Journal of Engineering Science and Technology

Special Issue on ISSC’2016, April (2017) 114 - 125

© School of Engineering, Taylor’s University

SUSTAINABLE AND OPTIMUM GENERATION MIX

POSSIBILITIES FOR MALAYSIA POWER SECTOR

N. Y. DAHLAN*, A. A. MOHAMMAD ARIS, M. N. M. NAWI

Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA,

40450 Shah Alam, Selangor DE, Malaysia
School of Technology Management and Logistic, Universiti Utara Malaysia, 06010 Sintok,
Kedah, Malaysia
*Corresponding Author: [email protected]

Abstract
Malaysia's energy generation mix has long depended on a single fuel. This
over-dependency harms long-term energy sustainability. This has led Malaysia
to find other alternative resources to generate electricity. Options include coal,
leading to dependency on imported coal and increases CO2 emissions; natural
gas, though Malaysia is currently facing depletion of gas reserve and gas price
fluctuations; nuclear, however the recent Fukushima incident and public
acceptance are issues; or renewable energy (RE), which is interruptible and
expensive. This paper proposes a study to determine the optimal long-term
generation mix for Malaysia using Dynamic Programming. The price of natural
gas, cost and availability of nuclear power, environmental policy and energy
security are all considered in the model. The model was tested on the Malaysian
power system. Result shows that an optimal generation mix for Malaysia in
2030 will be 40% coal, 38% gas, 11% renewable energy, 5% hydro, 5% nuclear
and 1% oil. Increasing RE target capacity and introducing a carbon tax will
affect the development of coal. On the other hand, increasing gas prices reduce
the percentage of gas and increase the proportion of coal and nuclear.
Keywords: Generation mix, Dynamic Programming, energy policy.

1. Introduction
In 1977, about 85% of electricity generation in Malaysia used oil. The global oil
crisis in the 1980s resulted in an increase in oil price. In addition to the discovery
of natural gas, Malaysia’s government was forced to introduce the Four-Fuel
Policy (1981). The four fuel diversification policy focused on oil, gas, coal and
hydro. This policy was implemented to reduce dependency on oil as a primary

114
 Sustainable and Optimum Generation Mix Possibilities for Malaysia . . . . 115

Nomenclatures

CCt Total Carbon Emission

FOMall,t Total Fixed Operation and Maintenance Cost
ICt Total Investment Cost
Kt Retirement Year
PCall,t Total Production Coast
PRE Tot Total power generation from RE
PNuc Tot Total Power Generation from Nuclear
TC Total Cost
VOMall,t Total Variable Operation and Maintenance Cost
Xt Generating Capacity

fuel. Since then, the use of gas increased rapidly until it became the major
resource of electricity (~75% of generation mix) in 2001. Later, depletion of
natural gas reserves and limitation of gas supplies by PETRONAS in 2002 has
made coal an attractive fuel strategy despite being environmentally hazardous.
Hydro may be a cheap, environmentally friendly fuel, but complex technological
requirements and high costs for building dam has made such plans unattractive. In
2001, in conjunction of fuel diversification and awareness in energy efficiency,
the fuel policy was expanded with the introduction of renewable energy as the
fifth generation fuel. The focus of 5th fuel policy was securing a safe, cost-
effective, sustainable and secure energy supply for Malaysia’s power sector [1].
In 2011, it was reported that approximately 57.65% of electricity was
generated from gas, 33.3% from coal, 8.8% from hydro and 0.3% distillate [2].
Over-dependency on a certain fuel types is not a viable long-term option. This has
led Malaysia to diversify its current generation mix with various fuel types for a
more secure and sustainable electricity supply.
Genereration mix model has been developed in [3-5]. However, this paper
proposes a Dynamic Programming (DP) approach for determining optimal long-
term generation mix possibilities for Malaysia’s power sector from 2013 to 2030.
The model takes into account current fuel constraints, policy, and Malaysia’s existing
power development plan. A sensitivity analysis is performed to investigate the effect
of economical and political constraints on Malaysia’s future generation mix.

1.1 Fuel options for generation mix in Malaysia

Several fuel options may diversify the current generation mix. Fuel options and
their limitations are described below:
1.1.1 Gas
In Malaysia, about 50% of gas producing fields are solely owned and operated by
PETRONAS Carigali. As of January 2012, Malaysia ranked 12th worldwide for
largest available gas reserves. Malaysia’s gas reserves stood at 83.0 trillion
standard cubic feet (tscf) [6]. The total generation capacity from gas in 2011 was
12,207 MW. This capacity has a contracted gas volume of 1,744 mmscfd.
Depletion of gas reserves has forced PETRONAS to limit gas supply. With the

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

116 N. Y. Dahlan et al.

current supply of gas limited to 1,150 mmscfd, gas-fired plants are limited in
operation [2]. Furthermore, volatile global gas prices reduce investment in gas-
fired power plants, as revenue is not promising. As a consequence, more coal and
other fuels are required, affecting the future generation mix.
1.1.2 Coal
Coal used to generate electricity in Malaysia is entirely imported. In 2011, 73% of
coal was imported from Indonesia, 20% from Australia and another 8% from
South Africa [2]. The issue became worse when the Indonesian government
announced plans to limit coal exports in 2009 as domestic demand grew. A
shortage of coal and an increase in price are the main issues of coal use in
Malaysia. Moreover, coal has the highest carbon footprint among all fossil fuel
resources. In an effort to enhance energy security, the Malaysian government is
also exploring the potential for development of local coal sources, particularly in
Sarawak, as well as securing long-term supplies from abroad.
1.1.3 Hydro
Although Malaysia has an abundance of hydro potential, this generation
technology has not been considered for expansion technology in this paper,
because most of the hydropower potential is situated in Borneo and not the
Peninsular [7]. The hydro potential for Peninsular Malaysia is limited due to flat
terrain. Moreover, developing a new hydropower plant would require support
from state governments, which is not easily obtained [2].
1.1.4 Renewable energy (RE)
Renewable energy is a viable option for generation in Malaysia. However, the
main issues hampering the expansion of RE are a high cost per kWh and low
capacity. The Sustainable Energy Development Authority Malaysia (SEDA) is
targeting 4,000MW of generation from RE by 2030 [8]. The cost and availability
of RE as well as RE development policy will influence choices for RE and other
technologies in Malaysia’s generation mix.
1.1.5 Nuclear
Malaysia is considering building nuclear power plants to diversify its fuel mix.
The Malaysia Nuclear Power Corporation (MNPC) is looking into the possibility
of building a 2GW nuclear power plant, with the first 1GW expected to be ready
by 2021 [9]. However, the recent Fukushima incident and the public acceptance
are the major issues of implementation. Despite safety concerns, nuclear power
plants have some advantages over conventional fossil fuel power plants in terms
of providing a lower cost of electricity generation [10], producing a large amount
of energy, and reducing CO2 emissions.

1.2 Committed expansion plants from competitive bidding exercise

EC is targeting 4,500 MW of new capacity by 2016 via competitive bidding [11].
This is intended to replace capacity from the 1st generation power purchase
agreement (PPA) which will expire between 2015 and 2017, as well as preparing
for future load growth [12]. The first track bidding process was completed on
October 2012. TNB won the bid and is responsible for owning and operating a
combined-cycle power plant with capacity of 1,071MW in Prai, Penang. The

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

 Sustainable and Optimum Generation Mix Possibilities for Malaysia . . . . 117

combined-cycle power plant will use two units of Siemens H-class gas turbines to
achieve plant efficiency at around 60% compared to the efficiency of an F-class
combined cycle plant in the system at around 55%. This power plant was
expected to be commissioned by March 2016 [13]. The second track (restricted
tender) bidding process associated with six first IPP agreements saw the
retirement of three IPPs in 2015, which are YTL Power International Bhd (Paka
and Pasir Gudang) with total capacity of 1,212MW, Powertek (Telok Gong) and
Malakoff (Port Dickson) with both 440MW capacities. Meanwhile, Genting
Sanyen Power Sdn Bhd and Segari Energy Ventures Sdn Bhd, with a capacity of
720MW and 1,303MW respectively, were given an extension to their agreement
for another 10 years beginning in 2015. On the other hand, TNB’s Pasir Gudang,
with a 729MW capacity, will be extended for another five years beginning in
2017.

