report of the impact assessment of the indonesia domestic biogas programme

0 Impact assessment of the BIRU programme - August 2016

Final Report

of the

Impact Assessment of the Indonesia Domestic

Biogas Programme (BIRU) on the Development of a

Market-based Biogas Sector

Prepared for:

Prepared by: Fred Marree Consultancy in cooperation

with YRE and Hivos

Date: 21 August 2016


Table of contents

Executive summary ........................................................................................ 3

1. Introduction, objectives and methodology ................................................. 4

1.1 Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 5

1.2 Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 5

2. Survey results from biodigester construction organisations and individual

masons and supervisors ................................................................................. 7

2.1 Type of organisation and relation to BIRU ............................................................................ 7

2.2 Number of BIRU model digesters constructed outside of BIRU programme support .............. 8

2.3 Planned number of BIRU model biodigesters ..................................................................... 10

2.4 Clients and underlying reasons for installing a biodigester.................................................. 11

2.5 Independent promotion of biogas ..................................................................................... 13

2.6 Biogas sector services ........................................................................................................ 13

2.7 Skills development of biogas constructors ......................................................................... 14

2.8 Appliance manufacturers .................................................................................................. 15

3. Quality inspections of BIRU model biodigesters constructed without BIRU

programme involvement ............................................................................... 16

3.1 General quality of the inspected biodigesters .................................................................... 16

3.2 Quality of the construction materials ................................................................................. 17

3.3 Quality of the biodigester inlet, dome and outlet ............................................................... 17

3.4 Reasons and benefits of having a biodigester ..................................................................... 18

3.5 Financing of the biodigester .............................................................................................. 18

3.6 Other information provided by users ................................................................................. 18

4. Government adoption of household biogas ............................................... 20

4.1 Identified government institutions active on biogas ........................................................... 20


4.2 Government policies and programmes on biogas and inclusion of BIRU standards .............. 21

4.3 Number of biodigesters constructed and size of the investment ......................................... 22

4.4 Future government investments in household biogas ........................................................ 23

5. Conclusions and recommendations ........................................................... 24

References .................................................................................................... 25

Annexes ........................................................................................................ 26


Executive summary

Strong signs of market forces and the development of an independent sector have been identified. Current and former CPOs and masons seem to find business opportunities in building household biodigesters outside of the BIRU programme. A few hundred current and former partners, masons and supervisors have been interviewed as well as government officials. 82 BIRU model digesters have been inspected to determine their quality. The impact assessment concluded that indeed a biogas sector is developing outside BIRU’s scope. This would not have been happened without BIRU kick-starting the market, by promoting biogas, training masons, grooming partners and advocacy to the government.

Mainly constructed since 2012, a minimum estimation of 6,060 BIRU model digesters have been reported, all constructed without the programme being involved in the financing, installation and post-construction phases. This means that for each BIRU digester 35% extra are constructed. The concentration of this market is on Java (75%). The respondents also reported to have constructed BIRU model biodigesters in provinces in Sumatra, and in Kalimantan, Jambi, North Sulawesi. These provinces were earlier identified as new potential areas for programme expansion.

It became clear from the assessment that the Government of Indonesia (GoI) has a huge impact on the development of a biogas sector. The GoI uses the National State Budget and the Special Allocation Funds (DAK), both administered by MEMR, to provide funding for biodigesters. While BIRU works closely with the government in applying DAK funds for biogas, 5,912 household digesters were constructed through these funds outside of BIRU’s scope. Since 2014, 10%-15% of the DAK funds must be used for biogas and specifically the BIRU model and standards (technical specifications guidelines) must be used. 3,051 household digesters were constructed through DAK outside of BIRU. The planned DAK 2017 funds is IDR 23 billion (EUR 1.57 million) for digester sizes from 4m3-6m3. The focus areas are Jambi, Kalimantan and Sulawesi.

The BIRU quality standards are not always used in digesters funded with the national APBN fund and the local APBD fund. However, MEMR applies the BIRU technical standards as a bidding requirement. For at least 2,861 biodigesters constructed during 2011-2015 the BIRU standard has been applied, without further involvement of the BIRU programme, but through BIRU certified masons.

The interviewed (ex-)CPOs and (ex-)masons confirmed that in over 50% of the cases, the government was the initiator of biogas construction. 97% of the constructors responded that they perform independent promotional activities, mainly networking and door-to-door advertising. Services they provided are mainly user and bioslurry trainings, but records were low. 5% indicated to have provided after sales services. Providing access to credit was also nearly absent and this did not relate to heavily subsidised digesters. This means almost 3 out 4 owners were able to finance their investment. Over 68% of the (ex-)CPOs perform independent skills development and training for staff, but contrasts exist between provinces. Out of the 50 individuals who have constructed biodigesters outside of BIRU, as much as 13 masons have trained 76 other individuals in BIRU model digester construction.

The overall quality of the 82 inspected BIRU model digesters in general is good and little technical problems were reported (5 digesters). Guarantees and after sales services were only given in a few cases to the owners. User and bioslurry trainings were provided to almost half of the biodigester owners. The strong role of the government becomes visible again as owners reported that the government convinced them in almost all cases to invest in a digester. Subsidies of 80%-90% were common in East Nusa Tenggara (NTT), West Nusa Tenggara (NTB) and Lampung. BIRU will have to work with the government in order to not have the market over-flooded with over-subsidised biodigesters. Overall, the need for energy was their main underlying reasoning to have a biodigester. This is in contrast with BIRU programme end users, who mention the reduction in household expenditures as main reason to invest. The user satisfaction rate was reported 80%.

BIRU needs to work even closer with the government in order to avoid distortion of market forces due to highly subsidised digesters as well as improve sector services to maintain and improve the quality.


1. Introduction, objectives and methodology

Since May 2009 Hivos is running the Indonesia Domestic Biogas Programme aimed at development of

the domestic biogas sector in Indonesia. Based on experience and as shown by the feasibility study

undertaken by SNV in 2008 the construction and use of biodigesters in Indonesia knows many failures

which are quite common worldwide. These failures relate to technical problems (low quality design

and/or construction), maintenance issues (absence of training, ignorance, lack of ownership), lack of

monitoring and after-sales services at the site, and no institutionalized market sector. Biogas

programmes addressing these issues have been developed worldwide since the early nineties,

addressing these matters. Projects undertaken by SNV, Hivos and other actors in many countries in

Asia, Africa and South America have shown that by developing a sustainable biogas sector with specific

characteristics and with clear technical and managerial guidelines, users can have substantial benefit

from their digesters.

Indonesia is one of the countries which started a domestic biogas programme using the approach

already undertaken in the other countries, addressing the challenges encountered. The BIRU

programme which took off in 2009, quickly gained acceptance by the Indonesian Ministry of Energy

and Mineral Resources (MEMR) and it managed to reach 17,000 users by early 2016. The BIRU

programme works with local entities (NGOs, cooperatives, companies and groups) which are groomed

to become biogas digester constructors and service providers, selling their services to the biogas

market in Indonesia. The BIRU programme has to address both the supply side (constructors and

manufacturers) as well as the demand side (users). The BIRU programme has groomed over 100

partner organizations, called CPOs (Construction Partner Organizations), of which 64 are still working

in a relation with the BIRU programme. Some of the groomed organizations did not make it, retreated

or their relation was terminated for other reasons. Some of these are actually still building digesters

on their own, using the technology they got from the BIRU programme.

The BIRU programme is highly structured and organized with clear management regulations laid out

in the so-called SOG, the Standard Operating Guidelines. BIRU partner organizations have to abide by

certain obligations and are given guidance and supervision by the BIRU programme, the management

of which is gradually devolved to a local institution called Yayasan Rumah Energi (YRE). An investment

subsidy is provided by BIRU to maintain leverage towards the construction partners: a digester is co-

financed by the BIRU programme, so part of the income of the partners comes from BIRU, which will

ensure high quality and after-sales services. The relation will also ensure regular training as needed,

exchange of information and technological innovation and it also provides opportunities to get

involved in government tenders and other possibilities to extend the market. On the other hand, the

partners will have sanctions if they do not abide by the rules as agreed in a special agreement with

YRE.

It is not an obligation of the partners to have all their biogas construction work registered under the

BIRU programme. In fact, it is a good sign if the partners develop their own biogas activities, as it shows

that an independent biogas sector is developing, even beyond the scope of BIRU. The investment

subsidy is meanly meant to trigger sector development in the hope it will eventually lead to market

forces which will take over, which is still not the case in most of the target areas.

Even though the BIRU programme has not yet been able to develop a full-fledged independent biogas

sector with many strong actors, there are developments which indicate that a lot of biogas activities

are proliferated as a result of the BIRU programme. Some of the current BIRU partners build digesters

outside the BIRU programme in various sizes, and also a number of the previous partners have


undertaken or are currently undertaking biogas activities, which definitely would not be the case if

BIRU had not groomed these partners. Also, of the more than 1,000 masons and 300 supervisors

trained since 2009, only around 350 of these are active building under the BIRU programme, while at

least some of the masons which are not registered as active BIRU masons are still building digesters.

Looking into the demand side, it is obvious that biogas has gained a lot of publicity and knowledge

about this technology is becoming widespread, but not immediately leading to an independent high

demand. In terms of demand, it should be noted that the government is also a factor to take into

account. Indonesia is used to have government subsidies for rural development and under the current

wave of Renewable Energy activities, the government tends to subsidize investments in biogas. The

BIRU programme has to work with the government to ensure that the quality of the digesters is

maintained. If not, many low quality digesters will be made and the biogas sector will get destroyed.

This situation asks for an assessment of the impact that the BIRU programme has had on the Indonesia

biogas sector as a whole. Within the BIRU programme there is a good overview of the number of

digesters built, and the quality thereof. Apart from the actual construction of 17,000 digesters,

manufacture of biogas appliances has been developed, over 1,000 masons have been trained,

networks have been set up, biogas has become a common phenomenon in selected rural areas with

government and public more aware of the benefits of biogas. It is, however, not clear to which extent

the biogas sector has development beyond the BIRU programme and to which extent this development

can be attributed to the existence of BIRU. This assessment aims to give the answers to a range of

questions which are presented in the scope of work below.

