas Coal

Momentum case Capacity Emissions

denotes a least GW million tCO2e
cost scenario with
no carbon 400 928 1,000
emission target
350
and coal capacity
capped at ~50% 300
266
250 51
200 170
18 90
150 126
15 60
100 220 90
60 20 43
7 24 125
50 18 92
68
31 44
0 0
2020 30 40 50 2060

Source: Power Model 2

To optimize for carbon neutrality, PLN identifies 4 scenarios:
renewable-only, normal, accelerated and disruptive
PLN carbon neutral scenarios

Momentum case Renewable-only Normal Accelerated Disruptive

Scenarios High carbon baseline
Description Technology deployment based
on current cost progression
without carbon constraints;
coal mix kept at ~50%
Interconnection led
Current cost progression with
carbon constraints +
interconnections between
regions
CCUS led Interconnection & CCUS led Nuclear led
Current cost progression with Current cost progression with Current cost progression with
carbon constraints + CCS carbon constraints + CCS + carbon constraints + nuclear
interconnections between regions build starting 20401

Carbon neutral No zero carbon constraints by Zero carbon constraints by Zero carbon constraints by Zero carbon constraints Zero carbon constraints by
constraints 2060 2060 2060 by 2060 2060

New coal build Allow new coal build Do not allow new coal build Do not allow new coal build Do not allow new coal build Do not allow new coal build

Renewables Cost trajectory based on Cost trajectory based on Cost trajectory based on Cost trajectory based on Cost trajectory based on
team’s bottom-up validation team’s bottom-up validation team’s bottom-up validation team’s bottom-up validation team’s bottom-up validation

CFPP phase out Natural retirement Natural retirement for non- Natural retirement for non-CCS Natural retirement for non-CCS Natural retirement for non-
CCS ready CFPP ready CFPP ready CFPP CCS ready CFPP

CCS No CCS No CCS Allow CCS retrofit on existing Allow CCS retrofit on existing Allow CCS retrofit on existing
CFPP identified as CCS-ready CFPP identified as CCS-ready CFPP identified as CCS-
ready

Nuclear No nuclear build No nuclear build No nuclear build No nuclear build Nuclear allowed since 20401

Hydrogen/ No hydrogen/ ammonia co- Allow hydrogen/ammonia Allow hydrogen/ ammonia Allow hydrogen/ammonia Allow hydrogen/ ammonia
ammonia firing due to lack of co-firing co-firing co-firing co-firing
co-firing infrastructure

Interconnections Java to Sumatera >8GW Interconnections from Java to Sumatera ≤8GW interconnections from Java to Sumatera
other islands to Java allowed other islands to Java allowed

1. Following 2 GW nuclear power plant in Sumatera in 2040

3
To achieve net zero, disruptive scenario is the most economical
while accelerated scenario is the most optimal non-nuclear pathway
2060 overview
PLN carbon neutral scenarios Most optimal non-nuclear scenario
Renewable-only Accelerated
Momentum (Interconnection Normal (Interconnection Disruptive
(High Carbon) led) (CCUS led) + CCUS led) (Nuclear led) Remarks

Incremental
cost impact
– High Low

Generation 9% 15% H2 co-firing

26% 18%
share comparison 38% Nuclear
20% CCS
RES
Fossil Fuel
91% 85% 66%
58% 58% Negative emission offsets
remnants of unabated
fossil fuel generation

4% 8% 3%

Reasons for accelerated scenario as most optimal:

 Non nuclear
 Low cost
 Moderate CS requirement 4
USD 3 – 10 cents/kWh generation LCOE increase and USD 300 – 500
Bn incremental CAPEX are required to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060
2060 overview
PLN carbon neutral scenarios Most optimal non-nuclear scenario
Renewable-only Accelerated
Momentum (Interconnection Normal (Interconnection Disruptive
(High Carbon) led) (CCUS led) + CCUS led) (Nuclear led) Remarks

Incremental
cost impact – High
High Low
Renewable-only is
Generation LCOE, 6.2 15.9 10.0 9.4 8.9 most expensive,
USD cents/kWh primarily driven by
high H2 co-firing to
achieve carbon
neutrality
CAPEX (2020 – 2060), 268 771 581 614 616
USD bn Normal scenario is
more expensive than
accelerated due to
more regionalized
Incremental total cost - 868 522 462 408 capacity
(CAPEX+OPEX) vs Disruptive scenario
momentum case is least expensive as
(’31 – ’60), USD Bn nuclear replaces
some of the more
Avg. cost/ton CO2 expensive CCS and
- 62 37 33 29 RES
mitigated
(’31 – ’60), USD / ton

