Issue

Vol. 5 No. 2 (2021): NOVEMBER

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Should drill or shouldn’t drill? Urban and rural dwellers’ acceptance of geothermal power plant in Mount Slamet protection forest, Indonesia

https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v5i2.13400
Dhifa Qorizki
Forest Management Department, Faculty of Forestry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Dwiko B. Permadi
Forest Management Department, Faculty of Forestry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9975-9468
Teguh Yuwono
Forest Management Department, Faculty of Forestry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Rohman Rohman
Forest Management Department, Faculty of Forestry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Corresponding Author(s) : Dwiko B. Permadi

Dwikopermadi@yahoo.com

Forest and Society, Vol. 5 No. 2 (2021): NOVEMBER

Abstract

Geothermal is one of the new renewable energy, which is more environmentally friendly than the existing fossil energy and has great potential to become an alternative source of energy in the future. However, the level of social acceptance of geothermal power plants operating in forest areas has not been widely studied. This study aims to reveal the social acceptance of affected residents toward the exploration of Baturaden geothermal power plant, operating in the protection forest area of ​​Mount Slamet. The survey was conducted online  to indirectly affected residents living mostly in Banyumas urban areas, while the offline face-to-face survey was administered to the directly affected residents in Sambirata and Karang Tengah villages. A total of 286 samples were analyzed. It was found that the majority of respondents preferred not to continue the establishment of the geothermal power plant, but both rural and urban dwellers have distinctive responses and reasonings. The rural tended to have stronger rejection compared to the urban residents. The acceptance of the project in both groups combined was motivated mainly by the prospect of electricity from more environmentally friendly energy sources and compliance to government policy. Those who refused tend to see from the negative impacts on the disruptions of the daily livelihood in rural areas and environmental damages. Three attitude factors significantly affect the continuation of drilling operation of GPP, namely: economic prospects of geothermal utilization in protection forests, technological optimism to migate the engative impacts, and perceived environmental concerns. To increase the social acceptance, it is suggested that policy makers and energy industry players should integrate the mitigation measures by using more proper technology within the project budget and act harmoniously to increase public awareness of the use of renewable and cleaner energy as well as pay attention to the health, welfare and culture of the local community

