A press release issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh on 6 July 2017 revealed UNESCO’s withdrawing its much talked about controversial objections about the Rampal Power Plant (RPP) in its location. The Ultra Super Critical Technology using High Efficiency Low Emission (HELE) power plant’s location is 14 Km away from the outer periphery of Sundarban Mangrove forest and about 70 Km from the region earmarked as world heritage.

The press release states, “The World Heritage Committee of UNESCO has withdrawn its earlier objection to the construction of Rampal power plant project at its current location. It has also spared the Sundarbans from being relegated to the List of World Heritage in Danger. The decision was made at the 41st session of the World Heritage Committee being held in Krakow, Poland. A high level inter-ministerial delegation led by Dr. Tawfiq-e-Elahi Chowdhury BB, Adviser to the Prime Minister on Power, Energy and Mineral Resources Affairs is participating in the meeting to defend Bangladesh’s position.”

RPP is 1320 MW ultra-super critical technology (USC) adopting High Efficiency Low Emission (HELE) type imported coal based power plant under implementation by BIFPCL, a PDB, Bangladesh and NTPC, India Joint Venture company. In the wake of major depletion of discovered gas resource which provided the fuel for power the Bangladesh government adopted imported coal as the preferred fuel for power generation. Given the complexity of mining own coal it chose imported coal as preferred option. Rampal was selected as the most suitable site for its location beside Poshur river and having enough sparsely habited fallow land.

Moreover, the prospect of massive industrialisation in Southern Region of Bangladesh following the completion of Padma Multipurpose bridge and proximity of Mongla Export Processing Zone were also among the reasons for choosing the location. Considering the proximity of echo sensitive Sundarban mangrove forest the government was additionally careful about adoption of technology and use of coal for the plant.




The EPC tender document prescribed for adoption of HELE type Ultra Super Critical Technology, use of less polluting low sulfur, low ash coal, incorporation of FGD, Low NOX burner, ESP, Dry Ash Collection method for mitigating SOX, NOX, Mercury and Ash emissions. Comprehensive ETP has been incorporated in the design for neutralising effluents before release and 2-degree Celsius temperature difference has been prescribed between intake and off take of water. Water Recycling is also in the design for minimising the water use.

A fully covered coal storage facility is also in the design. Covered handyman type coal carrier would transship and transport coal from Panamax type mother vessels anchored in the deep sea. A 275-Meter-high Chimney for letting out much less than prescribed minimum emissions is also provided for. About 200 plant engineers and operators would live inside the plant area. If they are not affected there cannot be any reason why uninformed academicians and non-technical persons are worried about ecosystem and bio diversity of Mangrove forest at safer distance. It is a pity that such persons are treated as Energy Expert in certain Bangladesh media.

All these above were explained in many different ways by experienced professionals in response to uninformed concerns raised by a section of academicians and civil society. These groups with the patronage of international anti-coal NGOs in social media and print media continued their propaganda avalanche. UNSECO also possibly got concerned. Earlier in 2016, a Reactive Monitoring Mission from UNESCO recommended relocation of Rampal power plant considering its likely impact on the Sundarbans.

Unfortunately, the report of the committee reflected almost entirely the position of a self-styled Oil Gas Protection Committee (OGPC) of Bangladesh instead of relying on the government assurances. UNESCO observations were duly responded.

The 41st session of the World Heritage Committee being held in Krakow, Poland discussed the matter on Wednesday, 4 July where a high powered Bangladesh team clarified its position and commitments for safeguarding environment. The 21-member World Heritage Committee decides on whether a cultural or natural site should be inscribed on the World Heritage List, monitors the state of conservation of the inscribed heritage sites, and can place a site on the World Heritage in Danger if found that the site is not being properly managed by the concerned State.




After a long deliberation, the Committee endorsed Bangladesh’s decision to construct Rampal power plant at its current location with necessary mitigation measures. The Committee in its decision also welcomed a number of steps taken by Bangladesh since 2016 to ensure conservation of the Sundarbans World Heritage Property. At the request of the Committee, Bangladesh agreed to undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the South-West region of the country, including the Sundarbans.

The session of World Heritage Committee is still not over. The decision of the committee is expected to be officially announced within weeks of conclusion of the meeting. Unfortunately quoting the working paper of the meeting dated 19 May 2017 some vested quarter is still trying to confuse people. That document which some persons are referring to
WHC/17/41.COM/7B, Paris, 19 May 2017 does not reflect the discussion and decisions of the meeting held on 4 July 2017. There is no reason for any one getting confused at all.

Works of RPP is proceeding smoothly after Indian EXIM Bank providing loan to BIFPCL. The EPC Contractor BHEL India has started the work and the Commercial operation of the plant is expected within 48 months meaning sometime in 2021.

Those who thinks coal will soon be discarded as preferred fuel must note that a recent study by the Australian government engaged specialist committee revealed that High Efficiency Low Emission technology using modern coal power plants would cost much less than renewable energy — Solar, wind or any other power generation option. Australia is going to go for such plants replacing the existing ageing coal plants. Coal would continue contributing as major fuel for base load power generation in the world well into foreseeable future.

