This analysis reveals the emissions impact of retiring coal plants in Indonesia, suggesting health benefits for the population.
Indonesia ranks as the eighth-largest emitter of greenhouse gases globally, with a high portion coming from the energy sector. The country relies heavily on coal-fired power plants due to their cost efficiency, despite their negative impacts on the health of the surrounding population. With targets to reduce emissions by 31.89 % by 2030, the Indonesian government plans to phase out conventional steam and subcritical coal plants by 2030 and 2035, respectively. This study develops a Retirement Index ( RI ) that incorporates; a. CO 2 emissions, b. population-weighted damage from PM 2.5 exposure, and c. additional plant characteristics to evaluate the phase-out of coal-fired power plants in Indonesia. CO 2 emissions were quantified, while PWD was estimated by combining PM 2.5 dispersion patterns generated using the HYSPLIT Trajectory Model with population density data in QGIS, providing a measure of potential health impacts. To complement this analysis, NO 2 data from the Sentinel-5P TROPOMI satellite were used to examine the spatial distribution of atmospheric pollutants and compare with HYSPLIT trajectories. The study identified six power plants as top candidates for decommissioning based on combining age, CO 2 , PM 2.5 emissions, and Population Weight Damage. Decommissioning those power plants potentially reduces annual CO 2 emissions by 93.52 million tonnes a -1 and PM 2.5 emissions by 33,583 tonnes a -1 . By developing a retirement index that integrates CO 2 emissions and the population-level health impacts of PM2.5, this study provides evidence-based guidance for prioritizing coal plant retirement in Indonesia. Accelerating a just and effective transition away from coal in a major coal-dependent economy such as Indonesia is not only critical for national sustainability but also has significant implications for global climate mitigation and public health.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fadiilah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: