DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/jil.24.6.1349-1363

Kajian Kuantitatif Potensi Limbah Organik dan Panas Sisa Industri sebagai Sumber Daya Ekonomi Sirkular di Kabupaten Indramayu

1Graduate School, Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia

2Departemen Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian, Fakultas Pertanian, Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia

3Departemen Biologi, Fakultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam, Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia

Received: 12 Jun 2026; Revised: 10 Sep 2026; Accepted: 12 Sep 2026; Available online: 2 Nov 2026; Published: 6 Nov 2026.
Editor(s): Budi Warsito

Citation Format:
Abstract
Pengelolaan limbah organik yang tidak optimal dan pemborosan energi panas dari sektor industri merupakan dua permasalahan lingkungan yang saling terkait namun jarang dikaji secara terintegrasi dalam satu kerangka penilaian kuantitatif. Penelitian ini bertujuan mengkaji secara kuantitatif potensi limbah organik dan panas sisa industri sebagai sumber daya ekonomi sirkular di Kabupaten Indramayu. Metode yang digunakan adalah analisis data sekunder berbasis kalkulasi terstruktur, mencakup estimasi potensi limbah dari sektor pertanian, peternakan, dan rumah tangga, serta estimasi panas sisa industri dari Kilang Pertamina RU VI Balongan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan total potensi limbah organik yang dapat dimanfaatkan mencapai 2.449.876 ton/tahun, terdiri dari limbah pertanian 2.045.752 ton/tahun, limbah peternakan 156.435 ton/tahun, dan limbah rumah tangga 247.689 ton/tahun. Potensi panas sisa yang dapat dipulihkan diestimasi sebesar 1,44–3,3 juta GJ/tahun, cukup untuk mendukung proses pengeringan biomassa dan aktivasi zeolit dalam sistem produksi pupuk organik. Integrasi kedua sumber daya ini berpotensi menghindari emisi gas rumah kaca sebesar 97.995–244.988 ton CO₂e/tahun pada skenario moderat (tingkat pemanfaatan 20%), dengan basis perhitungan total usable biomass sebesar 2.449.876 ton per tahun dan faktor emisi 0,2–0,5 ton CO₂e/ton, serta meningkatkan sekuestrasi karbon tanah sebesar 92.000 ton CO₂/tahun. Dari sisi ekonomi, model ini memproyeksikan pendapatan sebesar Rp 293,99 miliar per tahun dengan Net Present Value sebesar Rp1,79 triliun selama 10 tahun pada skenario moderat, meskipun angka tersebut bersifat theoretical upper bound yang memerlukan kalibrasi lebih lanjut pada implementasi nyata. Temuan ini menegaskan bahwa Kabupaten Indramayu memiliki basis sumber daya yang komplementer dan signifikan untuk pengembangan sistem ekonomi sirkular lintas sektor.
Fulltext View|Download Email colleagues
Keywords: limbah organik; panas sisa industri; ekonomi sirkular; mitigasi emisi gas rumah kaca; sekuestrasi karbon