1.1 Objectives

The main objective of this impact assessment is: “To which extent has the biogas sector developed

beyond the BIRU programme and to which extent can this development be attributed to the existence

of BIRU?”

The specific research questions are:

• Which (new) sector players are active in the biogas sector who have constructed BIRU-model

digesters outside the monitoring of the BIRU programme? And how many have they constructed?

• What is the quality of these digesters compared to the quality of the BIRU monitored units?

• What are the key differences for households with BIRU programme installed digesters and BIRU-

model digesters constructed by other sector players (e.g. size, investment costs, credit obtained,

bio-slurry training and After Sales Service received)?

• How sustainable are these sector players in terms of their financial position, skills development,

institutional development?

• Which other signs of sector developments can be identified outside BIRU’s scope (e.g.

promotion)?

1.2 Methodology

The BIRU programme is active in ten provinces of Indonesia and has offices in eight cities. Since 2009,

the programme has partnered with 117 CPOs of which 67 are still active as partner today. Information

has to be obtained from at least 75% of all (ex-)partner organisations. The BIRU programme trained

and certified over 1,000 masons and 300 supervisors so far. The programme has 648 valid phone


numbers available for this target group. For this assessment at least 30% (ex-)masons and (ex-

)supervisors need to be interviewed. Manufacturers of biogas appliances need to be interviewed as

well as government officials at district, provincial and national level. Furthermore, biodigester owners

are visited to perform a quality inspection of their non-BIRU digester. Due to time limitations, a

minimum of six and a maximum of ten digesters need to be inspected per province. The lending partner

organisations have been left out of this assessment, although credit provision is an important part of

the sector. The focus of this assessment is on the constructors (organisations and masons) and the

government initiatives in biogas, and the verification of quality of BIRU model fixed-dome digesters

constructed outside the programme. Both time and resources were too limited to include the LPOs.

Table 1: Overview of the number of interviews per target group and number of digester inspected

Province Current CPOs Former CPOs Current masons & supervisors

Former masons & supervisors

Government officials

Digesters inspected

Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual Actual Actual

Bali 3 2 7 6 9 5 14 7 3 10

West Java 4 2 9 3 10 4 15 8 2 10

Central Java 12 11 11 11 20 20 10 10 7 15

East Java 14 15 9 4 25 35 25 18 0 10

Lampung 5 5 4 4 15 12 9 4 1 11

NTB* 7 6 5 1 20 20 5 5 2 10

NTT* 4 4 4 3 15 10 12 8 3 6 South Sulawesi 13 10 6 1 15 11 15 10 1 10

Totals 62 55 55 33 129 117 105 70 19 82 * NTB = West Nusa Tenggara (incl. Sumba) and NTT = East Nusa Tenggara (including Lombok)

187 individual current and former masons and supervisor have been interviewed. In three cases,

organisations which never partnered with BIRU were identified due to the interview results. This makes

the total of interviewed construction organisations (non-government) 91.

The assessment has been undertaken by a lead consultant (international) in cooperation with the

national programme implementer Yayasan Rumah Energi (YRE) teams in the target areas. Hivos has

provided constant support as well, especially with the desk study. The methodology tools used are

(semi-) structured questionnaires, phone interviews, face-to-face meetings and desk study. The

assessment team developed four main questionnaires:

• Form A for (ex-)partner organisations (see Annex 1);

• Form B for (ex-)masons/supervisors (see Annex 2);

• Form C for government officials (see Annex 3);

• Form D for a digester quality inspection (see Annex 4).

The assessment team had about four weeks (part-time) available to inform the provincial teams about

this assessment, prepare all questionnaires, conduct all interviews, perform a desk study and write the

final report. The limitations for this assessment were:

• Double counting: interviewed masons could have worked for interviewed construction

organisations resulting in double counting of non-BIRU digesters;

• The possible lack of openness of respondents on business-sensitive information;

• The lack of information provided due to low quality of digesters;

• The challenge to get clarity what is happening in provinces not targeted by BIRU (‘blind spots’).


2. Survey results from biodigester construction organisations and individual masons and supervisors

CPOs and masons are the main constructors of high quality BIRU fixed-dome model biodigesters. CPOs

and mason groups are not obliged to work exclusively with BIRU. In fact, BIRU is stimulating a market

whereby constructors promote, install and service biodigesters for farming households on a profitable

basis. The goal of the surveys (form A and B) is to determine the volume of the biogas business of CPOs

and masons, who their clients are and which sector services they provide; all outside of the BIRU

programme’s context.

2.1 Type of organisation and relation to BIRU

Almost 39% of the interviewed constructors are NGOs, followed by private enterprises (23%) (table 2).

Over half of the constructors are based in Java: Central Java (24%), East Java (22%) and West Java (5%).

The interviews managed to reach 82% of all current CPOs on the short timeframe of the assessment.

Of the ex-CPOs 60% has been interviewed. In three cases, organisations which never partnered with

BIRU were identified due to the interview results. This makes the total of interviewed construction

organisations (non-government) 91. 65% of the (ex-)CPOs had starting partnering with BIRU since 2012

only.

Table 2: Type of CPO interviewed

Province Cooperative Mason Group

NGO Private

Enterprise Others Total

Bali 6 2 8

Central Java 2 4 8 7 21

East Java 12 2 4 2 20

Lampung 2 5 1 1 9

NTB 3 3 1 7

NTT 1 6 7

South Sulawesi 1 3 2 6 2 14

West Java 1 1 1 2 5

Total 17 15 35 21 3 91

The business core of organisations which have never partnered with BIRU varies. They are not only

actively engaged in biogas business as their core business, but are also focusing on agriculture,

construction, cattle farming, cooperatives, community empowerment and environmental issues. They

became mainly aware of the BIRU programme or the BIRU model digester through Hivos, YRE of (ex-

)CPOs. Either from HIVOS/YRE staff or from (ex)CPO. They also claimed knowing the programme from

the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (MEMR). Two out of three respondents indicated that

they received the knowledge and skill to construct BIRU model digester from training of which was

conducted by Hivos and YRE in the context of BIRU. The other stated that they did not receive the

training from BIRU, but from a mason whom previously received a training from BIRU.

Table 3 presents the number of type of masons and supervisors interviewed. A total of 187 individuals

have been reached, over half of them are current masons. As expecting, half of the respondent are


based on Java. Two thirds of the respondents are still active in constructing biodigesters, whereas one

third stated they had completely stopped. No specific reasoning was provided for this. NTT and South

Sulawesi show the highest number in this regard.

Table 3: Business relation of masons and supervisors interview and active status

Province Current Former

Other Total Active Mason Supervisor Mason Supervisor

Bali 5 5 2 12 7


East Java 27 8 15 3 53 35

Lampung 10 2 3 1 16 11

NTB 20 5 25 21

NTT 4 4 6 2 1 17 7

South Sulawesi 11 9 1 2 23 12

West Java 5 1 2 4 12 7

Total 101 15 54 14 3 187 122

The peak of the number of masons and supervisor stopping their biogas activities was in 2014 (12

persons), after which the number declined to the average of currently 7.

More than 9 out of ten individual constructors are part of an organisation (figure 1). They are part of

current or former CPOs interviewed or work independently. Still, the independent masons (including

one supervisor) mentioned to work with two to three assistants, though not formally in a registered

organisation.

Figure 1: Share of interviewed (ex-)masons and (ex-)supervisors working independently or in a group

2.2 Number of BIRU model digesters constructed outside of BIRU programme support

All respondents have been asked how many BIRU model digesters they have constructed outside of the programme’s scope (figure 2). This counts uses the following set of accumulative criteria:

• The digester is constructed according to the technical specifications of the BIRU fixed-dome model biodigester;

• The digester is not registered in the database of BIRU, but the digester is registered at the responsible individual or organisation which constructed the digester.

7.65%

53.53%

38.82%

Independent

Part of a mason group

Part of another organisation


Figure 2: Number of BIRU model digester built outside of BIRU programme’s scope per province

A total of 6,060 BIRU model digesters have been counted based on the interviews with current and former CPOs, masons and supervisors (SVs) (table 4). Almost 74% of the recorded digesters constructed without involved of BIRU have been installed in Java. One former CPO, Energi Persada, based in West Java was responsible for 1,200 units outside of the programme. 50 out of 187 individual respondents (masons and supervisors) (27%) have reported to construct biodigester outside of the BIRU programme. 45 out of 91 organisations (49%) participating in the survey have reported to construct biodigester outside of the BIRU programme.

Table 4: Number of digester built outside of BIRU programme’s scope per province

Based in Province Current Former

Others Total CPO Mason / SV CPO Mason / SV

Bali 60 50 59 8 - 177

Central Java 624 272 97 - - 993

East Java 557 316 459 19 - 1,351

Lampung 171 1 12 0 - 184

NTB 327 - 71 641 - 1,039

NTT - - 35 10 - 45

South Sulawesi 92 - - 11 38 141

West Java 30 350 1,200 550 - 2,130

Total 1,861 989 1,933 1,239 38 6,060

Theoretically current and former masons and supervisors can have worked for current and former CPOs. The risk of double counting the constructed BIRU model digesters therefore exists. To avoid double counting, all recorded digesters from masons and supervisor who have worked for (ex-)CPOs have not been included in this assessment. Where relatively high numbers of digester are counted at CPO and individual level, further investigation has been done to avoid double counting. For example, West Java and NTB present a high number of digesters constructed by former masons and supervisor. It has been checked that these digesters have not been constructed as part of a CPO, which also has

177

993

1351

184

1039

45141

2130

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

2000

2250

Bali CentralJava

East Java Lampung NTB NTT SouthSulawesi

West Java

BIR

U m

od

el b

iod

iges

ters

Respondent based in province


been interviewed. Similarly, for individual masons interviewed as part of a mason group it has been checked that the numbers provided are not the work of the same mason. Additionally, those organisations and individuals who provided an estimation of constructed digesters presented an additional 352 to 570 biodigesters to the total of 6,060 in the table above. Since these are estimations, the numbers have been left out of the further analysis. Nine current and former biogas constructors, all based in Java, have been active in eight other provinces as well: North Sumatra, West Sumatra, South Sumatra, Kalimantan Tengah, Jambi, Riau Islands, North Sulawesi and West Papua. These organisations represent private enterprises, cooperatives and NGOs. Two of them have constructed over 400 digesters outside of the programme and one 1,200 units (Energi Persada). These three organisations have built digesters in six of the eight other provinces. However, it’s unclear how many they have constructed per province. A dozen masons and supervisor have also constructed BIRU model biodigester in these provinces. However, these are left out of the analysis to avoid double counting as it was not possible to determine if they were part of the nine organisations based in Java.