Keywords

Social acceptance Renewable energy Strategic environmental assessment Logistic regression Forest utilization policy
Qorizki, D. ., Permadi, D. B., Yuwono, T. ., & Rohman, R. (2021). Should drill or shouldn’t drill? Urban and rural dwellers’ acceptance of geothermal power plant in Mount Slamet protection forest, Indonesia. Forest and Society, 5(2), 575-590. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v5i2.13400
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Ahmad, A., Rashid, M., Omar, A.N., Alam, S.S. (2014). Perceptions on Renewable Energy Use in Malaysia: Mediating Role of Attitude. Jurnal Pengurusan 41, 123 – 131.
  2. Cataldi, R. (1999). Social acceptance: a sine qua non for geothermal development in the 21st century. Bulletin d'Hydrogiologie, 17, 467-476.
  3. Cataldi, R. (2001). Social acceptance of geothermal projects: problems and costs. In Prociding European Summer School on Geothermal Energy Applications. Oradea/RO, 343-351.
  4. Dear, M. (1992). Understanding and overcoming the NIMBY syndrome. Journal of the American planning association, 58(3), 288-300. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369208975808
  5. de Jesus, A. C. (2016). Environmental benefits and challenges associated with geothermal power generation. In DiPippo, R. (Ed.) Geothermal Power Generation (pp. 477-498). Woodhead Publishing.https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100337-4.00017-6.
  6. Dowd, A. M., Boughen, N., Ashworth, P., & Carr-Cornish, S. (2011). Geothermal technology in Australia: Investigating social acceptance. Energy Policy, 39(10), 6301-6307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.07.029
  7. Gizawi, A. S., Ritohardoyo, S., & Haryono, E. H. (2017). Kajian ekologi bentanglahan dan persepsi masyarakat terhadap rencana eksplorasi panas bumi. Majalah Geografi Indonesia, 31(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.22146/mgi.24223
  8. Hoover, W. S., Girmansyah, D., Wiriadinata, H., & Hunter, J. M. (2009). Exploration of High elevation liana colonies on Mt. Slamet, Central Java, Indonesia. Reinwardtia, 13(1), 45-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.14203/reinwardtia.v13i1.433
  9. Hymans, J. E., & Uchikoshi, F. (2021). To drill or not to drill: determinants of geothermal energy project siting in Japan. Environmental Politics, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2021.1918493
  10. Kalima, T. (2007). Keragaman jenis dan populasi flora pohon di hutan lindung Gunung Slamet, Baturraden, Jawa Tengah. Jurnal Penelitian Hutan dan Konservasi Alam, 4(2), 151-160. https://doi.org/10.20886/jphka.2007.4.2.151-160
  11. Karytsas, S., & Polyzou, O. (2021). Social acceptance of geothermal power plants. In C. O. Colpan, M. A. Ezan, & O. Kizilkan (Eds.) Thermodynamic Analysis and Optimization of Geothermal Power Plants (pp. 65-79). Elsevier.
  12. Kępińska, B., and Kasztelewicz, A. 2015. Public Perception of Geothermal Energy in Selected European Countries. In Proceedings World Geothermal Congress, Melbourne, Australia (19-25 April 2015).
  13. Kubota, H., Hondo, H., Hienuki, S., & Kaieda, H. (2013). Determining barriers to developing geothermal power generation in Japan: societal acceptance by stakeholders involved in hot springs. Energy Policy, 61, 1079-1087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.084
  14. Kusuma, Y.W.C., Astuti, I.P. (2009). Population and Microhabitat Characteristic of Homalomena bellula Schott in Mount Slamet, Central Java, Indonesia. Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity, 10(4), 201-205. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d100407
  15. Latifah, M., dan Gusmayanti, E. (2012). Optimalisasi Pemanfataan Panas Bumi sebagai Sumber Energi Pembangkit Listrik untuk Mencapai Keamanan Energi. The 2012 ASC Paper Competition Participants. Universitas Indonesia.
  16. Liu, H., Wang, H., Gou, Y., & Li, M. (2018). Investigation on social acceptance of the geothermal energy utilization in China. Geothermal Resources Council Transactions, 42, 812-824.
  17. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M., Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook (3rd Edition). SAGE Publication, Inc.
  18. Ministry of Environment (MOE). (2008). Pertimbangan-pertimbangan dalam Penerapan Kajian Lingkungan Hidup Strategis untuk Kebijakan, Rencana dan Program Penataan Ruang. Kementerian Lingkungan.
  19. Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MOEF). (2015). Rencana Strategis Direktorat Pemanfaatan Jasa Lingkungan Hutan Konservasi Tahun 2015-2019. Direktorat Jenderal Konservasi Sumberdaya Alam dan Ekosistem. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan.
  20. Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (MEMR). (2015). Rencana Strategis Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral 2015 – 2019. Kementerian Energi dan Sumberdaya Mineral.
  21. Meijaard, E., Dennis, R. A., Saputra, B. K., Draugelis, G. J., Qadir, M. C. A., & Garnier, S. (2019). Rapid environmental and social assessment of geothermal power development in conservation forest areas of Indonesia. PROFOR, The World Bank.
  22. Payera, S. V. (2018). Understanding social acceptance of geothermal energy: Case study for Araucanía region, Chile. Geothermics, 72, 138-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geothermics.2017.10.014
  23. Reith, S., Kölbel, T., Schlagermann, P., Pellizzone, A., & Allansdottir, A. (2013). Public acceptance of geothermal electricity production (Deliverable n° 4.4 Report on public acceptance). GeoElec. http://www.geoelec.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/D-4.4-GEOELEC-report-on-public-acceptance.pdf
  24. Romanach, L., Carr-Cornish, S., & Muriuki, G. (2015). Societal acceptance of an emerging energy technology: How is geothermal energy portrayed in Australian media?. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 42, 1143-1150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.088
  25. Setiawan, S. (2012). Energi panas bumi dalam kerangka MP3EI: Analisis terhadap prospek, kendala, dan dukungan kebijakan. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Pembangunan, 20(1), 1-28.
  26. Setiawan, A. R. I. F., Djuwantoko, A. W., Bintari, Y. W. C., Kusuma, S. P., & MA, I. (2007). Populasi dan Distribusi Rekrekan (Presbytis fredericae) di Lereng Selatan Gunung Slamet Jawa Tengah. Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity, 8(4), 305-308. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d080412
  27. Simon, H. (2000). Pengelolaan Hutan Bersama Rakyat. Bigraf Publishing.
  28. Suara Merdeka. 2017. Perubahan Hutan Lindung di Gunung Slamet Picu Banjir. Suara Merdeka. https://www.suaramerdeka.com/smcetak/baca/45087/perubahan-hutan-lindung-di-gunung-slamet-picu-banjir
  29. Tampubolon, B.I. (2015). Analisis Kebijakan Pemanfaatan Energi Panas Bumi sebagai Alternatif Pembangkit Listrik (Master Thesis). Institut Pertanian Bogor.
  30. Widhiono, I. (2015). Diversity of butterflies in four different forest types in Mount Slamet, Central Java, Indonesia. Biodiversitas Journal of Biological Diversity, 16(2), 196-204. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d160215
Read More

Author Biography

Dwiko B. Permadi, Forest Management Department, Faculty of Forestry, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Scopus Author ID: 54913753600
Download this PDF file
PDF