Mon 6 Aug 2007
To Editor:
Daily Star.
Dear Editor,
I wanted to bring to your attention the wide outrage that has been caused among the NRB experts on energy sector by recent series by Shehrier Khan on Asia Energy and its proposed open pit coal mining methods. While going to the source in a foreign land and doing fact finding is indeed a fresh change in news reporting in deshi print media, the people involved in this area with extensive research have found this report to be shockingly onesided.
As highlighted on my piece in Forum this month, the role of BEN (Bangladesh Environment Network) in forming key environmental movement via BAPA has been path setting. This organization with its experts spread worldwide on highly reputed organizations on energy and environmental issues add a lot of weight to the exisiting discussion that is happening surrounding energy issues in Bangladesh. They recently produced a full coal policy highlighted in the op-ed in your paper . Most of the members in the group found it appalling that such an important piece which got front page treatment completely fails to cover the major reservations against the open pit coal mining.
I have read several of Shehrier’s pieces before and found them to be quite thorough. However, thre recent pieces are problematic in several fronts. First of all, the trip was arranged by Asia Energy (even though it was paid for by DS) which has the whole company at stake on getting this deal done. A trip for a reporter carefully managed by them undoubtedly will not be objective. Should Daily Star wanted to spend money on this issue, it would not have been difficult to arrange a trip with the help of experts and independent third parties. Secondly, the report which should have covered both sides of the argument on such a contentious issue, almost reads like a powerpoint presentation prepared by Asia Energy. Asia Energy, as you know, is a company with no past history on this field and has been explicitly set up in London for the sole purpose of Phulbari coal mining. Putting DS credibility at stake for such a company, in my opinion, should have required extra vigilance and far more careful research and fact checking from the reporter’s side. Rather he decided to do a report based on trips entirely stage managed by two key stakeholders who have an active interest and who are on a active PR campaign to have the deal go through. Most importantly the report should have addressed the key reservations against their policy of open pit coal mining to make the article more comprehensive. I am cc’ing key members in BEN who will soon produce a response on this series.
As part of the NRB-RB conversation on local issues that I highlighted in my piece in Forum, I wanted to bring this to your attention and I hope that the response from BEN gets equal editorial treatment in your paper considering the importance of the issue.
Sincerely,
AS
Past UV entries on Asia Energy and Phulbari
DS Report supporting Open Pit Coal Mining - 1
DS Report supporting Open Pit Coal Mining - 2
BEN Reservations on open pit coal mining
August 6th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
Some clarification please:
Wasn’t this company trying to do this in Bangladesh earlier and ran into a lot of trouble during the last BNP administration? Or are there two such companies in business? If it’s the former, it ran into a lot of trouble in the second half of last year when the AIM stock was massively shorted on(it seems with advance) information of licensing and PR difficulties.
Also it seems that Asia Energy (if it’s the same listed in AIM) is now called Global Coal Management.
August 6th, 2007 at 2:02 pm
Same company. They are making a comeback.
The article mentioned and hence it seems they are trying to convince the media first by inviting them to Germany et al.
You can see the past articles here
August 6th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
The Asia Energy has started pursuing the caretaker government to resume its operation in the Phulbari coal mine, official sources said.
But the government is in a dilemma over the issue of Asia Energy as a very complicated situation has been created after the two ministers of the immediate past BNP-led government reached agreement with the residents of the mine area. The sources said the Asia Energy requested the Energy Adviser and other policymakers to settle the issue as soon as possible.
The policymakers explained the country’s political situation and asked the UK company to wait for another few months, at least until the proposed coal policy is approved by the government.
Sources said the UK government has also urged the caretaker government to settle the dispute over the Asia Energy issue.
http://www.energybangla.com/article_det.asp?aId=612
August 6th, 2007 at 2:53 pm
I wish someone somewhere working for a decent energy company with coal expertise would come and sort us out. the painful reality is we made poor use of the gas. Decision makers are simply unable
to guide any process and the environmental lobby speaks more loudly than it should. Bangladesh is very very behind in terms of electricity production.
The journalist bhai mentions explicitly that DS paid for his conveyance. He was trying to express his intellectual independance. We all know through and through how defenders of the truth are actively manipulated in BD and in other countries. Here the dude is concious of the matter and quite open with it.
To the non-coal expert its very easy to be impressed by succesful projects running on the ground or by confounding environmentalist interpretations and political exploitation of the debate.
Maybe the problem needs to be cast like this. There are huge coal deposits and very little energy in the country. Isnt it in the public interest to exploit it?
August 6th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
Re: 4
Please read (the panel includes coal experts)
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/06/23/d706231501107.htm
Also, shortly, there should be a rebuttal in the DS of the Mr. Shahrier Khan articles by Professor Saifur Rahman of Virginia Tech, who is an energy expert.
About your query: should we not exploit the coal that we have? If indeed in any particular case, the cost-benefit analysis shows that it is in our interest to do so, we should go ahead. In this particular case, if you parse through all the arguments for and against and look through all the figures, there is little doubt that the answer should be a no as far as Phulbari.
For more reading, you can look through articles in
http://www.ben-center.org/tableOfContents/toc_Energy_Policy.htm
August 6th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
Why are you so against a foreign company investing billions of dollars into our impoverished country and enabling us all to have the most basic of human needs - Power!
I am sick and tired of my country falling behind. We have India and China on our doorstep whos economys are booming because they allow foreign companies and people to invest in their country.
This is reality! we need to join the world and the trade that comes with it. Only by allowing this to go ahead can our great country rise along with the rest of our partners. Can the campaigners against Phulbari and foreign investment not see this?
Give the coal mines the go ahead!