2. Generation Mix Modelling

2.1 Proposed model for generation mix
2.1.1 Dp-based generation mix model
DP-based generation mix is designed to minimize the total cost of generation
expansion. Some factors that contribute to the generation cost of the technologies
are included in the generation mix model such as investment cost, construction
time, plant lifetime, fixed and variable O&M costs, fuel cost, fuels escalation rate,
and the carbon emission tax. The total cost of future generation expansion is
given by the following equation:
𝑃𝐶𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑋𝑡 𝑡 + 𝐼𝐶 𝑈𝑡 𝑡 +
𝑇𝐶 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑇𝑡=1
𝐹𝑂𝑀𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑋𝑡 𝑡 + 𝑉𝑂𝑀𝑎𝑙𝑙 (𝑋𝑡 )𝑡 + 𝐶𝐶𝑡 (1)
where TC is the total cost of generation mix over the simulation horizon, PCall,t
is the total production cost of all the generating units in the system at year t, ICt is
the total investment cost of the new investments, Xt is the cumulative capacity
(MW), Ut is the capacity addition and T is the planning horizon. Multiplying the
marginal cost by the energy produced gives the production cost of each unit. The
energy produced each year is computed by performing economic dispatch for
each segment of the load duration curve (LDC). On the other hand, FOMall,t is
the total fixed O&M cost of all the generating units, VOMall,t is the total variable
O&M cost of all the generating units and CCt is the total carbon emission cost of
coal and gas power plant.
The mathematical description of yearly PC, FOM, VOM and CC of the
individual generating units in the system are as follows:

𝑃𝐶𝑖,𝑡 =
𝑆𝑠=1 𝑀𝐶𝑏𝑖,𝑠 𝑝𝑖,𝑠 𝑑𝑠 (2)

𝐹𝑂𝑀𝑖,𝑡 = 𝐹𝑂&𝑀 𝑃𝑖 𝑚𝑎𝑥 (3)

𝑉𝑂𝑀𝑖,𝑡 =
𝑆𝑠=1 𝑉𝑂&𝑀 𝑝𝑖,𝑠 𝑑𝑠 (4)

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

118 N. Y. Dahlan et al.

𝐶𝐶𝑖,𝑡 =
𝑆𝑠=1 𝐶𝑂2 𝐶𝑇𝑝𝑖,𝑠 𝑑𝑠 (5)

where S is the number of segments in the LDC, MCbi is the marginal cost of
generating unit i, pi,s is the power produced by generating unit i at segment s
(obtain from economic dispatch) and ds is the duration in hours. FO&M, is the
annual fixed O&M cost per MW capacity, VO&M, is the variable O&M cost per
MWh of energy produced, CO2 is the amount of carbon dioxide emission per
MWh of energy produced by coal and gas technologies and CT is the carbon tax
set by government for every tonne of carbon.
Optimization is subject to several of the following constraints:
𝑋𝑡 = 𝑋𝑡−1 + 𝐴𝑡 + 𝑈𝑡 − 𝐾𝑡 , 𝑡T (6)

𝑅𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝑅 𝑋𝑡 , ∀𝑡 ∈ 𝑇 (7)
𝑃𝑅𝐸𝑡𝑜𝑡 = 𝑃𝑅𝐸𝑚𝑎𝑥 (8)
𝑃𝑁𝑈𝐶𝑡𝑜𝑡 ≤ 𝑃𝑁𝑈𝐶𝑚𝑎𝑥
(9)

U t  Ct , t T (10)

where Kt is the capacity retirement in year t, At is the committed addition of units,

R is the reserve margin resulting from the generation capacity Xt, and Rmin is the
minimum reserve requirement each year. Equation (6) indicates that the
cumulative capacity at year t is equal to the capacity at the previous year, plus the
new committed addition of units and new capacity built from DP at year t, minus
the capacity retirement. At and Kt are given data, and Ut is the unknown variable
that need to be determined. Equation (7) constrains the installed capacity to be
greater than the minimum reserve requirements allowed in the system. Equation
(8) constrains the total cumulative installed capacity of RE at year T to meet the
Government RE policy target. Equation (9) limits the total installed capacity of
nuclear power at year T to be less than or equal to the maximum projected
capacity. This is due to the constraint of locations for building nuclear plant in
Malaysia. Equation (10) shows that capacity addition in each year is subjected to
investment availability in year t.

