Solar power should not become Bangladesh’s next expensive mistake

A farmer who runs a diesel pump knows the price of fuel before sunrise. A small factory owner knows the pain of an electricity bill before paying workers. A family in a hot city apartment knows what load-shedding means before reading any energy policy. For them, Bangladesh’s renewable energy debate is not about technology alone. It is about cost, reliability, fairness, and survival. Bangladesh’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) makes the energy question unavoidable. By 2030, the energy sector is expected to deliver nearly all of the country’s planned greenhouse gas emission reductions: 26.3 MtCO₂e under the unconditional scenario and 59.7 MtCO₂e under the conditional scenario (UNFCCC, 2025).

Bangladesh is now giving renewable energy a stronger place in policy. Solar power has received major fiscal support. Taxes and duties on key solar components are being reduced. Rooftop solar is being encouraged. Energy storage is finally entering the planning agenda. The latest budget also sets a target of meeting 20% of electricity demand from renewable energy by 2030, and 30% to 50% by 2050 (National Budget Speech FY2026–27).

Undoubtedly, these are important steps. They deserve recognition. Yet a difficult question remains. Will Bangladesh build a nature-smart energy system that is also affordable, transparent, and fair? Or will solar power become another costly shortcut, shaped by the same weak governance that made the fossil fuel economy expensive?

The answer matters because renewable energy is not automatically just. A solar panel can produce clean electricity, but only the right rules can make the system nature-smart. A poorly governed solar market can still produce inflated tariffs, land disputes, elite capture, and public debt. Green technology cannot fix old practices by itself. That is why the question is not only whether energy is clean, but whether it is governed in a way that protects people, land, water, and public money.

Bangladesh’s own solar experience shows the danger. Solar is now one of the cheapest electricity technologies in the world, yet Bangladesh has often procured it at high prices. In one assessment, solar projects that began operating in 2022/23 had an average tariff of about USD 0.155 per kWh in Bangladesh, compared with USD 0.053 in India and USD 0.084 in Vietnam. Another calculation found that solar power could be generated in Bangladesh at around 5.78 cents per kWh, while observed costs were close to 11.60 cents (Change Initiative, 2024). The problem was not the sun. The problem was the market around the sun.

This is why the concept of Nature-Smart Energy is more comprehensive than simply “clean” or “green” energy. Clean energy usually asks one question: does it reduce emissions? Nature-Smart Energy asks more. Does it reduce emissions without grabbing fertile land? Does it lower costs, protect water and biodiversity, give communities a voice, avoid debt traps, and break the old power monopoly? A solar park that cuts carbon but displaces farmers, inflates tariffs, or locks the country into debt is not nature-smart. It is only green on paper.

Bangladesh currently has about 1,797 MW of installed renewable energy capacity, according to SREDA’s national database. Solar makes up the largest share, at around 1,504 MW (SREDA, 2026). This is progress, but it remains small compared with national demand and future targets. The gap is not only about money or sunlight. Bangladesh has enough sunlight. The harder problem is how projects are approved, financed, priced, connected to the grid, and shared with people.

Research on solar power contracting in Bangladesh has shown that the country has often paid higher solar tariffs than comparable neighbours. This points to one uncomfortable conclusion: solar becomes expensive when the power market remains closed. The country’s renewable energy projects have too often proceeded through unsolicited bids, opaque tariff negotiations, and informal networks linking investors, intermediaries, and officials. In that kind of market, the best price does not always win. The best-connected player often does. This is how cheap technology can become an expensive contract. Ordinary people pay for this. A high tariff is not an abstract number. It travels through the power system and appears in subsidies, bills, public borrowing, and industrial costs. When competition disappears, prices rise. When prices rise, citizens pay.

The government’s move towards competitive bidding and a review of expensive power contracts is therefore not a minor administrative step. It is central to the future of the energy transition. Competitive procurement can bring serious investors into the market. It can reduce tariff pressure. It can also weaken the informal networks that benefit from closed-door deals. This is where Bangladesh must break the power monopoly. For years, the electricity sector has been shaped by a single-buyer model, closed negotiations, capacity payments, and a narrow circle of politically connected suppliers. Solar should not be added to that structure as another protected business line. It should open up the sector. More bidders, more rooftops, more community systems, more transparent auctions, and more direct consumer participation can reduce the grip of the old power economy.

But auctions alone will not solve the problem. Land is the next battlefield.

Large solar parks need large plots. Bangladesh does not have empty land waiting for projects. Land is tied to rice fields, ponds, grazing space, homesteads, memories, disputes, and livelihoods. When developers are left to arrange land on their own, only powerful actors can move quickly (Change Initiative, 2025). That creates entry barriers for better but less well-connected investors. It can also drive up land prices and trigger local resistance.

A land-smart renewable strategy is now essential. Solar parks should not be built by blindly converting agricultural land. Bangladesh should first use rooftops, public buildings, industrial sheds, railway land, degraded land, water bodies suitable for floating solar, and grid-adjacent, low-conflict zones. For larger projects, the government should prepare transparent land banks, ensure fair compensation, consult communities, and auction ready sites competitively.

Rooftop solar offers the fastest and least controversial path. A roof does not need to be acquired. It does not displace a farmer. It reduces pressure on the grid. It can power factories, schools, hospitals, markets, apartment buildings, and public offices. Bangladesh’s revised net-metering rules, which allow wider participation, can turn consumers into producers.

Every incentive should face three public tests. Did it reduce project costs? Did it lower electricity prices? Did it expand participation beyond a few large players? Failure on these tests would turn a green incentive into another subsidy without accountability.

But rooftop solar must not become a privilege for only large factories and wealthy households. Small shops, rural institutions, apartment owners, and community facilities also need access. That means affordable credit, simple approvals, reliable installers, consumer protection, and clear payment systems. A school rooftop in Rangpur or a health clinic in Satkhira should be able to benefit, not just an export factory in an industrial zone.

The new tax incentives can help: lower duties on panels, inverters, batteries, cables, mounting structures, and monitoring systems can reduce upfront costs. A 0 percent tax rate for the solar sector until 2035 and a consumer rebate on solar electricity bills send a strong signal (NBR, 2026). But tax relief should not become a blank cheque.

Every incentive should face three public tests. Did it reduce project costs? Did it lower electricity prices? Did it expand participation beyond a few large players? Failure on these tests would turn a green incentive into another subsidy without accountability.

Storage must also move from policy language to real investment. Solar power rises and falls with the sun. Bangladesh’s grid was not built for high shares of variable renewable energy. It was built mainly for centralised power plants, not thousands of variable solar producers whose output rises, falls, and shifts with the weather and the time of day. Without batteries, smart grids, demand response, forecasting, and time-based tariffs, solar growth will hit technical limits. A country cannot build tomorrow’s energy system with yesterday’s grid.

Electric vehicles create another opportunity and risk. The transition should not treat existing fuel pump owners as losers. They can become the first generation of charging-station operators. Every major petrol station can be offered a solar-linked charging bay, battery-swap counter, and safety-certified battery service point. For buses, three-wheelers, delivery vans, and motorbikes, battery swapping can make EV use faster than waiting for a full charge. A driver should be able to enter a station, exchange a depleted battery, and return to work within minutes. If charging is linked with rooftop solar, workplace solar, market sheds, and community batteries, EVs can reduce oil imports without adding pressure during evening peak hours (Change Initiative, 2023). This is the kind of transition people can endorse: not one that removes livelihoods, but one that upgrades them. The policy choice will determine which path Bangladesh takes.

Finance is just as important as technology. Climate finance is often described as support for vulnerable countries. In reality, much of it arrives as loans. In Bangladesh’s energy sector, this pattern is even sharper: climate finance allocation stands at about USD 2.54 billion, of which USD 2.35 billion is in loans and only USD 0.196 billion in grants, creating a loan-to-grant ratio of 11.99 (Change Initiative, 2025). For Bangladesh, this creates a painful contradiction. A country that contributes little to global emissions is borrowing money to protect itself from climate impacts it did not create. This is not climate justice. It is a climate debt trap.

