Pumped Out: Why Private Gas Stations Are Running Dry and What It Means for Competition and Consumers

In recent weeks, commuters across major urban centers, particularly Jabodetabek, have faced an infuriating reality: many familiar private-sector gas stations (SPBU Swasta) are running on empty. Brands like Shell, BP-AKR, and Vivo have seen their pumps dry up, with premium products such as Shell Super, Shell V-Power, Shell V-Power Nitro+, BP Ultimate, and BP 92 frequently listed as unavailable. This phenomenon is not new, having occurred repeatedly, most recently in January and February 2025.

The consequence of this scarcity goes beyond mere inconvenience, forcing some SPBU employees to take drastic measures like selling coffee, snacks, or other services to maintain income. Moreover, the prolonged operational disruption has raised serious concerns about job security, with reports of employee rotation, reduced working hours, and the potential risk of massive layoffs (PHK).

The Core Conflict: Quotas, Policy, and Demand Shift

The root cause of the scarcity lies in a complex intersection of government policy changes and unexpected market demand shifts.

1. The Government's Stance on Quota: The Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM) consistently denies that the scarcity is due to a lack of import quota. Vice Minister of ESDM, Yuliot Tanjung, stated that the government had already increased the BBM import quota for private companies by 10 percent from the 2024 allocation. Minister ESDM Bahlil Lahadalia affirmed that the 110% allocation was deemed sufficient.

2. Policy and Logistics Disruptions: Critics, including members of the DPR and industry practitioners, point to policy shifts as the major disruption. The ESDM changed the import permit scheme from an annual basis to a six-month period, with an evaluation every three months, a move first noted in early 2025. This regulatory instability is deemed counterproductive and complicates logistic planning for private operators, which rely heavily on imports. BP-AKR, for instance, noted that the strict 110% cap jeopardizes their expansion plans, which include opening 10 new SPBUs by the end of the year.

3. The Crisis of Trust and Demand Surge: A significant factor driving the private SPBUs to hit their quota limits early is the abrupt "shifting" of consumption. Many consumers, especially those who previously bought Pertamina's Pertamax (RON 92), migrated to private SPBUs following widely reported cases of alleged Pertamax adulteration ("oplosan") involving Pertamina officials during the 2018–2023 period. This switch reflected a deep loss of public trust in Pertamina's product quality, even though private fuel tends to be pricier.

The Proposed Solution and the Ethanol Hurdle

To address the immediate supply gap, Minister ESDM Bahlil Lahadalia introduced a solution: SPBU swasta must collaborate with and buy the shortfall of BBM through Pertamina Patra Niaga via a Business-to-Business (B2B) scheme.

This solution was formalized with four key points:

1. Private operators must agree to take imported fuel through Pertamina in the form of "base fuel" (pure fuel without additives), which they could then blend themselves.

2. The transaction must use an "open book" mechanism to ensure price transparency and fairness (cengli).

3. A joint surveyor would verify the quality.

4. ESDM guaranteed that stock would normalize within seven days of the agreement.

The Deal Breaker: Despite initial steps, the collaborative effort quickly stalled. Several operators, including Vivo and BP-AKR, cancelled or postponed their planned purchases of the first 100,000-barrel cargo imported by Pertamina. The primary reason cited was the fuel's content: the base fuel provided by Pertamina Patra Niaga was found to contain 3.5% ethanol.

While Pertamina and ESDM clarified that 3.5% ethanol is far below the regulatory limit of 20% and is considered an international "best practice" for reducing carbon emissions, the private SPBUs insist this content does not match their internal product specifications or commercial standards. BP-AKR specifically required a Certificate of Origin (COO), which Pertamina allegedly failed to provide, raising concerns about compliance with international sanction laws (due to BP's global operations).

Warnings of Monopoli and Investment Risk

The government's heavy handed approach—limiting independent imports while simultaneously channeling purchases through the state-owned competitor (Pertamina)—has triggered widespread criticism regarding potential monopoly or quasi-monopoly practices.

The Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition (KPPU) initiated a study on the market dynamics, focusing on preventing monopoly practices that could harm the public. Critics, including economist Fahmy Radhi, argue that confining imports to Pertamina reinforces its dominance and risks increasing operational costs for private SPBUs, which could ultimately force them out of the market.

This situation casts a negative light on Indonesia's investment climate. Analysts warn that if business certainty is undermined, global investors might hesitate to commit capital, especially since the existing SPBU swasta (Shell, BP) are mostly foreign entities.

Adding to the complexity, the scarcity has become a legal matter: Minister ESDM, Pertamina, and Shell Indonesia were recently sued by a consumer in the Central Jakarta District Court (PN Jakpus) over the disruptive lack of supply. Minister Bahlil has stated he respects the legal process.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Bottom Line: The crisis at private SPBUs highlights the fragility of energy logistics when policy intervenes aggressively in a competitive market. While the government stresses national control over strategic commodities mandated by the constitution (Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution), critics argue that implementing this control by restricting competition only pushes consumers back toward a state-owned entity that is still recovering from a massive trust deficit due to the previous adulterated fuel scandal.

The challenge for the government now is to navigate the complex negotiation phase, addressing the technical issues of ethanol content and import documentation, while restoring investor confidence and proving that the policy is a pragmatic solution, not a hidden agenda to promote the state monopoly. As one policy observer noted, well-intentioned policies sometimes create negative consequences or "blind spots" in implementation that must be identified early to avoid controversy and public harm