The long-term strategy of Indonesia's energy resources mix policy for renewable energy supply is targeted to achieve 23 % in 2025. This is due to the increase of population growth and the growing demands of electricity consumption which is estimated to be around 2,500 kwh /capita in 2025. Unfortunately, the renewable energy used in 2016 was only 10% of the total energy production. For this reason, Indonesia plans to convert from non-renewable to renewable energy. This is also in line with Indonesia's commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emission around 29 % in 2030 as agreed in Paris Agreement (COP 21). Indonesia has several resources of renewable energy. This study aims to determine and to select the appropriate renewable energy power plant for Indonesia's condition and developed criteria of: 1) Economic; 2) Technical; 3) Environmental; and 4) Social. The Methodology used is Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) consisting of Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) as the main methodology, and supported by others: MACC, Pairwise Comparison, and SMART. The result shows that the rank of choices is: 1) Hydro; 2) Biomass; 3) Geothermal; 4) Micro-hydro; 5) Solar PV; and 6) Wind. Therefore, this study can be useful for the government to formulate long term energy strategy effectively and efficiency.

No abstract

No abstract

Food waste represents a potential source to produce value-added materials replacing the use of virgin ones. However, the use of food waste as feedstock in biorefineries is still at an early stage of development and studies assessing its economic viability at large scale are lacking in the literature. This paper presents a techno-economic and profitability analysis of four food waste biorefineries that use wastes from tomato, potato, orange, and olive processing as feedstock. The study includes the assessment of potentially available quantities of those waste flows in Europe. Due to the low technology readiness level of this kind of biorefineries, a screening methodology to estimate the investment and manufacturing costs as well as two profitability ratios (the return on investment and the payback time) was adopted. Results show that not all the waste feedstocks have the same potential. The most profitable options are those related to implementing fewer plants, namely concentrating the production and capitalising on economies of scale while being at risk of increasing externalities, e.g. due to logistics of the feedstocks.

HighlightsThe waste hierarchy is not enough for prioritizing food waste prevention measures.The methodology proposed prioritizes measures using LCA and mathematical programming.The methodology identifies quick wins – actions with low cost and high impact avoided.The relevance of the weighting set used in the prioritization is limited.Targets for food waste prevention must be set at the level of environmental impact.