August 6th, 2007 at 10:24 pm
Re: 6,
There is a fundamental assumption here–FDI’s automatically imply that the country will be helped. There are numerous counter examples through out the world. For this or any investment to be viewed positively, it has to be a net plus for the country.
Perhaps, you should read up more on what strip mining is about and what it does to the land and the water table around the place and the adverse impact on agriculture for a wide area around that place. For a densely populated country, such as ours, the impact is devastating. Then again, you may argue that any economic activity is likely to have its down sides. This is where the cost benefit calculation comes in. Giving away ownership of the entire resources at Phulbari to AEC with a paltry 6 percent royalty is hardly anything to write home about.
Given what strip mining has done through out the world, and given the scarcity of land in Bangladesh, the argument is not even close.
August 6th, 2007 at 10:27 pm
Big love to environmental people, and to people who pool together their expertise to try something funky.
We will have to agree to disagree over whether the Coal Riots were political fodder exploiting local desperation, or wise collective action.
I loved the DS liberal splattering of the word ‘expert’. The BEN (please sort out your website) paper itself admits its nonprofessional character.
“This effort was a labor of love for the panel members. Each has a full-time job, a family and social lives to attend to.”
No decent leading government engineer would make such an excuse. The legendary Quamrul Islam Siddiqui would be so well informed about every report on his desk that donors and colleagues would be scared to try one on him.
BEN might have an energy panel, but from the report ‘a brief survey’ its very amateurish, like most of this sort of stuff in desh. I could get more sense(more mufassil sense, engineering sence, economic sense, ecological sense) out of a game of cards and chitter chatter at the BUET club. The DS article uses the diasporas name in vain. I was really dissapointed. Peoples lives depend on the quality of information flowing around. Info like this will do the rounds but contribute very little that is concrete.
I wish they would have included some graphs to show energy production, maps to show generation distribution to at least demostrate the ability to collect decent data. It doesnt strike me in any way shape of form as a credible product from such a panel which includes several doctorate holders. Maybe BEN needs experienced engineers from the public power sector.
Analysis of the blow outs is helped by Nurul Islams(of IAT right?) actual involvement in the trouble shooting, but elsewhere the credibility doesnt shine through. ***They dont seem interested in the energy famine***, just the soft stuff. The advisors can advise, but they can’t do your work for you.
If i were in a position to patronise my seniors with advice(a bit more) i would advise that they pull their fingers out and MAKE that cost benefit analysis that they go on about. Costing things intelligently appeals to economists, who generally sit on ECNEC and approve things. This is energy, not human rights, you have to rise to the competition.
the report http://www.ben-center.org/energy/BEN_Energy_Panel_Final_Final_Sep%201_2006.doc seems heavily influenced by trendy ascientific pop development speak and the disciplinary axes that its authors have to grind. This can be seen by the comparative length of discussion on various energy options.
Intractable problems need the full force of the organised and creative human mind, not the effete sidestep of postindustrial guilt acting by proxy through the sincere bangladeshi.
Is there a more detailed recent study by the group that follows up on its own recomentations?
btw.
Renewables dont work on a big scale and they arent accepted in the field. Go to where they have tried to fob of Bangladeshi’s with it and see what they think.
A self sacrificing, experienced and well educated XN asked me last month. ‘What is the contribution of the environmentalists to national development?’
Im looking for a suitable answer.
August 6th, 2007 at 10:53 pm
Fugstar,
Come up with something on your own before picking up the traditional Bangali psyche of pontificating without any actions and criticizing and ridiculing other’s good intentions and work. By mere chance, I have met you in person and unfortunately my first impression was that you aren’t capable of much more than tearing others to shreds. Grow up.
August 6th, 2007 at 11:15 pm
I see th exact Bangla version of this in other newspapers too. It looks like a concerted move.
Although I read BEN stand and all the stuff at weekly 2000.
Although protection national environment, natural and historical resources is a topic very close my heart, As I know a little in this matter, I won’t comment on this issue.
Interestingly I met the CEO of the australian firm who did the feasibility consultancy on behalf of Aisa energy in Fulbari site. To me his unbiased opinion sounded strongly in favor of open pit mining.
August 7th, 2007 at 1:29 am
Re: 10:
From an Australian perspective, strip mining may not seem all that bad–they have plenty of land and it really does not matter if the after effects of strip mining leaves the land around it toxified and unusable for years to come–I suspect this is reflected in the Australian guy who did the feasibility study. It’s an entirely different matter in a heavily populated country like BD. Further, in principle, companies like AEC can say that they are going to mitigate the environmental damage after they have completed strip-mining. However, in reality, this is a long shot. You need to look no further than the Occidental gas disaster in Magurchaara, Sylhet–they simply sold off their interest to another company without settling. Our institutional capacity in successfully prosecuting multinationals is at best weak, and this must be be part of the equation.
We are much better off waiting for technology to evolve so that we have an alternate to strip-mining in Phulbari. There is no need to rush into this.
Note not all coal mines in BD need strip mining. It is this particular location Phulbari and this particular contract with AEC that is in question. It is not an opiton between strip mining or no mining, as seems to be the general impression among some of the bloggers. Other places also have significant deposits, where the coal is at a sufficient depth to allow regular mining.
August 7th, 2007 at 5:56 am
I do construct and act when the role requires and the competance permits, this is not your concern. Even criticism to improve is action in itself and BEN needs to compete.
If you see the first sentence of the above post there is deep appreciation to the intentions of people who do have a go. About growing up, nobody is beyond improvement and some matters are easier to see flaws in than others. folks who report on public matters have thick enough skins to cope. Diasporas are not Divine.