Whenever Indonesia discusses its energy future, we almost always\nbegin with numbers. How many gigawatts of power plants will be built?\nHow many megawatts of renewable energy will be added? How much\ngeneration capacity is required to meet growing electricity demand?<\/p>\n
What are the targets for solar, wind, geothermal, or hydropower\ncapacity over the next ten per cent years? These figures are important,\nas without sufficient capacity, it is impossible for a country to run\nits economy.<\/p>\n
However, there is a more fundamental issue. Megawatts only measure\nenergy capacity, not the value created by that energy. A country can\npossess large generation capacity but still have an energy system that\nis expensive, unreliable, or unable to support industrialisation.\nConversely, a country with an appropriately designed energy system can\nuse every unit of energy to generate far greater economic\nproductivity.<\/p>\n
Therefore, it may be time for Indonesia to stop viewing energy\nprimarily as a question of how many megawatts we possess, and start\nasking much more important questions: how much prosperity, productivity,\nand economic strength can we create from each of those megawatts?<\/p>\n
Capacity-based thinking is actually very easy to understand. Energy\nis a sector that requires massive investment, and its developmental\nresults can be clearly measured. The government can state that\ngeneration capacity has increased by a certain number of gigawatts,\ntransmission networks have expanded by a certain number of kilometres,\nor the electrification ratio has reached a specific level.<\/p>\n
All of these are important indicators. However, these indicators only\nexplain the input side of the energy system. They do not explain whether\nthat energy is available at the time and location required by industry,\nwhether the price is competitive, whether the quality of electricity is\nsufficient for advanced manufacturing, or whether the additional\ncapacity actually creates new economic activity. In a modern economy,\nenergy is not the end goal. Energy is an input for something far\ngreater.<\/p>\n
The history of the Industrial Revolution provides an illustration of\nthis difference. When humans discovered how to utilise coal on a large\nscale, the change that occurred was not merely an increase in the amount\nof available energy. That energy transformed human production\ncapabilities. Steam engines allowed factories to produce goods in\nquantities previously impossible. Railways accelerated the mobility of\ngoods and people. The steel industry flourished. Cities grew. Trade\nincreased. Energy became productivity, and productivity became economic\ngrowth. What made coal so important was not just its energy content, but\nthe human ability to transform that energy into economic output. In\nother words, the value of energy does not stop at the unit of energy\nproduced. Its value emerges from what humans can do with that\nenergy.<\/p>\n
The same principle applies to Indonesia today. When we build power\nplants, the first question must indeed be how much capacity is needed.\nBut the second question must be more important: what will that capacity\nbe used for? Will it strengthen existing industries? Will it open new\nindustrial zones? Will it attract data centres and computing hubs?<\/p>\n
Will it develop advanced manufacturing? Will it support transport\nelectrification? Will it produce hydrogen or value-added chemical\nproducts? Will it increase the productivity of small and medium\nenterprises? If these questions are not part of energy planning, we risk\nbuilding electrical capacity without maximising its economic\ncapacity.<\/p>\n
This is where the concept of energy productivity becomes increasingly\nimportant. In a simple economy, we tend to measure energy from the\nconsumption side: how much electricity is used, how much fuel is\nconsumed, and how much energy is produced.<\/p>\n
However, developed nations increasingly need to look at the\nrelationship between energy and output. How much economic value is\ngenerated from each unit of energy? How many jobs are created? How much\ninvestment flows in? How much export is generated? How much does\nindustrial productivity increase? Through this lens, energy is no longer\ntreated as a passive commodity, but as a productive asset.<\/p>\n
This perspective is becoming more vital as the global economic\nstructure changes. The world no longer just needs energy to run\nconventional factories. Artificial intelligence, cloud computing, data\ncentres, electric vehicles, robotics, precision manufacturing, and\nvarious new technologies require large amounts of electricity alongside\nhigh-quality supply.<\/p>\n
Data centres, for example, do not just need large amounts of\nelectricity. They require electricity that is consistently available, of\nhigh quality, and can be projected over the long term. The semiconductor\nindustry is even more sensitive to power disruptions. For such\nindustries, a single supply disruption can have an economic cost far\ngreater than the value of the electricity lost during that\ndisruption.<\/p>\n
Therefore, when Indonesia wants to attract future investment, it is\nnot enough to say that we have additional generation capacity. Investors\ndo not come simply because a country has many megawatts. They come when\nenergy is available in the right place, at the right time, at a\ncompetitive price, and with a reliable level of dependability. This is\nthe difference between installed capacity and economic capacity. The\nformer speaks to power generation. The latter speaks to\u2026<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesia-must-stop-thinking-in-megawatt-units-1789599164", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }