Phulbari Coal: Hydrogeological environment not favourable for open pit mining

Engr. A K M Shamsuddin*

The Daily Star, September 29, 2007. Dhaka, Bangladesh

Asia Energy proposed to extract about 10-15 million tons of coal from Phulbari coal field adopting open-pit mining from final depth of 250 to 300 meters by removing 4400 million tons of overburden (rock, sand, mud, soil) covering an area of about 5.2 sqkm throughout the life of the mine i.e. 36 to 38 years. Mining operations will mainly consist of dweatering of aquifer, cleaning and top soil stripping, overburden removal, rehabilitation of mined out areas and overburden dumps. Coal seams (upper and main) ranging in total thickness between 20 and 65 meters are planned to be extracted. Aquifer dewatering will be continuous throughout the operation life of the mine.

Asia Energy assessed that a large quantity of groundwater ranging from 400 to 800 MnL/day will need to be discharged throughout the life of the mine i.e. 36-38 years. It plans to make discharged groundwater available to the tune of 100 to 230 MnL/day for riparian use, river discharge purpose and water for coal fired power station. Of the removable 4400 million cubic meters of overburden, 30 percent will be dumped ex-pit and the remainder deposited back into the pit. According to Asia Energy, the mine would displace 40,000 people of some 100 villages and a portion of Phulbari town. To maintain dry working condition in open-pit mine, aquifers need to be depressurised. Due to mine dewatering activities water level drawdown will lead to water level decline in excess of 10 km from the mine. This would reduce groundwater availability of Phulbari township, surrounding villages and local farming communities within the given area of influence. This will also impact on bio-diversity, wetlands and rivers in the surrounding areas.

Impact on hydrogeological environment

Potential and major groundwater reservoir of Bangladesh lies in its north-western region covering greater Dinajpur and Rangpur districts. The groundwater resource of this region is the main aquifer of Bangladesh which is about 80-120 meters thick in the DupiTila formation and situated at about 10-12 meters below the surface. A study by School of Environmental Studies, Jadavpur University, Kolkata and Dhaka Community Hospital (DCH) on "Possible Arsenic Contamination Free Groundwater in Bangladesh" reveals that groundwater of north-western region of Bangladesh is almost arsenic-contamination free. It runs low in the region during dry season and makes it difficult for the tube wells to draw water. The government and non-government organisations have been trying with tree plantation for many years to prevent desertification in the region.

The underground water level in eight districts of the northern region including Dinajpur is falling gradually posing a threat to Irri-Boro farming. About 30 percent tube wells in the area have become inoperative for declining underground water level. The badly affected districts are Dinajpur, Thakurgaon, Kurigram, Rangpur, Lalmonirhat, Nilphamari and Gaibandha.

According to an NGO consultancy firm the northern region has the possibility of turning into a desert if water is lifted from underground level in excess of 15,000 cusecs a year. But at present about one lakh cusecs of water is being lifted for irrigation which is alarmingly higher than the red mark. Most alarming is that the lifted water is not being proportionately compensated by regular seasonal rainfall. This maximum gaps may cause natural disaster at any time as cautioned by the experts.

Extraction of Phulbari coal adopting open-pit mining method can be disastrous for the north-western region in particular and Bangladesh in general due to dewatering of arsenic contamination free source of drinking and irrigation groundwater from DupiTila formation from a depth of 250 to 300 meters to the tune of 800 million liters per day over a period of 38-years. Dewatering in the Phulbari mining area may not only disturb but also damage the aquifer, making the area a desert like place.

Prof. Nazrul Islam of Department of Geography and Environment at Dhaka University says Dhaka WASA should avoid groundwater extraction and search for surface water sources in order to save groundwater environment. Groundwater extraction alone poses a grave threat to land subsidence with a potentially negative impact like that experienced in countries like Thailand and Mexico, he said. "Two decades ago land subsidence of few inches took place every year in those countries due unbridled groundwater extraction." While the benefits remain uncertain, the results to the environment could be seriously harmful, he explained. "The initiative to set up 1000-ft deep tube wells in Dhaka city is very destructive since existing 600-ft deep tube wells have already created a large vacuum within the underground level due to lack of water recharge, making the situation very vulnerable to earthquakes," he asserted. Extraction of huge quantity of groundwater at Phulbari coal basin can thus put the region to the threat of land subsidence, land sliding and earthquake. Re-injection of only 25 percent of extracted toxic and contaminated water, as per Asia Energy, will not change the situation.

Access to safe water is a fundamental human need and a basic human right. We need to safeguard the supply of pure water and ensure that everyone has excess to it. The right to water has been accepted as a natural, social fact, governments and corporations cannot alienate people from it. Water right comes from nature and creation, not from the rules of the market. We have no right to deny Phulbari People's right of access to water for coal. Water is no less important than oil, gas and coal.

According to Asia Energy, the top-soil will be removed and preserved once mining operation begins in a particular block. This top-soil will be brought back and spread on the top of the area after completion of mining at the particular block which may take 3-5 years. It will be very difficult to preserve top-soil for such a long time. Top-soil may be washed away during monsoon. At least 3-5 monsoons will be there before top-soil is used at the top of the filled out mining block. And the fertility of the top-soil will also be lost during these 3-5 rainy seasons.

During monsoon, already mined out area will be filled up by rain water, which is required to be pumped out again. During rainy season mining will be difficult and may have to be postponed to facilitate pumping of water out of the mine. Thus 2-3 months in a year may be lost due to this. Thus uninterrupted supply of coal to the power station and other coal consumers may not be possible.

Barapukuria coal mine

M/s Wardell Armstrong, a very reputed mining exploration and consulting company of UK, conducted techno-economic feasibility study of Barapukuria coal deposit during 1987-1991. They strongly rejected the idea of open-pit mining at Barapukuria. They estimated removal of 8,000-10,000 litres of groundwater per second for the whole operational life of the mine (30 years) to dewater DupiTila aquifer for open-pit mining at Barapukuria. They realised that the huge extraction of groundwater for such a long time from DupiTila aquifer may damage the most potential and major aquifer in the whole region. This is one of the reasons that M/s Wardell Armstrong opted for underground mining at Barapukuria. 35-40 percent coal can be recovered by adopting underground longwall mining method which is being practiced in most parts of the world.

Present 7 to 8 percent recovery from Barapukuria Coal Mine is not the fault of underground mining method. It is perhaps the fault of mine designer, mine builder, mine developer and mine operator. Therefore, present low recovery at Barapukuria cannot be cited as a supportive example for open-pit mining at Phulbari.

Conclusion

The government may undertake a detail hydrogeological study on major and potential aquifer in the north-western region of Bangladesh in the light of Asia Energy's proposal for open-pit coal mining at Phulbari. At the same time Asia Energy may give a second thought to their proposal and examine underground mining prospects at Phulbari. Adopting underground longwall mining method 35 to 40 percent coal recovery is very much possible also at Phulbari which can easily meet AEC's requirement to run 1000MW power station there ulbari.

Mr Forrest Cookson, in his article "Dealing with existing coal projects" published in The Daily Star on September 05, 2007 has cautioned the government about the consequences if the Phulbari contact is cancelled. But if Asia Energy's proposal of open-pit mining puts the region in the danger of desertification, earthquake, land subsidence and sliding and other natural disasters, then the government in the interest of the country very rightly ask Asia Energy to revise their proposal i.e. switching over to underground mining.

*Engr. A K M Shamsuddin, a petroleum and mining consultant, is former Managing Director, Pashchimanchal Gas Co. Ltd. (PGCL), Petrobangla.

Killings in Phulbari Ignite Unstoppable Protest: Local Communities Stand Strong against Open Cut Mining

From the Archive. SEHD Report. www.sehd.org Photo: Philip Gain/SEHD

Phulbari town in Dinajpur district is burning in people’s anger and also in fire. The situation has turned from bad to worse. This is a consequence of the killing of at least five persons on 26 August during a massive protest of farmers, ethnic communities and those of the town against Asia Energy, a UK-based company. The foreign company has been exploring coal and intending to initiate an open cut mine in this northwestern corner of Bangladesh.

The demand for expulsion of the company from Phulbari and also from the country has become stronger after the killing on 26 August. The protesters set a deadline for the foreign company’s exit at 11:00 A.M. on 28 August. Given that Asia Energy’s employees were still there, the angry protesters burnt the information center of Asia Energy and ransacked its laboratory that stores samples of coal extracted from 150 drilling sites. Finding no way out, the Asia Energy staff then sealed their main office and left Phulbari in a roundabout way, viz., through Dinajpur, under police escort. The people also ransacked and burnt the houses of a number of people identified to be accomplices of Asia Energy.

The National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port organized the protest against the open cut mining and seize of Asia Energy’s offices. Around 50,000 protesters from villages in the mine area and those of Phulbari town took to the streets and approached the offices of Asia Energy to demonstrate their “no” to the foreign company’s attempt of open cut mining. Hundreds of paramilitary forces—BDR, police and other security agencies—heavily guarded the offices of Asia Energy. It is reportedly the BDR that opened fire on the demonstrators, killing at least five people and injuring many others. This caused uproar among the protesters.

