Home Watch Videos Wars Login

[🇧🇩] Energy Security of Bangladesh

[🇧🇩] Energy Security of Bangladesh
517
17K
More threads by Saif

G Bangladesh Defense

Bangladesh’s renewable ambitions aren't actually unrealistic

27 January 2026, 00:10 AM
By Sudeepto Roy

1769564554102.webp

Blended finance, green bonds and sukuk, stronger use of institutions like IDCOL, and deeper engagement with development partners can create projects that investors will be willing to fund. Photo: FREPIK

Bangladesh’s energy transition is now at a point where execution matters most. The country’s climate commitments, including the Mujib Climate Prosperity Plan (MCPP) 2022-2041 and the Integrated Energy and Power Master Plan (IEPMP) 2023, set ambitious targets for renewable energy (RE) capacity. MCPP has set renewable goals up to 40 percent by 2041. Bangladesh will need to invest between $23.9 and 53.7 billion to build the necessary capacity and meet these goals. The implementation of solar-based projects will require most of the expenditure—over 65.6 percent. For the rest, wind-based power projects will require 15.8 percent of the expenditure, while hydro power projects will require 18.4 percent. However, despite clear goals, financing remains slow and uneven.

Our country currently uses two primary domestic channels to finance RE. Bangladesh Bank (BB) has operated a refinancing scheme since 2009, helping commercial banks extend loans to renewable and other green projects. Loan tenures extend beyond eight years, and the fund size doubled from Tk 200 in the beginning to Tk 400 crore. BB is lending the money at interest rates from five percent to 12 percent.

The other domestic channel is the Infrastructure Development Company Limited’s (IDCOL’s) renewable energy financing scheme and programmes. IDCOL has so far implemented numerous refinancing schemes and coordinated programmes to diversify RE installations in solar micro and mini-grids, solar irrigation, biogas and biomass-based energy generation, and other commercial-scale RE projects. There was a major reform in July 2022, which made solar and other green projects eligible for loans at a rate of five to six percent, with refinancing ceilings of TK 10 crore for rooftop solar and Tk 35 crore for large solar parks.

Besides these mechanisms, Bangladesh has begun experimenting with innovative financial instruments. For example, Tk 30 billion green sukuk issued by Beximco in 2021 to finance a 230 MW solar project demonstrated the potential of Sharia-compliant finance for large-scale renewable deployment. BB introduced a formal green bond framework in 2022. The framework provides clear eligibility criteria and a national taxonomy for green market activities. These steps represent an important foundation for a domestic green capital market, but the scale remains small compared to what is needed.

But the problem lies in the lack of awareness of entrepreneurs regarding available financing options. Some concerns persist over banks’ reluctance to provide long-term loans. On top of that, the loan disbursement process is slow. Many renewable projects fail not because they are technically unfeasible, but because financing structures do not adequately manage risk. Power producers face uncertainty over long-term costs. Additionally, lenders are concerned about exchange rate exposure. International investors also struggle to reconcile Bangladesh’s regulatory environment with global risk standards. These challenges discourage the private sector from investing in renewable energy.

In 2024, the amount disbursed in green finance was Tk 30,653.78 crore, accounting for 13.29 percent of total term loan disbursement. In 2023, the amount was Tk 19,304.31. Despite the positive trend, these flows fall far short of the long-term financing needed to meet renewable energy goals. This gap highlights the importance of blended finance, where concessional public funds are combined with private capital through grants, equity, guarantees, and risk-sharing instruments. There are international programmes, such as the World Bank’s Scaling Solar and the Inter-American Development Bank’s sustainable energy initiative, which show how blended finance can lower tariffs, accelerate deployment, and integrate renewables into national grid models.

With blended finance, green bonds present an opportunity for Bangladesh to mobilise long-term capital. The domestic bond market, as well as international institutional investors, could play a transformative role if supported by appropriate policy frameworks. Sovereign green bonds could finance grid upgrades and large-scale renewable parks, while corporate green bonds could support independent power producers.

International experience offers useful lessons for Bangladesh, particularly from Vietnam and India. After introducing feed-in tariffs and fiscal incentives, Vietnam’s solar and wind capacity experienced a rapid transformation. By the end of 2023, combined solar and wind capacity reached about 21,664 MW, accounting for around 27 percent of total installed power capacity, up from virtually negligible levels just a few years earlier. Vietnam’s corporate tax regime offers preferential rates as low as 10 percent for up to 15 years for qualifying renewable and environmental energy projects, along with tax holidays and reductions in the first years of operation. The government also provides land-use and land-rent exemptions and import tax relief for renewable energy investments. Together, these measures sharply improved project profitability and attracted large volumes of private investment in a short period of time.