2.1.2 Economic dispatch

Economic dispatch is a short term determination of the optimal output of a
number of electricity generation facilities to meet the system load at the lowest
possible cost, while serving power to the public in a robust and reliable manner.
Economic dispatch is modeled in the DP-based generation mix model to calculate
the power dispatch by the generating unit in the system and production cost of
each unit. The economic dispatch is performed for each segment of the LDC of
each year. The economic dispatch is modelled as an optimization problem, and
the total yearly operating cost is minimized:
S I 
min   MCbi pi , s d s  (11)
 s 1 i 1 

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

 Sustainable and Optimum Generation Mix Possibilities for Malaysia . . . . 119

where I is the number of generating units in the system.

The objective function is subject to several constraints:

𝐼𝑖=1 𝑝𝑖,𝑠 = 𝑝𝑑𝑠 (12)
𝛿𝑖,𝑠 𝑃𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝑝𝑖,𝑠 ≤ 𝛿𝑖,𝑠 𝑃𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑥 (13)
where δi,s is a binary variable ϵ {0,1}, that determines the status of generating
unit i at segment s, pds is the system demand at segment s. The first constraint is
enforced so that the selected generation meets the load demand of segment s; as in
equation (12). Each of the generating units is also constrained by its minimum
generation and the maximum capacity that can be supplied as in equation (13).

2.2 Test data

The proposed model has been implemented in MATLAB. The analysis has been
carried out on Malaysia’s power system. The system consists of forty generating
units with a total installed generation capacity of 22,722MW. The existing
technologies in the system are listed in Table 1. Table 2 shows two expansion
plants that have been scheduled to be built in the future based on the EC plan
from the results of competitive bidding exercise and nuclear development
program by MNPC. The first power plant is a CCGT with 1,071MW capacity in
Prai, Penang in 2016 and second is a 1,000MW nuclear power plant in 2021. Two
IPPs (Genting Sanyen Power, Segari Energy Ventures) will be granted a 10-years
PPA extension and will be retired on 2025. Meanwhile, TNB’s Pasir Gudang
plant will extend its services for another five years and will be retired on 2022.
These plants are also shown in Table 3. The plants have been determined to
emerge in the DP generation mix model during the simulation. Four IPPs plants
(YTL Power (Paka and Pasir Gudang), Malakoff Berhad (Port Dickson) and
Powertek Berhad (Telok Gong)) will be shuttered in 2015 upon expiry of their
PPAs, as shown in Table 3.
We considered three generation technologies, namely nuclear, coal and gas, to
be selected as DP each year for future generation expansion. The technical and cost
characteristics of the expansion plants are shown in Table 4 as presented in [14].
Similar costs data and carbon intensity of different technologies have been used for
the existing system. The cost functions of the generating units are assumed to be
linear. Fig. 1 graphically shows the position of the technologies in the system on the
supply curve according to their marginal cost.
It is also assumed that the load of each segment of the LDC increases by 3.0%
every year [2]. Fig. 2. shows a six-segment of discretized LDC for Malaysia in
2013, based on the hourly load data in year 2011. The minimum system reserve
margin in the DP-based generation mix model is set at 20% as targeted by [15]. The
RE has been assumed to consistently increase 220.6MW each year to achieve a
target cumulative capacity of 4000MW in 2030.

Table 1. Existing generation technologies for Malaysia Power System.