The answer matters because renewable energy is not automatically just. A solar panel can produce clean electricity, but only the right rules can make the system nature-smart. A poorly governed solar market can still produce inflated tariffs, land disputes, elite capture, and public debt. Green technology cannot fix old practices by itself. That is why the question is not only whether energy is clean, but whether it is governed in a way that protects people, land, water, and public money.

Renewable energy finance must therefore be affordable, concessional, and justice-based. Commercial loans may work for profitable projects. But adaptation, community energy, resilience, and decentralised systems should not deepen public debt. Development partners should support grant-based finance, debt relief, debt-for-nature swaps, and low-cost credit lines that reduce the cost of capital without weakening fiscal stability. Carbon revenue can also become part of this financing shift.

Bangladesh’s NDC 3.0 has opened the door to carbon trading under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, along with green bonds, blended finance, and a transparent measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) system. Research conducted by Change Initiative estimates that Bangladesh could generate at least USD 4.7 to 5.3 billion per year from carbon credits, but the market remains largely untapped because emissions data, project pipelines, verification, finance linkages, and buyer access are still fragmented (Change Initiative, 2025). This is another place where monopoly must be prevented early. Carbon markets should not become a new club for a few consultants, brokers, and connected project owners. Bangladesh needs a one-stop national carbon market and climate finance platform where communities, SMEs, renewable energy projects, solar irrigation, waste-to-resource systems, mangrove restoration, and clean cooking can be measured, verified, financed, and linked transparently to credible buyers.

Bangladesh also needs one clear implementation roadmap. Targets are useful, but targets do not install panels, connect grids, or lower tariffs. A real roadmap should show yearly targets for rooftop solar, utility-scale solar, wind, storage, floating solar, solar irrigation, and industrial renewable procurement. It should include grid investment milestones, land-use rules, auction calendars, tariff reform, and financing tools.

Renewable investment does not flow simply because a country has sunlight. Investors look for credible rules, predictable approvals, bankable contracts, functional finance, and institutions that can deliver what the government announces. Bangladesh has moved beyond the starting line. The next task is to turn fiscal incentives into institutional trust.

Renewable energy must also be understood beyond the power sector. A solar irrigation pump can reduce diesel costs for farmers. A rooftop system in a hospital can keep services running during heatwaves. A factory powered by renewable energy can protect export competitiveness. A transparent auction can save public money. A grant-based finance package can protect the national budget.

This is why the concept of Nature-Smart Energy is more comprehensive than simply “clean” or “green” energy. Clean energy usually asks one question: does it reduce emissions? Nature-Smart Energy asks more. Does it reduce emissions without grabbing fertile land? Does it lower costs, protect water and biodiversity, give communities a voice, avoid debt traps, and break the old power monopoly? A solar park that cuts carbon but displaces farmers, inflates tariffs, or locks the country into debt is not nature-smart. It is only green on paper. Similarly, breaking monopoly does not only mean changing who wins large power contracts. It also means reducing people’s dependence on a system where one central grid decides when electricity reaches a village, a market, a school, or a clinic.

Solar should not be added to the old power structure as another protected business line. It should decentralise power. A community with rooftop solar, shared batteries, solar irrigation pumps, and a local energy committee is less vulnerable to load-shedding and less dependent on distant fuel imports or closed-door contracts. More bidders matter, but more community energy systems matter just as much. They shift power from a few suppliers to many citizens. This is the promise of a nature-smart renewable transition. It is not only about megawatts. It is about people, land, water, jobs, exports, and public money.

Bangladesh has already paid a high price for energy decisions made through short-term fixes. Expensive contracts, capacity payments, fuel imports, and weak planning have burdened the economy. Solar should not repeat that story in green.

The path ahead is clear. Build renewables fast, but fairly. Break the power monopoly before it captures solar. Choose competition over collusion, rooftops before land conflict, storage before grid stress, and grants before debt traps. Give opportunities to citizens, farmers, workers, and small businesses alongside investors.

Solar power can become a foundation for economic sovereignty and climate resilience. But only if Bangladesh refuses to turn it into another expensive shortcut.

Tonmay Saha is a Research Associate at Change Initiative.

Send your articles for Slow Reads to slowreads@thedailystar.net. Check out our submission guidelines for details.