EN | ID

Better questions. Better energy decisions.

Technical reading and system illustrations to prepare your next facility discussion.

ENERGY INTELLIGENCE / SUN POWERINDO

Evidence. Assumptions. Better project decisions.

Practical case notes and transparent worked examples connecting engineering choices with commercial decisions.

MICROGRID · SOLAR PV · BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE

Kalimantan plantation microgrid: is 3 MWp solar + 5 MWh BESS the right size?

An illustrative study for a PLN-connected plantation estate. Compare energy cost, solar utilisation and critical-load reserve before selecting the battery size.

Worked example, not a SUN client project or measured operating result. Load and solar profiles are synthetic. All prices are scenario assumptions, not vendor quotations or a verified tariff for this site.

3 MWpReference PV · 3.779 GWh/year
5 MWh / 2 MWBESS energy / PCS power · assumed
8,760 hSynthetic dispatch · 525 size combinations
Solar PV · 3 MWpBESS · 5 MWh / 2 MWPLN · PCC / protectionEstate AC busEMS / microgrid controllerCritical loads · sectionalised
Concept topology, not a construction single-line diagram. Island operation requires engineered isolation, protection, grid-forming controls and commissioning; an ordinary grid-tied inverter cannot provide it.

Start with the operating objective, not the battery size.

Under these example assumptions, solar plus storage is not the lowest energy-cost option. Storage becomes a design requirement when a specific critical-load reserve is imposed and the cost of resilience is accepted.

ConfigurationPLN GWh/yearEquivalent total cost · IDR bn/year
PLN only8.7609.07
3 MWp PV5.2548.74
3 MWp PV + 5 MWh BESS5.02212.61
Lowest tested: 2.5 MWp PV5.6788.63
Reserve constrained: 2.5 MWp PV + 2 MWh BESS5.64810.24

Equivalent cost includes PLN energy, annualised CAPEX and O&M, not just the electricity bill. The reserve-constrained row has a different objective. These results are not a procurement recommendation.

01 · Start with the hourly baseline

Engineers need average kW per interval, not a generator or coal plant nameplate. Aim for 12 months of timestamped 15–60 minute data: kWh, kW, grid/generator status, production schedules and critical loads. kW × 1 hour = kWh; a 15-minute interval uses 0.25 hours. Separate facility consumption from gross generation, generating auxiliaries and distribution losses.

This example uses 8,760 synthetic hours: 1.2 MW daytime and 0.8 MW night-time demand, with ±8% seasonal variation; annual consumption is 8.760 GWh. It represents no named plantation, excludes any palm-oil mill biomass generation and does not use measured local weather.

02 · How the solar and battery sizes are screened

SUN-MG-SCREEN-1.0 tests 525 combinations: PV 0–6 MWp in 0.25 MWp steps and BESS 0–10 MWh in 0.5 MWh steps. Each runs through 8,760 hours. PV serves demand first; surplus charges the battery; stored energy serves a deficit; PLN supplies the remainder. Unused surplus is curtailed. Export and export income are zero.

BESS limits: 20–90% SOC, charge and discharge efficiency each √85%, PCS power = 0.4 × nameplate kWh (5 MWh → 2 MW). There is no grid charging, simultaneous charging/discharging, demand charge, time-of-use tariff, ancillary-service revenue or outage event. The result is the lowest cost on the tested size grid and dispatch policy, not a global optimum or bankable design.

03 · What the 3 MWp / 5 MWh reference actually does

Pre-loss reference: 1,700 kWh/kWp/year; PR 78%; additional energy correction 5%. Generation = 3,000 × 1,700 × 78% × 95% = 3,779,100 kWh/year. The 1,700 assumption is neither site PVOUT nor irradiation in kWh/m². Do not apply PR again to a net PVOUT estimate without checking its loss boundary.

Without BESS, 3.506 GWh of solar directly serves demand and 0.274 GWh is curtailed. With 5 MWh BESS, 0.274 GWh charged delivers 0.232 GWh, with 0.041 GWh lost; PLN imports fall from 5.254 to 5.022 GWh. That incremental energy is worth approximately IDR241 million/year gross at the assumed IDR1,035.78/kWh, before battery cost, O&M, tax and ageing. A battery shifts energy; it does not generate it.

04 · Cost optimisation and backup are different decisions

The energy-cost objective selects 2.5 MWp PV with no BESS on the tested grid. Assumed battery cost outweighs the value of recovered solar. This does not establish that batteries never pay: resilience, production losses during outages, diesel costs and time-of-use tariffs can change the decision.

A separate screen requires a protected reserve of 0.5 MW for 2 hours = 1 MWh AC. The lowest tested combination becomes 2.5 MWp PV + 2 MWh BESS / 0.8 MW PCS, holding the normal-operation SOC floor at approximately 74.2%, above the 20% minimum. This excludes auxiliaries, ageing, temperature effects, motor starts and repeated outages; actual reserve sizing may need to be larger.

A 5 MWh battery provides about 3.23 MWh AC from 90% to 20% SOC: approximately 3.23 hours at a 1 MW load. If an outage starts at 40% SOC, only about 0.92 MWh remains above the minimum. Neither number is a backup guarantee.