This is an unprecedented scenario at a time when Bangladesh is hoping for a major step forward in the mining industry and attracting Foreign Direct Investing (FDI). But the trouble has grown out of the method of mining, viz., open cut, requiring massive relocation of people. People in the mine footprint are dead against the open cut mining although the company has always set aside peoples’ discontent.

On 26 August the protesters including ethnic communities assembled at the Dhaka Morh (circle), the entrance of the Phulbari town. They had sticks in their hands. The Santals joined with their drums, bows and arrows. Led by the leaders of the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port, the protesters began their march towards the offices of Asia Energy at about 3:30 P.M. On the way to the main office of the company, some stones were thrown at Asia Energy’s information center that is located in the middle of the town. The main part of the Phulbari town lies on the east side of Chhoto Jamuna river with a small bridge over it. The security forces put barricades at the bridge site. The leaders of the national committee talked to Upazila Nirbahi Officer (UNO), who according to Prof. Anu Muhammad, gave his words to move the Asia Energy out of the town.

According to eyewitness some protesters crossed the river. A rally also approached from the western side of the river. The protesters on the western side of the river actually came under massive gunshots from the BDR and teargas shells from the police. The bloodshed led to a seemingly unstoppable protest leading to a continued strike in Phulbari and the burning of houses of beneficiaries or accomplices of Asia Energy.

The home minister has asked for inquiry into the causes of peoples’ discontent in Phulbari. Newspapers on 27 August reported Asia Energy’s Chief Officer Mr. Garry Lye’s statement: “It is most unfortunate that unrepresentative outsiders have come to cause trouble in our community”. Actually Lye pointed his finger at the organizers of the protest and seize program. Condemning what Lye says about the organizers, Md. Khorshed Alam Moti, the joint convener of the Phulbari Raksha Committee, said to this writer: “The people of Phulbari and others of the mine area spontaneously participated in the protest program on 26 August. No outsider came to Phulbari to cause trouble. We want to get rid of Asia Energy. We want Asia Energy’s immediate expulsion from our land.”

What has been happening in Phulbari is tragic and it is important that all concerned honestly look into the factors that has led to this catastrophic situation.

The project

An Australian company, BPH, started the coal exploration in Phulbari area. The Bangladesh government signed a contract with BPH through an open tender. In 1998, the contract was transferred to Asia Energy. Asia Energy, after estimation of coal reserve, has submitted to the government a plan of operation. The government has already granted environment clearance to the company.

According to Asia Energy, 5,900 hectares or 59 sq. km. land area is required for the mine. The area covers more than a hundred villages of seven unions in four Upazilas—Phulbari, Birampur, Nawabganj and Parbatipur—and part of Phulbari Sadar Upazila, under Dinajpur district. Thousands of acres of cropland fall within its boundaries.

The area of Phulbari Thana Sadar that falls within the project area has brick-built houses, schools, colleges, tarmacked roads, railroads, business facilities and so forth. Outside the township lie vast crop fields, forest patches and plantations. Beneath the expanse of beautiful landscapes lies the 38m thick (on an average) coal fossilised over 270 million years. According to Asia Energy the coal reserve in this mine is 572 million tons. The company believes, if explored, more coal will be traced in the south of the present mine.

Who benefit and who lose from open pit mining?

Appointed by Asia Energy, GHD, an international organisation, prepared a report for the company that claims Bangladesh will receive benefits worth US$21 billion over the 30 years of the mine's lifetime. Of this, US$7.8 billion will come as a direct benefit and US$ 13.7 billion, as indirect or multiplier benefits. The mine itself and the coal-fired plant for production of electricity will contribute one percent per annum to the GDP of the country.

The inhabitants of the mine area complain that people living in other parts of the country do not realize their plight, nor do they foresee the disaster the open pit mining is likely to cause to this region.

"We heard there is a coal deposit in this area. But the people engaged by Asia Energy did not let us know that the method for mining would be open cut, which necessitates eviction and destruction of our houses, schools, colleges and all other establishments in the mine footprint. All of us, irrespective of party affiliations, are against it," said Md. Khurshid Alam Moti, leader of the Phulbari Raksha Committee. He is also the principal of Phulbari Women's Degree College and chairman of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) in Phulbari.

According to Asia Energy that is in contract with Bangladesh government for exploration of coal, 40,000 people need to be relocated from the mine footprint. But according to Phulbari Raksha Committee that is composed of people from all parties at the local level contend the company’s estimate. “We understand that about 150,000 people of the mine area will be directly affected and 200,000 to 250,000 would be affected indirectly,” said Moti.

Nima Banik, a lecturer at Phulbari Women's Degree College says, "No matter wherever we are put, if we get evicted from our homes, we will lose our traditions, social organization and businesses. These losses are beyond compensation. Moreover, we do not trust Asia Energy. Its estimate is unfounded."

M. Anwarul Islam, Asia Energy's general manager (environment and community) disagreed and said, "We have always mentioned the idea of open pit. In Phulbari, there is no other option." According to the company all the damages will be compensated and the condition of the inhabitants of the mine area will be better than before. However, the aura of distrust and the demand of the locals is clear: "We do not want open pit mining." From June 2005 the Phulbari Raksha Committee has been organising processions and meetings every Saturday in Phulbari in protest against it.

Asia Energy claims that Bangladesh has no risk in the Phulbari mine project. The company claims that Bangladesh will receive half of the total profit accrued from the mining operation. The profit includes 6 percent royalty, 45 percent corporate tax and 2.5 percent import duty. The other gains of Bangladesh as the company mentions will be "a new source of energy for the country, a new commodity for export, new industries, employment opportunities, regional development, poverty alleviation, growth of nascent industry, new rail and port infrastructure."

Professor Anu Muhammad's fear is: "It is Bangladesh where the coal has been found; and a foreign company will become its owner. There is no proper way to measure the actual benefit of Bangladesh and the price it would have to pay for it. What becomes clear is Bangladesh will have to buy its own coal from the company at an international price."

Impacts on environment

A serious concern of open pit mining is its environmental impacts. The method requires the mine area to be completely dewatered so that the hollow of the mine does not get immersed in water. Not an easy task. Large pumps are required to suck out underground water around the mine round-the-clock during the entire lifetime of the project. The impact on the already dry Barind Tract is obvious. Water level runs lower in Barind Tract during dry season and make it difficult for the tubewells to draw water. When dewatering starts for the mining, the shallow and deep tubewells will not draw enough water for farmers in the larger area near the mine.

Asia Energy's solution is to distribute the water pumped out among the farmers. It is an open question if the water distribution would be even-handed. The government and non-government organizations have been trying many options including tree plantation for many years now to prevent desertification in north Bengal. If dewatering in the mining area hastens the desertification process, pouring water above the ground remains a doubtful viable option for agricultural sustainability.

According to Asia Energy sources the average thickness of coal's layer in Phulbari is 38m. In order to reach the layer of the coal, overburden between 150 and 250m needs to be removed, leaving a thousand-foot deep hollow. Once used up, the hollow will be filled with earth and a new area will be dug out. The area filled up does not become useful in many years. According to a high official in Asia Energy, topsoil will be removed and preserved once the mining operation begins in a particular block. Topsoil will be brought back and spread on the top of the area filled in. But no one can say when the land becomes cultivable again. The other question is: will the company fill the hollow with the same care as it is done in the developed countries? Non-compliance of existing laws is a common practice in Bangladesh.

At the final stage of the mining operation, in about 30 years after the operation begins, Bangladesh will get a huge lake that according to the company will be filled up with fresh water providing a big source of water, fishery and recreation. But mining experts warn that the final hollow, after 30 years of digging and other activities, will contain toxic substances. It may not be realistic to envision this polluted lake becoming a source of fresh water.

Handling the other forms of environment pollution is also a challenge. There will be routine dynamite explosion inside the mine to break the rocks and the coal. Heavy machinery will be set up in and outside the mine. Heavy 240-ton trucks and trains will carry the coal causing noise pollution. Coal dust will be a major source of air pollution. If the enormous amount of polluted water generated from washing of the coal is not properly treated before it is dumped into surrounding water bodies, it will kill fish and other forms of life. Further, the earth through such deep digging and many types of pollution will lose all its micro-organisms. Air pollution from burning of coal to produce electricity is a big concern. Air polluting agents such as sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds (VOC), mercury, lead, cadmium, chromium, and arsenic will contaminate earth, water, plants and animals.

Eliminating pollutants is extremely difficult. Asia Energy expects to keep the pollution within a tolerable level. However, there is a fear that the company will not adopt adequate measures to mitigate pollution because these involve much effort and cash.

Transportation of the coal is another concern. In order for marketing, the coal will be carried to the deep seaport through the Sundarbans. New seaport and railroads need to be built for this. On the positive end, this will create employment and bring in revenue, but it also adversely affects the environment of the Sundarbans (the largest mangrove forest on earth). The noise and water pollution created by the Mongla Port has already become a threat to the animals, plants and other life forms in the mangrove forest. The added transportation over the 30 years of the mine's lifetime will increase threats to the Sundarbans.