Table 5: Number of digester built outside of BIRU programme’s scope per year and per size

Year Size (m3)

Total Share per

year* Share of BIRU

digesters 4 6 8 10 12 20 Unknown

2010 1 1 nihil 9%

2011 7 7 nihil 17%

2012 14 19 1 4 1 52 91 3% 19%

2013 129 36 360 525 19% 18%

2014 401 195 11 488 1,095 40% 17%

2015 359 287 8 362 1,016 37% 13%

2016 12 6 1 1 13 33 1% 7%

Unknown 3,296 3,296 n/a 9%

Total 915 543 1 21 1 4,579 6,060 100% 100%

* Share of the total digesters known per year (is 2,768)

Of 46% of the digesters built outside BIRU it’s unknown in which year they are built and of 80% it is unknown what the digester size is. The last column in table 5 presents the share of BIRU digesters constructed per year, registered in the official BIRU database (2009 is left out of the calculations). After 2012 the share is declining, while for BIRU digesters constructed outside the programme the peak years are 2014 and 2015. Data for 2016 is very limited, also due to the fact that most digesters will be built in the second half of the year (after harvesting season). The most reported sizes are 4m3 and 6m3, mainly due to the government regulations for government supported digesters (elaborated in section 2.4). The official BIRU programme digesters shows 30% more 6m3 sizes than 4m3.

2.3 Planned number of BIRU model biodigesters

The number of planned BIRU model biodigesters in 2016 and 2017 mostly are stable or increasing as informed by 52% of interviewed (ex-)CPOs and (ex-)masons or supervisors (table 6). However, the former group reported a decreasing biogas business in 54 of the cases (55%).


Table 6: Business prognoses of number of BIRU model digester outside the programme

Respondent Increasing Decreasing Staying the same Total

(Ex-)CPO 24 25 17 66

(Ex-)Mason/supervisor 23 54 21 98

Total number 47 79 38 164

Total share 29% 48% 23% 100%

10% of all respondents have planned 2,903 BIRU model digesters to be constructed during 2016 and 2017 (table 7). Especially one current CPO, named Yayasan Trukajaya is working in an Exxon Mobile-funded Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) project to construct over 2,000 BIRU model digester. Another 10% mentioned not to have planned any new digesters and the rest did not know yet. The underlying reasoning of these planning numbers has not been assessed.

Table 7: Planned number of digester outside of the programme for 2016 and 2017

Province

Interview (ex-) CPOs Interview (ex-)masons/supervisors

Respondents planning?

Target Respondents planning?

Target

2016 2017 2016 2017

Bali 2 20 30 - - -

Central Java 2 2,414 - - -

East Java 3 131 100 - - -

Lampung - - - 2 7

NTB - - - 2 - -

NTT 4 143 5 49

South Sulawesi - - - 1 2 -

West Java 2 - - 3 7

Totals 13 2,838 13 65

2.4 Clients and underlying reasons for installing a biodigester

73 organisations have reported to have constructed BIRU model digester without programme involvement. In more than 50% of the case, mainly the government has requested to construct these digesters. In 15% of the cases it was mainly the household which directly requested the (ex-)CPO to construct a digester at their home.

Table 7: Clients of current and former CPOs

Province Government Private

enterprise Household NGO Others Total

Bali 4 1 4 9


East Java 7 5 3 4 19

Lampung 2 1 3

NTB 8 2 10

NTT 3 2 1 6

South Sulawesi 5 1 6

West Java 2 1 1 1 1 6

Total 37 13 11 5 7 73


With BIRU programme digesters, the government initiated the construction for 35% of all the digesters (table 8). Households are in more than 63% of the cases the initiator of having a biodigester. This data cannot directly be compared to the government as main actor initiating digesters in table 7 above, since it not taking the number of digesters into consideration nor the end decision at household level. Still, it shows the high commitment of the Indonesian government to construct BIRU model digesters. Chapter 4 will elaborate on that.

Table 8: Clients under BIRU programme

Government Private enterprise Household Others Total

Digesters 6,238 210 11,280 96 17,824

Share 35% 1,2% 63,3% 0.5% 100%

In cases whereby individual masons and supervisors were requested to construct biodigesters, the

government was in over 50% of cases the main initiator, similar as with organisational data presented

in table 9 below. A slightly higher difference can be found in the share of private enterprises (20%)

requesting to the masons to construct digesters in comparison with requests to organisations (table

7). The difference is caused by the fact that individual masons can be asked to work on contract base

for various organisations.

Table 9: Clients of current and former masons and supervisors

Province Government Private

enterprise Household NGO Others Total

Bali 4 4

Central Java 7 1 1 9

East Java 15 5 13 5 38

Lampung 1 3 1 5

NTB 18 13 3 34

NTT 3 3

South Sulawesi 2 2 1 5

West Java 6 1 4 1 12

Total 56 22 24 1 7 110

Based on the main initiator to construct a biodigester (see tables 7 and 9), the main reasoning behind this has been asked to the biodigester owner to invest in a biodigester. The data just provides an indication of the main reasoning, as it concerns the judgement of the respondent and not directly that of the biodigester user. The table 10 below presents the data compiled on organisational level. Data from individual masons have been left out of this analysis due to unreliability of the answers provided and different interpretation of the question.


Table 10: Main underlying reason noted by (ex-)CPOs for biodigester investment

Environmental reasons include having healthy smokeless kitchen environment as well as less firewood

consumption. Other reasons the respondents reported for having a biodigester were saving of fuel

costs, reduction of pollution and odours, a received grant made it possible and one respondent saw

business opportunities in having a biodigester. Section 3.5 will present the results of the main initiator

and underlying reasoning behind digester installation from the perspective of the 82 owners

interviewed.

2.5 Independent promotion of biogas

As much as 97% of interviewed CPOs, masons and supervisors are currently doing independent biogas

promotion (table 11). They mostly practise door-to-door and networking with key stakeholders

including government and cooperatives. Digester construction might be much higher in the future if

the active respondents practise online advertisement which can reach a large target group and is cost-

efficient.

Table 11: Independent promotion by active respondents

Independent biogas promotion (Ex-)CPO (Ex)-mason/SV Total Share

Not promoting 2 2 4 3%

Printed advertisement 9 9 18 12%

Online advertisement 2 4 6 4%

Door-to-door 16 45 61 40%

Other (mostly networking) 19 54 73 48%

2.6 Biogas sector services

The BIRU programme is providing services to their partners (CPOs, LPOs, users) such as operation and

maintenance and bioslurry trainings, after-sales services, bioslurry extension services and prepare

credit linkages to finance biodigesters. Table 12 presents following services by respondents while

constructing biodigesters outside of the programme’s scope.

Province CSR Demand

for energy Government

policy Demand for

fertiliser Environmental

reason Others Total

Bali 1 4 2 7

Central Java 2 8 1 11

East Java 3 4 7 2 7 4 27

Lampung 2 1 3

NTB 9 1 10

NTT 1 1 1 3

South Sulawesi 2 2 1 2 7

West Java 1 2 2 2 2 9

Total 7 22 24 7 11 6 77


Table 12: Sector services provided by active respondents

Sector services Current Former

Others Total CPOs Masons / SVs CPOs Masons / SVs

Bioslurry training 10 6 6 5 2 29

After sales services 3 6 5 1 - 15

Bioslurry service 1 3 2 1 - 7

User training 10 15 8 11 1 45

Credit linkage 1 - 1 2 - 4

Especially user trainings are provided, but numbers are pretty low. Three users got some sort of

guarantee from current and ex-masons as well as information on maintenance and advantages of

bioslurry. A sustainable biogas sector should be performing a wide variety of biogas services to

maintain a high quality of products and services to the end users.

2.7 Skills development of biogas constructors

According to the questionnaire, the organisation which constructed BIRU model digester employed

two up to twenty staff members in the process. Nine respondent claimed that they employed more

than ten full-time staff members, located in three provinces, East Java, Lampung, and NTB, while 50 of

claimed that they employed under 10 staff. In the BIRU programme, partners will be accompanied with

skill development to ensure the sustainability of the programme. In Central Java, Lampung, and NTB,

the data indicate that 100% of the (ex-)CPOs were conducting skill development to their staff. On stark

contrast, in East Java 100% of the respondent stated that they never conducted such activities to their

staff. In the rest of provinces, the variation ranging from 30-70% in which training was given to their

staff from the organization. In total of nine provinces, over two thirds of respondents were claiming

that they conducting biogas skills development to their staff (figure 3).

Figure 3: Share of (ex-)CPOs performing skills development to their staff

BIRU has trained since 2009 over 1,000 masons and 300 supervisors in the construction of the BIRU

model fixed-dome biodigester. Only around 350 of them are still actively involved as BIRU mason.

When asking to the individual masons if they have trained others on the construction techniques of

the BIRU model, out of the total number of respondents 14% of them mentioned to have trained

others outside of the BIRU programme. Out of the 50 individuals who have constructed biodigesters

outside of BIRU, as much as 13 masons or supervisor have trained others in BIRU model digester

construction, which is 26%. In these numbers, masons who are/were part of a (ex-)CPO have not

included. These 13 individuals claim to have trained 76 new masons, especially in the provinces West

Java and Bali. 15% of the interviewed masons and supervisors also said to have seen construction

assistants becoming constructors themselves.

68.63%

31.37% Yes

No


2.8 Appliance manufacturers

Appliance manufacturers form an important group of partners in the BIRU programme. There are three

appliance manufacturers active: Butterfly Stove Company, Atayzer and Energi Persada. These

organisations have been interviewed to determine the growth of a biogas sector in Indonesia outside

of the BIRU programme.