In India, diversified financing has helped drive rapid renewable transformation. By 2025, the country’s total installed renewable energy capacity reached around 254 GW, including about 133 GW of solar and 54 GW of wind. At the same time, India’s green finance market has expanded rapidly. In 2024, cumulative green and sustainability-linked debt issuance had grown to nearly $55.9 billion, with most of the funds flowing into clean energy projects.

Encouragingly, the tone from Bangladesh’s interim government on energy policy is signalling positive change. Instead of focusing almost entirely on building more capacity, there is a growing concern with financial discipline in the power sector, the performance of state-owned utilities, and the heavy fiscal burden created by inefficient contracts. There is also clearer recognition that renewable targets cannot be met through public spending alone.

Bangladesh’s renewable ambitions are therefore not unrealistic. But they will only materialise if the way projects are financed changes just as fundamentally as the technology itself. Blended finance, green bonds, and sukuk, stronger use of institutions like IDCOL, and deeper engagement with development partners can create projects that investors are willing to fund. If this momentum continues, the energy transition will no longer be just a climate commitment. It will become part of the country’s broader economic strategy, strengthening energy security, easing fiscal pressure, and supporting long-term growth. The decisions taken today on energy financing will therefore shape not only Bangladesh’s climate future, but also the competitiveness and resilience of its economy for decades to come.

Sudeepto Roy is research associate at the South Asian Network on Economic Modeling (SANEM).​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

Bangladesh to receive $42mn in compensation from Niko over 2005 gas field blowouts

bdnews24.com
Published :
Jan 29, 2026 22:53
Updated :
Jan 29, 2026 22:53

1769733340398.webp


An international tribunal has ordered Canadian oil and gas firm Niko Resources to pay $42 million in compensation to state-run Petrobangla over two gas field blowouts in Chhatak, Sunamganj, in 2005.

The confirmation about the order given by the US-based International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) came from Petrobangla Chairman Md Rezanur Rahman on Thursday.

“Niko has been ordered to pay $42 million in compensation,” said Rezanur.

Bangladesh will decide its next course of action after receiving the full copy of the verdict, he said.

Though the verdict came on Dec 18, Rezanur said Petrobangla came to know of the outcome on Wednesday.

Along with $42 million for losses in the blowout of 8 billion cubic feet of gas, the tribunal ordered Niko to pay $20 million in environmental compensation.

The order determining the amount of damages Niko owes Bangladesh comes six years after the tribunal found the company responsible for the blowouts.

In February 2020, the Tribunal ordered the compensation, asking for the loss and damages to be determined.

Bangladesh had claimed $1 billion in compensation. Gas blowout compensations are determined under two categories: loss of gas resources and environmental damage.

Bangladesh appointed the US-based law firm Foley Hoag LLP to determine the loss and damage from the blowouts.

Bangladesh had first filed its compensation claim with ICSID in March 2016. The claim demanded $11.8 million compensation for Bangladesh Petroleum Exploration & Production Company Limited (BAPEX) and $89.6 million for Petrobangla.

Besides gas and environmental losses, the claim focused on costs from Bangladesh having to buy gas from alternative sources after the blowouts.

In 2003, Niko signed a joint venture agreement with BAPEX to develop gas fields in Feni and Chhatak.

Petrobangla subsequently agreed to buy the gas extracted from the Feni field under a gas purchase and sales agreement.

However, a drilling well at Chhatak's Tengratila gas field exploded in January 2005 and was followed by another blowout at the same place later in June, resulting in extensive damage to the gas well, human lives, and the environment.

A government probe into the blowouts found fault in Niko's drilling procedure, prompting Petrobangla to sue the company for damages in a Bangladeshi court.

The state-run energy corporation subsequently stopped paying for the gas supplied from Feni in 2009 after the High Court put a freeze on all payments to Niko until the compensation claim was resolved.

But Niko instead pursued arbitration proceedings by filing two cases with the Washington-based ICSID, requesting a declaration absolving it of liability for the two blowouts and demanding payment for the gas it had supplied to Petrobangla from the Feni gas field.