We were always confident that UNSECO or any international organisation would come to senses when they get all information and documents from responsible government representative. From our past proven practical experience and having extensive discussions with RPP executives, site visits we were convinced that RPP designed as planned, constructed and operated according would cause no harm to Sundarbans. We hope theoreticians and agitators would refrain from creating further controversies about high priority national project.

At the same time, we would also expect that the government also engages a high powered national committee to monitor the activities of the project. The project team also needs qualified Bangladeshi professionals alongside Indian Counterpart. Bangladesh lacks expertise for managing operation of Ultra Super Critical Technology using power plants.

Saleque Sufiis an expert in energy sector infrastructure development, planning, construction management and operation in Central and South Asia and Australia. He has served as an adviser to the petroleum ministry of Afghanistan.

10 Responses to “UNESCO’s withdrawal and a deceitful anti-Rampal campaign”

  1. Lutfur Rahman use only Rahman

    The decision of the UNESCO is not the withdrawal of the objection already given but allowing the government some more times for more specific studies on environmental impact of the project.
    The most dangerous issue will be the transshipment of the coal most likely of the Indian quality and source.
    Some argued that Barapukuria coalmine is working and they will use more quality coal and technology, but they forget that there is no transshipment of the coal and not any waterways involved.
    The river excavation to clear the river depth every year for the vessels will be the responsibility of Bangladesh which will be highly costly and risky . This is because all the three main rivers carry huge quantum of silts every year.
    It will be highly dangerous to the biomass of the area both aquatic and terrestrial including human population under constant threat of gene mutation on the present gene pool. A hidden threat to all.
    However, govt. can think of changing the program of the area to solar energy capturing units of world first and vast clean electricity industry. For which may be UNESCO will give an award of exceptional nature rather than removing the sundarban from the world heritage.

  2. Gym Kamal

    India closed down four Coal based Power Plant last year to get advanced technology for electricity production. I think India is selling its junk mechineries to build Rampal Power Plant. I always oppose this project because it is on Wrong Place, Wrong Finance(Indian loan), Old technology, depends on imported coal, transporting throughout the Sunderbans.

  3. Syed Imtiaz Ali

    UNESCO doesn’t have the last word. But this is a window open now, disregarding all the expert views for years, even from India. This project was not built there only because of their own environmental damage.
    The consequences are IRREVERSIBLE, as many had come to learn from so many expert quarters, including UNESCO.

  4. Belal Beg

    If the claims is true that, “The World Heritage Committee of UNESCO has withdrawn its earlier objection to the construction of Rampal power plant project at its current location”, then why to make special request “We hope theoreticians and agitators would refrain from creating further controversies about high priority national project.”

    • Bashar

      There is no official statement from unesco as claimed in media and by govt.

  5. Ibrahim

    UNESCO did not withdraw their objection. They were all set to scratch Sundarban from the list of world heritage. However, the final decision says, Bangladesh will be given time till December, 2018 to prove Rampal will not harm the environment. UNESCO may go forward with their decision of removing Sundarban from World Heritage in 2019 if the environmental study is not acceptable.

  6. Shelley Shahabuddin

    This Rampal drama brings an analogy to my mind.

    Our children are trying to get their education in all types of educational Institutions across the country that they can afford, and is available to them.
    Suppose, all our eminent educationists demand that every child must get education in Ivy League or Oxford University standard Institutions. And if that is not possible, they must remain uneducated in order protect themselves from educational pollution!

    Are we not doing that about Rampal?

    Those who object to something, has the responsibility to suggest alternative choices. I have not heard anyone suggesting an alternative site for Rampal. And the suggestion must be doable.

    If the alternative suggested is that Bangladesh has to have the impossible best environmental Industry building decisions which no other country on Earth has done at this stage of their development, the only motive I understand is to check our national development.

    What interest is served by such a motive?
    I know at least one country that always wants to stop or check our development, if not destruction; seriously and honestly: ‘Pakistan’.

    We have to understand that all countries on Earth industrialised by some environmental and human sacrifices at first. To my knowledge, no country on Earth has dared to adopt the costly level of sophistication as is done for Rampal at this stage of their development.

  7. Bonphul

    Wait until what Anu Muhammad says to this UNESCO decision. There are genuine concerns and that is why UNESCO took so long to give its deliberation. Besides the decision to okay the project is only provisional as I understand and they are going to review it again next year. It is a matter of common sense that India wants this project built on Bangladesh side to protect their side of the Sundarbans. Any power plant that uses cheap coal to run the plant is seriously harmful to the environment. If the mangrove forest were not under threat then why would so many environmentalists including Nobel winner Al Gore go out of their way to say ‘NO’ to Rampal?

    • Hossain

      It would be mainly beneficial for Bangladesh and its people, not India. India has many power plants in their huge landmass, if we get Your European Contractors, and any other contractors in it would be double triple or maybe 10 folds the cost, as a result India is more cost effective.

      • Syed Imtiaz Ali

        We must focus on what junk we are getting at what cost to environment and flora and fauna that will be irreversible. Already hundreds are getting ‘approvals’ to set up other plants and factories!
        Choosing another site would be the best solution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *