Fossil Gas is Not Compatible With Indonesia’s Net Zero Ambitions

In the blink of an eye, the global average temperature rose 1.63 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level during the period from June 2023 to May 2024. Devastating climate impacts have been seen worldwide, and the situation will be more severe as the World Meteorological Organization reported that the world is likely to breach the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s long-term average threshold limit of 1.5-degree C within the next five years. The World Economic Forum warns that by 2050, the climate crisis could lead to an additional 14.5 million deaths and a staggering $12.5 trillion in economic losses.

To avert catastrophic climate disasters, countries must not only raise their climate pledges but also back them with ambitious, concrete actions. The upcoming round of updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the COP29 summit in Azerbaijan will be pivotal moments in determining whether the world can achieve the Net Zero Emission target to keep warming within safe limits. This includes Indonesia, which is now in the process of drafting its second NDC as the country’s emission reduction commitment to contribute to global efforts.

Achieving these targets requires a transformative shift in Indonesia’s energy sector, which remains dominated by fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas, which together are responsible for 75 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Indonesia is one nation in which fossil gas – misleadingly referred to as “natural” gas – has been promoted as a “transitional fuel” in the energy transition.

The final agreement of the COP28 summit recognized gas as a bridge toward renewables, describing it as a “cleaner” option than other fossil fuels. This endorsement has spurred a global expansion of gas, especially in the U.S., Qatar, and Australia, setting the stage for an liquefied natural gas (LNG) supply surge in the coming years. Demand for gas is also projected to increase, with emerging Asian countries, including Indonesia, forecast to see 5 percent annual growth in gas demand.

Indonesia’s government, aiming to use gas as a bridge fuel, has actively promoted new domestic gas exploration and gas utilization, especially in the power sector. However, the critical question remains: is reliance on gas truly a correct, viable path for Indonesia to meet its Net Zero Emission target on time – or is it a costly detour that risks worsening the climate crisis?

First, turning to gas as a transitional fuel fails to address the climate crisis. Gas, mainly composed of methane, produces significant greenhouse gas emissions – not only through combustion but also through methane leaks, which often go undetected at gas facilities. (From now on, the term “fossil gas” will be used in this article). Methane is particularly harmful, with a heat-trapping potential 82.5 times that of carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. Methane emissions have been responsible for approximately 30 percent of global temperature increases since the Industrial Revolution, and the energy sector, including fossil gas, contributes more than a third of these emissions. To align with the 1.5 degree C pathway, the IPCC recommends that global fossil fuel use decline sharply by 2050, including fossil gas, which needs to drop by around 45 percent.

However, the Indonesian government plans to use fossil gas as a “transitional fuel” for its energy transition and intends to raise fossil gas’s share in the national energy mix to 17 percent by 2050, while reducing oil and coal. The new draft Electricity Procurement Plan for 2024–2033 draft, which has been circulated, also emphasizes this approach, outlining a plan to add 8.6 gigawatts of new fossil gas power plants over the next decade.

Adding fossil gas is clearly incompatible with Indonesia’s climate goals as set out in its updated NDC, the primary benchmark for mitigation measures. Yet, in Indonesia’s second NDC, fossil gas is mistakenly framed as a low-carbon fuel and even included as a mitigation measure. Investing in new fossil gas infrastructure, with a lifespan of 30 to 40 years, risks locking Indonesia into decades of emissions that will undermine efforts to meet both its energy transition and its Net Zero Emission targets.

Second, turning to fossil gas does not create a safer environment. A survey by the Pew Research Center in 20 countries reveals that public perceptions of “natural gas” are much more positive than coal and oil. This perception is influenced by the term “natural,” which fosters the misleading impression that gas is a cleaner and more environmentally friendly option.

However, beyond greenhouse gas emissions, fossil gas power plants contribute to air pollution that impacts human health. These facilities release particulate matter, Nitrogen Oxides (NOx), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), all of which pose health risks. NOx and VOCs react with sunlight to form ground-level ozone, which can cause lung diseases and respiratory issues and reduce lung function.

Additionally, fossil gas operations can lead to severe accidents, endangering local communities. One accident that remains deeply ingrained in Indonesia’s memory is the Lapindo Mudflow incident, caused by a fossil gas mining failure in 2006. Leaked gas poisoned communities, and the hot mud eruption from this gas drilling accident was declared a national disaster. It forced 14,000 residents to evacuate. Gas drilling can also trigger earthquakes, as happened in the Netherlands, where repeated seismic activity from gas extraction led authorities to halt exploration in 2023. In light of these risks, it’s clear that fossil gas expansion compromises both environmental and public safety.

Third, turning to fossil gas undermines our energy security and threatens economic stability. Fossil gas prices are highly volatile due to competition between countries to obtain this depleting fuel. As a result, relying heavily on fossil gas will actually block us from achieving energy security. The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis warns that this price volatility will persist, driven by geopolitical tensions, supply-demand dynamics, and extreme weather threats.

One example is when the Russian-Ukraine war triggered a global fossil gas crisis, causing the gas price to surge by 1,900 percent from a low during the pandemic. Facing this situation, European countries raced to secure fossil gas for their domestic needs, leaving less developed nations facing blackouts. These included Bangladesh and Pakistan, which are home to almost half a billion people.

This situation demonstrates the fragility of fossil gas dependency, a risk that Indonesia may face as the country’s new president, Prabowo Subianto, has announced plans to significantly increase fossil gas usage in the energy transition. With Indonesia’s gas production declining consistently over the past decade, dependency on gas imports threatens the state power utility PLN with increasing energy subsidies, ultimately posing a bigger burden to the state budget and diverting funds from crucial sectors like education and health. An APEC study even projects that Indonesia will become a net gas importer by 2040 due to increasing demand, mainly for the power sector.

Allowing Indonesia to expand gas as a transitional fuel is equivalent to trapping the country in a gas lock-in situation. Not only will this path jeopardize our progress toward Net Zero Emissions by 2060, but it also undermines energy security and a healthy, sustainable environment. It also puts initiatives like the Just Energy Transition Partnership at risk, as a true energy transition cannot occur while fossil gas continues to expand. We should not forget the experience that once an oil exporting country, Indonesia now spends a huge amount of subsidy for domestic oil consumption.

In contrast, renewable energy such as solar and wind energy, is constantly getting cheaper than fossil gas, immune to market price volatility, and fully compatible with our climate targets. Not to mention that renewables produce minimal greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution – qualities essential for both environmental and public health.

Indonesia must focus on accelerating renewable energy development. With the goal of Net Zero Emissions by 2060 – or sooner – Indonesia cannot afford to add new fossil fuels, including fossil gas, to its energy mix.