According to Mr Gunawan, Head of the Production Department at Butterfly, based in Surabaya, East

Java, they have been a supplier to BIRU since the start of the programme. They assemble mainly biogas

stoves and biogas lamps, but also rice cookers. Other clients then BIRU are PT Swen (a fibreglass

biodigesters producer), PINBUK (a NGO constructing BIRU model digesters mainly in government

projects), the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, some municipal governments and individuals

promoting biogas in North Sumatra.

The volume of the business for biogas appliances is approximately 10-15% of the overall Butterfly

production. They have no competitors for selling biogas lamps, but there are at least three competitors

for the biogas stove including a metal company called Metalindo. Metalindo has been accepted as

BIRU supplier again after two years of absence due to quality issues. Currently, they are able to reach

the stove efficiency level as needed for the Gold Standard project criteria. Metalindo is able to produce

over 2,000 stoves a year.

Butterfly also answers to the demand for spare parts, for stoves or other appliances. On average 3,000-

4,000 stoves are produced and sold every year. In 2015, they produced almost 9,000 stoves (also for

overseas sales). Biogas lamp production has also increased from over 1,000 items in 2011 to 4,500 by

the end of 2015. They supply these the provinces in Sumatra, Irian Jaya (Papua), Kalimantan, Sulawesi,

NTT, NTB, Central and East Java but not to West Java. The areas of Sumatra, Papua, Kalimantan are

non-BIRU regions, but they have also been mentioned by the respondents constructing BIRU models

in these regions.

According to Mr Royani, Director of the NGO Atayzer, they have a supplier to BIRU partners since 2015.

They have been receiving BIRU technical capacity development support since then. Atayzer produces

and delivers gas taps, water drains, brass pipe fittings and manometers. Their workshop has the

capacity of producing 100-200 appliance items per day. Their business sales are still relatively small,

about 300-400 items per month, which provide an income of around IDR 9 million (EUR 600). Atayzer

is in the process of developing a biogas stove. BIRU has been inspecting this stoves and provides

technical advice. Their main competitor for stoves, water drains and gas taps is BCL (Barudak Cicalung

Lembang), another company supported by BIRU in West Java and which previously dominated the

market. BCL is selling on average 200 to 250 BIRU certified stoves annually. Atayzer has requested BIRU

to support them in finding buyers and their business strategy, as they are still new to the sector.

According to Mr Yono, Manager Program Biogas at from Energi Persada, based in West Java, they

construct household biodigesters and produce appliances such as biogas stoves, water drains, gas taps

and manometers. They were a biogas constructing partner of BIRU between 2010 and 2014, but were

terminated from the programme due to lack of quality management. However, they were regarded as

one of the most promising partners of BIRU in the inception phase. Since 2011, they have served

government projects mainly through DGNREEC. Furthermore, they work with other organisations on

biogas development, such as IBEKA, Yayasan Bina Lingkungan (EEP-funded), SNV (EEP-funded), WWF,

Yayasan Dana Bhakti Astra, Yayasan Solusi Bandung, Yayasan Bina Sehat and the Institution for

Technology Development (ADB-funded).


3. Quality inspections of BIRU model biodigesters constructed without BIRU programme involvement

To obtain proof of the BIRU model biodigesters constructed by the respondents, the assessment team

inspected a total number of 82 biodigesters. Seven units were still under construction. Besides the

comprehensive technical inspections conducted, the users have also been briefly interviewed (Form

D, see annex 4). The inspections are based on the official BIRU quality inspection form. 48% of the

inspected digesters had a size of 4m3. 32% was a 6m3 and the remaining 20% has a size of 3m3, 10m3,

12m3 and 15m3.

3.1 General quality of the inspected biodigesters

Table 13 presents an overview of the general quality of construction and training provided. Only Bali

and Central Java inspectors did not approve the digesters as full BIRU design. In West Java in a few

cases some form of guarantees was provided to the users. Certified and registered masons were used

in almost 2 out of 3 cases. And nearly half of the users have been equipped with user as well as bioslurry

trainings. Remarkably no trainings have been provided in Central Java and South Sulawesi for the

interview users. The digesters under construction not included in the weighted average for trainings

provided

Table 13: General digester quality and guarantees and training provided

Province Approved

BIRU design

3 yrs guarantee provided

3 yrs after sales guarantee provided

Certified and registered

mason used

User training

provided

Bioslurry training

provided

Bali 25% 0% 0% 0% 30% 33%

Central Java 67% 0% 0% 33% 0% 67%

East Java 100% 0% 0% 0% 80% 80%

Lampung 100% 0% 0% 100% 100% 36%

NTB 100% 0% 0% 100% 30% 30%

NTT 100% 0% 0% 67% 100% 83%

South Sulawesi 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 10%

West Java 100% 30% 20% 0% 70% 50%

Weighted average 81% 4% 2% 63% 53% 43%

During the inspections it became clear that nine of the completed digesters and appliances had issues.

Three stoves were broken and two technical issues were reported with the digester dome, clogging

and a cracked dome. Four non-technical issues were reported such as lack of water available and lack

of manure available (table 14). Only NTT and Bali reported non-functioning biodigesters.

Table 14: Share of issues with BIRU model digesters

Issue Inspected digesters

during survey BIRU programme

digesters

Non-technical issues 4.9% 4.5%

Technical issues 6.1% 1.6%

No issues at all 89% 93.9%

Total 100% 100%


In comparison to officially registered BIRU programme digesters, more issues are reported. However,

the overall quality of the inspected digesters constructed outside of BIRU is still good.

3.2 Quality of the construction materials

Table 15 presents the overview of the quality of the construction materials. For Lampung is was not

possible to check all the constructions materials and some questions have been misinterpreted.

Therefore, the results are left out. The inspectors found all construction materials is good shape for

the other provinces.

Table 15: Quality of construction materials

Province Good quality of:

Bricks Sand Aggregates Cement

Bali 100% 100% 100% 100%

Central Java 100% 100% 100% 100%

East Java 100% 100% 100% 100%

Lampung - - - 100%

NTB 100% 100% 100% 100%

NTT 100% 100% 100% 100%

South Sulawesi 100% 100% 100% 100%

West Java 100% 100% 100% 100%

Weighted average 100% 100% 100% 100%

3.3 Quality of the biodigester inlet, dome and outlet

As most of the digesters were completed, the assessment focused on the exterior quality aspects of

the biodigesters’ inlet, dome and outlet (tabe16). Overall, the quality can definitely be improved, but

there were also high scores reported. Based on other observations and the interviews with users, it

appears that the inlet pipes were of a good quality brand and well positioned according to the positon

of the overflow point. The depth of the outlet scored relatively low, and properly sized compost pits

were not always constructed.

Table 16: General quality of inlet, dome and outlet of completed digesters

Province

Inlet Dome Outlet Maximum / minimum

height maintained

Proper installation of mixing

device

Centre pipe at centre point

Correct top

filling

Correct turret height

and size

Accuracy lengths

and width

Accuracy of depth

2 proper sized

compost pits

Bali 50% 50% 100% 80% 40% - - -

Central Java 100% 100% 100% 100% 67% 93% 67% 100%

East Java 90% 80% 90% 40% 80% 90% 40% 20%

Lampung 100% 100% 91% 100% 60% 64% - 91%

NTB 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50%

NTT 100% 100% 100% 100% 17% 100% 100% 0%

South Sulawesi 90% 60% 100% 90% 70% 100% 100% 60%

West Java 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 90% 40%

Weighted average 91% 85% 98% 89% 70% 90% 65% 56%

Note: shares based on construction being completed


Lower scores were reported with finishing of the turret for example, but this has far less impact than

if the inlet would be not well positioned. The main pipe and pipe fittings all used have the BIRU

standard, just as the stove and lamps used. In some cases, unnecessary fittings in the pipeline were

discovered, which could result in serious gas leakages. More importantly, the application of water

drains could be improved as well.

3.4 Reasons and benefits of having a biodigester

In section 2.4 is has been discussed that the government the main client was for the constructors and

that the underlying reasons for investing in a digester by the users the demand for energy was.

When asking the users these same questions, it became clear that in 98% of the cases it was the

government who convinced them to have a biodigester installed. In only a few cases, a role was played

by a private enterprise, mason or NGO helping with this decision. The BIRU programme will have to

work closely with local governments to understand the process the government is using and liaise with

the agencies which perform the promotional activities for biogas.

The top reasons by users to invest or have a biodigesters installed are the need for modern energy,

the need for fertiliser (bioslurry) and environmental reasons, such as having a smokeless healthy

kitchen. These main reasons were also mentioned in that order by the users in the annual biogas user

survey of 2015.

When asking for the main benefits, the users indicated the reduction of household expenditures as

man benefit, followed by feeling more safety and faster cooking on biogas. This is similar to the result

of the annual user survey 2015. This reasoning and the benefits will help the main initiators (local

governments) and constructors of biogas to understand how to promote the technology.

3.5 Financing of the biodigester

Almost 40% of the digesters (38 units) inspected were (heavily) subsidised by the governments. Eleven

digesters were fully subsidised, mainly in NTB and NTT. From 17 other subsidised digesters it was

recorded that the average investment cost was IDR 1,176,470 per user (EUR 80). This amount is far

less than a user would normally have to invest through regular CPOs and masons partnering for the

BIRU programme.

93% of the interviewed households reported not to have made use of other credit facilities to finance

their digester. Of the 7% who did find microcredit financing an average amount of IDR 7,700,000 (EUR

516) was lent per user, mainly for 6-8m3 units. In comparison to the BIRU programme end users, 46%

of them obtain microcredit to have a digester.

3.6 Other information provided by users

Other information discussed with the users are the information provided after construction was

completed. Table 17 present diverse results for information on after sales services, where to obtain

spare parts and who to contact in case of technical issues. As reported by the constructors, almost no

after sales services were offered. In case issues arise with biodigesters it is often not known where to

get spare parts or who to contact.


Table 17: Share of information provided to users after construction

Province

Information provided to the user on:

After sales services? Where to get spare parts?

Who to contact for technical issues?

Yes No Yes No Yes No

Bali 0% 100% 30% 70% 50% 50%

Central Java 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

East Java 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0%

Lampung 0% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0%

NTB 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100%

NTT 17% 83% 0% 100% 0% 100%

South Sulawesi 0% 100% 0% 0% 100% 0%

West Java 30% 70% 50% 50% 11% 89%

Weighted average 5% 95% 36% 64% 42% 58%

Partners in the BIRU programme are obliged to provide excellent information and guarantee after sales

services. The ultimate risk of not providing this in a proper way is the non-functioning of digesters,

users reverting back to traditional cooking fuels and leaving biogas with a bad image. So far, giving the

good quality of inspected this is not the case.

Even, of the functioning biodigesters the user satisfaction rate is 80% (51 answers provided). If the

non-functioning digesters are taken into consideration the satisfaction rate is 72%. Data from the

annual user survey shows a satisfaction rate of 88%.

Finally, the users have been asked who in the household is benefitting most from the digester (table

18). Except for NTB, all province report that the women in the household benefit most. Still, over half

of the respondent see benefits for males and females altogether.

Table 18: Main beneficiary of the biodigester in the household

Province Males Females Both

Bali 0% 33% 67%

Central Java 0% 100% 0%

East Java 0% 30% 70%

Lampung 0% 0% 100%

NTB 60% 0% 40%

NTT 0% 83% 17%

South Sulawesi 0% 10% 90%

West Java 0% 0% 100%

Weighted average 8% 34% 58%


4. Government adoption of household biogas

The BIRU programme has been working with local and national government agencies to get their

commitment to promote, fund and institutionalise biodigester standards and activities. BIRU envisions

a role for the government as standards enforcer, promoter and financier. In practical terms, the MEMR

chairs the six-monthly BIRU programme advisory committee. The programme biogas offices have

regular provincial consultation meetings with local government offices and stakeholders, such as

synchronising and liaising with energy agencies and development planning branches. In the previous

chapters it became clear that the government is an important initiator to construct biodigesters. This

chapter identifies does government institutions and the programme and projects they support. It

presents the policies to promote tangible biogas activities and what the positon of BIRU is herein.

Finally, the size of the investments is discussed as well as the future outlook.

4.1 Identified government institutions active on biogas

The key national government institution which is actively involved in biogas dissemination in Indonesia

is the Directorate Bio-Energy, under the Directorate General of New Renewable Energy and Energy

Conservation (DGNREEC) of the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (MEMR). Under the

Ministerial Regulation, PERMEN ESDM no. 3/2016, DGNREEC cooperates with provincial government

in biogas dissemination, through the Regional Working Units. The authority is delegated to the

Department of Mineral and Energy on provincial and or district levels. Table 19 shows the overview of

BIRU government organisations interviewed for this assessment.

Table 19: Interviewed government agencies

Province Government agency and/or department Level Active in biogas

Bali

Department of Agriculture and Horticulture Provincial 2013-2016

Department of Mineral and Energy, Department of Public Works Provincial 2014-2016

Department of Urban Planning District 2015

Central Java Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Provincial

& district 2012-2014

Department of Mineral and Energy District 2012

Lampung Department of Mineral and Energy District 2010

NTB Department of Mineral and Energy Provincial 2010

Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources District 2011

NTT

Department of Livestock, Environmental Agency District 2012

Department of Mineral and Energy District 2013

Department of Mineral and Energy, Department of Public Works District 2015

Environmental Agency District 2016

South Sulawesi Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Provincial 2014

West Java Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources Provincial 2011

Department of Livestock District 2015

- Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources National 2010-2016

More than half (57%) of the government officials interviewed claimed that the BIRU programme is very

important to their institution (57%). The remaining 43 stated that BIRU is important to them. The


reason of the importance of the BIRU programme relates to environmental and energy aspects, as well

as development issues. They stated that through the BIRU programme, the communities could reduce

the utilisation of traditional firewood biomass as well as fossil fuels and promote a sustainable

environment by using biogas as the main source of cooking energy. Some of them stated that the

programme could foster important economic activities through biodigesters. Additionally, they stated

that BIRU’s standardisation of after sales services and maintenance activities maintain the quality of

biodigesters. Other important government agencies active on biogas are the Departments of Livestock,

Agricultural, Environment, Cooperatives and Small and Medium Enterprise, and Finance.

4.2 Government policies and programmes on biogas and inclusion of BIRU standards

Since 2009, the BIRU programme has established partnerships with governmental institutions through

DGNREEC. The BIRU fixed-dome digester model (4-12m3) is registered with the Indonesian National

Standard (SNI) product with reference number 7826. The government is using the BIRU standard when

funding construction activities on household level through the Special Allocation Fund or Dana Alokasi

Khusus (DAK) and through the National State Budget (APBN).

The DAK is a large government programme and administered through the MEMR. Since 2013, under

the Ministerial Regulation PERMEN ESDM no. 3/2013, the BIRU standard and technical guideline

(through SNI 7826) has been yearly applied in DAK policies focusing on digester sizes 4m3 and 6m3.

Besides small scale energy solutions, the DAK is also applied in other sectors, such as agriculture,

healthcare and education. The national government assesses which sector will be given DAK in each

province. DAK is allocated to each provincial government and they select the particular districts which

have the highest potential for biogas use. According to government regulation PERMEN ESDM no.

3/2016, at least 15% of the DAK funds have to be allocated in the small scale biogas sector on district

level. Non-BIRU provinces which are targeted by DAK are: Aceh, North Sumatra, South Sumatra, West

Sumatra, Jambi, Bengkulu, Gorontalo, Southeast Sulawesi, Central Sulawesi, North Sulawesi, West

Kalimantan, East Kalimantan and Central Kalimantan. This indicates that the BIRU programme has

influenced a large area coverage outside BIRU current target areas.

Through the ABPN the government is funding biodigesters, but does not apply the BIRU standard in

the ABPN policies. The scheme covers various sizes of biogas plants ranging from 4m3 to (over) 136 m3.

However, DGNREEC, one of the directorates under MEMR which is administering the ABPN funds does

apply the BIRU standard in its bidding procedures. The bidding documents received by the assessment

team are confidential and cannot be shared further, but in an interview with Mr Agus, Head of the Bio-

energy Business Service and Monitoring section, confirmed that DGNREEC is applying the BIRU

standard. When ABPN funds are dispersed through local governments, it titled ‘APBD’.

Example of provincial government programmes including a strong biogas component were reported

in Bali, the Integrated Agriculture System programme or Simantri Programme (2009-2013) and the

Renewable Energy programme or Energi Baru Terbarukan. The BIRU model was not standardised in

these programme and fibreglass plants were mainly used. These installations were mainly fully

subsidised.

In South Sulawesi, the government-led Energy Independent Village Programme or Program Desa

Mandiri Energi (2011-2013) had a budget of IDR 200 billion (EUR 13 million), but did not apply the BIRU

standard. Since 2014, the standard is however applied in the government-led Bioenergy Development

Programme or Program Pengembangan Bioenergi budgeted IDR 800 billion (EUR 53.5 million) up till


2016. In the first half of 2015, the BIRU programme in this province is working with the government to

access DAK funds. So far, EUR 500,000 has been co-financed.

In NTB, the BIRU programme (trough Hivos) signed a cooperation with the provincial government and

the district government of Lombok Utara in 2012. The cooperation laid a solid foundation for a co-

sharing financial scheme of EUR 100,000 between the programme and the local government. This

cooperation model reduces the actual percentage of farmer input considerably, but they ensure high

quality digesters which are properly maintained and monitored.

Government officials interviewed based in Central Java, Lampung and NTT all declared that biogas

construction activities are organised through open bidding procedures and or direct appointments.

The conditions mentioned were that biodigesters must work properly and certified construction

experts must be used. Lampung has allocated funds to construct forty BIRU model digesters in 2015.

4.3 Number of biodigesters constructed and size of the investment

Provincial and district governments have been interviewed to determine the scope of the government investments: table 20 presents an overview for the BIRU targeted provinces only.

Table 20: Number of BIRU model digesters and investments through local government funds

Province Number of BIRU model digesters constructed

Investments through:

DAK APBD

Bali 117 No data No data

Central Java 608 (2012-2015) EUR 150,000 No data

East Java No interview was possible

Lampung 245 (2010-2015) No data EUR 34,000

NTB 514 (2013-2015) EUR 268,000 EUR 64,000

NTT 401 (2012-2016) EUR 367,000 EUR 94,000

West Java >1,000 (2011-2015) EUR 46,000 EUR 4,000

South Sulawesi 703 (2014-2016) EUR 500,000 No data

Minimum totals 3,588 EUR 13,300,000 EUR 196,000

* Note: APBD supports larger digesters sizes up to 136m3; DAK includes 4m3-6m3

The table above presents actual construction numbers. During brief talks during a national meeting in South Sulawesi in July 2016 with provincial government on biogas, it became clear that representatives of East Kalimantan, South Kalimantan and North Sulawesi (all non-BIRU areas) estimated a total number of 385 to 555 BIRU model digesters constructed through DAK or APBD. Since the DAK and APBD funds are derived from national level funds, administered through DGNREEC, interviews have been conducted to determine the nationwide scope of BIRU model biodigesters outside of the programme’s involvement. Table 21 presents the planned numbers only.

Table 21: Number of planned BIRU model digesters per year funded through APBN and DAK

Funded through 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

APBN - - 232 361 1,715 433 520 No data 3,261

DAK - - - - 1,859 3,034 1,003 No data 5,896

Total - - 232 361 3,574 3,467 1,523 - 9,157

BIRU programme 62 1,586 2,995 3,339 3,268 2,973 2,377 1,223 17,823 Note: Total DAK-funded units is 3,051 when the BIRU programme units are excluded


The numbers obtained on APBN and DAK only cover 4-12m3 sized digesters, following the BIRU mandatory sizes. Important to mention is that in the total DAK-funded digesters, a total of 2,845 units are labelled BIRU programme digesters and in the total of APBN-funded digesters a total of 400 labelled BIRU programme digesters making the total planned since 2011 of BIRU model digesters through APBN and DAK 5,912. There’s a possibility that the DAK numbers of 2015 are not fully updated yet and therefore may increase. Construction numbers for 2016 were not available yet. Digesters are usually built after the harvesting season in the second half of a year. To compare the number of BIRU programme digesters, the last row has been added in table 21.