The environment and social impact assessment (EIA and SIA) of the Phulbari Coal Project has already been carried out and approved by the Department of Environment of Bangladesh government. Three hundred consultants of several international and national companies, some Bangladeshi environmental organizations and individuals have done the EIA and SIA. They have produced 2,600-page reports after 18 months of work. This is where many question if the EIA and SIA commissioned by the same company that will extract the coal have been impartial. Asia Energy claims it will do all that is needed for the protection of environment and social harmony.

Although the people of mine area and their supporters stand against the open pit project, they are not against extraction of the coal in general. Their understanding is that the ownership of the coal and fate of the affected people just cannot be handed down to a foreign company. They suggest waiting until the country develops its own mining expertise and technology. "We may give our consent when the country will be able to mine the coal resource with our own technology," said Principal Moti. There are many others whose voices join with Principal Moti's.

Asia Energy had turned down the demand of the Phulbari people to wait until Bangladesh builds its own expertise and mining technology. It says that by the time Bangladesh has it own mining expertise and resources, the fossil fuel may not be required any longer. The company claims that it is high time to extract the coal. Now the local communities have contested the company with their blood.

Looking ahead

The past week has been a week of violence, expression of anger and mistrust of the people of Phulbari town and the mine area. All that has happened there has shaken the whole nation. The whole world has also looked at Bangladesh with concern and curiosity. It is difficult to predict how Phulbari will return to normal life. Application of the state security forces against the people has caused uproar in their minds. They send a very strong message to the state agencies and the company that it is their land that contains 270 million year old coal. It is them who decide if the resource is to be shared in the best interest of the community and the nation. It is the state that must protect the land and the communities. It was certainly a fatal mistake to attempt to resolve a serious human problem with bullets and teargas. If the state of Bangladesh is really for the people, its functionaries must bow before the people’s power and salute their courage. If that happens, it will be a step forward for providing political protection to those who need it most.

Coal policy advisory committee to keep options open for open-pit, shaft mining

The Daily Star, September 23, 2007

A 12-member coal policy advisory team held a review meeting yesterday following its visit to Barapukuria coalmine, Phulbari and Dighipara the day before. The team will advice the government on framing the national draft coal policy, according to sources at Barapukuria Coal Mine Company Ltd (BCMCL).

Mineral and Resources Department of Petrobangla formed the committee headed by Abdul Matin Patwari, former vice-chancellor of Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET) to help it finalise a draft national coal policy. Other members of the committee are Prof Nazrul Islam, chairman of Bangladesh University Grants Commission (UGC); Maj. Gen. Ismail Faruk Chowdhury, defence representative; Prof Nurul Islam, director of Institute of Appropriate Technology (IAT); Prof Badrul Imam, head of geology department of Dhaka University; journalist Ataus Samad; Prof Mustafizur Rahman of Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD); Nazrul Islam, chief executive of Infrastructure Investment Facilitation Centre (IIFC); Mokbul Elahi, director Petrobangla; Golam Mostafa, former managing director of BCMCL and Shahdeen Malik, a Supreme Court lawyer.

The team at its meeting at BCMCL auditorium yesterday reviewed recommendations of different professionals and rights group, local members of the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port and Citizen's Commission of Bangladesh Economic Association (BEA). The committee sources said it would not recommend discarding any particular mining method to keep options open for both open-pit and shaft coal mining in the country.

The committee, however, did not agree in principle to recommendations of the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas and Mineral resources and the BEA, which urged the government not to keep provision for open-pit mining system in the draft coal policy. The groups said open-pit mining pollutes the environment, displaces thousands of people from their homesteads and destroys vast areas of fertile farmlands.

The advisory committee also shared view of the two groups that coal export should not be allowed to ensure energy security for future generations. “We should not recommend or ban any mining method in the policy as the method should be fixed on the basis of technical, social, environmental and economic aspects”, Patwari told the review meeting. “If it is found that after cost-benefit analysis, open-pit mining is not viable, it is natural that no one will want to go for that (open-pit mining),” Patwari told the meeting. Other team members present at the meeting also shared Patwari's view, meeting sources said.

Basing on projected future coal requirement for power generation, Patwari said, if Bangladesh adopts only underground mining system, the extracted coal would be fully consumed even before 2025 while the government wants to ensure energy security for 50 years.

As per estimate, around 235 million tonnes of coal can be extracted through underground mining from four coalfields that have a total reserve of around 1,168 million tonnes. On the other hand, around 1,050 tonnes of coal can be extracted by open-pit mining.

Prof Badrul Imam, however, told the meeting that even if open-pit mining method is allowed in the country, it would not be possible to operate more than one open-pit mines as country's coal reserve is concentrated in only two districts.

The team left Dinajpur for Dhaka in the afternoon. Earlier they visited Dighipara under Nawabganj upazila in Dinajpur.

Coal Policy: Govt body to visit mine, coal rich areas today

The Daily Star, September 21, 2007

The committee tasked with finalising a coal policy for the country will be visiting today Barapukuria coal mine, Phulbari, Khalashpir, Dighipara and a few other areas that are rich with coal deposits. The members of the committee, accompanied by the energy secretary, will talk with the officials of Barapukuria Coal Mining Company as well as with the locals of Phulbari, including the ones who have been opposing the coal-mining proposal of Asia Energy, said sources.

On the way, the committee will visit the Dighipara and Khalashpir coal zones, the sources added. The committee also intends to visit and survey the area of Jamalganj -- the country's biggest coal deposit -- where no visible surface marking is available.

Furthermore, the committee that was formed in June has decided to send two of its members -- Prof Nurul Islam from Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (Buet) and Prof Badrul Imam from Geology Department of Dhaka University -- to the upcoming Saarc coal conference to be held in Kolkata in mid-October.

The committee recently resolved a vital debate on the mining method in the draft of national coal policy. While one group of people had been putting pressure on banning the open-pit method of mining in Bangladesh, the other group wanted all mining option to be open for particular mining proposals.

The committee decided that the policy would not restrict any mining method since it depends on technical issues such as geology or hydrology etc. and the government should have the discretionary authority to approve a mining method against each mining proposal.

The committee headed by Prof Abdul Matin Patwari, former vice chancellor of Buet, was formed as the sixth draft version of the national coal policy drew a lot of criticism for being anti-investment and self-contradictory.

The finalisation of the national coal policy is seen as a crucial document for the future of the existing deals with Asia Energy or Hosaf as well as for other offers that are pending government approval.

Two coal committee members to attend SAARC coal conference

NewAge, Dhaka, Bangladesh. September 18, 2007

The government is likely to send two members of the high-powered advisory committee, formed to finalise the coal policy, to attend a SAARC technical conference on coal to be held in Kolkata on October 12. The energy division has recommended to the government that Professor Nurul Islam, director of the BUET’s Institute of Appropriate Technology, and Professor Badrul Imam of the Department of Geology of Dhaka University should attend the conference. ‘Both the experts have expressed interest in attending the one-day conference as it will help them to give more input, based on the other SAARC countries’ experience, to the proposed coal policy,’ said a source in the division.

The members of the 11-member advisory committee, headed by former BUET vice-chancellor Abdul Matin Patwari, are scheduled to visit three coal-fields on Friday before the committee scrutinises every paragraph of draft of the coal policy submitted by the energy division.

The committee has so far held more than five meetings and heard the recommendations of various experts and professional and human rights groups. Professor Nurul Islam, meanwhile, has been appointed the chairman of the board of governance of the SAARC Energy Centre that was set up in Islamabad in 2006. The chairman of the board is selected for three years from each member-country in alphabetical order.

The centre has taken steps to conduct a study on regional energy trade, which will be financed by the Asian Development Bank, while another programme will be launched on the experts’ capacity building. The primary objective for the establishment of the centre is to have a regional institution for the initiation, coordination and facilitation of SAARC energy programmes, said energy officials of Bangladesh.

Other objectives include strengthening the region's capability to address global and regional energy issues by enhancing the coordination of energy strategies of the SAARC states, and facilitating intra-regional trade in energy by the establishment of interconnecting arrangements for electricity and natural gas, such as the proposed power grid and trans-national gas pipelines.

The centre will also promote cooperation in energy efficiency and conservation as effective mechanisms for demand-side management, the development of new and renewable energy resources for sustainable energy development in the SAARC states over the long term.

Open-pit coal mining not viable

NewAge, Dhaka, Bangladesh. September 13, 2007

Bangladesh is undoubtedly heading towards a major energy crisis in the days to come. But with the reserve of coal, even if recovered even by open pit mining, will at best contribute a pond, if not a drop, in an ocean. So we must explore multiple options like undertaking massive search for oil, gas and coal, tapping wind energy in the coastal belt, generating small-scale hydro-electricity in the hilly terrains, solar energy, and coal extraction by underground mining only from the known deposits, writes Dr Aftab Alam Khan, Professor Aftab Alam Khan, Department of Geology, Dhaka University.

An open pit coal mine may contribute four, five, even ten times greater than an underground coal mine does in energy production, an example cited from Germany. However, the controversy lies with a different scenario that might have been overlooked by some who are advocating for open pit coal mining in Bangladesh. The first line of comparison between the two should be drawn based on the principal condition lies with the same level and standard. If the level and standard between the two are different than those of the comparisons, it is not likely to sustain. Bangladesh and Germany are two countries with marked differences in culture, socio-economy, physiography, geomorphic, hydrogeologic and overall geologic point of views.