Power Plant Name Type Cap Power Plant Name Type Cap
S.A.S. Bersia 01 hyd 72 Nur Gen. 21 gas 220
Chenderoh 02 hyd 40.5 Paka 22 gas 808

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

120 N. Y. Dahlan et al.

S. A.S. Kenering 03 hyd 120 Pasir Gudang 23 gas 404

Sungai Piah U 04 hyd 14.6 Petronas Gas 24 gas 324
Sungai Piah L 05 hyd 54 Port Dickson 25 gas 440
Temenggor 06 hyd 348 Prai 26 gas 350
S. Ismail Petra 07 hyd 600 Putrajaya 27 gas 625
Sultan Mahmud 08 hyd 400 S. Iskandar 28 gas 729
Sultan Yusof Jor 09 hyd 100 Sultan Ismail 29 gas 1136
Sultan idris Woh 10 hyd 150 T.Kling 30 gas 330
Odak 11 hyd 4.2 Telok Gong1 31 gas 440
Habu 12 hyd 5.5 Telok Gong2 32 gas 720
Kampong Raja 13 hyd 0.8 Tek. Tenaga P 33 gas 650
Kampong Terla 14 hyd 0.5 T. Jaafar 34 gas 1500
Robinson Falls 15 hyd 0.9 Jimah 35 coa 1400
Sg Kenerong 16 hyd 20 Manjung 36 coa 2295
C.Bridge 17 gas 832 S. S. Abd. AS 37 coa 2420
G. Sanyen K.L 18 gas 720 Tanjung Bin 38 coa 2100
Lumut GB3 19 gas 651 Gelugor 39 oil 398
Lumut 20 gas 1303 RE 40 RE 29

Table 2. Scheduled future expansion and extension plant by EC and MNPC.

Year Commission/
Power Plant Name Type Cap Year Retire
Extension
Prai (TNB) PGEV_02 gas 1071 2016 -
Nuclear PGEV_01 nuc 1000 2021 -
Genting Sanyen K.L. Unit_18 gas 720 2015 2025
Lumut (Segari) Unit_20 gas 1303 2015 2025
Sultan Iskandar (TNB) Unit_28 gas 729 2017 2022

Table 3. Future retirement plant from IPPs.

Power Plant Name Type Pmax Year retirement
Paka (YTL) Unit_22 gas 808 2015
Pasir Gudang (YTL) Unit_23 gas 404 2015
Port Dickson (Malakoff) Unit_25 gas 440 2015
Telok Gong (Powertek) Unit_31 gas 440 2015
Table 4. Technical and cost characteristics of the expansion plant.
Parameters Nuclear Coal Gas
Unit
Name PGE1_03 PGE1_02 PGE1_01
Technical parameters
Net capacity MW 1000
Heat rate MBTU/MWh 19.78 7.35 7.04
Construction time years 9 4 5
Plant life time years 40 30 25
Carbon intensity tC/MBTU 0 0.0258 0.0145
Cost parameters
Fixed O&M $/kW/yr 57.14 20.63 14.29
Variable O&M $/MWh 0.365 3.063 0.476
Fuel cost $/MBTU 0.55 2.46 4.23
Fuel escalation rate % 0.5 0.5 1.5
Nuclear waste fee $/MWh 0.91 0 0

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

 Sustainable and Optimum Generation Mix Possibilities for Malaysia . . . . 121

Fig. 1. The position of the technologies in the system on the supply curve
according to their marginal cost.

Fig. 2. Six-segment of discretized LDC for Malaysia in 2013.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1 Base case
A base case study is first carried out using the proposed model to forecast
Malaysia’s generation mix for the next 17 years from 2013 to 2030. This base
case is a benchmark for the other analyses in this paper. In this base case, carbon
tax is not considered. Fig. 3. shows the results of optimal long-term generation
mix in the base case. Gas power plants are more competitive in the earlier years;
however, they are replaced by the coal and nuclear plants towards the end of the
planning horizon as gas becomes more expensive than coal and uranium. The
proportion of RE increases to meet the RE target in 2030.

Fig. 3. The combination results of optimal long-term

generation mix in the base case per year till 2030.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

122 N. Y. Dahlan et al.

Fig. 4. Plants expansion and retirement from

the DP-based generation mix in the base case.