In 2016, the Government of Indonesia allocated IDR 677,562,580,000 (EUR 46.7 million) to support 14 provinces to scale up renewable energy, with a minimum of 10% for household scale biodigesters. The government has formalised this through the MEMR Decree no 3, 2016.

4.4 Future government investments in household biogas

According to interviews with MEMR, the proposed national budget for household biogas dissemination

is IDR 23 billion (EUR 1.5 million) for 2017. The inquiry has been proposed to the Ministry of Finance

for approval. The DAK and APBN will continue to fund digesters in the future. Further national level

data is not yet available. Other potential funding for biogas includes the:

• General Allocation Fund or Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU);

• Credit for Food and Energy Security or Kredit Ketahanan Pangan dan Energi (KKP-E);

• Centre of Government Investment or Pusat Investasi Pemerintah (PIP);

• People’s Business Credit Programme or Kredit Usaha Rakyat (KUR).

These funding programmes come from various institutions and all have purposed various waste-to-

energy installation throughout Indonesia. They are not yet mandated to use the BIRU technical

standards. Advocacy on the BIRU technical guidelines will be needed to endorse compliance with BIRU

standard.

On provincial level, the current BIRU targeted provinces planned a total of 2,780 BIRU model digesters.

The programme could include part of this total if the investments are channelled through BIRU. The

government of South Sulawesi presents the highest commitment with 1,500 units in 2017 for an

investment of IDR 1.2 billion (EUR 80,000) through the earlier mentioned Bio-energy Development

Programme. Even for the years 2018-2020 7,000 units are planned for a total investment of IDR 5.6

billion (EUR 375,000) through the Energy Sovereignty Programme.

The government of NTB has planned at least 720 units through a DAK investment of IDR 9 billion (EUR

600,000); likely the digesters will be subsidised for 80-100%. Bali confirmed 10% of the DAK funds to

be spend on household biodigesters in 2017. So far, 100 units are planned for 2017 and another 100

for 2018. Central Java expects 300 units funded through APBD, while NTT reported 75 units through

both the Environment Agency and the Mining and Energy Agency. West Java planned 85 biodigesters

in 2017 for an APBD investment of IDR 700 million (EUR 47,000).


5. Conclusions and recommendations

It can be concluded that the impact of the BIRU programme on independently initiated biogas sector

activities is huge. The national government as well as provincial governments are the main initiators

of biogas construction activities outside of the scope and the geographical areas of the BIRU

programme. The BIRU technical specifications and guidelines are the common household biogas

standard since several years and more provinces are adopted them. Nearly 6,000 biodigesters have

been installed since 2010 through two government funds: The National State Budget (APBN) and the

Special Allocation Fund (DAK), of which the latter institutionalises the BIRU model biodigester standard

by obliging 15% of its funds to be used for BIRU models as well as often making use of certified

construction experts. In BIRU areas, an amount of over EUR 13 million for biogas has been allocated

since 2010. In addition, the DAK is focusing on provinces on Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Sumatra. A

variety of other government agencies the MEMR is adopting the BIRU standard as well.

The current and former construction partners and mason groups of BIRU seem to find additional work

due to these government initiatives. Over 6,000 biodigesters, a similar number presented by

government data, have been constructed, mainly on Java, by these (ex-)partners without further

involvement of the BIRU programme. Likely, this construction number is 10%-20% higher, since more

provinces are covered by the government and estimations of an additional few hundred BIRU model

biodigesters are left out of the counting process. The peak years of production are 2014 and 2015.

The (ex-)partners tend to follow mainly the government investments, besides partnering with larger

companies on CSR programmes and promoting biogas independently through networking and door-

to-door advertisement for individual households. They do not plan ahead much, as the governments

do not either, and still half of them mentioned that the business apart from BIRU is staying the same

or increasing. Independent investments in construction skills development are reported and 75 new

mason have been trained. Where the BIRU programme focuses on specific sector services, such as user

and bioslurry trainings, after sales services and credit provision, the (ex-)partners tend do much less in

this regard, which causes a risk of quality loss and feeding to a bad image for biogas in general.

However, the quality of BIRU model digesters have been assessed and they are overall in many cases

in good or very good condition. Still, 11% reported technical or non-technical failures (mainly in Bali

and Lampung) and different minor quality issues vary per inspected province. The user satisfaction rate

however reached 80%. Again, not much extra provided services or guarantees have been reported by

users, which are normally part of the deal through BIRU. Even, the government subsidies for biogas

are higher than BIRU’s incentives, and (nearly) a 100% in NTB, NTT and Lampung. Females are the main

beneficiaries of having a biodigester.

The government of Indonesia has a history in subsidising innovative household energy solutions. It is

recommended that BIRU works even closer with the government in order not to distort market forces

by (nearly) fully subsidised digesters. BIRU has clearly kick started the market and now it is time to find

the best sustainable solutions with the government agencies and the construction partners. BIRU

needs to better understand the reasoning of the private sector to bring biogas to scale. This

comprehensive and political sensitive task needs to be initiated from top down. It is recommended to

review BIRU offerings to the government and private sector and make BIRU more appealing to follow

their biogas sector strategy. BIRU could start with a national workshop to be held with the goal to liaise

and structure government efforts (policy and practical-wise) even further based on experiences in

building national biogas programmes by Hivos and its partners.


References

• Qibtiyyah, R.M., Sidik, M. and Masrizal. Ministry of Finance. Pengelolaan DAK: Kondisi dan

Strategi ke Depan. Jakarta, 2013, page 82-85;

• Republic of Indonesia. Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources. Ministry Regulation

Number 3 Year 2013: Technical Guidelines of Special Allocation Fund for Rural Energy

Financial Year 2013 Annex 1, page 18-29;



Financial Year Annex 1, page 18-29;







• Republic of Indonesia. Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources. “Monitoring dan Evaluasi

DAK Bidang Energi Skala Kecil TA 2016 Triwulan II”. Presented in Quarterly National

Coordination and Evaluation Meeting of Special Allocation Fund for Small Scale Energy Sector

Year 2016 II in Makassar, 28 July 2016;

• Republic of Indonesia. Ministry of Finance. Pembiayaan Energi Terbarukan: Solusi Atas

Membengkaknya Subsidi Energi, http://www.kemenkeu.go.id/Artikel/pembiayaan-energi-

terbarukan-solusi-atas-membengkaknya-subsidi-energi (8 August 2016);

• Republic of Indonesia. Ministry of Finance. Analisis Biaya dan Manfaat Pembiayaan Investasi

Limbah Menjadi Energi Melalui Kredit Program. Jakarta, 2014. page 42-45;

• Yayasan Rumah Energi. Laporan Provinsi Semester Kedua 2015 Program Biogas Rumah

(BIRU), page 76.

http://www.kemenkeu.go.id/Artikel/pembiayaan-energi-terbarukan-solusi-atas-membengkaknya-subsidi-energi

http://www.kemenkeu.go.id/Artikel/pembiayaan-energi-terbarukan-solusi-atas-membengkaknya-subsidi-energi


Annexes

• Questionnaire Form A for (ex-)partner organisations

• Questionnaire Form B for (ex-)masons/supervisors

• Questionnaire Form C for government officials

• Questionnaire Form D for a digester quality inspection


Annex 1 - Form A: Interview form for current CPOs, ex-CPOs and other

organisations that construct BIRU model digesters outside the programme’s scope

Important: please explain briefly to the respondent the goal of this BIRU survey. The survey results on

organisational level will remain confidential and no (business) sensitive information will be passed on

to third parties. The results will be compiled a research report, which they can get access to if needed.

NUMBER:

1. Full name of the respondent?

Nama lengkap

2. Name of the organisation?

Nama organisasi

3. Function of the respondent?

Jabatan

4. What is your email address and phone number?

Alamat email dan nomor telephone

a. Email:

b. Phone:

5.

What type is the organisation?

Jenis organisasi

☐ Private enterprise ☐ Mason group ☐ Cooperative ☐ NGO ☐ Other:

6.

What is the organisation’s relation to BIRU?

Hubungan organisasi dengan BIRU

☐ Current CPO (go to Q10.) ☐ Ex-CPO (go to Q10.) ☐ Organisation never partnered with BIRU

7. What is the core business of the organisation?

Bisnis utama dari organisasi

8. How did your organisation become aware of BIRU?

Darimana organisasi anda tahu tentang BIRU

9.

Who (person or organisation) trained the organisation in building BIRU digesters? Siapa (orang atau organisasi) yang melatih organisasi anda dalam membangun reaktor biogas BIRU Please go to question 11.

10.

Please tick the years of cooperation with BIRU:

Di tahun berapa anda berpartner dengan BIRU

☐ 2010 ☐ 2011 ☐ 2012 ☐ 2013 ☐ 2014 ☐ 2015 ☐ 2016

11.

How many BIRU model digesters have you constructed outside of BIRU

support?

Berapa banyak reaktor biogas yang dibangun di luar support BIRU

In case zero (0), please go to question 24.


12.

Could you provide us with the following numbers of BIRU model digesters per year and size, which have

been constructed outside of the programme’s scope?

Mohon diisi jumlah reaktor model BIRU yang dibangun di luar program BIRU

2m3 4m3 6m3 8m3 10m3 12m3 …m3

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

In case a clear answer has been provided, please move to question 15.

13.

In case unclear at question 12., please estimate the total number:

Bila nomor 12 sulit untuk dijawab, mohon diperkirakan jumlahnya

☐ 1-10 ☐ 10-25 ☐ 25-50 ☐ 50-75 ☐ 75-100 ☐ 100-150 ☐ 150-200 ☐ Over 200

14.

Is the number of BIRU model digesters your organisation constructs outside of BIRU support…?

Apakah jumlah reaktor biogas model BIRU yang dibangun di luar dukungan BIRU?

☐ Increasing ☐ Decreasing ☐ Staying the same

15.

Is your organisation planning to continue BIRU model construction without programme support?

