Sep 20, 2026
| Hasan Mehedi
The problem is an energy crisis, not an LNG crisis.
But look at how the government has responded, and you would be forgiven for concluding the opposite -- because almost everything on offer from Dhaka right now is, in one form or another, an LNG idea. After Excelerate Energy’s floating terminal shut down on July 21, followed by Summit Group’s on August 13, the country’s economic life ground to a halt.
In the scramble that followed, a stream of proposals to import more LNG began to surface in the press. This is worth pausing on, because it suggests something more troubling than a supply hiccup -- a government that may not have properly understood what kind of problem it is facing.
Start with the idea inherited from the last administration.
Under the Awami League government, a proposal was drawn up to privatise LNG import and supply. A policy document exists. But it left the cargo-tracking and metering system and the pipeline network in state hands -- and no private company will take on the risk of imports and supply. At the same time, the infrastructure around it remains someone else’s responsibility.
Unsurprisingly, the policy now sits unused in the secretariat.
Then there is the newer proposal to bring in LNG from Malaysia in ISO containers, delivered straight to factories and power plants, where the buyer would regasify it on site.
Every delivery point would need its own vaporiser -- and a unit capable of processing 50 million cubic feet a day costs roughly $250,000. Nobody appears to have worked out how many such units would actually be needed, who would install and operate them, what the running costs would be, or whether industry even wants this arrangement.
Floating an idea without doing that homework first is not policy. It is guesswork dressed up as a plan.
The power and energy minister added a third strand on August 13, announcing that the government intends to build three new floating LNG terminals -- at Hiron Point, Mongla and Payra -- with completion targeted for 2029.
On 28 July, a proposal from China National Energy Engineering and Construction Company to build a terminal at Kutubjom in Maheshkhali had already been approved. Three separate terminal plans, all pointed at the same fix.
The Minister of Power, Energy and Mineral Resources said the current crisis would take about two years to resolve. That claim would carry more weight alongside a credible list of near-term measures -- converting gas boilers to electric ones, an emergency LPG supply scheme for households, a national rooftop solar programme, a push to get stalled solar and wind projects generating on schedule, or proper funding for Bapex to expand domestic gas production.
None of that has been announced.
Instead, what has been proposed is a set of projects that lose either way - lose if they are built, and lose if they are not.
A floating LNG terminal takes at least two and a half years to construct and connect to the national grid. Even if the government signed contracts today, factoring in the environmental impact assessment, the metering system, new pipelines and construction, the earliest realistic date for operation is 2030. By then, with the right policies in place, Bangladesh may not need LNG at all.
Meanwhile, the announcement has already unsettled fishing communities around Kutubjom, who are left waiting to learn what a terminal on their doorstep would mean for their livelihoods.
Consider Hiron Point.
It sits 131km by river from Mongla port, and the nearest link to the national gas pipeline, at Khulna, is a further 45km away. Connecting the two would mean laying pipe through more than a hundred rivers and canals, across protected forest, a wildlife sanctuary and a UNESCO World Heritage site. Getting environmental clearance for that route is close to unimaginable, before even accounting for the need for UNESCO’s sign-off, the objections of environmental groups and climate-sensitive governments, or the challenge of finding a developer willing to take it on. The financing alone, and the political pressure that would come with it, would likely be enough to stop the project before it starts.
Mongla presents much the same trouble.
The Pashurriver does not have sufficient draft for large vessels, which is why big ships already anchor at Harbaria in the Sundarbans and transfer cargo onto smaller boats bound for port. Nobody has explained how LNG cargo -- considerably more hazardous to handle than ordinary freight -- would make that same journey.
Mongla port sits just 3.5km from the Sundarbans, and the Rampal power plant, 7km further north, is already inflicting serious damage on the forest. Both the current government and the opposition once campaigned against Rampal on exactly these grounds. It would be a striking reversal for either to now abandon that position and follow the very path they accused the ousted Awami League government of taking.
Then there is Payra, where this has effectively been tried before.
The Awami League government first proposed a terminal there in 2017, and signed an agreement with Siemens Energy for a 3,600MW LNG-fired power plant to go with it. A feasibility study in 2021 found that the Ramnabad channel lacks the draft for LNG carriers, and that dredging or lightering the cargo in would cost more than the project could ever recover. The government of the day shelved it. The channel has not grown any deeper since.
And even a working terminal at Payra would struggle to serve the country’s main demand centres --Dhaka, Meghnaghat, Gazipur -- given that Barishal city is 106km away, with the national grid connections at Khulna and Mawa a further 115km and 136km beyond that.
Add the cost of the terminal, the metering system and a new 221km pipeline, and the delivered price of gas would be more than most consumers could afford.
There is a precedent for how this usually ends. In 2022, a plan to pipe gas from Bhola to Dhaka was abandoned once the cost of a river-crossing pipeline became clear. A 2024 alternative -- converting the gas to LNG for transport instead -- was cancelled for the same reason -- cost.
If the government cannot justify building a submarine pipeline to move gas the 48km from Bhola to Barisal city, it is hard to take proposals for a 221km pipeline to Payra or a hundred-kilometre route through protected wetland to Hiron Point. Grand plans that deliver no real benefit should be shelved quickly, not repeatedly revived each time a terminal fails.
What is needed instead is an honest conversation about practical solutions. The prime minister has already apologised to the public over the energy and power crisis, promised a swift resolution, and invited other political parties to submit their own proposals -- the NCP and Jamaat-e-Islami have already done so. Setting those submissions aside for now, a few priorities stand out.
First, the prime minister should make a direct, public call for households across the country to install rooftop solar. A simple appeal from the top would likely persuade thousands to act.
Second, the National Board of Revenue should withdraw its current notification and waive import duties, taxes and VAT on renewable energy equipment for everyone, for at least the next ten years.
Third, a renewable energy-based merchant power policy needs to be implemented without delay, with the energy regulator, BERC, setting a competitive open-access charge for merchant power plants immediately.
Fourth, gas supply to households should be scaled back in favour of LPG and electric cooking. Even a fraction of what is currently spent subsidising LNG imports would be enough to make LPG affordable for middle-class families.
Fifth, industry should be discouraged from using gas boilers, with low-interest loans made available on easy terms for those switching to electric alternatives.
Sixth, solar and wind projects already under construction should be held to their power purchase agreements and required to start generating on schedule — with daily penalties or outright cancellation for those that fail to deliver.
Seventh, any new project that would deepen reliance on fossil fuels, particularly coal and gas, should be cancelled outright.
News Link: Seven things Bangladesh should do, instead of chasing more LNG