Figure 4. shows the result of selected plants and retirement plants from DP-
based generation mix model each year from 2013 to 2030. The upper block contains
the expansion plants selected by the DP and the power plants that have been
scheduled for expansion and extension by EC, while the lower block represents the
retirement units during the simulation. It can be seen that the committed expansion
plants, CCGT in Prai (PGEV_2) and the nuclear plant (PGEV_01) emerge in 2016
and 2021, respectively. Four IPPs plants, namely Paka Power Station (Unit_22),
Pasir Gudang (Unit_23), Port Dickson (Unit_25) and Telok Gong (Unit_31), will
retire in 2015. The extended IPPs plants at Sultan Iskandar (Unit_28) will retire in
2022 and at Genting Sanyen (Unit_18) and Lumut (Unit_20) in 2025.
Other expansion plants in Fig 4. are selected by the DP to meet demand growth
and to replace the retirement units. Another nuclear power plant besides the one
scheduled by the MNPC is selected by the DP in year 2025 to replace some units
that retire in that year. A more balance generation mix in 2030 is found with 40%
generation is from coal, 38% from gas, 11% from RE, 5% from hydro, 5% from
nuclear and 1% from oil.

3.2 Sensitivity to the development of RE

Sensitivity analysis towards the development of RE in Malaysia is carried out to
study the effect of the RE target capacity set by the Government on the generation
mix. The analysis is performed by varying the target capacity to a lower and a
higher value from the base case.
Figure 5, shows the result of sensitivity analysis when the RE capacity target is
set 30% higher than the base case of 5,200MW. In this case, it is assumed that the
RE capacity increases 287MW each year until cumulative installed capacity reaches
5,200MW in 2030. Results show that increasing the target capacity of RE reduces
the dependency on coal from 40% in the base case to 37% in 2030. When the RE
capacity target is lowered by 30%, the percentage of coal in the optimal generation
mix increases to 43% in 2030 (Fig. 5). These show that coal is the most relevant
technology to change the capacity of RE in the system.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

 Sustainable and Optimum Generation Mix Possibilities for Malaysia . . . . 123

(a) Varying RE target to 5,200 MW (b) Varying RE target to 2800 MW

Fig. 5. The result of sensitivity analysis when the RE capacity target changes.

3.3 Sensitivity to a CO2 Tax

Since carbon emission trading is relatively new in Malaysia, one of the possible
initiatives that Malaysia’s government could implement is introducing a carbon
tax scheme. In this study, the impact of CO 2 tax scheme on Malaysia’s generation
mix is analyzed. The analysis is performed by varying the CO 2 tax from no
tax to 40$/tC.
Figure 6. shows the results of generation mix in year 2030 for different cases of
CO2 taxes. Results show that increasing the CO2 tax reduces the development of
coal power plant in the generation mix. This is because the CO2 tax increases the
cost of generating electricity from coal. On the other hand, a gas plant, which has a
lower carbon content compared to coal, increases its proportion in the generation
mix at a small and increment rate. This is to replace coal power plants that are
affected by the scheme. This tax scheme encourages the development of nuclear in
the system. Nuclear plant contributes to 13% of generation mix in 2030 when the
CO2 tax is set to 30$/tC. There is no change in the generation mix when the CO2
price is set higher than 30$/tC.

100%
80% RE

60% Hydro

40% Nuclea
r
20%
0%
0 10 20 30 40
CO2 tax ($/tC)

Fig. 6. Various CO2 taxes.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

124 N. Y. Dahlan et al.

100%
RE
80%
Hydro
60% Nuclear
Gas
40% oil
Coal
20%

0%
4.23 6.22 8.11 10.01 11.9 13.8
Gas prices ($/MMBtu)

Fig. 7. Various gas prices.

3.4 Sensitivity to gas price

In this analysis, the effect of increasing the gas price on the generation mix is
explored. The analysis is performed by varying the gas price from the subsidy
price, for example 13.70 RM/MMBtu to the market price at 45.50 RM/MMBtu.
The gas prices in RM/MMBtu are converted to $/MMBtu for different cases, such
as 4.23 $/MMBtu (subsidy price), 6.22 $/MMBtu, 8.11 $/MMBtu, 10.01
$/MMBtu, 11.9 $/MMBtu and 13.8 $/MMBtu (market price). In this analysis,
CO2 tax is not considered.
Figure 7. shows the results of generation mix in 2030 when the gas price is
varied. Increasing the gas price from the current subsidy price to the market price
reduces the dependency on gas from 38% (with subsidy) to 22% (market price).
This scenario gives opportunity for the coal to be selected and increases its
proportion in the generation mix from 40% (with subsidy) to 48% (market price).
Clearly, also encourages the development of nuclear from 5% (with subsidy) to
13% (market price).