Apakah organisasi anda berencana untuk melanjutkan membangun reaktor biogas model BIRU di luar

dukungan program?

☐ Yes (please request the total number of planned units for 2016 and 2017) ☐ No ☐ Don’t know yet

2016: 2017:

16.

By whom was the organisation mainly requested to construct BIRU digesters outside of the programme?

Oleh siapakah organisasi diminta (terutama) untuk membangun reaktor biogas model BIRU di luar program?

☐ Government ☐ Private enterprise ☐ Households ☐ NGO ☐ Other:

More answers are possible, please tick the boxes

17.

Based on the answer at 16, what was the main underlying reason for the client to have biodigesters build?

Berdasarkan jawaban no 16, mohon sebutkan alasan utama klien membangun reaktor biogas?

☐ Corporate Social Responsibility ☐ Government policy ☐ Demand for fertiliser

☐ Demand for energy ☐ Environmental reason ☐ Other:

18. In which province(s) have you constructed these digesters?

Di propinsi mana saja anda sudah membangun reaktor biogas model BIRU?


Questions 19-21 are only meant for ex-CPOs and other organisations

19.

How does your organisation promote biogas?

Bagaimana organisasi anda mempromosikan biogas?

☐ Not ☐ Printed advertisement ☐ Online advertisement ☐ Door-to-door ☐ Other:

20.

Has your organisation supported the biogas households, outside of the BIRU programme, with…?

Apakah organisasi anda mendukung rumah tangga biogas rumah di luar program BIRU dengan?

☐ User training ☐ Bioslurry services ☐ Bioslurry training ☐ Link to credit facilities

☐ After Sales Services ☐ Other:


21.

Does your organisation work on individual skills development for your staff for biogas activities?

Apakah organisasi anda melakukan peningkatan keahlian staff terkait kegiatan biogas?

☐ Yes, example(s): ☐ No

22. How many staff do you currently employ for building BIRU model digesters?

Berapa orang staff yang dipekerjakan untuk membangun reaktor biogas model BIRU

23.

Are your masons working for other organisations as well?

Apakah mason bekerja untuk organisasi lain juga?

☐ Yes (please request their name and phone number) ☐ No ☐ Not aware

24.

Do you know of any other organisations building BIRU model digesters outside of the programme’s

scope?

Apakah anda mengetahui organisasi yang membangun reaktor biogas model BIRU di luar jangkauan

program?

☐ Yes (please request their name and phone number) ☐ No

25.

Could we please visit some of the biogas households for a brief quality examination?

Apakah kami diijinkan untuk mengunjungi beberapa biogas rumah untuk melakukan pengecekan singkat?

☐ Yes (please note down the location and household’s name) ☐ Not

Please mention the full anonymity of the examination results

Mohon disampaikan tentang anonym untuk hasil pengecekan

26. Any other important remarks by the respondent:

Ada catatan penting lainnya dari respondent:

Please use the reporting spreadsheet provided to feedback all the answers.


Annex 1 - Form B: Questionnaire to interview masons, ex-masons, supervisors, ex-

supervisors and other individuals that construct BIRU model digesters outside the

programme




NUMBER:


Nama lengkap

2.

What is your email address and phone

number?

Nomor telepon dan alamat email

a. Email:

b. Phone:

3.

In which year did you start working on biogas construction?

Di tahun berapakah anda mulai membangun reaktor biogas

☐ 2009 ☐ 2010 ☐ 2011 ☐ 2012 ☐ 2013 ☐ 2014 ☐ 2015 ☐ 2016

4.

Are you still actively constructing biodigesters?

Apakah anda masih bekerja membangun reaktor biogas

☐ Yes ☐ No, stopped in year:

5.

What is your business relation to BIRU?

Apa hubungan bisnis anda dengan BIRU?

☐ Current mason ☐ Current supervisor ☐ CPO employee/manager (please ask name and use form A)

☐ Ex-mason ☐ Ex-supervisor ☐ Never had a relation with BIRU ☐ Other:

6.

In case still active in biogas construction, are you working independently or in a group?

Kalau-kalau masih aktif membangun reaktor biogas, apakah anda bekerja sendiri atau bergabung dalam

kelompok tertentu?

☐ Part of a mason group ☐ Part of another organisation (please note down name)

7.

How many digesters have you constructed outside of BIRU support?

Berapa jumlah reaktor biogas yang sudah anda bangun di luar dukungan BIRU?

In case zero (0), please go to question 18

8.

Could you provide us with the following numbers of BIRU model digesters per year and size, which have

been constructed outside of the programme’s scope?

Mohon menyebutkan jumlah reaktor model BIRU tiap tahunnya berdasarkan ukuran reaktor, yang dibangun

di luar dukungan program BIRU.

2m3 4m3 6m3 8m3 10m3 12m3 …m3

2009


2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

In case a clear answer has been provided, please move to question 10.

8.


Kalau sulit menyebutkan angka yang pasti dari pertanyaan no 7, mohon berikan angka perkiraan

☐ 1-10 ☐ 10-25 ☐ 25-50 ☐ 50-75 ☐ 75-100 ☐ 100-150 ☐ 150-200 ☐ Over 200


9.

Is the number of BIRU model digesters you are constructing outside of BIRU support…?

Apakah jumlah reaktor model BIRU yang dibangun di luar program BIRU?

☐ Increasing ☐ Decreasing ☐ Staying the same

10.

Who trained you in constructing BIRU model digesters?

Siapa yang melatih anda dalam membangun reactor model BIRU?

☐ BIRU ☐ NGO ☐ Private enterprise ☐ Independent mason ☐ Government ☐ Other:

11. Have you trained others on BIRU model construction?

Apakah anda pernah melatih orang lain untuk membangun reaktor model BIRU?

☐ Yes, how many: (please ask for direct contact details or the employee) ☐ No

12.

Are you planning to continue BIRU model construction without programme support?

Apakah anda berencana untuk melanjutkan pembangunan reaktor model BIRU tanpa dukungan program?

☐ Yes (please request the total number of planned units for 2016 and 2017) ☐ No ☐ Don’t know yet

2016: 2017:

13.

By whom are you mainly requested to construct BIRU digesters outside of the programme’s support?

Oleh siapakah (terutama) anda diminta untuk membangun reaktor model BIRU di luar dukungan program?

☐ Government ☐ Private enterprise ☐ Households ☐ Other:


14.

Based on the answer at 13, what was the main underlying reason for the client to have biodigesters build?

Berdasarkan pertanyaan no 13, apa alasan utama klien membangun reaktor biogas?

☐ Corporate Social Responsibility ☐ Government policy ☐ Demand for fertiliser

☐ Demand for energy ☐ Environmental reason ☐ Other:

15. In which province(s) have you constructed these digesters?

Di provinsi-provinsi mana saja anda membangun reaktor-reaktor tersebut?


16.

How does your organisation promote biogas?

Bagaimana organisasi anda mempromosikan biogas?

☐ Not ☐ Printed advertisement ☐ Online advertisement ☐ Door-to-door ☐ Other:

17.

Has your organisation supported the biogas households, outside of the BIRU programme, with…?

Apakah organisasi anda mendukung rumah tangga biogas rumah di luar program BIRU dengan?

☐ User training ☐ Bioslurry services ☐ Bioslurry training ☐ Link to credit facilities

☐ After Sales Services ☐ Other:


18.

Do you know of any other organisations or person building BIRU model digesters outside of the

programme’s scope?

Apakah anda mengetahui organisasi lain yang membangun reaktor model BIRU di luar jangkauan program?

☐ Yes, how many: (please ask for name and phone number) ☐ No

19. In case working with BIRU, did you see construction assistants becoming constructors themselves?

Dalam bekerja dengan BIRU apakah anda melihat asisten tukang yang menjadi tukang ?

☐ Yes, how many: (please ask for name and phone number) ☐ No

20.

Could we please visit some of the biodigesters constructed outside of BIRU’s scope for a brief quality

examination?

Apakah anda akan mengijinkan kami mengecek biogas rumah tangga untuk pengecekan singkat?

☐ Yes (please note down the location and household’s name) ☐ No

Please mention the full anonymity of the examination results


Ada catatan penting lainnya dari responden?



Annex 3 - Form C: Interview protocol for current government institutions

supporting the construction of BIRU model digesters outside the programme’s

scope




NUMBER:


2. Name of the government organisation and department?

3. Function of the respondent?

4. What is your email address and phone number? a. Email:

b. Phone:

5. On which level does this government organisation operate?

☐ National ☐ Provincial ☐ District ☐ Other:

6. In which years has the government organisation actively promoted BIRU model digesters:

☐ 2010 ☐ 2011 ☐ 2012 ☐ 2013 ☐ 2014 ☐ 2015 ☐ 2016

7. How important is the BIRU programme to your government organisation?

☐ Not at all ☐ Somewhat important ☐ Important ☐ Very important

8.

Please elaborate on the answer selected in previous question 7.:

9. Could you provide an overview of the biogas programmes and projects your organisation was and is

involvement in, including investment?

# Name of program/project Duration

(years) Investor name

Investment

in Rp.

Applied BIRU

model?

1 ☐ Yes ☐ No

2 ☐ Yes ☐ No

3 ☐ Yes ☐ No

4 ☐ Yes ☐ No

5 ☐ Yes ☐ No

n ☐ Yes ☐ No

Please ask the respondent to provide us with documented information on these programmes/project

10. How many BIRU digesters have you supported outside of the BIRU programme?



11. Could you provide us with the following numbers of BIRU model digesters per year and size, which have

been constructed on the initiative of the government organisation (outside of the programme’s scope)?

2m3 4m3 6m3 8m3 10m3 12m3 …m3

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Or information per programme/project described at question 9.

Program Nr of BIRU digesters Implemented by

(name and contact)

Investment cost for

farmer Share of subsidy

1

2

3

4

5

n

12. Could you please elaborate on the implementation method of your programmes/project:

13.


☐ 1-10 ☐ 10-25 ☐ 25-50 ☐ 50-75 ☐ 75-100 ☐ 100-150 ☐ 150-200 ☐ 200-300

☐ 300-500 ☐ 500-750 ☐ 750-1,000 ☐ 1,000-2,000 ☐ Over 2,000

14.

