<![CDATA[This study evaluates which financing conditions make battery-electric buses financially feasible relative to a diesel comparator on Medan BRT Corridor 5, Lapangan Merdeka-Tembung. Unlike studies that report a single technology or total-cost ranking, the analysis compares three operator financing architectures—full CAPEX+OPEX responsibility, public absorption of CAPEX, and Buy the Service—while jointly testing passenger demand, discount rate, electricity price, and carbon valuation. A 12-year quantitative comparative case study uses eight-bus corridor operating assumptions, 12 direction-period peak passenger-count observations collected on three working days in April 2026, and annual operator passenger data for April 2025-March 2026. NPV, IRR, Payback Period, and scenario sensitivity are evaluated from the operator perspective. The electric alternative requires more than twice the initial capital but has about 21% lower annual OPEX. Under full CAPEX+OPEX responsibility, neither technology is financially feasible at the base assumptions; after CAPEX is removed from operator cash flow, the reported electric-bus case becomes feasible, and under Buy the Service both alternatives are feasible. Across the tested ranges, load factor shifts the feasibility boundary more strongly than electricity-price variation, while the study-level carbon-value scenario is too small to reverse the base decision. The findings show that Corridor 5 electrification is constrained primarily by financing architecture and sustained demand rather than by electric operating efficiency. Policy should therefore combine capital support or performance-based service payments with measures that sustain utilization. ]]>
Copyrights © 2026