4. Conclusions
This paper presents a least cost DP-based model to determine a long-term
generation mix for Malaysia’s industry supply from year 2013 to 2030. Four of
five fold-key points highlighted by TNB will shape Malaysia’s generation mix,
including price of natural gas, cost and availability of nuclear power, environment
policy and energy security are considered in the model. Results show that the
optimal generation mix for Malaysia in 2030 in the base case is 40% coal, 38%
gas, 11% RE, 5% hydro, 5% nuclear and 1% oil. Results of sensitivity analysis
show that introducing carbon tax reduces the contribution of coal plant in the
generation mix. However, increasing the gas price reduces the percentage of gas
power plant and increases the proportion of coal. Clearly, both incentives
encourage the development of nuclear power plant in the future Malaysia’s
generation mix. On the other hand, increasing renewable energy target reduces
dependency on the fossil fuels.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017

 Sustainable and Optimum Generation Mix Possibilities for Malaysia . . . . 125

References
1. Economic Planning Unit, Government of Malaysia. (2001). Chapter 11:
Energy policy in the 8th Malaysia plan. Retrieved March 5, 2016, from
http://www.epu.gov.my.
2. Noh, M.; and C.K, T.N.B. (2012). Challengges and prospects in enhancing
Malaysia's energy security. National Energy Security Conference. Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.
3. Abon, S.A.; Dahlan, N.Y.; and Yassin, Z.M. (2015). Evolutionary
programming based generation mix model for Malaysia considering cost,
environmental and reliability factors. Journal of Electrical Systems, Special
issue 3, 26-34.
4. Mutalib, N.A.H.A.; Dahlan, N.Y.; Abon, S.A.; Rajemi, M.F.; and Nawi,
M.N.M. Baharum, F. (2014). Optimum generation mix for Malaysia's
additional capacity using evolutionary programming, Power and Energy
(PECon) IEEE International Conference. 65-70.
5. Shokri, S.M.M.; and Dahlan, N.Y. (2014). An application of the multi-
objective approach for the evaluation of long-term electrical generation
optimum mix. International Review of Electrical Engineering, 9(5), 991-1001.
6. Rahim, K.A.; and Liwan, A. (2012). Oil and gas trends and implications in
Malaysia. Energy Policy, 50, 262-271.
7. Isa, A.M.; Magori, H.; Niimura. T.; and Yokoyama, R. (2010). Multi-criteria
generation optimal mix planning for Malaysia’s additional capacity.
International Journal of Energy and Environment, 4, 221-229.
8. S.E.D.A. Malaysia (2012). The renewable energy roadmap. National Energy
Security Conference. Kuala Lumpur.
9. M.N.P. Corporation. (2012). Making nuclear power a valid energy option in
peninsular Malaysia: Pre-project activities spearheaded by MNPC. National
Energy Security Conference. Kuala Lumpur.
10. International Energy Agency (2005). Projected cost of generating electricity:
2005 .IEA, OECD Publication, 20-40.
11. Mutalib, N.H.A.; Dahlan, N.Y.; Abon, S.A.; Rajemi, M.F.; Nawi, M.N.M.;
and Baharum, F. (2014). Optimum generation mix for Malaysia's additional
capacity using evolutionary programming. Power and Energy (PECon) IEEE
International Conference. 65-70.
12. Eng, C. (2011). Tenaga Nasional post election play, Malaysia equity
investment research. Retrieved March 15, 2016, from
klse.i3investor.com/files/my/ptres/res5754.pdf.
13. Malaysia Energy Commission (2012). Media release-results of international
bidding for new capacity in Prai and restricted tender for renewal of
operating licences of first generation IPP and TNB. Retrieved March 9, 2016,
from www.st.gov.my.
14. Dahlan, N.Y. (2011). Valuation models for generation investment in liberalized
electricity market. PhD Thesis. United Kingdom: The University of Manchester.
15. Ramasamy, S. (2012). Initiative to enhance Malaysia's electricity supply
security. National Energy Security Conference. Kuala Lumpur.

Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue 4/2017