Niko's claim against liability for the explosions was later dismissed by the tribunal in 2013.

The following year, the arbitral tribunal also stayed its second case until the matter of compensation for the Tengratila blowouts was resolved.

Reports in the media at the time also indicated an attempted cover-up of the blowouts by the BNP-Jamaat-e-Islam coalition government at the time.

Niko had reportedly given an SUV to the then state minister for power AKM Mosharraf Hossain as a kickback.

A Niko official later confessed to the bribery and was fined 9.5 million Canadian dollars by a Canadian court.

In its first verdict, the ICSID ruled in favour of Bangladesh, noting that Niko violated the terms of its agreement with Petrobangla by failing to comply with international standards in carrying out its work in the gas fields.

Niko’s bankruptcy casts doubt on the recovery of the compensation.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

Making the LPG market cartel-free

FE
Published :
Jan 29, 2026 23:49
Updated :
Jan 29, 2026 23:49

1769733724176.webp


The ongoing liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) crisis in the country appears to be less of a problem of supply and more of a consequence of weak regulatory oversight, which has allowed market distortion through cartelisation. Despite imports exceeding domestic consumption needs during the July-December 2025 period, consumers across the country have been grappling with an acute shortage of LPG, accompanied with a sharp and often unjustified rise in retail prices. This disconnect between availability and access raises serious questions about market transparency, competition and regulatory control.

Official data show that LPG imports averaged 152,818 metric tonnes (MT) per month during the period, comfortably above the country's average monthly demand for around 125,000 MT. Yet, consumers continue to face what industry insiders describe as an artificial shortage. In many areas, LPG cylinders are either unavailable or sold at prices nearly double the government-fixed rates, indicating deliberate supply manipulation rather than a genuine scarcity of fuel. A key factor behind this situation is the oligopolistic structure of the LPG market. Although 58 companies have been licensed to operate, only seven to eight firms are actively importing LPG. According to the National Board of Revenue (NBR) data, just seven companies imported 121,750.12 MT of LPG in December 2025. While this marked a significant month-on-month increase, the concentration of import activity in a few hands has made the supply chain vulnerable to coordinated control. With limited competition, dominant players are able to influence supply flows and dictate retail pricing, undermining the very purpose of a liberalised market. Sector insiders and energy officials largely agree that the crisis is not driven by a lack of imported LPG. Instead, they point to deliberate supply restrictions, particularly during peak winter demand, to push prices higher. The situation has been exacerbated by rising demand for LPG as natural gas supplies continue to decline, forcing households and businesses to rely heavily on cylindered fuel. Looking ahead, demand for LPG is projected to reach 2.5 million tonnes by 2030 - a 60 per cent increase within the next five years. Analysts warn that if the current monopolised structure persists, it could pose a serious threat to the country's energy security.

While some market operators have blamed supply disruptions from the Middle East and the presence of illegal distributors outside the regulated system, these explanations appear insufficient. Given the adequacy of imports and the dominance of a small group of companies, it is difficult to dismiss the decisive role of cartels in shaping market outcomes. Energy experts argue that the government's failure to enforce existing competition and regulatory laws has allowed a few major operators to control the market.

The authorities can no longer afford to remain passive. Ensuring fair competition, activating dormant licence holders, strengthening monitoring of imports and distribution, and taking firm action against cartel behaviour are essential to restoring stability to the LPG market. Without decisive intervention, consumers will continue to bear the cost of an artificially contrived and poorly regulated system.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond
Niko case: Bangladesh to receive Tk 5.12bn against Tk 123.71bn claim



Staff Correspondent Dhaka

Published: 31 Jan 2026, 10: 38


1769908187915.webp


Fire at Tengratila gas field in Sunamganj.File Photo: Prothom Alo



The final verdict in the compensation case over the explosion at the Tengratila gas field in Sunamganj is finally approaching.


According to the ruling of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), Bangladesh may receive compensation of USD 42 million, which is equivalent to Tk 5.12 billion at the current exchange rate. The compensation will be paid by the Canadian company Niko Resources.


However, the Bangladesh government and BAPEX had claimed USD 1.014 billion (Tk 123.71 billion) as compensation for the gas that was burnt and the environmental damage caused by the explosion at the Tengratila gas field.


After speaking to six senior officials from the Energy Division, Petrobangla, and BAPEX it has been learnt that the amount of compensation was found on a brief summary of the verdict received through lawyers.