The North Rhine Westfalia (NRW) coal mine areas in Germany do not possess any catchment area like Teesta fan in Bangladesh. Neither does it possess such thick groundwater bearing formation like Dupitila in Bangladesh overlying directly coal beds. Sand, clay and gravel layers overlying the coal bearing formation in NWR converge towards a valley not even 10km wide and eventually is directed along the valley gradient towards The Netherlands occupying very negligible land in NWR, Germany. The NE-SW geological cross section of NWR coal mine area clearly exhibits its subsurface geological condition which is markedly different from Bangladesh coal field region. While the coal field regions in Bangladesh are characterised by more porous and permeable thick groundwater bearing layer directly overlying coal bearing formation and diverge radially along multiple river valley systems occupying around 50 per cent of the valley covered region. In addition, around 30 per cent and more area of the Teesta fan will be affected by massive groundwater depletion. Both surface and subsurface gradients in the North Rhine Westfalia (NRW) coal zone are directed to only narrow linear zone along Rhine river valley. While, both the surface and subsurface gradients of Bangladesh coal field areas are directed radially along Sib-Barnai, Atrai and Little Jamuna river valley systems.

It is reported that the NRW mining area is pumping out 550 million cubic metres of groundwater annually where open pit mining is likely to start and very interestingly this mining area is not characterised by or linked to any such region like Teesta fan and thick Dupitila formation. Hence, it is apprehended that if an open pit mine is started in Bangladesh it would require dewatering few times higher than that of NWR open pit mine area. Barapukuria underground coal mine is pumping out around 15 million cubic meter of water annually from a water bearing formation at around 300m depth which is markedly sealed at the top by an impermeable shale/clay layer separating overlying highly porous and permeable Teesta fan sediments and Dupitila formation. Thus, the present dewatering at Barapukuria underground mine is being managed for the water discharging only from the coal bearing formation alone. An obvious question arises as to how much water shall be required to be pumped out when an open pit mine face along with the entire Teesta fan and Dupitila in coal field areas will be open?

An article/company brochure published by RWE Power AG (www.mining-technology.com) states quote ‘Rheinbraun has developed sophisticated dewatering programmes that can handle up to 1,200Mmm³/y of groundwater without affecting neighboring communities’ water supplies’. However, it did not mention actually how much of water is being managed by dewatering and from flooding in actual field development. The article has projected very successfully the positive sides of an open-pit coal mining in NRW, Germany but it has very candidly overlooked the article published in Natural Resources on March 21, 2007 by Steffen Winter (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany) where it was written ‘Germany has little oil or natural gas, but it does have large reserves of another resource: lignite. However its extraction through open cast mining is highly controversial — and can lead to the disappearance of entire villages’. It further states that ‘the excavators used at the mining facilities have devastated an area equal to 182,000 soccer fields, wiping at least 244 villages and neighbourhoods off the map’. More interestingly it states that ‘Central German Brown Coal Mining Company (Mibrag) has been owned by US investors — Washington Group International and NRG Energy — since 1994 –– there’s no shortage of money, and the firm is used to dealing with public resistance. The company has been trying to access the coal beneath the town of Heuersdorf in Saxony since 1994, the citizens protested, but then the so-called “Heuersdorf Law” was passed by Saxony’s state parliament, stating that the village — which is 709 years old — has to be vacated by 2008, the dead buried in the cemetery will be moved to new graves and the church will be rebuilt elsewhere’.

Germany is a net energy importer, with its total energy consumption exceeding its production by a very large margin. Germany presently ranks as the world’s 5th greatest energy consumer, accounting for about 3.4% of the world’s annual energy consumption. Germany has consumed about 4 million gigawatt-hours of electricity in the year 2003 against only one third of its own production in comparison to Bangladesh’s approximately 50 thousand megawatt-hours of electricity. A comparison on other components is listed in the table. With such differences, how could an example of benefit out of open pit mining be brought to justify the same for Bangladesh?

Bangladesh is undoubtedly heading towards a major energy crisis in the days to come. But with the reserve of coal, even if recovered even by open pit mining, will at best contribute a pond, if not a drop, in an ocean. So we must explore multiple options like undertaking massive search for oil, gas and coal, tapping wind energy in the coastal belt, generating small-scale hydro-electricity in the hilly terrains, solar energy, and coal extraction by underground mining only from the known deposits. Import of gas from Shwe Gas Field on the Arakan coast in Myanmar might be another option to minimise immediate crisis.

Phulbari, Asia Energy and Grassroots Revolt

Phulbari, Asia Energy and Grassroots Revolt, SEHD Report
www.sehd.org

In the last week of August 2006, an unbelieving nation watched, with increasing concern, tragedy unfold in a coal-rich area of Dinajpur. Popular protests against the Asia Energy Project had resulted in firing by the BDR on citizens, leaving at least three dead and more than two hundred injured. In this report Philip Gain looks at the issue and explains the background to the crisis.

The grassroots revolt in Phulbari against the open-cut mining plan of Asia Energy, a British company, seemed like an unstoppable inferno. The anger of the local people was real. They took to the streets of Phulbari town in thousands on 26 August 2006. It was an unprecedented scene. An estimated 50,000 farmers, laborers, members of ethnic communities, teachers, students, politicians—most of them from the mine area—assembled in the Phulbari town to tell the foreign company that it must vacate their land and sacred places. They would rather die than allow the company to open up their land for coal that would require relocation of a huge population.

The protesters had just sticks in their hands. The Santals (the largest ethnic community in North Bengal) joined with their drums, bows and arrows. The National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port organized the massive protest event. The protesters began their march towards the offices of Asia Energy at about 3:30 P.M. without understanding that the worst was waiting.

As the massive rally reached the Chhoto Jamuna river, they were stopped by barricades set by the security forces. While the main part of Phulbari town is located on the east of the river with a small bridge over it, the head office of Asia Energy and its warehouse are located on the other side. The barricades were set to stop the protesters from going near the company’s head office. The leaders of the national committee talked to the Upazila Nirbahi Officer (UNO), who according to Prof. Anu Muhammad, the member secretary of the committee, gave his word to move Asia Energy out of the town.

This was not the end of the day! As Prof. Anu Muhammad and other leaders of the national committee went back, some protesters crossed the river as reported by eyewitnesses. A rally also approached from the western side of the river. The protesters on the western side of the river suddenly came under massive gunfire from the BDR and teargas shells from the police. At least three people (the missing two are believed dead) were killed and more than two hundred were wounded. The bloodshed led to a seemingly unstoppable protest leading to a continued strike in Phulbari. The demand for expulsion of the company from Phulbari and also from the country became stronger. The protesters set the deadline for the foreign company’s exit at 11:00 A.M. on 28 August. Given that Asia Energy’s employees were still there, the angry protesters burnt the information center of Asia Energy and ransacked its laboratory (warehouse) that stored samples of coal extracted from 150 drilling sites. Finding no way out, the Asia Energy staff then sealed their main office and left Phulbari in a roundabout way, viz., through Dinajpur, under police escort. The people also ransacked and burnt the houses of a number of people identified to be accomplices of Asia Energy.

It was on the fourth day [August 30, 2006] of the continued strike that the Government, in a dramatic turn, submitted to the Phulbari protesters and agreed to meet all six of their demands. Foremost of the demands are to expel Asia Energy from four Upzilas including Phulbari and the country. The government also agreed not to opt for open-cut mining in four Upazilas including Phulbari and any other part of Bangladesh.

The agreement was reached in a meeting at Parbatipur Upazila, neighboring Phulbari and one of four Upazilas in the mine footprint. Rajshahi City Corporation Mayor Mr. Mizanur Rahman Minu signed the deal on behalf of the government while Prof. Anu Mohammed signed it on behalf of the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port. In accordance with the agreement, the national committee representing the protesters ended the strike and other protest programs. The government conceded to compensate the families of those killed and pay the medical expenses of those wounded. A sum of Taka two lacs was sanctioned to each of the families of the 26 August killings and Taka nine lacs for the treatment of those injured and damages caused in the ransack of hotel, restaurant, houses, etc. The government also gave its word to drop cases filed against the protesters and reinforce inquiries into the killings of August 26 and the alleged hiding of corpses. The government was also to cease from harassing and filing any new cases against the protesters.

While the people became jubilant in Phulbari and quiet for the time being, full implementation of the agreement between the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port and the government seems to be the hardest part of the episode. The initiative to strike a deal with the protesters is reported to be a matter handled solely by the prime minister’s office. The energy adviser and the concerned ministry reportedly know nothing officially about the government deal with the Phulbari protesters.

According to the agreement between the government and the national committee, the government was to terminate the contract with Asia Energy within one month from the date of signing it. However, according to Prof. Anu Muhammad the agreement has not been implemented to date. In the mean time, the company (Asia Energy PLC) has changed its name to Global Coal Management PLC (in the second week of January 2007) although the company’s Bangladesh subsidiary’s name would reportedly remain unchanged.

