Energy policy and alternative energy in Malaysia: Issues and challenges for sustainable growth

Incineration of municipal solid waste in Malaysia: Salient issues, policies and waste-to-energy initiatives

“…This proposed 1500-ton incinerator project, if built, will become one of the biggest incinerators in Asia. It was to be built by a consortium consisting of an overseas contractor and a local 9 industrial partner and the proposed site was located near a university and water catchment area as well as surrounded by vegetable farms, palm oil and fruit plantations [25]. Due to a highly publicized public outcry as well as high capital expenditure (approximately USD400 million) and maintenance costs, it was subsequently scrapped.…”

“…A premier policy mechanism called Small Renewable Energy Power (SREP) program was implemented by the national government to promote smallscale renewable electricity in Malaysia from 2001 to 2010 [25,26]. One of SREP's main objectives was to promote Malaysia's Fifth Fuel Policy of diversifying from oil, gas, coal, and conventional hydroelectricity into alternative renewable energy sources such as biomass, biogas, municipal solid waste, solar, and mini-hydroelectricity and achieving 5 % of national electricity supply from renewable resources by 2005 [27].…”

“…In the case of the former, approximately 3,600 m 3 /hr of landfill gas (60% methane) is captured to generate power through a 1-MW gas engine while unused methane is destroyed using flares [27]. For the Air Hitam sanitary landfill, its gas contains about 55% methane and its generated 2 MW energy is transported to the national grid [25].…”

Cost Effective Options for Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Reduction in the Power Sector for Developing Economies — A Case Study in Sabah, Malaysia

“…They do not involve power generating technologies. h The fuel price is computed using subsidised gas price of RM 10.70 per mmbtu [37] in Malaysia and the corresponding plant efficiency for the respective technology; i Additional USD 520 per kW based on previous research [17] is added to the capital cost of a standard combined cycle gas plant of RM 6000 per kW; j The fuel cost is computed based on 2009 Indonesian coal price of USD 30.72 per ton for the coal grade of 4200 kCal/kg [38] and the corresponding plant efficiency of the technology; k Capital cost of PV includes installation of complete system [16] and assumed to reduce annually by 3.6% [39]; l Additional USD 1060 per kW based on previous research [17] is added to the capital cost of a conventional PCC coal plant of RM 6000 per kW; m Additional USD 316 per kW based on previous research [35] is added to the capital cost of a conventional PCC coal plant of RM 6000 per kW; n Conservative assumption of 10 years for mechanical and electrical equipments; o Additional capital cost invested to achieve the energy savings computed based on the MIEEIP findings [29,31,40], whereby an upgrade of RM 100.4 million resulting in annual energy saving of 2.583 million GJ; p Additional capital cost invested to achieve the energy savings computed based on: the LEO building results [32] line [6]; s The electricity purchased cost of RM 0.11 per kWh from Bakun hydropower plant [6] is input as the flexible O&M cost for LEAP modeling purpose, including 7.5% of transmission loss in the 500 km transmission line; t A foreign currency exchange rate of USD 1 = RM 3.50 applied for all above calculation; u All costs used in this paper are nominal current price…”

Integrating and ranking sustainability criteria for housing

“…Energy and atmospheric considerations are ranked as the second most important criterion. This is probably because of the amount of global investment in renewable power generation has been greatly increased relative to investment in fossil fuel energies since 2008 (Oh et al, 2010). The trigger for this change was probably the economic downturn in 2008.…”