Bangladesh’s energy documents are replete with dissimilarities, particularly in their renewable energy targets, which, energy experts say, expose the country’s love for fossil fuels.

Emran Hossain

The dissimilarities mislead people, energy experts say, leaving them confused about a solution that could have saved billions in energy bills, possibly sparing the worst economic crisis in decades that is currently sweeping Bangladesh.

Bangladesh spent over $32billion since 2009, mostly on fossil fuel expansion, creating a power system with frail transmission and distribution system and over 50 per cent overcapacity. The immediate-past Awami League government during its 15 years of rule changed its energy documents repeatedly, bringing changes that pushed Bangladesh away from a sustainable energy solution.

A comparison of the renewable energy targets envisioned in the revised draft of the renewable energy policy, Mujib Climate Prosperity Plan and Integrated Energy and Power Master Plan provides a glimpse into Bangladesh’s energy policy regime.

The revised draft of the renewable energy policy, which was originally formulated in 2008 with the target of ensuring 10 per cent renewable energy by 2020, sets new goals under which renewable energy would account for 10 per cent of the energy mix in 2025, 20 per cent in 2030 and 40 per cent in 2041.

The MCPP, on the other hand, seeks to generate 30 per cent electricity from renewable energy in 2030, 40 per cent in 2041, and 100 per cent in 2050.

The IEPMP however states no net zero plan until 2070, seeking to retain fossil fuel dominance through liquefied natural gas and coal use and the introduction of advanced technologies such as hydrogen energy, ammonia co-firing and carbon capture and storage technology.

The IEPMP, passed in 2023, lowered the renewable energy target by 2041 to 9 per cent as it seeks to generate 31 per cent power from clean energy using the advanced technologies. The IEPMP plans to create nearly 31 per cent from fossil fuels in 2050.

Energy experts have already identified advanced technology as a false solution for they cause significant carbon emissions, are not proven and 300 per cent more expensive than fossil fuel.

“Contradictory policy and plans hold back achievement of goals,” said Helen Mashiyat Preoty, a research associate at the Centre for Policy Dialogue, a think tank.

Varying renewable energy targets resulted in slow deployment of renewable energy which accounts for less than 5 percent of over 28,000MW of Bangladesh’s current installed power capacity.

The revised draft of the renewable energy policy seeks to create a level playing field by increasing tax exemption to 10 percent from 5 percent. Fossil fuel-based power generation enjoyed a 10 per cent tax waiver for a long time.

A major hurdle to renewable energy projects has been land scarcity. The government for years managed land for fossil fuel projects but left it to renewable energy investors to find land for their projects. The IEPMP has no plan to address the land scarcity problem. It rather highlights a host of limitations of renewable energy.

About investment, the IEPMP envisages 50-50 public-private partnership. The MCPP discusses public sector investment only, without determining how much of the money needed for energy transition will come through domestic private investment or foreign direct investment. The draft renewable energy policy encouraged both public and private investments but without specifying any targets.

The MCCP estimated the renewable energy investment potential to be at least $10 billion over the next decade in generation alone. It says that the investment promises to save at least $1.7 billion per year in fossil fuel subsidies by 2030, and create around 12,000 new jobs by 2025 and approximately 40,000 jobs by 2030.

The CPD in a review said that the revised draft of the renewable energy policy expands renewable energy options to biofuel, solar irrigation, waste-to-electricity, and regional trading of clean energy. The original renewable energy policy was solar based.

The original renewable energy policy focused on fuel availability, emissions, and energy security. The revised draft has a broader vision that prioritizes efficient, sustainable, secure, affordable, competitive, and environmentally friendly power systems.

The MCPP favors the generation of green hydrogen. The revised draft renewable energy policy prioritizes the use of regular hydrogen energy. The CPD advised against using hydrogen for fossil fuels that are required for the creation of normal hydrogen.

Both the MCPP and the revised draft renewable energy policy recommended promoting the adoption of low-carbon technologies. The use of low-carbon technology is a way of retaining fossil fuel use.

Although the policy draft has fairly specific fiscal incentives for various energy mixes, the IEPMP does not accurately reflect the policy framework for renewable energy subsidies, the CPD said.

Formulated in September 2021, the MCPP won the AL government numerous accolades for having a net zero target. But in February 2023, the MCPP was silently changed with alternate use of renewable and clean energy and changing the renewable energy target from 40 per cent to ‘up to 40 per cent’ by 2041.

‘The change greatly weakened the document and rendered renewable energy expansion uncertain,’ said Hasan Mehedi, member secretary, Bangladesh Working Group on Ecology and Development, a platform of green activists.

The CPD in an analysis compared the three energy documents under 17 categories. Regarding the reduction of fossil fuel use, the MCPP and IEPMP remain silent. But the renewable energy policy draft promises to decrease fossil fuel use.

The MCPP and the IEPMP do not encourage private investments in renewable energy which the RE policy does.

The MCPP and the IEPMP lack any planning to achieve international climate goals while the draft renewable energy policy says nothing about it.

Energy audit is not considered in either the policy or the plans.

The MCPP and the revised draft renewable energy policy support providing technical and financial assistance for renewable energy projects which was absent in the IEPMP. Technological modernization is discussed in the MCPP and the IEPMP but was ignored in the draft renewable energy policy.

The MCPP and the renewable energy policy find regional cooperation helpful in tapping renewable energy potentials but the IEPMP does not have such plans.

The MCPP pledges support for electric vehicles while the IEPMP is silent about it and the draft renewable energy policy position on the matter is not clear. The MCPP prioritizes alternative fuels while the IEPMP does not talk about it at all.

The RE policy and the MCPP prioritize energy efficiency which is not discussed in the IEPMP.

‘The dissimilarities compromise renewable energy potentials. Ideally, the plans were supposed to follow the policy,’ said M Zakir Hossain Khan, chief executive of Change Initiative.

After 2010, the generation cost of renewable energy was reduced by up to 85 per cent but that was not considered in the MCPP.

‘Our economy is bleeding because of fossil fuel overreliance. Our failure to pursue renewable energy will surely leave us behind,’ said Zakir.