What has happened in Phulbari is tragic and it is important that all concerned honestly look into the factors that had led to this catastrophic situation.


The Project

An Australian company, BPH, started coal exploration in the Phulbari area. The Bangladesh government signed a contract with BPH through an open tender. In 1998, the contract was transferred to Asia Energy. Asia Energy, after estimating the coal reserve, submitted to the government a plan of operation. The government has already granted environment clearance to the company.

According to Asia Energy, 5,900 hectares or 59 sq. km. land area is required for the mine. The area covers more than a hundred villages of seven unions in four Upazilas—Phulbari, Birampur, Nawabganj and Parbatipur—and part of Phulbari Sadar Upazila, under Dinajpur district. Thousands of acres of cropland fall within its boundaries.

The area of Phulbari Thana Sadar that falls within the project area has brick-built houses, schools, colleges, tarmacked roads, railroads, business facilities and so forth. Outside the township lie vast crop fields, forest patches and plantations. Beneath the expanse of beautiful landscapes lies the 38m thick (on average) coal fossilised over 270 million years. According to Asia Energy the coal reserve in this mine is 572 million tons. The company believes, if explored, more coal will be traced south of the present mine.

Who Benefit and Who Lose?

Appointed by Asia Energy, GHD, an international organisation, prepared a report for the company that claims Bangladesh will receive benefits worth US$21 billion over the 30 years of the mine’s lifetime. Of this, US$7.8 billion will come as a direct benefit and US$ 13.7 billion, as indirect or multiplier benefits. The mine itself and the coal-fired plant for production of electricity will contribute one percent per annum to the GDP of the country.

How dependable is this estimate of Asia Energy? Economist Prof. Anu Muhammad, in an interview with Sangbad, a vernacular daily newspaper, contended: “This evaluation of the mine project is a kind of deception. It only shows how Bangladesh will benefit from the investment of Asia Energy and suppresses the extent of damage it would cause. This is actually a sham on Asia Energy’s part because it intends to cover up the questions about its activities that have already been raised.” The inhabitants of the mine area complain that people living in other parts of the country do not realize their plight, nor do they foresee the disaster the open pit mining is likely to cause to this region.

“We heard there is a coal deposit in this area. But the people engaged by Asia Energy did not let us know that the method for mining would be open cut, which necessitates eviction and destruction of our houses, schools, colleges and all other establishments in the mine footprint. All of us, irrespective of party affiliations, are against it,” said Md. Khurshid Alam Moti, leader of the Phulbari Raksha (protection) Committee. He is also the principal of Phulbari Women’s Degree College and chairman of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) in Phulbari.

According to Asia Energy that is in contract with the Bangladesh government for exploration of coal, 40,000 people need to be relocated from the mine footprint. But the Phulbari Raksha Committee that is composed of people from all parties at the local level contends the company’s estimate. “We understand that about 150,000 people of the mine area will be directly affected and 200,000 to 250,000 will be affected indirectly,” said Moti.

Nima Banik, a lecturer at Phulbari Women’s Degree College says, “No matter wherever we are put, if we get evicted from our homes, we will lose our traditions, social organization and businesses. These losses are beyond compensation. Moreover, we do not trust Asia Energy. Its estimate is unfounded.”

M. Anwarul Islam, Asia Energy’s general manager (environment and community) disagreed and said, “We have always mentioned the idea of open pit. In Phulbari, there is no other option.”

According to the company all the damages will be compensated and the condition of the inhabitants of the mine area will be better than before. However, the aura of distrust and the demand of the locals is clear: “We do not want open pit mining.” From June 2005 the Phulbari Raksha Committee has been organising processions and meetings every Saturday in Phulbari in protest against it.

Asia Energy claims that Bangladesh has no risk in the Phulbari mine project. The company claims that Bangladesh will receive half of the total profit accrued from the mining operation. The profit includes 6 percent royalty, 45 percent corporate tax and 2.5 percent import duty. The other gains of Bangladesh as the company mentions will be “a new source of energy for the country, a new commodity for export, new industries, employment opportunities, regional development, poverty alleviation, growth of nascent industry, new rail and port infrastructure.”

Professor Anu Muhammad’s fear is: “It is Bangladesh where the coal has been found; and a foreign company will become its owner. There is no proper way to measure the actual benefit of Bangladesh and the price it would have to pay for it. What becomes clear is Bangladesh will have to buy its own coal from the company at an international price.”

Impacts on Environment

A serious concern of open pit mining is its environmental impacts. The method requires the mine area to be completely dewatered so that the hollow of the mine does not get immersed in water. Not an easy task. Large pumps are required to suck out underground water around the mine round-the-clock during the entire lifetime of the project. The impact on the already dry Barind Tract is obvious. Water level runs lower in the Barind Tract the during dry season and makes it difficult for the tubewells to draw water. When dewatering for the mining starts, the shallow and deep tubewells will not draw enough water for farmers in the larger area near the mine.

Asia Energy’s solution is to distribute the water pumped out among the farmers. It is an open question if the water distribution will be even-handed. The government and non-government organizations have been trying many options including tree plantation for many years now to prevent desertification in north Bengal. If dewatering in the mining area hastens the desertification process, pouring water above the ground remains a doubtful viable option for agricultural sustainability.

According to Asia Energy sources the average thickness of the coal layer in Phulbari is 38m. In order to reach the layer of coal, overburden between 150 and 250m needs to be removed, leaving a thousand-foot deep hollow. Once used up, the hollow will be filled with earth and a new area will be dug out. The area filled up does not become useful for many years. According to a high official in Asia Energy, topsoil will be removed and preserved once the mining operation begins in a particular block. Topsoil will be brought back and spread on the top of the area filled in. But no one can say when the land becomes cultivable again. The other question is: will the company fill the hollow with the same care as is done in developed countries? Non-compliance of existing laws is a common practice in Bangladesh.

At the final stage of the mining operation, about 30 years after the operation begins, Bangladesh will get a huge lake that according to the company will be filled up with fresh water providing a big source of water, fishery and recreation. But mining experts warn that the final hollow, after 30 years of digging and other activities, will contain toxic substances. It may not be realistic to envision this polluted lake becoming a source of fresh water.

Handling the other forms of environment pollution is also a challenge. There will be routine dynamite explosion inside the mine to break the rocks and the coal. Heavy machinery will be set up in and outside the mine. Heavy 240-ton trucks and trains will carry the coal causing noise pollution. Coal dust will be a major source of air pollution. If the enormous amount of polluted water generated from washing the coal is not properly treated before it is dumped into surrounding water bodies, it will kill fish and other forms of life. Further, the earth through such deep digging and many types of pollution will lose all its micro-organisms. Air pollution from burning coal to produce electricity is a big concern. Air polluting agents such as sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds (VOC), mercury, lead, cadmium, chromium, and arsenic will contaminate earth, water, plants and animals.

Eliminating pollutants is extremely difficult. Asia Energy expects to keep the pollution within a tolerable level. However, there is a fear that the company will not adopt adequate measures to mitigate pollution because these involve much effort and cash.

Transportation of the coal is another concern. In order to market, it will be carried to the deep seaport through the Sundarbans. New seaport and railroads need to be built for this. On the positive end, this will create employment and bring in revenue, but it also adversely affects the environment of the Sundarbans (the largest mangrove forest on earth). The noise and water pollution created by the Mongla Port has already become a threat to the animals, plants and other life forms in the mangrove forest. The added transportation over the 30 years of the mine’s lifetime will increase threats to the Sundarbans. The environmental and social impact assessment (EIA and SIA) of the Phulbari Coal Project has already been carried out and approved by the Department of Environment of Bangladesh government. Three hundred consultants from several international and national companies, some Bangladeshi environmental organizations and individuals have done the EIA and SIA. They have produced 2,600-page reports after 18 months of work. This is where many question if the EIA and SIA commissioned by the same company that will extract the coal have been impartial. Asia Energy claims it will do all that is needed for the protection of environment and social harmony.

Although the people of the mine area and their supporters stand against the open pit project, they are not against extraction of the coal in general. Their understanding is that the ownership of the coal and the fate of the affected people just cannot be handed down to a foreign company. They suggest waiting until the country develops its own mining expertise and technology. “We may give our consent when the country will be able to mine the coal resource with our own technology,” said Principal Moti. There are many others whose voices join Principal Moti’s.

Asia Energy had turned down the demand of the Phulbari people to wait until Bangladesh built its own expertise and mining technology. It says that by the time Bangladesh has its own mining expertise and resources, the fossil fuel may not be required any longer. The company claims that it is high time to extract the coal. Now the local communities have contested the company with their blood.

Looking Ahead

All that has happened in Phulbari—violence, expression of anger and mistrust of the local communities about Asia Energy—has shaken the whole nation. The whole world has also looked at Bangladesh with concern and curiosity. For now Phulbari has retuned to normal life. But the fear still persists. Application of the state security forces against the people has caused an uproar in their minds. They have sent a very strong message to the state agencies and the company that it is their land that contains 270 million year old coal. It is them who decide if the resource is to be shared in the best interest of the community and the nation. It is the state that must protect the land and the communities. It was certainly a fatal mistake to attempt to resolve a serious human problem with bullets and teargas. If the state of Bangladesh is really for the people, its functionaries must stay bowed before the people’s power and respect the commitments that they have made to their representatives. If that happens, it will be a step forward for providing political protection to those who need it most.