5
RES generation share increase are accompanied with greater BESS
and interconnection capacity need
Most optimal non-nuclear scenario NT-Java Kalimantan-Java Sumatera-Java
2060 overview
PLN carbon neutral scenarios
Renewable-only Accelerated
Momentum (Interconnection Normal (Interconnection Disruptive
(High Carbon) led) (CCUS led) + CCUS led) (Nuclear led) Remarks
RES generation
9% 85% 58% 66% 58%
share
446
RE capacity, GW
262 308 258

51

BESS avg. BESS duration &

1.2 7.5 5.1 3.8 4.6 capacity vary
duration, hours
across scenarios
with renewable-
BESS capacity, GW only requires
313
highest BESS
74 97 55
5
>8GW intercon.
31
Intercon capacity, capacity in
4 19 renewable-only
GW 16 3 scenario for
1 3 8 3
11 8 optimization
convergence

6
Allowance for greater interconnection and nuclear capacity reduces
reliance on CCS
2060 overview
PLN carbon neutral scenarios Most optimal non-nuclear scenario
Renewable-only Accelerated
Momentum (Interconnection Normal (Interconnection Disruptive
(High Carbon) led) (CCUS led) + CCUS led) (Nuclear led) Remarks
CCS generation
- - 38% 26% 20%
share

CCS capacity, GW 80
54 Gas CCS
48 45
26 20 Coal CCS
0 0 32 28 25

CO2 sequestration 457

367 310
(CCS), mtCO2 /year
0 0

7
Generation mix comparison in 2060
xx RE share, %
Wind Biomass (ST) CCS Gas retrofit Coal
xx CCS share, % Solar Biomass co-firing (CCS) CCS Gas
xx Nuclear share, % Hydro Nuclear CCS Coal retrofit
2060 generation mix comparison, % xx H2 cofiring share, % Geothermal Hydrogen co-firing Gas

1,338 TWh 1,351 TWh 1,344 TWh 1,351 TWh 1,344 TWh Key takeaways
4% 8% 9% 8%
2% 3% 12%  In renewable-only scenario, H2 co-firing
18% 16% 20% 16% is required to support generation need
31% not covered by RES + interconnection
23% 23%
24%  In normal scenario, allowance for CCS
6% 6% (38% generation share) reduces the
3% 6% 4%
27%
3% 3%
5%
3% need for H2 and RES relative to
72% 3% renewable-only.
2% 18%
6% 19% 10%
9% 7%
2%  In accelerated scenario, the greater
14%
16% 12%
interconnectivity reduces CCS reliance
15%
0% 0% 0% 4% 0%
7%
0% 3% relative to normal scenario.
Momentum Renewable-only Normal Accelerated Disruptive  In disruptive scenario, nuclear takes
9% 85% 58% 66% 58% 18% generation share, reducing reliance
on some CCS and RES that are more
- - 38% 26% 20% expensive
- - - - 18%
8
- 15% - - -
Capacity mix comparison in 2060
Wind Biomass (ST) CCS Coal retrofit
xx RE share, % Solar Nuclear Gas
xx CCS share, % Hydro CCS Gas retrofit Coal
2060 capacity mix comparison, % xx Nuclear share, % Geothermal CCS Gas

266 GW 524 GW 370 GW 413 GW 362 GW Key takeaways

11% 11% 11% 11%
15%  In renewable-only scenario, carbon
1% 3% neutrality in 2060 is achieved by
39% 39%
transitioning to RES and H2 co-firing in
43%
34% 55% unabated gas plants.
 In normal scenario, CCS capacity
16% 16% replaces H2 co-firing and some RES.
15%
3% 3%
2% 3% 2%  In accelerated scenario, the formation
14% 3%
47% 12% 5% 9% of NT- and Kalimantan-Java corridors
3% 2%
7% 5% reduces CCS capacity share by 9%
9% 7%
14% 11% relative to normal scenario.
6% 6%
Momentum Renewable-only Normal Accelerated Disruptive  In disruptive scenario, nuclear holds
9% capacity share, reducing the need
19% 85% 71% 75% 71% for the some of CCS and RES +
- - 22% 13% 12%
interconnection capacity that are more
expensive.
- - - - 9%
9
PLN roadmap to Net Zero Emission by 2060 in the accelerated
scenario is led by interconnection and CCUS

