Cost-Benefit Analysis of G.A. Siwabessy Reactor Revitalization for I-131 Production
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55981.tdm.2025.7127Keywords:
Cost-benefit analysis, Revitalization, G.A. Siwabessy multipurpose reactor, I-131 radioisotopeAbstract
One of the IAEA expert team’s recommendations in the peer review of three Indonesian research reactors in 2022 was to increase their utilization, especially for the production of radioisotopes and radiopharmaceuticals, through a revitalization program and operating permits extension, such as for the G. A. Siwabessy Multipurpose reactor (RSG-GAS). One of the radioisotopes widely used in the health sector is I-131. The existing I-131 domestic demand is recorded at 2,869.35 Ci per year and is projected to increase along with cancer prevalence. Imports fully meet the current demand at quite high prices. Therefore, the RSG-GAS and its supporting facilities revitalization project and post-revitalization have strategic value for the national pharmaceutical industry independence which could be started with the I-131 production. The revitalization requires large funds, so the benefits are expected to be greater than the investment. This study aims to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the revitalization project plan. Two scenarios were formulated such as I-131 production scenario (‘with the project’) and counterfactual scenario (’without the project’). The ‘with the project’ scenario was carried out for reactors with varied operating power (5 MW, 15 MW, and 30 MW). The results show that with current rate for Non-Tax State Revenue (PNBP) tariff, the ’without the project’ scenario is unfeasible, indicated by a negative net present value (NPV) of IDR -114,32 billion. The ‘with the project’ scenario is also unfeasible at all reactor capacities, indicated by negative NPV (IDR -418.17 billion at 5 MW; IDR -540.72 billion at 15 MW and IDR -722.51 billion at 30 MW). Negative incremental NPV values relative to their counterfactual scenario also emphasize the unfeasibility of this scenario (at IDR -303.85 billion at 5 MW; IDR -426.40 billion at 15 MW and IDR -608.19 billion at 30 MW). Sensitivity analysis of I-131 PNBP tariff for ‘with the project’ scenario under 15 MW RSG-GAS power shows that the project will be feasible at a minimum PNBP tariff of IDR 21,000 per mCi.
References
[1] “Policy Brief Strategic Role of Research Reactors in National Development (in Bahasa).” National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), Jakarta, p. 18, 2022.
[2] “Terms of Reference for the Study of the Fulfillment of Iodine 131 (I-131) Demand in Nuclear Medicine (in Bahasa).” Nuclear Energy Regulatory Agency (BAPETEN), Jakarta, 2022.
[3] M. V. Wisescistiati, N. G. A. A. Wetan, ng M. Yuniawaty, I. B. T. W. Manuaba, and P. A. T. Adiputra, “Description of Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma Patients in Sanglah Hospital in 2015 - 2020 (in Bahasa),” J. Med. Udayana, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 76–80, 2022, doi: 10.24843.MU.2022.V11.i4.P13.
[4] “National Basic Health Research Report 2018 (in Bahasa),” Publishing Institute of Health Research and Development Agency, Jakarta, 2019.
[5] “Global Burden of Cancer Study (GLOBOCAN),” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://gco.iarc.fr/.
[6] P. Senduk, V. R. Danes, and J. F. Rumampuk, “Use of Radioisotopes in Early Detection of Cancer (in Bahasa),” J. e-Biomedik, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 620–623, 2015, doi: 10.35790/ebm.3.2.2015.8549.
[7] W. Xu, J. Li, and L. Shi, “Study on producing radioisotopes based on fission or radiative capture method in a high flux reactor,” Nucl. Eng. Technol., vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 3585–3593, doi: 10.1016/j.net.2024.04.008.
[8] G. Flux, F. Leek, P. Gape, J. Gear, and J. Taprogge, “Iodine-131 and Iodine-131-Meta-iodobenzylguanidine Dosimetry in Cancer Therapy,” Semin. Nucl. Med., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 167–177, 2022, doi: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2021.11.002.
[9] X. Y. Wu, B. Li, J. Zhang, L. L. Duan, B. X. Hu, and Y. J. Gao, “Analysis of the clinical factors affecting excellent response of Iodine-131 treatment for pulmonary metastases from differentiated thyroid cancer,” Heliyon, vol. 9, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20853.
[10] H. Chai, H. Zhang, and Y. Yu, “The therapeutic responses to I-131 ablation in patients of differentiated thyroid carcinoma complicated with nodular goiter,” Med. Nucl., vol. 46, pp. 169–174, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.mednuc.2022.03.002.