COMAPANIES AND INDIVIDUALS PROVIDING SPECIALIST INPUTS TO THE EIA

SMEC International Pty Ltd, Australia: Project management, social impact assessment, resettlement planning, environmental monitoring, surface water hydrology, hydraulic modelling, GIS, air quality, noise, rehabilitation, water quality, traffic, town planning, the environmental management plan, EIA/SIA reporting.

GHD Pty Ltd, Australia: Resource evaluation, geotechnics, hydrogeology, local and regional infrastructure and transport, data management, geophysics, river diversion studies.

Mine Consult Pty Ltd, Australia: Mine design and mine scheduling.

QCC Ltd, Australia: Coal quality, coal treatment plant.

Coffey Geosciences Pty Ltd: Water management, mine water balance.

Centre for Environmental and Geographic Information Services (CEGIS), Bangladesh: GIS database, surveying, field hydrology instrumentation and data collection.

Nature Conservation Management (NACOM), Bangladesh: Dry and wet season ecological database and biodiversity field assessments.

Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission (BAEC): Airborne particulate matter sample analysis, quality assurance auditing, geophysical borehole logging.

Bangladesh Centre for Advanced Studies (BCAS): Resettlement surveys.

Health Promotions Limited: Health impact assessment.

Institute of Water Modelling (IWM), Bangladesh: Regional surface water modeling.

The World Conservation Union (IUCN): Legislative and policy advice, peer review of biodiversity study.

Dr. M.K.Ahmed, Dhaka University: Arsenic in groundwater assessment.

Dr. N.Kamal & K.Z. Ashan, Independent University: Demographics.

Mr. Mannan, Independent University: Anthropology, ethnic minorities.

Professor M Hoque, Jahangirnagar University: Archaeology, historical sites.

Dr. Amin, Hazi Danesh Science & Technology University, Dinajpur: Soil science and agriculture.

Professor SMM Rahman, Dhaka University: Socio-economics.

Dr. Zaman, Canada: Resettlement.

Dr. Chris Johansen: Agriculture, land utilisation, rehabilitation.

Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET): Water quality testing.

ALS Environmental Laboratories, Brisbane, Australia: Water quality testing.

International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (ICDDR,B): Bacteriological and arsenic testing.

Source: Environmental Impact Assessment, Phulbari Coal Project, Asia Energy, June 2005

PHULBARI COAL PROJECT : SOME BASICS
[According to Asia Energy, 2006]

• Project Proponent: Asia Energy Corporation (Bangladesh) Pty Ltd. the Bangladesh subsidiary of UK based Asia Energy PLC.

• Product: Bituminous coal (high calorific value, low ash, low sulphur)—both thermal and metallurgical.

• Estimated Coal Deposit: 572 million tons some 150-250 meters beneath the surface.

• Co-Product: Clay, Sand, Gravel, Kaolin, Water.

• Total Coal Resource: 572 million tones (could be higher still with further drilling in the south).

• Export/Local consumption: Coal will be both exported and consumed domestically. Export will be mostly through Khulna and Akram Point in partnership with Bangladesh Railway and Mongla Port Authority.

• Project life: More than 30 years.

• Project timeframe: Dewatering is due to start in 2006, physical mine development in 2007 and first production of coal in 2008.

• Project area: 7 Unions and 1 Municipality in 4 Upazilas of Phulbari, Birampur, Nawabganj and Parbatipur in the district of Dinajpur.

• Total land area required for the Project: About 5,900 hectares over the life of the mine.

Projects of Mass Destruction (PMD) and Asian Development Bank (ADB): The Case of Phulbari Coal Project

Anu Muhammad, The National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port, Bangladesh

In a press conference on 27 March 2007, Hua Du, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) country director in Bangladesh expressed ADB’s eagerness for the quick decisions in favour of big Indian corporate group TATA’s proposals related with gas and coal, and British company Asia Energy’s (AEC) Phulbari Coal Project (PCP).

Hua Du categorically stated, 'Business is business. You would have to decide whether to grab it or not’. She also added that, 'the offer of FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) won't wait, they will go away, it is vital to take decision1. The report of leading English weekly further stated, ‘In case of Asia Energy, analysts feel that there is little room to say 'yes' as the shady project has already claimed lives of people in Phulbari, the project site in Dinajpur district. Moreover, the proposed coal policy is very controversial. Thus, the incumbent government needs to review the coal policy very carefully before saying anything in final terms.’ (Holiday, April 1, 2007)

It is important to note that about seventy thousand people were gathered in Phulbari on 26 August 2006 to protest against the proposed open pit mining PCP. They were bullet shot by government forces while returning from the protest rally. Hundreds were injured, about 20 people got permanent injury and three were killed. Instead of stopping protest people multiplied in road and mass uprising happened. After days of intensive protest participated by Bangalee, Adibashi (indigenous people), women, men, senior and children, government accepted defeat and signed contract with the protestors.

That historic social contract stated clearly, among others,

1. ‘Phulbari coal project will be scrapped and Asia energy will leave the country.’

2. ‘No open pit mining will be allowed anywhere in the country’.

3. ‘Steps for coal development and utilization will be taken after proper consultation with the people keeping national interest intact’.

Meanwhile an expert committee formed by the government submitted its report that opined that the project should be cancelled in environmental, economic and legal consideration. Nevertheless, nothing could change ADB’s mindset. Why Asian Development Bank is on the one hand so enthusiastic to back AEC, and remain indifferent about experts’ opinion about the Project or local peoples clear NO to the project on the other? Why profit for a company is preferable for ADB even if it costs peoples lives, livelihood and environmental disaster although their written commitments say otherwise?

ADB for PMDs

If anybody looks at ADB funded projects and their consequences in Bangladesh one should not surprise with its present role on Phulbari project. ADB is generally known as the World Bank in Asia, that always goes hand in hand with the World Bank and IMF in neoliberal policies that put corporate profit as the supreme objective at the cost of peoples lives and environment. This may be unknown to the people of developed countries, whose money is spent on these institutions in the name of development and poverty reduction, we find this ‘business as usual’ practice of ADB, like the World Bank and the IMF in larger scale.

ADB so far has funded numerous projects in Bangladesh. ADB funded project in forestry created deforestation in different places and make forest land a private business. Development projects, for example, in Chokoria, Cox'sbazar destroyed forest and salinized land in order to give space to export oriented shrimp cultivation. Project in Modhupur turned forests into rubber plantation and land of cash crop, gave business to few and created high insecurity amongst indigenous people (Gain, 1998, 2006).

On March 18, 2007 Choles Ritchil, a leader of the indigenous Garo people living in the Modhupur forest area was killed after barbaric torture by the government forces, another leading person was killed on January 3, 2004 by police firing for opposing an eco-park project. ADB has been involved in forestry projects for social forestry and many other plantation and cash crop projects. These funding and policies towards deforestation, privatization and marketization strengthened market and business orientation. A network of beneficiaries of these orientation want to go further by evicting Garo people in the name of ill conceived Modhupur forest Eco-Park project, under which a wall is being constructed around 3,000 acres of Modhupur forests. This wall will destroy the forest and disrupt the livelihood of the Garo and other indigenous people who live in the area and depend on the Modhupur forests for their livelihood.

ADB funded projects in water and irrigation gave business to local-foreign consultants and contractors a good business but created permanent water logging in different parts of the country. In southern part of Bangladesh, the success and failure of project put lives of about 2 million people in a horrible situation (Islam and Kibria 2006). In education sector ADB projects created path for privatization, high corruption and disastrous reform. Protests from teachers and students compelled previous government to stop from implementing reforms but huge money wasted in the process. ADB was successful in lending, but Bangladesh became indebted for creating mess.

In energy sector, ADB has been involved since early 1980s in formulating policies to privatize common property and to create favourable path for foreign corporate. Along with the World Bank, projects of the ADB helped MNCs to grab natural resources in terms and conditions very unfavourable for people of this country along with dismantling of national institutions and erosion of capabilities (Muhammad, 2003). How did that happen? Let me point out the steps taken by the ADB and the World Bank regarding this sector as follows:

Step 1: Study on Energy by the ADB and the World Bank provided a policy prescription to restructure and downsize public sector organizations in order to create space for foreign private sector (since 1982).

Step 2: Argument followed that the foreign private investment would provide an inflow of foreign currency, would ensure remarkable development of the energy sector and would contribute to develop other sectors as well. Precondition of this was to downsize or dismantling public institutions (1980s).

Step 3: Constant advocacy by the ADB and the World Bank for rising price of gas and electricity (since 80s).

Step 4: Gas blocks awarded to the Multinational Corporations. As a result of the contracts Bangladesh became trapped to purchase its own gas with triple of the price from local company and with foreign currency. National exploration agency has been kept idle. Budget deficit and negative effect on foreign exchange reserve increased due to obligation to foreign company. Similar things happened in power sector since 1993.

Step 5: Further increase of the price of gas and power along with export of gas have been prescribed by the ADB and the World Bank to avert further crisis and to ensure further development since 1997.