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Research Article
Language : ID
Most cited articles
Analisis Penyebab Masyarakat Tetap Tinggal di Kawasan Rawan Bencana Gunung Merapi (Studi di Lereng Gunung Merapi Kecamatan Cangkringan, Kabupaten Sleman Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta) Studi Pendahuluan Cemaran Air Limbah Rumah Potong Hewan di Kota Mataram PENGELOLAAN SAMPAH RUMAH TANGGA DI KECAMATAN DAHA SELATAN PENGARUH FAKTOR-FAKTOR SOSIAL-EKONOMI TERHADAP PERILAKU PENGELOLAAN SAMPAH DOMESTIK DI NUSA TENGGARA TIMUR Perencanaan Kegiatan Wisata Pendidikan Dalam Kawasan Geopark Rinjani Lombok Berbasis Daya Dukung Lingkungan (Studi Daerah Aik Berik) More cited articles
  1. Aguirre-Villegas, H. A., Larson, R. A., & Reinemann, D. J. (2024). Ammonia emissions from livestock manure management systems: A systematic review of mitigation strategies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 382, 135298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135298
  2. Bassi, A. M., Bianchi, M., Guzzetti, M., Pallaske, G., & Taisch, M. (2021). Improving our understanding of circular economy potential at territorial level using systems thinking. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27, 128–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.10.028
  3. Bernal, M. P., Alburquerque, J. A., & Moral, R. (2017). Composting of animal manures and chemical criteria for compost maturity assessment: A review. Bioresource Technology, 100(22), 5444–5453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.11.027
  4. Brunner, P. H., & Rechberger, H. (2016). Handbook of material flow analysis: For environmental, resource, and waste engineers (2nd ed.). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315313450
  5. Chertow, M., & Park, J. (2020). Scholarship and practice in industrial symbiosis: 1989–2019. In R. Salomone et al. (Eds.), Product-oriented environmental management systems. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31025-0
  6. Chojnacka, K., Witek-Krowiak, A., Moustakas, K., Skrzypczak, D., Mikula, K., & Loizidou, M. (2020). A transition from conventional irrigation and fertilization systems to sustainable nutrient recycling in agriculture: Circular economy model. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 130, 109959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.109959
  7. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications
  8. D'Amato, D., Droste, N., Allen, B., Kettunen, M., Lähtinen, K., Korhonen, J., Leskinen, P., Matthies, B. D., & Toppinen, A. (2020). Green, circular, bio economy: A comparative analysis of sustainability avenues. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, 716–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.053
  9. Ecosystem Marketplace. (2023). State of the voluntary carbon markets 2023. Forest Trends. https://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/carbon-markets
  10. Food and Agriculture Organization. (2019). Climate change and the global dairy cattle sector. FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/CA2929EN
  11. Forman, C., Muritala, I. K., Pardemann, R., & Meyer, B. (2016). Estimating the global waste heat potential. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 57, 1568–1579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.192
  12. Geissdoerfer, M., Pieroni, M. P. P., Pigosso, D. C. A., & Soufani, K. (2020). Circular business models: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 277, 123741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123741
  13. Huysman, S., De Schaepmeester, J., Ragaert, K., Dewulf, J., & De Meester, S. (2017). Performance indicators for a circular economy: A case study on post-industrial plastic waste. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 120, 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.01.015
  14. Inglezakis, V. J., & Zorpas, A. A. (2012). Heat of adsorption, adsorption energy and activation energy in adsorption and ion exchange systems. Desalination and Water Treatment, 39(1–3), 149–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2012.669169
  15. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2021). Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896
  16. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2023). AR6 synthesis report: Climate change 2023. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896
  17. International Energy Agency. (2022). World energy outlook 2022. IEA Publications. https://www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2022
  18. Kaza, S., Yao, L., Bhada-Tata, P., & Van Woerden, F. (2018). What a waste 2.0: A global snapshot of solid waste management to 2050. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1329-0
  19. KESDM. (2022). Handbook of energy and economic statistics of Indonesia 2022. Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral. https://www.esdm.go.id
  20. Kirchherr, J., Yang, N. H. N., Schulze-Spüntrup, F., Heerink, M. J., & Hartley, K. (2023). Conceptualizing the circular economy (revisited): An analysis of 221 definitions. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 194, 107001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2023.107001
