Sumba Iconic Island是一項由印尼政府能源與礦產部門執行的計畫，目標在於藉由再生能源，發展出最適合實行的農村電氣化模型。計畫在現階段已展現出成效，同時，對於不同再生能源的選擇及應用也需要更進一步的研究及討論。本研究將評估目前和未來的用電需求、了解再生能源技術的潛在發展能力，進而找出最佳的成本效益選擇，希望以地方可獲得的資源條件來供應地方的電力需求。另外，在研究方法上，本研究對於能夠滿足未來能源需求的不同再生能源，以循序漸進、整合供需分析的方式進行比較。針對未來能源需求的預測，本研究主要以人口成長、經濟發展、生產所需電力(Productive Use of Electricity, PUE)作為推算的基礎。接著，有關再生能源的資源利用，也會根據地方的區域特色和生產電力的科技條件限制進行評估。最後，以電力平準成本(Levelized Cost of Electricity, LCOE)為基準比較各項再生能源的選擇。 電力的需求主要可以分成三個主要類別：家庭用電、公共設施用電以及生產用電(PUE)。估計在2025年，總用電需求會成長三倍，到達1.9 GWh/年，其中超過80%為家庭用電需求。若從估算電力生產來看再生能源的科技潛力，太陽光電有最大的可用度，每年7755 GWh，其次為風力發電537 GWh/年，再者為小型水力發電，2.56 GWh/年。然而，針對每個地點以不同的再生能源科技進行成本比較，發現成本的變化範圍極大。太陽光電為最常被選擇的技術，因為發電量較為平均，每個地方產出的電量差異不大，也具有較低的投資和維護成本。小型水力發電相較之下，雖然可用度不高，但是卻有絕對的最低電力平準成本(LCOE)($0.39/kWh)。風力發電技術的地點選擇，多半考慮最適合風力發電的地區或是太陽光電與小型水力發電不可行的地區。因此，若從成本的面向來評估，在考慮其他再生能源技術以前，印尼農村地區的電氣化應以小型水力發電發展為優先考量。 ;Sumba Iconic Island is an initiative by Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, Indonesia to develop best practice rural electrification model using renewable energy (RE). Progress has already been made and it requires further study on different RE options. This study aims to assess current and projected electricity demand, identify RE technical potential and to find the most cost-effective configuration to meet electricity demand using locally available resources. This study was conducted using consecutive order and integrated supply-demand analysis by comparing available RE solutions to fully supply projected electricity demand. Electricity demand was projected based on population growth, economic development and emergence of productive use of electricity (PUE). Then, renewable energy resources were assessed based on climatic and local topographic characteristics which gave an estimate of electricity production. Finally, each RE options were compared in the basis of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE). The electricity demand was divided into three major categories: household, public infrastructures and PUE. The total electricity demand is projected to triple to 1.9 GWh/year in 2025, with more than 80% from household demand. RE technical potential was calculated with estimated electricity generation for Photovoltaic (PV) is the largest among three RE options available (7755 GWh/year), followed by wind energy (537 GWh/year) and MHPP (2.56 GWh/year). However, cost comparison using different RE technology on each site suggest wide range of cost spectrum. PV technology is the mostly chosen technology because of its uniform output and low initial and recurring cost compared to other RE technology. MHPP comes after PV because of limited availability but it offers significantly low LCOE ($0.39/kWh). Wind solution was only chosen on windy site where suitable site for PV is far and MHPP site is unavailable. This concludes that rural electrification should prioritize MHPP if it is available before considering other RE technologies because it offers least-cost solution.