Is your organisation planning to continue BIRU model construction without programme support?

☐ Yes (please request the information in the table below) ☐ No ☐ Don’t know yet

Year Planned nr of digesters Planned total investment in Rp. Planned programme/project

2017

2018


2019

2020

Please ask the respondent to provide us with documented information on the planned programmes/project

15. Which public policy documents include information on BIRU model digesters?

Policy Year Web link or received hardcopy?

16. Do you know of any other organisations building BIRU model digesters outside of the programme’s scope?

☐ Yes (please request their name and phone number) ☐ No




Sudah ada kotoran (filled plant)

Belum diisi (Non-Filled Plant)

Nama pemilik (Name of the plant owner) __________________________________________

Alamat (Address) ;_______________________Kabupaten (District) ____________________

No Digester (Plant ID number)________________ Ukuran (Plant Size)__________________

Nama CPO (Name of CPO or organisation)________________________________________

Nama Tukang (Name of (ex-)mason)______________________Reg. no.________________

Kontrol oleh (Plant controlled by)________________________________________________

Wakil CPO (CPO or organisation representative) ____________________________________

Tanggal kontrol (Plant control date)______________________________________________

QS no Standar Kualitas

Quality standards

Temuan-temuan Findings

Keterangan

Remarks

UMUM (GENERAL)

1 Hanya satu reaktor per rumah tangga

Only one plant per household

Ya (Yes) ______

Tidak (No) ______

3 Reaktor sesuai dengan rancangan yang

disetujui Construction as per approved design Yes_____ No_____

4 Reaktor sudah lengkap

Plant fully completed

Yes_____ No_____

6 Kartu garansi 3 tahun telah diberikan

3 years guarantee card given

Yes_____ No_____

7 3 tahun garansi layanan purna jual diberikan

3 years after sales services guarantee given

Yes_____ No_____

8 Pelatihan pengoperasian untuk pengguna

User’s operation training given

Yes_____ No_____

9 User’s bioslurry training given? Yes_____ No_____

Annex 4 - Form D: Indonesia Domestic Biogas Programme

Adjusted Quality Control Form for BIRU Assessment

Only for claimed BIRU model digesters build outside BIRU’s scope;

please inspect digesters under construction as well


10 Menggunakan tukang bersertifikat dan terdaftar Registered and certified mason used

Yes_____ No_____

MATERIAL KONSTRUKSI

CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS

11 Batu bata berkualitas baik

Good quality bricks

Yes_____ No_____

12 Pasir berkualitas baik

Good quality sand

Yes_____ No_____

13 Batu cor berkualitas baik

Good quality aggregates

Yes_____ No_____

14 Semen dengan kualitas baik

Good quality cement

Yes_____ No_____

15 Penggunaan semen dengan kuantitas yang benar

Bags of cement used (50 Kg)

________Bags

16 Cat akrilik dengan kualitas dan kuantitas baik

Good quality and quantity of acrylic paint used

Yes_____ No_____ Company_____

Ltr_______

17 Menggunakan batang penguat

Reinforcement rods used

_________ Kg

DIGESTER

18 Lubang digester dengan kedalaman yang

akurat Accuracy depth of digester pit Yes_____ No_____ _______ cm

19 Dinding bulat dengan radius yang akurat

Accuracy radius of round wall

Yes_____ No_____ _______ cm

20 Dinding bulat dengan pemipaan yang akurat Accuracy plumb of round wall

Yes_____ No_____ Differ _____cm

21 Dinding bulat dengan ketinggian yang akurat Accuracy height of round wall

Yes_____ No_____ _____cm

22 Pengisian dinding belakang dengan benar

Proper back filling on wall

Yes_____ No_____

23 Penyelesaian dinding bagian dalam dengan

benar Proper finishing inside round wall Yes_____ No_____

24 Penyelesaian lantai digester dengan benar

Proper casting and finishing of digester floor

Yes_____ No_____

KUBAH

DOME


25 Kubah dengan ketinggian yang akurat

Accuracy height of dome

Yes_____ No_____ ______ cm

26 Kubah dalam radius yang akurat

Accuracy of radius of dome

Yes_____ No_____ ______ cm

27 Perlakuan yang tepat sisi dalam kubah

Proper treatment inside the dome

Yes_____ No_____

28 Pipa gas utama terletak pada bagian tengah

Center pipe at centre point of dome

Yes_____ No_____

29 Pengurukan yang tepat keliling puncak kubah

Correct top filling over dome

Yes_____ No_____

30 Turret dengan ukuran yang benar

Correct size of turret

Yes_______ No_____ -------cm X ------cm

31 Turret dengan ketinggian yang benar

Correct turret height

Yes_____ No_____ --------cm

HYDROLIC CHAMBER

32 Panjang dan lebar yang akurat

Accuracy of lengths and width

Yes_____ No_____ ______cm

33 Kedalaman yang akurat

Accuracy of depth

Yes_____ No_____ ______cm

34 Volume (isi) yang akurat

Accuracy of volume

Yes_____ No_____ ______m3

35 Posisi yang benar lubang keluar terhadap manhole dan turret

Correct position overflow vs manhole and dome

Yes_____ No_____ ______degrees

36 Penyelesaian dinding dalam yang benar

Proper back fillings of walls

Yes_____ No_____

37 Outlet ditutupi penutup yang tepat dan perkuat dengan pelat

Outlet covered with properly cast and reinforced slabs

Yes_____ No_____

38 Akurasi jarak antara dasar outlet - top manhole

Accuracy distance bottom HC- top manhole

Yes_____ No_____ ______cm

39 Minimal 2 buah lubang kompos

Minimum two proper size compost pits

Yes_____ No_____ ___cm X____cm

INLET


40 Diposisikan dengan benar atas manhole

Properly positioned vs manhole

Yes_____ No_____

41 Lantai inlet diposisikan dengan benar terhadap lubang outlet

Inlet floor properly positioned vs outlet overflow

Yes_____ No_____ ______cm high

42 Ketinggian maksimal/minimal inlet terjaga Maximum/minimum height maintained

Yes_____ No_____ ______cm

43 Penyelesaian lubang inlet yang benar

Proper finishing of inlet pit

Yes_____ No_____ ______cm

44 Instalasi peralatan Mixer

Installation of mixing device

Yes_____ No_____

45 Instalasi mixer (pencampur) yang benar

Proper installation of mixing device

Yes_____ No_____ ______cm

PERPIPAAN AND PERALATAN

APPLIANCES AND PIPES

46 Merek pipa utama yang digunakan

Applied Main pipe as BIRU standard?

Yes_____ No_____ Brand_________

47 Merek Katup utama yang digunakan

Applied main gas valve as BIRU standard?

Yes_____ No_____ Brand_________

48 Pipa dan peralatannya yang dipergunakan

Applied pipe and pipe fittings as BIRU standard?

Yes_____ No_____ Brand_________

49 Kran pembuangan air yang dipakai

Applied water drain as BIRU standard?

Yes_____ No_____ Brand_________

50 Kompor gas disetujui oleh IDBP

Applied gas stove as BIRU standard?

Yes_____ No_____ Brand_________

51 Gas lamp approved by IDBP Yes_____ No_____ Brand

52 Pipa fleksibel yang dipakai

Applied flexible pipe as BIRU standard?

Yes_____ No_____ Brand_________

53 Pipa Inlet yang dipakai

Applied Inlet pipe as BIRU standard?

Yes_____ No_____ Brand_________

54 Peralatan Mixer disetujui oleh IDBP

Applied mixer as BIRU standard?

Yes_____ No_____ Brand_________

FITTINGS AND GAS PIPES

55 Tidak ada perangkat yang tidak perlu di jalur

pipa Unnecessary fittings in the pipeline Yes_____ No_____


56 Tidak ada kebocoran gas di jalur pipa dan katup

Gas leakage in the pipeline/valves

Yes_____ No_____

57 Menggunakan penyegelan yang tepat

Use of proper sealing agent

Yes_____ No_____

58 Pipa ditanam setidaknya pada kedalam 15 cm

Pipe buried at least 15 cm deep

Yes_____ No_____ ______cm

59 Mampu mengalirkan air dari jalur pipa

Able to drain all water from the pipeline

Yes_____ No_____

USERS

60 What type of organisation convinced the household to get a digester?

- Government Yes_____ No_____ Level?

- Private enterprise Yes_____ No_____

- NGO Yes_____ No_____

- Mason or mason group Yes_____ No_____

- Other

61 Why did the household decide to invest in a digester?

- Need for modern energy Yes_____ No_____

- Need for fertiliser Yes_____ No_____

- Environmental reason Yes_____ No_____

- Other: Please explain

62 What is the main benefit of biodigester currently?

- Reduction in household expenditures Yes_____ No_____

- More safety Yes_____ No_____

- Faster cooking Yes_____ No_____

- Reduction in firewood collection Yes_____ No_____

- Less effort to have energy Yes_____ No_____

- Other Please explain

63 If applicable, what is the reason on non-functioning of the digesters?

Please explain

64 If applicable, is the owner using the gas for cooking, lighting or both?

☐ Cooking ☐ Lighting

☐ Both


65 What was the investment cost for the owner? Rp.

66 Has a subsidy been provided? Yes_____ No_____ If yes, Rp.

67 Did the owner use a credit facility to pay for the digester?

Yes_____ No_____ If yes, name or org. and amount

68 Which information has been provided by the mason other than training?

- Explanation of ASS if applicable? Yes_____ No_____

- Where to get spare parts? Yes_____ No_____

- Who to contact in case of tech. issues? Yes_____ No_____

- Other?

69 What is the overall user satisfaction? %

70 Who’s benefitting most from the digester in the household?

☐ Male ☐ Female ☐ Both

* Kontrak, laporan penyelesaian, tanda terima subsidi, kartu garansi

Contract, completion report, subsidy receipt, warrantee card provided ------- Yes ----No

Catatan lain

Other remarks, if any:

Tanda tangan wakil CPO Tanda tangan staf IDBP Tanda tangan pemilik

Signature of representative Signature of IDBP staff Signature of User

report of the impact assessment of the indonesia domestic biogas programme

Documents