05 · Economics and the diesel / coal baseline

Assumptions: PV IDR9 million/kWp (USD0.50/Wp × IDR18,000/USD); BESS including PCS IDR4.5 million/kWh (USD250/kWh), not verified market pricing. Discount rate 10%; PV evaluation life 25 years and battery life 10 years; annual O&M 1.2% and 2% of CAPEX. Total equivalent annual cost = grid energy purchases + annualised CAPEX + O&M. Capital recovery factor = r(1+r)^n / [(1+r)^n−1]. The first-year profile and tariff repeat; degradation, augmentation, tax, financing, residual value and cost escalation are excluded. This is not a cash electricity bill or bankable LCOE.

For diesel, obtain litres/hour against kW, delivered fuel cost, minimum stable load, unit availability, starts/stops and spinning reserve. For a coal plant, add part-load heat rate, fuel cost, auxiliary demand, minimum stable generation, ramp rates, minimum up/down times and start costs. Thermal optimisation requires unit commitment; changing a single tariff is insufficient. Only the PLN baseline is modelled here.

06 · Turn the screen into a scoped project assessment

SUN can support baseline development, option sizing and scope definition, technical-commercial proposal comparison and developer/EPC discussions within the agreed engagement. A project study requires metered data, coordinate-specific weather, power quality, PCC limits, islanding requirements, protection studies, fire safety, flood levels, maintenance access, throughput warranties and end-of-life planning with responsible specialists.

Confirm the installation class and permitting pathway with PLN and the relevant authorities. ESDM Regulation 2/2024 addresses rooftop solar; it is not automatically the approval framework for every plantation ground-mounted array. No PLN approval, quota, export credit or verified carbon reduction is assumed. Engagement starts with an agreed scope and quotation; payment is offline against invoice.

Sources: World Bank / Global Solar Atlas · Indonesia dataset (metadata 2023); NREL 2024 ATB · commercial battery storage (85% RTE reference); US DOE · Islanding a Microgrid (2021); ESDM Regulation 2/2024 · rooftop solar. Model version SUN-MG-SCREEN-1.0 · 9 November 2026.

Worked example · approved screening assumptions

1,000 kWp industrial solar: the numbers behind the decision

Separate facility demand, PV capacity and self-consumption before comparing ownership with PPA.

1,259,700 kWh / year
Read case & assumptions

Context & scope

Facility demand: 1,000 kW. PV capacity: 1,000 kWp. Year-one generation = 1,000 × 1,700 × 78% × 95% = 1,259,700 kWh. The 1,700 kWh/kWp/year reference is applied before PR and correction in this screening model.

Technical & commercial approach

At USD 0.50/Wp and IDR 18,000/USD, indicative PV CAPEX is IDR 9 billion. At IDR 1,035.78/kWh and 100% self-consumption, avoided electricity cost is IDR 1,304,772,066/year. After an O&M allowance of 1.8% of CAPEX, annual net benefit is IDR 1,142,772,066: simple payback is approximately 7.9 years.

Result & decision boundary

A 20% PPA discount gives IDR 828.624/kWh and first-year customer savings of IDR 260,954,413 under identical utilisation. This is a screening example, not a client result or tariff offer. Hourly matching, roof condition, grid/export rules, tax, finance, degradation and replacement costs need a project-specific model.

Explore Calculator →
Public facility case · two sites

OneMed / Jayamas Medica — 740 kWp

Why portfolio-wide capacity must be separated from individual facility design.

Krian + Mojoagung
Read case & assumptions

Context & scope

The developer reports 740 kWp across Krian and Mojoagung. The figure represents both facilities together; it is not assigned to one rooftop.

Technical & commercial approach

Technical review: separate load profiles, roof constraints, protection and metering at each site. Commercial review: compare site-level energy use and contract responsibilities before consolidating the investment view.

Result & decision boundary

Reported result: published installed capacity. SUN Powerindo’s public reference describes requirements discussions and project facilitation; this page does not attribute EPC delivery or unverified savings to SUN Powerindo.

Primary project source →
Explore Calculator →
Public facility case · ground-mounted PV

Indocement Tarjun — 19.7 MWp

A large industrial solar project starts with land, grid and operating interfaces.

19.7 MWp / 15 MW AC
Read case & assumptions

Context & scope

Indocement announced its ground-mounted Tarjun plant in May 2024: 19.7 MWp DC and 15 MW AC. These are different electrical ratings, not interchangeable units.

Technical & commercial approach

Technical approach to assess: usable land, geotechnical and drainage conditions, connection design, protection coordination and industrial load matching. Commercial value is established through measured energy use, agreed scope and the actual contract.

Result & decision boundary

Reported result: the client’s published operating installation. The capacity is a public project reference; it does not by itself establish SUN Powerindo’s EPC responsibility or revenue.

Primary project source →
Explore Calculator →
Worked utility-scale reference

100 MWp IPP: screening scale, not an investment verdict

Start with generation, then build a credible offtake and delivery model.

125.97 GWh / year
Read case & assumptions

Context & scope

100 MWp = 100,000 kWp. Using the same preliminary energy assumptions gives 125,970,000 kWh in year one. At USD 0.50/Wp and IDR 18,000/USD, the PV CAPEX reference is IDR 900 billion.

Technical & commercial approach

This scale-up is illustrative. It excludes land, grid reinforcement, financing, taxes and contingency unless specifically included in a later budget. Industrial retail PLN tariffs and a 20% rooftop PPA discount are not an IPP offtake price.

Result & decision boundary

Required next evidence: site-specific resource, connection study, land rights, permits, offtake terms and a bankable cost schedule. No IRR, contracted capacity or project award is claimed.

Explore Calculator →

Your Project Development Journey