2022-30 2031-40 2041-50 2051-60

Fossil fuel 2030: 2040: 2055:

No new coal-, oil-, and unabated Oil-based power plants (End of Unabated coal-based power
gas-based power plants post- Life) EOL plants EOL
2030

RES 2030: 2040: 2050: 2060:

RES holds 29% capacity share RES holds 50% capacity share RES holds 67% capacity share RES holds 75% capacity share
(29 GW), dominated by hydro (94 GW), dominated by solar (204 GW), dominated by solar (308 GW), dominated by solar
and hydro and hydro and hydro

Intercon. 2035: 2045: 2055:

3.4 GW Java-Sumatera
interconnection corridor
formation
Java-Sumatera interconnection
corridor capacity increase to 8
GW
2050: 3.5 GW Java-Kalimantan
and 1.5 GW Java-Nusa Tenggara
interconnection corridor formation
Java-Kalimantan interconnection
corridor capacity increase to 8
GW
Java-Nusa Tenggara
interconnection corridor capacity
increase to 3 GW

CCS 2030: 2045: 2055:

CCS coal pilot at 1 GW capacity CCS coal ramps to 4 GW
2050:
CCS coal ramps to 10 GW
CCS coal ramps to 16 GW
First COD of CCS gas at 16 GW
2060:
CCS coal peaks at 29 GW
CCS gas peaks at 26 GW
10
 In accelerated scenario, the allowance of multiple interconnection
corridors reduces CCS reliance in Java by 2060
2060 overview Export Import Local demand/generation
≤ 8GW interconnection line
Kalimantan Sulawesi Transmission flow (net loss)

TWh 1,000 TWh 1,000 RES capacity, CCS capacity,

GW GW
500 500
109
182 176 176 Papua and Maluku
73 109
0 0 TWh 1,000
Demand Supply Demand Supply
107 GW 500
17 17
0
6 GW Demand Supply
24 GW
Sumatera 47 GW 2 GW

TWh 1,000 51 GW 3 GW
427
500 353 8 GW
74
353
0 8 GW
Demand Supply

80 GW 22 GW 0.4 GW
20 GW Nusa Tenggara
Java
TWh 1,000 TWh 1,000
651 651
500 150 500 16
501 32 48 32
0 0
Demand Supply Demand Supply
11
Capacity mix: in accelerated scenario, PLN could achieve carbon
neutrality through the addition of 308 GW RE and 54 GW CCS
xx RE gen. share, % xx Levelized cost, USD cents/kWh xx Emission intensity, kg CO2e/MWh xx Sequestered carbon,mtCO2e

RUPTL addition (oversupply) RES Oil and other Non-RES Gas CCUS Gas Coal CCUS Coal

Momentum case Accelerated scenario – Interconnection and CCS led

Capacity mix, 400 500
413
GW
266 400
300 305
51 300
200 170 308
126 90 188
18 200 204
90 15 60 99 94
100 60 20 43 100 60 14 26
18 24 92 125 66 77 46
31 44 68 31 18 41 27 29
0 0 15
2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060
14% 17% 10% 9% 9% 14% 27% 49% 66% 66%
6.3 6.1 6.2 6.4 6.2 6.3 6.8 7.1 8.1 9.4

Emissions1, 1,000 928 1,000

million tCO2e 97
800 681 800
600 496 71 600
352 51 831 330
400 400
220 37 610 220 35 200
200 29 445 200 100
273 266 94 6
176 176 106 94
0 0
2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060
0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 102 367
1. Scope 1 & 3 emissions

Source: Power Model 12

In accelerated scenario, Indonesian power capacity is expected to
be at 413 GW with USD 596 Bn CAPEX requirement …
RUPTL addition (oversupply) Nuclear RE CCS Gas CCS Coal Others

xx Storage capacity, GW xx Storage duration, hours xx CAPEX1, USD bn

Capacity by region
Indonesia capacity, GW Sumatera capacity, GW Kalimantan capacity, GW Sulawesi capacity, GW Papua + Maluku capacity, GW
413
133