However, the full verdict has not yet been published. Once the complete ruling is received, discussions will be held with lawyers and further steps will be decided in consultation with the government, they added.



The Bangladesh government and BAPEX had claimed USD 1.014 billion (Tk 123.71 billion) as compensation for the gas that was burnt and the environmental damage caused by the explosion at the Tengratila gas field.


The officials also said the compensation amount is far too low. Bangladesh suffered much greater losses, and a significant amount of money was also spent on running the case.


Power, Energy and Mineral Resources Adviser Muhammad Fouzul Kabir Khan also confirmed the compensation issue to Prothom Alo. He said that the information about the compensation has been received on a preliminary basis, and that further decisions will be taken after reviewing the full verdict.

1769908329646.webp

Soil testing is under way in areas adjacent to the Tengratila gas field following the explosion. File Photo: Prothom Alo

Tengratila explosion


The Tengratila gas field, located in Chhatak of Sunamganj, was handed over to Niko in 2003 for gas exploration. After drilling began, two devastating explosions occurred at the gas field on 7 January and 24 June 2005.


The resulting fires burned off the field’s gas reserves and caused extensive damage to surrounding infrastructure and assets. Petrobangla demanded compensation of Tk 7.465 billion from Niko for the losses, but the company refused to pay.


In 2007, Petrobangla filed a case in a Bangladeshi court to recover compensation. At the same time, payment of bills for the Feni gas field, which was under Niko’s control, was suspended. The case against Niko later went to the High Court, which ordered the seizure of all Niko’s assets in Bangladesh and the cancellation of its contracts. When the case reached the Supreme Court, the verdict again went in favour of Petrobangla.


The information about the compensation has been received on a preliminary basis. Further decisions will be taken after reviewing the full verdict-----Muhammad Fouzul Kabir Khan, Power, Energy and Mineral Resources Adviser.


At a press conference on 19 May 2020, the then state minister for Power, Energy and Mineral Resources, Nasrul Hamid, said Niko had filed an arbitration case at ICSID in 2010, seeking a declaration that it was not responsible for the Chhatak gas field explosion.


In 2016, Bapex conducted a study through a committee formed with international experts. Subsequently, Bapex lodged a claim at ICSID seeking compensation of USD 118 million from Niko, while the Bangladesh government sought USD 890.6 million. Together, the total compensation claim stood at USD 1.014 billion (Tk 12,371 crore at current value), he added.


Nasrul Hamid also said the ICSID tribunal delivered its verdict on 28 February 2020, holding Niko responsible for breaching the terms of the joint venture agreement in relation to the 2005 explosions.


Two officials of Petrobangla and Bapex involved with the case told Prothom Alo that the amount claimed at ICSID was much higher than the compensation initially sought from Niko in Bangladesh, which had been questioned during hearings. There are some other issues as well, they said, and therefore it is not possible to comment before seeing the full verdict.


They added that during the previous government’s tenure, the premature disclosure of information about the ruling had created complications, including allegations of breaching ICSID’s confidentiality. As a result, they said, it would be prudent this time to wait for the detailed verdict rather than rushing to comment.


In 2008, when the case was being heard in a lower court, the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Ports protested against the compensation claim of Tk 7.46 billion from Niko. The committee said the losses at Tengratila were not Tk 7.46 billion but nearly Tk 220 billion.


National committee had protested


In 2008, when the case was being heard in a lower court, the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Ports protested against the compensation claim of Tk 7.46 billion from Niko. The committee said the losses at Tengratila were not Tk 7.46 billion but nearly Tk 220 billion.


The committee had further claimed at the time that after the 2005 accident, a government investigation committee had stated that only 30 billion cubic feet of gas had burned, whereas the actual loss was 242 billion cubic feet.


Anu Muhammad, former member secretary of the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Ports, told Prothom Alo on Friday that there had been negligence from the outset in determining the amount of compensation.


He said there were also weaknesses in filing the case and conducting the hearings, which is why proper compensation was not secured. However, he added, the verdict proves that Niko was responsible, which is a moral victory. If there is scope, the government may appeal on the issue of the compensation amount.


Energy and Mineral Resources Division Secretary Mohammad Saiful Islam also believes the compensation amount is disappointing compared with the claim. He told Prothom Alo that once the full verdict is received, it will be reviewed. He added that the total cost of pursuing the case is also being calculated.