  21. KLHK. (2022). Enhanced nationally determined contribution Republic of Indonesia. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/NDC/2022-09/23.09.2022_Enhanced%20NDC%20Indonesia.pdf
  22. KLHK. (2023). Laporan kinerja pengelolaan sampah nasional 2023. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan Republik Indonesia. https://www.menlhk.go.id
  23. Lal, R. (2020). Regenerative agriculture for food and climate. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 75(5), 123A–124A. https://doi.org/10.2489/jswc.2020.0620A
  24. Miró, L., Brückner, S., Cabeza, L. F., & Lauterbach, C. (2021). The potential of industrial waste heat recovery for reducing CO₂ emissions in the German economy. Energy, 228, 120511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.120511
  25. Pardalis, G., Johansson, M. T., Thollander, P., & Söderström, M. (2022). Techno-economic analysis of waste heat recovery measures in a Swedish foundry. Energies, 15(3), 1006. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15031006
  26. Putri, A. M., Damanhuri, E., & Sembiring, E. (2022). Organic waste potential and management strategy in Indonesian municipalities. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 24(3), 1045–1058. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-022-01380-w
  27. Pomponi, F., & Moncaster, A. (2017). Circular economy for the built environment: A research framework. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 710–718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.055
  28. Ramesh, K., Reddy, D. D., Biswas, A. K., Subba Rao, A., & Rao, A. S. (2021). Zeolites and their potential uses in agriculture. Advances in Agronomy, 113, 219–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394278-4.00004-X
  29. Sari, A., Maulidya, M., Butarbutar, R., Sari, R., & Rusmantoro, W. (2021). Indonesia and climate change: Working paper on current status and policies. Climate Policy, 21(5), 600–614. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1890037
  30. Sariningsih, Y., Hermawan, A., & Sudrajat, R. (2022). Inorganic fertilizer dependency and soil degradation in Indonesian paddy farming systems. Soil and Tillage Research, 220, 105378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2022.105378
  31. Singh, J., Suhag, M., & Dhaka, A. (2021). Augmented digestion of lignocellulose by steam explosion, acid and alkaline pretreatment methods: A review. Carbohydrate Polymers, 117, 624–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2014.10.012
  32. Scarlat, N., Martinov, M., & Dallemand, J. F. (2010). Assessment of the availability of agricultural crop residues in the European Union: Potential and limitations for bioenergy use. Waste Management, 30(10), 1889–1897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.04.016
  33. Smith, P., Soussana, J. F., Angers, D., Schipper, L., Chenu, C., Rasse, D. P., Batjes, N. H., van Egmond, F., McNeill, S., Kuhnert, M., Arias-Navarro, C., Olesen, J. E., Chirinda, N., Fornara, D., Wollenberg, E., Álvaro-Fuentes, J., Sanz-Cobena, A., & Klumpp, K. (2020). How to measure, report and verify soil carbon change to realize the potential of soil carbon sequestration for atmospheric greenhouse gas removal. Global Change Biology, 26(1), 219–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14815
  34. Tisserant, A., Pauliuk, S., Merciai, S., Schmidt, J., Fry, J., Wood, R., & Tukker, A. (2020). Solid waste and the circular economy: A global analysis of waste treatment and waste footprints. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21(3), 628–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12562
  35. Tubiello, F. N., Rosenzweig, C., Conchedda, G., Karl, K., Gütschow, J., Xueyao, P., Obli-Laryea, G., Wanner, N., Qiu, S. Y., De Barros, J., Flammini, A., Gola, G., Havlík, P., Michetti, M., Napolitano, E., Orr, B. J., Palazzo, A., Sandalow, D., Sanz Sanchez, M. J., & Schmidhuber, J. (2021). Greenhouse gas emissions from food systems: Building the evidence base. Environmental Research Letters, 16(6), 065007. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac018e
  36. United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development (A/RES/70/1). United Nations General Assembly. https://doi.org/10.18356/b6291bf9-en
  37. U.S. Department of Energy. (2008). Waste heat recovery: Technology and opportunities in U.S. industry. Industrial Technologies Program. https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/02/f7/waste_heat_recovery.pdf
  38. Wiedmann, T., & Minx, J. (2008). A definition of carbon footprint. In C. C. Pertsova (Ed.), Ecological economics research trends (pp. 1–11). Nova Science Publishers
  39. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications
  40. Zhang, H., Wang, L., Van Herle, J., Maréchal, F., & Desideri, U. (2021). Techno-economic comparison of green ammonia production processes. Applied Energy, 259, 114135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114135

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2026-11-06 21:29:02

No citation recorded.