98
107 58
305 308 50 50
81
30 34
188 11 21 35 15 47 19 51
17 4 7 24 3 7 24 3 3 4 4
1
9 3 11
6 15 13 3 3 7 3 4 2 7 9 6 2 4 3 8
11 10 1 5 2 1 2 1 3 3
204
94 2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060
99
9 0 26 - - 3.2 20.5 22.8 - - 0.4 5.5 9.9 - - 0.6 4.0 52.5 - - 0.0 0.4 0.7
60 26
7 28
93 92 - - 1.1 3.6 3.4 - - 1.1 2.0 4.5 - - 1.1 3.9 4.0 - - 1.1 4.2 4.0
53 59 51
193 87 96 11
2020 30 40 50 2060
Java capacity, GW N. Tenggara capacity, GW
- - 4.7 35.2 97.1
147
127
- - 1.4 3.5 3.8
96 80
596 61
58 35
40 6 4
13 18
By 2060, RE will dominate 4 61 60 45 2 4 13 21
36 36 1
Indonesia’s capacity mix at 75% 2 3 2 11 20
share 2020 30 40 50 2060
2020 30 40 50 2060

- - 0.0 1.4 5.8 - - 0.4 3.5 5.5

As demand center, Java will hold
the most capacity share at 36%, - - 1.2 1.1 1.1 - - 4.5 5.6 6.2
followed by Sumatera at 32% 185 25

1. Generation capacity and storage only (not including interconnection)

Source: Power Model 13

… with total USD 411 Bn CAPEX required to support renewable
capacity of 308 GW in Indonesia by 2060
Biomass Wind Offshore Wind Onshore Solar Hydro Geothermal

xx Storage capacity, GW xx Storage duration, hours xx CAPEX1, USD bn

RE capacity by region
Indonesia RE capacity, GW Sumatera RE capacity, GW Kalimantan RE capacity, GW Sulawesi RE capacity, GW Papua + Maluku RE capacity, GW
308 107
13
81 5 4
45 2 4
72 47 51
35 54 3 9
204 24 24 24
25 9 2 11 3 29
12 3 6 16 21 10 3 11 3 3
2 20 1 1 2
20 177 2 4 4 5 5 4 6 0 11 2 4 6 9 12 1 1
94 2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060
6
115
- - 3.2 20.5 22.8 - - 0.4 5.5 9.9 - - 0.6 4.0 52.5 - - 0.0 0.4 0.7
56
26 63 - - 1.1 3.6 3.4 - - 1.1 2.0 4.5 - - 1.1 3.9 4.0 - - 1.1 4.2 4.0
45
7 12 21
8 10 11 10 135 69 63 9
2020 30 40 50 2060
Java RE capacity, GW N. Tenggara RE capacity, GW
- - 4.7 35.2 97.1

- - 1.4 3.5 3.8 80

61 6
411 6 26
35 13
30 37 20
13 17 3 11
4 3 5
Indonesia RE capacity potentially 6 4 5 8 5 8 5 7 2 8 14
reaches to ~308 GW by 2060, 2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060
dominated by solar
- - 0.0 1.4 5.8 - - 0.4 3.5 5.5

Sumatera will hold the greatest - - 1.2 1.1 1.1 - - 4.5 5.6 6.2
share of RE capacity at 35%, 117 18
followed by Java at 26%
1. Generation capacity and storage only (not including interconnection)

Source: Power Model 14

Generation mix: in accelerated scenario, PLN can achieve carbon
neutrality through 66% RE and 26% CCS generation mix
xx RE gen. share, % xx Levelized cost, USD cents/kWh xx Emission intensity, kg CO2e/MWh xx Sequestered carbon,mtCO2e

RUPTL addition (oversupply) Wind Offshore Wind Onshore Solar Biomass Hydro Geothermal Oil and other Non-RES Hydrogen Gas Coal

Momentum case Accelerated scenario – Interconnection and CCS led

Generation mix, 1,500 1,338 1,500 1,351
TWh 28 117
976 244 984 264
1,000 1,000 105
698 38 699 173
178
83 71 99 328
500 291
463 127 20 969 500
463 243 77
18 51 709 291 61 51 82 86
23 59 500 272
58 242 269
180 294 180 283 186
0 0 116 63
2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060

14% 17% 10% 9% 9% 14% 27% 49% 66% 66%

6.3 6.1 6.2 6.4 6.2 6.3 6.8 7.1 8.1 9.4

Emissions1, 1,000 928 1,000

million tCO2e 97
800 681 800
600 496 71 600
352 51 831 330
400 400
220 37 38 610 220 25 200 100
200 29 445 200 29
273 266 94 6
176 176 106 94
0 0
2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060
0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 102 367
1. Scope 1 & 3 emissions

Source: Power Model 15

In accelerated scenario, total ~USD 18 Bn CAPEX will be required to
support ~19 GW of interconnections from Sumatera to Java by 2060
xx CAPEX, USD bn xx Capacity factor, %

Key takeaways
Interconnections grow to
~19 GW by 2060
To cater for the deficit in Java,
Java potential interconnections are
needed from Sumatera,
Kalimantan, and Nusa
Sumatera Kalimantan Nusa Tenggara Tenggara
Transmission 20 20 20
capacity, GW
10 8,0 8,0 10 8,0 10
3,4 3,5 3,0
1,5
0 0 0
2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060
3.0 10.3 4.5

Transmission 150 150 150

inflow, TWh 100 69 100 68 100
49
50 50 29 50 15
4 7
0 0 0
2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060 2020 30 40 50 2060
13% 70% 98% 96% 98% 54% 58%

16
Total 54 GW of CCS capacity will be required in
accelerated scenario
Ultra-supercritical Supercritical Subcritical Pilot project xx CAPEX, USD bn

40
Coal CCUS 28
30
retrofit1, GW
20
9 Key takeaways
9 6
10 1 1 3
4 2 13 28 GW of existing and
0
2020 30 40 50 2060 pipeline coal power plants
could potentially be
0.0 0.5 0.6 13.9 43.4
retrofitted with CCUS by
2060, with USC and SC starting
in 2050
Gas CCUS GW Retrofit New build
50 26
0 4 ~4 GW Gas CCUS retrofit
22
0 0 would come online by 2060,
2020 30 40 50 2060 followed with 22 GW new gas
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.6 CCUS build in 2060

CCUS offsets ~367 million

tCO2e from coal and gas
Total Pilot project Sequestered carbon
sequestered
generation by 2060
400 367
carbon, million
tCO2e 200 102
1 3
0
2020 30 40 50 2060

1. CCS retrofitablity has been assessed plant by plant during bottom-up validation

17
In accelerated scenario, remaining RES potential can theoretically
generate ~2,400 TWh annually but is concentrated in Maluku & Papua
2060 overview xx% % remaining potential Potential Capacity

Nusa Remaining Annual gen.

Sumatera Kalimantan Java Sulawesi Tenggara Maluku & Papua potential, GW equivalent, TWh
143 GW 170 GW 51 GW 60 GW 28 GW 115 GW
72 GW 24 GW 37 GW 29 GW 14 GW 1 GW
Solar 49% 86% 26% 52% 51% 99% 389 564

8 GW 11 GW 3 GW 5 GW 0 GW 12 GW
Hydro
8 GW 11 GW 3 GW 5 GW 0 GW 0 GW 21 84
Reservoir - 89% - - 99%
14 GW 19 GW 4 GW 7 GW 0 GW 12 GW
Hydro Run-of- 14 GW 19 GW 4 GW 7 GW 0 GW 2 GW 10 58
the-River - - - - 86%

0 GW 0 GW 0 GW 2 GW 0 GW 275 GW
0 GW 0 GW 0 GW 0 GW 0 GW 0 GW
- - - 83% - 100%
Wind offshore 277 1,255

5 GW 11 GW 55 GW 24 GW 23 GW 84 GW
Wind onshore 4 GW 0 GW 26 GW 9 GW 5 GW 0 GW
157 470
99% 53% 62% 78% 100%

4 GW 0 GW 5 GW 1 GW 0 GW 1 GW
Geothermal 4 GW 0 GW 5 GW 1 GW 0 GW 1 GW 0.1 0.4
- - - - - 9%
6 GW 6 GW 7 GW 0 GW 0 GW 0 GW
Biomass1 5 GW 3 GW 6 GW 0 GW 0 GW 0 GW 0.3 2
- - - - 99% 85%

Total = 2,432 TWh

1. Potential based on availability of sustainable land for biomass farming

Source: hydro & geothermal – Puslitbang PLN, wind onshore – RUEN, wind offshore – World Bank, solar and biomass – ESDM with team’s internal validation 18