The results of these steps have been disastrous for the economy and the people. Because,

(1) price of gas and power on a continuous increase, as a result of that

(2) cost of production at every level increased that resulted fall in competitiveness of Bangladeshi product;

(3) hard earned currency are being used to purchase gas and electricity which could be bought with local currency at a much cheaper rate;

(4) dismantling of local production skill and exploration establishment;

(5) financial losses of state agencies, as a consequence, reaches huge;

(6) common property becomes private property being used to maximize corporate profit and

(7) public non-renewable resources like natural gas becomes huge liability.

The same instruments and similar arguments are being used to rationalize further grabbing of coal and gas resources by Indian big corporate body TATA and British company Asia Energy Corporation (now named as Global Coal Management) in multiple disastrous projects. ADB is still using its power and influence derived from public money to serve companies at the cost of people and environment.

This is a ‘road map’ to ensure gravitation of businesses to big corporate bodies and yet creating and trumpeting a myth that these are for development and poverty reduction. People in Phulbari gave their lives to stop PCP, one of such projects and gave signal that people will not accept FDI that goes against national interest and creates disaster for present and future generations. ADB makes its stand clear against peoples’ verdict.

Natural gas, Coal and Oil resources: Constraints for Bangladesh

In order to ensure energy security of a country like Bangladesh and to find the best possible path to explore natural resources we need to keep following constraints in mind:

1. Oil, gas and coal are non-renewable resources, cannot be reproduced;

2. These resources are limited, while domestic demand is growing;

3. Global uncertainty and conflicts on oil, gas and coal mark insecurity for the weak countries;

4. Energy price rising and becomes unpredictable.

To ensure best possible utilization of energy resources in present and future, every steps concerning exploration, production and utilization of these resources should be transparent. The contracts patronized by ADB or World Bank-IMF has always been secretive. To ensure energy security:

• The sector should be organized with an objective to fulfill energy demand (present and future) of people and the productive sectors;

• Peoples ownership and authority over their own resources must be ensured;

• Development of national institutions and capability must be get the highest priority.

However, main features of government policies derived from ADB, WB support to date are:

• There has never been any attempt so far to have comprehensive energy policy and related steps that is consistent with national interest and energy security of the people.

• Non-renewable resources have always been considered as something tradable.

• Privatization and commercialization of gas, coal and oil has been on the top priority.

• Global agencies systematically worked to grab the resources in favour of global corporate. Foreign aided development projects were utilized to formulate policies in this regard. Energy sector study project of 1982, Energy regulatory commission
in 1993, Gas sector master plan and Coal policy in 2006 are some of the examples where World bank, Asian Development Bank were involved.

• Dismantling of national agencies, undermining national capabilities, ignoring national needs in short and long term have been common.

Phulbari Coal Project: Why people and experts oppose?

The Phulbari coalfield was the latest discovery among the big four coalfields found in Bangladesh since independence. In 1994 the then government signed agreement with the BHP of Australia, in 1998 BHP transferred its right to one year old British- Australian company Asia Energy Corporation (AEC).

The AEC was preparing itself for open-pit mining. It said in its documents, ‘Mining by the open cut method is new to Bangladesh, but it is a proven and highly productive and safe method in similar geological and hydrological conditions in other parts of the world such as Australia, India, Indonesia and Germany.’ It goes without saying that projecting such a sweeping comparative statement as expert opinion is ill motivated. Leaving aside other criteria, the population and water aspect in Phulbari is entirely different from the reality in other countries like Australia or Germany even India or Indonesia.

The AEC further stated in defense of open-pit mining: ‘Adoption of this method will permit the fullest extraction of coal resources, and will augment duration of the mining period and thus enhance socio-economic opportunity, income prospects and gains for the Bangladesh economy.’ It was not made clear who would bear the cost and who would be the beneficiaries of this ‘fullest extraction’! We know the beneficiaries are company and allies while losers are the people and the country.

Key points of the Project are:

• The latest figure for the extractable quantity of coal in Phulbari is 572 million tonnes. Besides coal, the mine contains high-grade silica (sand), ceramic clay, Madhupur clay and gravels and rocks of high quality.

• The coalfield will extend over 135 sq km. Again, the area, which can be affected directly or indirectly during the mining operation including de-watering, will be nearly 656 sq km.

• This area is very fertile, paddy output is high, and nearly all the land yields three crops per year!

• The business activities in the non-agricultural sector are also expanding fast.

• The density of population is very high, 4245 per sq km.

• The company says, as the mine advances during the first 5 to 10 years, between 15,000 and 20,000 people will have to be resettled, and over the 30-year life of the mine, the total number of people resettled could be 50,000. According to the local
sources, the affected number of people may go beyond 2,00,000!

• Because of the coal-mining operations, the production activities of the entire area in agriculture, livestock, fisheries and forestry will be totally destroyed and will remain unproductive for an indefinite period! The products here include Aman, Aus, IRRI and Boro varieties of rice, wheat, mustard, potato, corn, banana, sugarcane, jute, chilli, garlic, onion, vegetables of all varieties, and numerous fruit-bearing and timber trees.

• There are also rivers and canals, beels, and fish farms numbering over a thousand, and farms that rear ducks, hens and cattle, etc. Besides the above, there are many shops, and business and commercial houses. Economic activities in the entire area will come to an end.

• Desertification will ruin lives and livelihoods in greater area beyond mine site.

• Water contamination in the mining area may affect total water system of the country because of its network.

• AEC stated that ‘during the operation of the mine, 2,100 short-term and 1,100 long-term positions would be available for employment’. AEC has been deafeningly silent about the fact that livelihood of over 2,00,000 people will be
destroyed by its operation.

• If we consider only coal in the mine, AEC could make profit Taka 1,500 billion (more than US$ 200 billion) in thirty years.

• On the other hand, Bangladesh could receive, by way of 6 per cent royalty and taxes, $7 billion or Tk 48,000 crore in thirty years, little over Tk 1,500 crore per year. In this context, it should be noted that currently the export earning of Bangladesh has exceeded Tk 60,000 crore per year. Bangladeshis working abroad send foreign exchange remittances worth around Tk 30,000 crore per year.

• According to company’s account, considering the adverse effect on production and economic activities, the total loss for Bangladesh will be Tk 1,800 crore per annum! So net loss per year would be 300 crore taka in addition to loss of coalfield and environment.

Problems, Flaws and Irregularities with the project:

1. The contract signed with the Asia energy shows royalty to be paid to the government of Bangladesh as 6 per cent of the production, although the original contract with BHP had been 20 per cent.

2. The coalfield was transferred from BHP to AEC in 1998, but no gazette notification was served at the time.

3. Submission of development plan as PCP needed a deposit of 3 percent Bank guarantee but no deposit was made.

4. Mines and minerals Rules 1968 (amended in 1987 and 1989) According to clause 41, it allows only 400 hectares for open-pit, but the AEC's project is for nearly 6000 hectares. The land allocated for the mine was more than 10 times than the existing law permits.

5. According to clause 43 leases can be made only for 10 years and extension can be made upon review but in AEC's case, it is for 35 years.

6. According to international law, practices and convention, any development project requires consent of local people where the project is to be implemented. Asia Energy has made lies and false campaign on this claiming people have consent on the project.

7. The company did not publish its plan and document to the people of the area and did not go for circulating. Only thing they circulated is a propaganda sheet hiding consequences and glorifying the project.

8. UN convention categorically stated that if any project area has indigenous inhabitants than it is mandatory to have full consent from them. The PCP was advancing completely against the opinion of indigenous people.

9. After obvious failure to convince people on the project Asia Energy was engaged in bribing people with cash and kind to become informer against agitating people, they also tried to terrorize people by hiring and organizing mastans and goons.

10. Long before getting final work, order Asia Energy started mobilizing capital from London stock market. `Some 48 million shares were floated in 2004, rocketing up to a price of 900 pence a share by March 2005, for a total market capitalization of
over $800 million, six months before the Department of Environment of the Government of Bangladesh granted
Environmental Clearance for mining on 11 September 2005. Asia Energy envisioned a $1.1bn (£578m) investment and was
negotiating for backing from the Asian Development Bank and the US Ex-Im Bank.' (Analytical monthly review, 15.10.06).

Conclusion

If AEC and its local commission agents and collaborators could succeed in implementing their sinister plan, the foreign company would leave Bangladesh after grabbing an astronomical sum as profit, and the sycophantic agents and devious politicians would be bloated by commission money gorged by them, and today’s green, living and thriving Phulbari would be permanently consigned to the status of a disfigured wasteland. No one can predict what would be the condition of the people remaining in the region.

Therefore, the Phulbari project is nothing but a project of mass destruction and genocide. It is economically irrational, environmentally disastrous to a scale unprecedented in the country. It is legally flawed, corrupt and deceptive.

People of Phulbari by sacrificing lives halted this project. They have written peoples verdict in blood:

• People will not accept any FDI that goes against interest of the people and the country;

• People will not honour any contracts secretly signed by the commission agents, keeping people in the dark and against their will;

• Natural resources are common good; this cannot be privatized for corporate profit that must be used for people’s need and development.

