A record that I made when there has been a tension between the legislative and executive, of the new Parliament building plans. At that time, had been a tension because of opposition by various parties. Finally, the building plan has been drawn. Let’s wait, whether the plan will appear again on another occasion, or not. Happy reading.
Already almost a year, tensions between people and DPR had not yet finished due to the new building plan for 560 members of DPR, which has 36 storeys at a cost of 1.1 T. Along the way, the various criticisms, insults, and ridicule to knock logic and conscience addressed to DPR. So far, they are quite able to withstand the attacks in various ways. Meanwhile, preparations for construction of the building still remains, although not openly known to the public.
In fact, they are fed and immune if only shot with the words “inappropriate or unnecessary to build a new magnificent building”. But, nothing wrong with a little creative to attack the vision of building itself, who knows the story may be somewhat different. If we observe the building design and actual problems associated with this nation, there would arise many questions. One of the important and critical issues being faced by Indonesia, is the energy problem.
For that reason, let’s discuss the following two facts! First, based on data issued by the International Energy Agency in 2008 (IEA 2008), there are approximately 35% of Indonesian who have not had access to electricity, which means that the electrification ratio (ER) is only 65%. That figure is still below the average ER of ASEAN which already reached 71.4%, and far left behind from Malaysia of 99.4%. Second, more and more countries in the world conscious to save energy, especially in an office building. Generally, the energy cost of office building shares about 30-40% of total operational costs. Hence, these two facts must be confronted to the building plans.
What does it mean energy for a magnificent building?
Lack of openness DPR, regarding the technical data of the building design, is not a major obstacle to answering the question above. There are still some considerations that can be accounted for logically. First, there are plans to provide pool and spa facilities. Second, there is a special rest room which is likely to frequently used as a place to stay for some reason. Third, the DPR is the “pure hard worker” type who convened often until late at night. Fourth, due to many permanent members and guests, the use of elevators and other electronic devices is quite high. Fifth, the building overlooks a little further east so that more walls exposed to sunlight. So, everything indicates that energy concerns are not a priority, but more interested in the beauty and facility of the building.
Based on the above considerations and with no intention to underestimate the concerns of individual members of DPR about energy conservation, it is assumed that the energy consumption index (ECI) of the new building is 300 kWh per-square-meter per-year (kWh/m2/year), or 25% exceeding the average of Jakarta ECI of 240 kWh/m2/year (categorized as wasteful). That figure is the result of energy audits for buildings using procedures in SNI 03-6196-2000. With total floor area of 62,216 m2 and assuming 3,000 hours of work a year, then the electrical energy consumption is 18,664,800 kWh per year. Thus, the estimated total power required approximately 6.2 MW, or 11.2 kW if divided evenly for each room. Quite reasonable when considered as luxury residential PLN’s customer. So, what is the meaning of 6.2 MW?
For PLN, would have to prepare extra power of 6.2 MW. That is, the Jakarta power load increases during the peak load time (PLT), because of the previous “workaholic” reason. If, Jakarta experienced power shortages in one day due to disruption or interruption of transmission, resulting in rolling blackouts, whether the new DPR building is also getting blackout? Can PLN be fair?
For the government, there is increased spending on electricity subsidies. Each electrical energy consumed, it means taking subsidies. With the cost of production (CPP) reported by PLN in 2008 at 1.272 Rp/ kWh, then at least monthly electric bill is about Rp.3.53 million per room, or 1.98 M for the building. That’s not included the cost of subscription charges and other costs.
For poor families as customers of PLN with power 450 W, 6.2 MW could serve 13,826 connections. Good enough to contribute in increasing ER. As for SMEs, it can feed 124,432 people, assumed, an SME only requires 2 kW, employs 10 people, and each person feed 3 people.
Indeed, whatever the facts given, it would not be able to stop the development plans. However, at least, let us offer the following two options;
First, please proceed without revising the building design. However, the consequence is the DPR should pay with energy savings. It must be the most energy efficient building (EEB) through the program of energy efficiency (EE). If DPR can prove 150 kWh/m2/year (categorized as quite efficient), it was considered as a great achievement. Of course, all members must concern for energy savings, which must be created through the tighly energy conservation program. Just examples of simple and easy ways to do: use certified energy efficient equipments, optimize the working hours in order the building energy consumption more efficient. Delay is a waste of energy!
Second, if DPR can still be patient and not afraid of cancellation due to the risk of political changes in the future, then it would be better if the design of the building was converted to the concept of low energy office (LEO). If possible, apply the concept of zero energy building (ZEB). Roof and walls can be utilized to produce the electricity from renewable energy (RE) sources, using solar cells or wind. If hot water also required, it can be generated by solar collector. Anyway, no swelling costs, but actually decreased.
Neither the first or second option is chosen, there are 3 important conditions that must be done by DPR to prove seriousness and concern for energy conservation. First, the building must participate in the nomination of the most EEB. The target is to become a winner, not just participating. Second, the ECI must be one of parameter to evaluate the performance of DPR and it must be reported regularly. Third, all information about the program and the results of energy performance, must be accessible online by public. The aim is emulated by others. If extended to domestic, busines and industry customers, of course the effect will be more powerful. It will help the EE and ET program initiated by the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (MEMR).
Then, what else can be donated from the new building? Suppose, if each room can save a million a month from energy savings, it has collected 560 million. It could be used to build 2 SD Inpres a month. Later, the building could also become a symbol in promoting EE and RE in Indonesia. This not only shows that Indonesia is really serious in dealing with climate change and energy security, but also create jobs in the construction sector and renewable energy industries.
Although the actual building energy conservation program in Indonesia has been started since 1985, it could be a sign of the seriousness of Indonesia in the energy saving program. At least, the working visit last year to the European parliament which used to work in an EEB, can imprint into the new building plan. Just a comparison, Malaysia had just started seriously in early 2000, but already has some EEB’s. What about Indonesia? Anyway, do not expect to be able to compete with Malaysia, if as the representatives of the people cannot be role model.
As a last hope to DPR, if ever it could no longer be stopped the construction, try honestly asking yourself, “Is there still a desire to contribute something towards energy saving awareness through your new building? “If not, forget it! Let the government and PLN to work more focused with the current available resources for people to improve their welfare. Please, do not steal their future, but think how to provide a bright future for them!