Feasibility Evaluation of Energy Source Selection for Aluminum Ingot Smelter Industry with 1 Million TPY Capacity in Sukamara Regency, Central Kalimantan Using Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) Method and Monte Carlo Simulation Sensitivity Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37577/sainteks.v8i02.1145Keywords:
Aluminum Smelter; Energy Mix; Simple Additive Weighting; Monte Carlo Simulation; LCOE; MCDM; Feasibility StudyAbstract
This study evaluates the feasibility of energy source selection for an aluminum ingot smelter with a capacity of 1 million tons per year (TPY) in Sukamara Regency, Central Kalimantan, using the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) multi-criteria decision-making method integrated with Monte Carlo Simulation sensitivity analysis. Five energy source alternatives are evaluated: Coal Steam Power Plant (PLTU), Natural Gas Combined Cycle (PLTG-CC), Run-of-River Hydropower (PLTA RoR), Solar PV Utility Scale with Battery Energy Storage System (PLTS+BESS), and a Hybrid Coal-Solar combination. Six evaluation criteria are applied: Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE), supply reliability, carbon emission intensity, CAPEX investment, local energy potential suitability, and regulatory compliance with the National Energy Mix (Rencana Umum Energi Nasional/RUEN). Expert weighting was conducted through Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) involving 12 experts from the energy, industry, and government sectors. SAW calculation results show that PLTU Coal ranks first with a normalized score of 0.847 for short-term cost economy, followed by Hybrid Coal-Solar (0.763), PLTG-CC (0.689), and PLTS+BESS (0.534) among the alternatives able to independently meet the smelter's power demand. PLTA RoR (Run-of-River Hydropower) attains the highest technical SAW score (0.942), but because its 800 MW installed capacity cannot cover the 1,800 MW demand on its own, it is excluded from this standalone ranking and instead evaluated as a component of an integrated energy mix. However, Monte Carlo Simulation with 10,000 iterations on LCOE uncertainty variables (±15%), carbon price (USD 2–70/ton CO?), and supply reliability (±10%) shifts the ranking significantly: PLTS+BESS rises to the highest composite robustness score at the 95th percentile. At a carbon price of USD 50/ton, the probability of PLTU maintaining top ranking drops to 34%, while PLTS+BESS achieves 61% probability as the optimal alternative. These findings serve as a quantitative basis for the Feasibility Study (FS) of the Aluminum Ingot Smelter in Sukamara, Central Kalimantan, particularly for the energy chapter and ESG-aligned investment framework.
Downloads
References
Afshari, A., Mojahed, M., & Yusuff, R. (2010). Simple Additive Weighting Approach to Personnel Selection Problem. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 1, 511–515. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIMT.2010.V1.89
Boudreau, P., Johnson, M., & Bergthorson, J. M. (2024). Techno-economic assessment of aluminum as a clean energy carrier to decarbonize remote industries Electronic supplementary information (ESI). Energy Advances, 3(8), 1919–1931. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1039/d4ya00151f
Brans, J.-P., & De Smet, Y. (2016). PROMETHEE methods (Vol. 233, pp. 187–219). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3094-4_6
Darvazeh, S. S., MansooriMooseloo, F., & Acero-López, A. E. (2026). Chapter 49 - SAW: Simple additive weighting for multi-attribute decision-making. In G. Haseli, M. Deveci, & M. Hajiaghaei-Keshteli (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Multi-Attribute Decision Making (MADM) (pp. 683–700). Morgan Kaufmann. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-33275-3.00016-6
ESDM. (2020). rencana strategis kesdm 2020-2024.
ESDM. (2024). Indonesia Minerals Yearsbook 2024.
Helton, J. C., & Davis, F. J. (2003). Latin hypercube sampling and the propagation of uncertainty in analyses of complex systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 81(1), 23–69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(03)00058-9
International Energy Agency. (2023). World Energy Outlook 2023. www.iea.org/terms
Kurniawan, N. I., Winanti, P. S., & Cahyati, D. D. (2025). Recarbonization Through Decarbonization: Nickel Extraction and the Deepening of Fossil Fuel Dependence in Indonesia. Global Environmental Politics, 25(3), 118–138. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep.a.12
Msumange, D. A., Jampaiah, D., Tardio, J., Nilsson, M., Arandiyan, H., & Bhargava, S. K. (2026). A Review of Nickel and Cobalt from Laterite Ores: Toward Sustainable Extraction Pathways for the Battery Industry. In Journal of Sustainable Metallurgy (Vol. 12, Number 2, pp. 1038–1069). Springer Science and Business Media Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40831-026-01439-6
Ogunniran, O., Babatunde, O., Akintayo, B., Adisa, K., Ighravwe, D., Ogbemhe, J., & Olanrewaju, O. A. (2025). Risk-Based Optimization of Renewable Energy Investment Portfolios: A Multi-Stage Stochastic Approach to Address Uncertainty. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 15(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/app15052346
PERPRES NO.22. (2017). Lampiran II Perpres Nomor 22 Tahun 2017.
Promentilla, M. A., Janairo, J. i, Yu, D., Pausta, C., Beltran, A., Orbecido, A., Tapia, J. F., Aviso, K., & Tan, R. (2018). A stochastic fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making model for optimal selection of clean technologies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.183
Saaty, R. W. (1987). The analytic hierarchy process—what it is and how it is used. Mathematical Modelling, 9(3), 161–176. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8
Sáez-Guinoa, J., Garcia Franco, E., Llera-Sastresa, E., & Romeo, L. (2023). The effects of energy consumption of alumina production in the environmental impacts using life cycle assessment. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 29, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-023-02257-8
Sahabuddin, Md., & Khan, I. (2021). Multi-criteria decision analysis methods for energy sector’s sustainability assessment: Robustness analysis through criteria weight change. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 47, 101380. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101380
Shao, M., Han, Z., Sun, J., Xiao, C., Zhang, S., & Zhao, Y. (2020). A review of multi-criteria decision making applications for renewable energy site selection. Renewable Energy, 157, 377–403. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.04.137
Sitorus, F., & Brito-Parada, P. (2022). The selection of renewable energy technologies using a hybrid subjective and objective multiple criteria decision making method. Expert Systems with Applications, 206, 117839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.117839
Vassiliadou, V., Peppas, A., & Taxiarchou, M. (2022). A Mathematical and Software Tool to Estimate the Cell Voltage Distribution and Energy Consumption in Aluminium Electrolysis Cells. Materials Research Society Symposia Proceedings. Materials Research Society, 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/materproc2021005116
Wang, C.-N., Kao, J.-C., Wang, Y.-H., Van Thanh, N., Nguyen, V. T., & Syed, T. H. (2021). A Multicriteria Decision-Making Model for the Selection of Suitable Renewable Energy Sources. Mathematics, 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9121318