There had been negligence from the outset in determining the amount of compensation. He said there were also weaknesses in filing the case and conducting the hearings, which is why proper compensation was not secured------Anu Muhammad, former member secretary of the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Ports.


No reason for satisfaction


Outside official government efforts, Professor M Shamsul Alam, energy adviser to the Consumers Association of Bangladesh (CAB), filed a case against Niko in Bangladesh’s High Court back in 2016.


He sought two remedies from the court: seizure of all Niko’s assets and recovery of compensation for the explosion. The court ordered the seizure of all Niko’s properties and directed the government not to pay USD 27 million in proceeds from gas sales to Niko in Bangladesh. As a result, the process of paying Niko’s gas bills was halted.


CAB energy adviser M Shamsul Alam told Prothom Alo on Friday that there had clearly been shortcomings in the capacity to realise the compensation claim. He said there was nothing to be satisfied about receiving millions of dollars after demanding billions, and that full and proper compensation must be recovered.



According to Petrobangla sources, the Tengratila gas field is divided into two parts: Chhatak East and Chhatak West. While gas from one layer of the Chhatak West section burned in the fire, other layers and the Chhatak East section remain intact. The field is considered to have potential reserves of between 2 and 5 trillion cubic feet of gas.



A development project proposal (DPP) has already been prepared for drilling new wells at the Chhatak gas field. Petrobangla officials said that once the final ICSID verdict is received, the next steps will be taken promptly after consulting legal advisers.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

Fines for illegal gas use to double
Govt set to amend gas act
Asifur Rahman and Baharam Khan

1770279611850.webp


The government is set to amend the Bangladesh Gas Act 2010, nearly doubling the fines for illegal gas use and introducing provisions to penalise property owners -- including land, flat or building owners -- for illegal usage.


Fines for illegal household gas use -- currently between Tk 10,000 and Tk 20,000 -- will be increased to a maximum of Tk 40,000, as per the draft of Bangladesh Gas (Amendment) Ordinance, 2026, which is set to be placed before the advisory council meeting today for approval.

Commercial users will face fines of up to Tk 80,000, up from the existing Tk 40,000.

For industrial users, captive power plants and CNG refuelling stations, the maximum fine will rise to Tk 4 lakh from Tk 2 lakh.


Meanwhile, irregularities in the power and fertiliser sectors will attract fines of up to Tk 10 lakh, double the current ceiling of Tk 5 lakh.

The draft ordinance has retained the imprisonment provisions unchanged, ranging from six months to five years.

A new paragraph added to the offences and penalties chapter states that if gas is used illegally -- either directly or with the assistance or instigation of a contractor or any other person -- the owner of the premises where the offence is committed, along with any involved employee of the gas company, contractor or other individual, will be deemed offenders.


According to the draft, the use of gas by non-metered consumers with more stoves than the approved number, as well as gas consumption by metered consumers exceeding the approved hourly load, will be treated as offences.

In formulating rules under the ordinance, the government has curtailed the role of the Bangladesh Energy Regulatory Commission (BERC).


While the Bangladesh Gas Act 2010 required the government to frame rules through a gazette notification in consultation with the regulator, the new ordinance omits any reference to BERC’s involvement.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

Interim government grants VAT, tax exemptions to ease local LPG supply

bdnews24.com
Published :
Feb 05, 2026 20:31
Updated :
Feb 05, 2026 20:31

1770338156950.webp


In a bid to maintain a steady supply of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), the Advisory Council has approved VAT and tax exemptions at the local production and trader level.

The decisions came at a meeting of the Advisory Council at the Chief Advisor’s Office (CAO) in Dhaka’s Tejgaon on Thursday, led by Chief Advisor Muhammad Yunus.

After the meeting, Press Secretary Shafiqul Alam said: “A 7.5 percent VAT and 2 percent advance tax exemption have been granted at the local production and trader level.

“In addition, a proposal to impose a 7.5 percent VAT on imports has been approved.

“As a result, the overall tax burden on LPG will reduce slightly, which should bring prices down in the local market.”

Earlier in January, supply disruptions, allegations of manipulation, and government operations had prompted traders to halt LPG cylinder sales.

To restore normal supply, the Energy and Mineral Resources Division had recommended a 10 percent import VAT and local-level tax exemptions to the National Board of Revenue (NBR).​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

Posts you haven't read yet..

Members Online

No members online now.

Latest Posts

Back
 
G
O
 
H
O
M
E