[11] E. M. Gabzdyl and C. Gabzdyl, “Thyroid Cancer Case Report: Should Routine Neck Checks be Done?,” J. Nurse Pract., vol. 20, no. 10, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.nurpra.2024.105204.
[12] L. Feng, S. Li, C. Wang, and J. Yang, “Current Status and Future Perspective on Molecular Imaging and Treatment of Neuroblastoma,” doi: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2022.12.004.
[13] Y. Adinatha and K. Ariawati, “Description of characteristics of childhood cancer at Sanglah General Hospital, Bali, Indonesia, 2008-2017 (in Bahasa),” Intisari Sains Medis, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 575–581, 2020, doi: 10.15562/ism.v11i2.638.
[14] S. Mastrangelo, A. Romano, G. Attinà, P. Maurizi, and A. Ruggiero, “Timing and chemotherapy association for 131-I-MIBG treatment in high-risk neuroblastoma,” Biochem. Pharmacol., vol. 216, no. July, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2023.115802.
[15] A. Biswas and S. Chakraborty, “Cost benefit analysis of integrated constructed wetland microbial fuel cell system for sustainable and economic domestic wastewater treatment,” Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments, vol. 60, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2023.103475.
[16] Y. Wu et al., “Emission reduction and cost-benefit analysis of the use of ammonia and green hydrogen as fuel for marine applications,” Green Energy Resour., vol. 1, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.gerr.2023.100046.
[17] A. R. M. T. Islam et al., “A cost-benefit analysis of flood early warning system: Evidence from lower Brahmaputra River Basin, Bangladesh,” Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct., vol. 104, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104380.
[18] H. Ding, G. Wu, F. He, J. Tong, and L. Zhang, “Study on the costs and benefits of establishing a unified regulatory guidance for emergency preparedness of small modular reactors in China,” Prog. Nucl. Energy, vol. 161, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.pnucene.2023.104722.
[19] J. Eom et al., “Cost-benefit analysis of human adenovirus vaccine development in a Korean military setting,” Vaccine, vol. 42, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.05.054.
[20] B. Jain et al., “Cost-benefit analysis of intraoperative neuromonitoring for cardiac surgery,” J. Stroke Cerebrovasc. Dis., vol. 33, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2024.107576.
[21] S. Pinem, W. Luthfi, P. H. Liem, and D. Hartanto, “Evaluation of neutronics parameters during RSG-GAS commissioning by using Monte Carlo code,” Nucl. Eng. Technol., vol. 55, pp. 1775–1782, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.net.2023.01.008.
[22] P. Surian, S. Dibyo, W. Luthfi, V. I. S. Wardhani, and D. Hartanto, “An Improved Steady-State and Transient Analysis of the RSG-GAS Reactor Core under RIA Conditions Using MTR-DYN and EUREKA-2/RR Codes,” Sci. Technol. Nucl. Install., vol. 2022, 2022, doi: 10.1155/2022/6030504.
[23] J. Kałowski and K. Kowal, “An integrated risk-informed safety classification for unique research reactors,” Nucl. Eng. Technol., vol. 55, pp. 1814–1820, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.net.2023.01.017.
[24] C. Yu et al., “Supply of I-131 in a 2 MW molten salt reactor with different production methods,” Appl. Radiat. Isot., vol. 166, no. July, p. 109350, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.apradiso.2020.109350.
[25] Y. Wei and S. A. Hadigheh, “Cost benefit and life cycle analysis of CFRP and GFRP waste treatment methods,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 348, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.128654.
[26] European Commission, Guide to Cost-benefit Analysis of Investment Projects: Economic appraisal tool for Cohesion Policy 2014-2020, no. December. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014.
[27] H. M. Abdullah and A. H. Ahmed, “Study on (n, α) reactions for the production of 51Cr, 89Sr, 99Tc, 131I, 133Xe, 137Cs and 153Sm radioisotopes used in nuclear medicine,” Nucl. Eng. Technol., vol. 55, pp. 3352–3358, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.net.2023.05.022.
[28] A. L. Siyal, A. Hossain, F. K. Siyal, T. Jatt, and S. Iram, “Use of Radioisotopes to Produce High Yielding Crops in Order to Increase Agricultural Production,” 2022, doi: 10.3390/iocag2022-12267.
