The city of Makassar in South Sulawesi, Indonesia, has taken a cautious stance on its proposed Makassar PSEL environmental guarantee policy by deciding not to proceed with a high-profile waste-to-energy project until comprehensive environmental safeguards are fully assured. This decision reflects growing concerns among local leaders, community members, and environmental advocates regarding the potential impacts of waste-to-energy infrastructure on public health, ecosystems, and urban sustainability.

At the center of this debate is the Proyek Pengolahan Sampah Menjadi Energi Listrik (PSEL), or Waste-to-Energy Power Plant, which was planned for Makassar to transform municipal solid waste into electricity. Originally envisioned as part of Indonesia’s broader strategy to modernize waste management and generate renewable energy, PSEL projects are being promoted nationally under regulations aimed at accelerating clean and environmentally sound approaches to municipal waste and urban energy.

Yet in Makassar, ambitions to implement PSEL have been tempered by rigorous demands from the Mayor and broader stakeholders that environmental protection guarantees be clearly established before any physical construction or implementation moves forward. This position illustrates an evolving local governance ethos that prioritizes environmental integrity, legal compliance, and community confidence before advancing major infrastructure projects.

The Decision to Halt Progress Pending Environmental Guarantees

The decision not to advance the PSEL project without a solid Makassar PSEL environmental guarantee stems directly from concerns voiced by the city’s leadership that environmental and social impacts must be thoroughly assessed and mitigated. Wali Kota (Mayor) Munafri Arifuddin has explicitly stated that implementation of the PSEL project will not proceed unless there is a comprehensive examination of technical, environmental, social, and regulatory aspects. This review process is intended to ensure that the project will not harm residents or local ecosystems.

Local officials have stressed that although preliminary agreements and contractual arrangements were initially made with the developer, PT Sarana Utama Synergy (PT SUS), these are considered void until a fresh, full suite of assessments and guarantees is secured. In other words, the city has effectively placed the project on hold until the Makassar PSEL environmental guarantee is concretely addressed. This approach mirrors a precautionary principle in public policy, where potential risks — particularly those affecting health and environment — are not ignored or deferred.

The mayor’s emphasis on environmental safeguards also goes beyond regulatory compliance to encompass deeper considerations about how the facility would affect nearby neighborhoods. Concerns raised by citizens include potential air and water pollution, noise nuisance, and impacts associated with handling and incineration of waste streams. The proximity of proposed facilities to residential zones and schools has also amplified public anxiety. Municipal authorities want assurance that best practices in technology, waste segregation, emissions control, and monitoring are enforced and that no unacceptable levels of risk persist.

Community Concerns and Environmental Advocacy

Community input has played a significant role in shaping the Makassar PSEL environmental guarantee requirement. In the months leading up to the decision to postpone project implementation, residents of areas like Tamalanrea voiced strong concerns about potential health effects and environmental degradation. Some residents had taken their grievances to hearings with local government officials, drawing attention to the operation’s proximity to densely populated residential zones and highlighting potential risks related to airborne pollutants like dioxins and furans, which can have long-term health implications.

This public resistance underscores a broader national conversation about how waste-to-energy technologies should be integrated into urban waste management strategies. While environmental authorities at the national level have promoted PSEL as part of Indonesia’s effort to mitigate landfill overflow and manage solid waste, environmental groups such as WALHI have criticized centralized waste-to-energy approaches that do not explicitly prioritize detailed environmental and health risk assessments. Although this broader national critique is not specific to Makassar, it echoes themes evident in local discourse.

In response to community advocacy and regulatory pressures, city officials have proposed that the PSEL facility be sited within designated landfill areas, such as the Tempat Pembuangan Akhir (TPA) Tamangapa, rather than in new or residential zones. This move reflects a compromise that could allow the project to proceed if environmental guarantees and risk mitigation measures are in place. In effect, the Makassar PSEL environmental guarantee has become a condition precedent for any future development action.

The Role of Technical and Environmental Assessments

One of the central pillars of the city’s rationale for requiring a Makassar PSEL environmental guarantee is the need for rigorous environmental assessments. Municipal authorities have called for detailed technical, social, and environmental studies that go beyond standard procedural checks. These assessments would evaluate potential emissions, wastewater impacts, community health implications, and the capacity of existing infrastructure to support environmentally sound operation of a waste-to-energy facility.

Such comprehensive evaluations are intended to align the project with international environmental standards and to provide transparent, evidence-based justifications for decision-making. They would also form the basis of emission control strategies and monitoring protocols that could reassure both the community and technical regulators that environmental protection is not merely aspirational but enforceable.

These assessments are expected to be carried out in close collaboration with the national Ministry of Environment and Forestry and other relevant ministries, following guidance on environmental impact assessments (AMDAL) and other regulatory requirements. The aim is to ensure that environmental safeguards are codified in project planning and do not remain vague or unenforceable.

Balancing Waste Management Innovation With Environmental Integrity

The debate over the PSEL project in Makassar also reflects the complex balance that modern cities must strike between innovative waste management solutions and protecting environmental quality. Waste-to-energy facilities can offer significant benefits by converting problematic waste streams into usable electricity and thereby reducing reliance on conventional energy sources. Strategic proponents argue that such initiatives can be part of a broader sustainable development agenda that includes renewable energy, reduced landfill use, and green growth.

However, as the Makassar PSEL environmental guarantee requirement makes clear, implementing such technologies demands careful consideration of local contexts. Urban environmental governance must reconcile technological opportunities with community expectations, regulatory frameworks, and environmental health priorities.

Makassar’s decision to hold off on the project without strong environmental assurances also highlights the role local governments play in shaping sustainable infrastructure outcomes. While national policy sets broad direction, municipal authorities are on the front lines of operationalizing policy and must respond to residents, environmental conditions, and on-the-ground realities that may vary significantly from place to place.

Future Prospects and Policy Considerations

Looking ahead, the fate of the PSEL project in Makassar will likely hinge on the outcomes of environmental and technical evaluations. If the city obtains credible environmental guarantees backed by thorough risk assessments and mitigation plans, the project could move forward with stronger community buy-in and environmental legitimacy.

At the same time, this case provides valuable lessons for other Indonesian cities contemplating similar waste-to-energy projects. Ensuring that environmental guarantees form an integral part of project planning and execution can help avoid conflict, strengthen public trust, and produce better long-term outcomes for sustainable urban development. As Makassar’s experience shows, sustainable innovation depends not only on technological solutions but also on governance frameworks that fully integrate environmental protection and societal needs.

The Makassar PSEL environmental guarantee requirement represents a pivotal moment in local environmental policy and urban governance. By refusing to proceed with major waste-to-energy infrastructure without confirmed environmental safeguards, Makassar is asserting a governance model that prioritizes environmental integrity, community participation, and evidence-based planning. While the project’s future direction remains open, this approach may prove instrumental in fostering more sustainable and socially legitimate waste management solutions not only in Makassar but in other cities facing similar challenges.