Danang Noor Arifin
Research Centre for Geotechnology-LIPI

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

The Economic Assessment on Bottom Ash Utilizing as The Bio Coal Fuel Dyah Marganingrum; Chandra Irawan; Anggoro Tri Mursito; Lenny Marilyn Estiaty; Lina Nur Listyowati; Danang Noor Arifin; Hidawati
Jurnal Ekonomi dan Pembangunan Vol. 29 No. 1 (2021): Jurnal Ekonomi dan Pembangunan
Publisher : BRIN Publishing (Penerbit BRIN)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.14203/JEP.29.1.2021.27-40

Abstract

  Coal ash was included in Hazardous and Toxic Waste (LB3). It required manage seriously so it was not warm to environment and human’s health. LB3 management becomes an obligation for the industry which producing itself. This condition becomes a burden to industry itself due to the waste utilization project often regarded as the high-cost investment projects or less profitable. This study aims to conduct an economic assessment of pilot- scale projects in bottom ash utilizing to support the clean industry strategy. The study mixed coal bottom ash with biomass from municipalities solid waste (MSW), called bio-coal fuel (BCF). These raw materials were combined by a composition of 60%:40% weight (bottom ash: biomass) to be briquette by adding amylum as a binder. This study used the benefit-cost analysis approach to assess economic feasibility. Tree indicators used in this study were net benefit-cost ratio, payback period, and return on investment. These indicators provided the company policy to continue or stop this project. The finding study showed air emission test under emission standard and burning test did not disturb to boiler perform. Financial calculation showed that the company got a payback period and net benefit from ninth year. The company also achieved a net B/C ratio was more than one, and ROI was 1.09 times in ninth year. The other beneficiaries acquired by the company was included external costs, such as risks from commitment failure by third parties in coal waste management, costs rising risk of purchasing coal, and given a positive value for providing employment.