We must recall that in 1964 USAID funded a Hydroelectric project in Chattagram, south east of Bangladesh, that evicted nearly one hundred thousand indigenous people. Most of them are still not resettled, not being compensated. Although that project generated some electricity, but permanent conflict created by the project till today cost Bangladesh went beyond benefits decades ago. Power generation also now facing crisis. Meanwhile whole peaceful and beautiful landscape turned into an area of conflict, gave birth to insurgency, resulted militarization, caused regular casualties and drainage of public money. Distrust, violence, blood bath all continues. USAID was successful in project sense; generations in the country are paying for their sin.

Comparatively, Phulbari coal project is much more disastrous in many ways. Nevertheless, ADB is showing determination to go with the project. If this can make a success TATA will come with another open pit for Barapukuria, adjacent area. People in Phulbari area showed their determination to protect their lives and national interest. If anybody now goes with the project, in another way, asks for genocide in different forms. Now people of countries that dominate ADB have to take a decision whether they want to see their money being utilized to invite genocide, mass destruction, environmental disaster just to satisfy vulgar greed of a company.

National Committee (NC) terms ministry’s opinion on Phulbari deal disrespectful of people

Committee terms ministry’s opinion on Phulbari deal disrespectful of people
Staff Correspondent, NewAge, September 6, 2007. Dhaka, Bangladesh
www.newagebd.com

The National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port has said that the law ministry’s reported opinion that termed the Phulbari agreement ‘illegal’ was disrespectful of the people’s verdict. The committee demanded that the government fully implement the Phulbari agreement with the people by cancelling the deal with Asia Energy for mining the Phulbari coal-field.

The committee’s convener, Sheikh Md Shahidullah, and member secretary, Anu Muhammad, in a statement on Tuesday said that government had already implemented a number of conditions of the Phulbari agreement with people which was signed on August 30 in response to a mass movement to protect country’s resources, farmland, water, people and environment. ‘It has been reported, quoting the law ministry, that the government’s Phulbari agreement with the people does not have a legal basis. This is disrespectful of the people’s verdict and will only abet the corruption, fraud and anti-state activities of Asia Energy,’ said the statement.

The committee said that a number of legal experts have opined that the Phulbari agreement became effective as the government had already fulfilled a number of the agreement’s conditions. ‘So it is the government’s responsibility to also fulfil the other conditions of the agreement,’ said the committee’s statement.

The committee’s members observed that it would be easy for the government to fulfil the other conditions by cancelling the deal with Asia Energy, as an expert committee formed by the government found that the company’s mine development programme was not acceptable on any account — legally, environmentally, economically — and was against the public’s interest.

The committee’s leaders demanded that the government cancel the project for open-pit mining at Phulbari and oust Asia Energy from Bangladesh after taking compensation from it.

Coal Policy Not to Ban any Mining Method to Keep Options Open

Coal policy not to ban any mining method to keep options open
Staff Correspondent, NewAge, September 5, 2007. Dhaka, Bangladesh

The advisory committee, formed to finalise the draft coal policy, has decided in principle that the policy would not recommend or ban any particular mining method to keep options open for both open-pit and underground mining in the country.

The committee, headed by former BUET vice-chancellor Abdul Matin Patwari, at a meeting on Monday evening reviewed recommendations of different rights group and professionals including the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port and the Citizen’s Commission of the Bangladesh Economic Association.

The committee, however, did not agree in principle with the recommendations of the oil and gas committee and economic association, which were submitted recently, to drop the open-pit mining method from the coal policy. The groups demanded that the open-pit mining method should be dropped from the policy as it would pollute the environment, oust thousands of people from their homesteads and destroy fertile farmland that produces three rice crops in a year. The advisory committee also shared the view of the two groups that no coal export should be allowed from the country to ensure the energy security of the coming generations.

‘We should not recommend or ban any mining method in the policy as the method should be fixed on the basis technical, social, environmental and economic aspects. If it is found that open-pit mining is not viable after analysing the costs and benefits, it is natural that no one will want to engage in open-pit mining,’ Patwari told the meeting.

Other members present at the meeting included University Grants Commission chairman and environmentalist Nazrul Islam, Dhaka University terachers Badrul Imam and Mustafizur Rahman and Petrobangla director Maqbul-E-Elahi, all of whom echoed Patwari’s view.

Five other committee members were not present at the meeting. Patwari, based on the estimate of the requirement for coal in the country for power generation, observed that if the country adopts only underground mining system, the extracted coal would be fully consumed even before 2025 although the government wanted to ensure energy security for 50 years.

He told the meeting that the oil and gas committee’s convener, Sheikh Shahidullah, recommended that the country should immediately go for underground mining in all coal-fields and after 20 years, if it is found viable, the country could go for open-pit mining after developing its own technical manpower. ‘So, Mr Shahidullah has not ruled out open-pit mining forever,’ he said.

As per the estimate of the framers of the draft coal policy, around 235 million tonnes of coal can be extracted by underground mining from four coal-fields that have a combined reserve of around 1,168 million tonnes. On the other hand, around 1,050 tonnes of coal could be extracted by open-pit mining. As per the power sector master plan, the country will need 41,890 megawatts of electricity by 2025 if the growth rate is considered to be 8 per cent. The draft coal policy estimated that country would need around 450 million tonnes of coal by 2025 to generate around 32,837 megawatts of electricity and rest of the electricity would be generated by gas. By 2035, a total of 1,200 million tonnes of coal will be needed if no new power plants are set up after 2025.

Professor Badrul Imam, however, told the meeting that even if the open-pit mining method is allowed in the country, it would be impossible to operate more than one open-pit mine as country’s coal reserve is situated in only two districts. The committee members will visit Barapukuria, Phulbari and Dighipara coal-fields on September 11-12 before starting to review thoroughly the draft of the coal policy submitted by the energy division.

Same-side Coal

Forum, volume 2, issue 8, September 2007. Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Photo: Mumit M.

Md. Khalequzzaman runs the rule over the various coal mining options available to us

Production and consumption of energy are probably the most reliable indicators of the economic strength and standard of living in a society. The per-capita energy use in Bangladesh is 118 KgOE (kilogram oil equivalent), which is one of the lowest even among the least developed countries. Per capita energy use in India is three times higher than in Bangladesh. For reference, per-capita energy consumption in the US is about 8,000 KgOE.

The degree of electrification is a measure of industrialisation in a country. Less than 25 percent of the entire population in Bangladesh has access to electricity, which is used mainly for household needs.

India produces about 136,000 MW of electricity. To have same level of per-capita electricity, Bangladesh would need to produce about 18,000 MW, whereas we only produce about 3,200 MW.



By the year 2016, India plans to add another 36,000 MW to her production, implying that Bangladesh will have to produce a total of 23,000 MW by the year 2016 in order to have similar per-capita level. Bangladesh has made a pledge to provide electricity to all citizens by 2020. The population is projected to reach 180 million by 2020, which means that Bangladesh will need to produce five times the current level of electricity, i.e. about 16,000 MW just to maintain the same per-capita level of consumption of energy.

Bangladesh relies heavily on natural gas as a source of energy for production of electricity: about 50 percent of the annual production of 584 billion cubic feet of gas is used to generate electricity.

Total proven and recoverable reserve of natural gas in Bangladesh is calculated to be between 5 trillion cubic feet (TCF) and 12 TCF. At the current annual rate of consumption (0.5 TCF), natural gas will be depleted in the next 10 to 24 years. However, with a growth rate of 5 to 10%, which is desirable, even the higher estimated amount of gas reserve (12 TCF) will be depleted between 2014 and 2020. Just to provide electricity to her 180 million people, Bangladesh will need about 1.25 TCF per year beyond 2020. Bangladesh will need a lot more energy if she decides to have increased growth in heavy industry and production of commercial products, including fertiliser.

For reference, the USA has a population of 300 million, and consumes 21 TCF of gas to meet only 23% of her yearly energy requirements, and 1 billion tons of coal to produce an additional 23% of the energy needs. According to one projected estimation, Bangladesh will require about 100 to 150 TCF of gas or its equivalent up to the year 2050. It is obvious that Bangladesh will not have any gas left beyond 2020 (or earlier) to meet the energy demands. The question is, what other alternative sources of energy can Bangladesh turn to?

Coal plays a vital role in the energy mix throughout the world. So far, a total of 2.7 billion tons of coal have been discovered in five fields in Bangladesh. About 1.4 billion tons are recoverable, which is equivalent to 37 TCF of natural gas, and can generate electricity for about 30 years beyond 2020. India, for example, has a coal reserve of 92 billion tons, which is enough for over 200 years at the current rate of consumption; yet India imports about 37 million tons (1 TCF of gas equivalent) every year.

Bangladesh is an energy-starved country, and all of her fossil fuels (gas and coal) reserves have to be exploited to achieve national energy security; she simply cannot afford to export any of her discovered energy resources. If Bangladesh mines all its recoverable coal and uses it for generation of electricity, then the country can achieve energy security for about 30 years or so.

Coal is used to produce a huge amount of electricity (up to 68% in India and 80% in China), and can play an important role in the energy mix of Bangladesh in the future. However, before Bangladesh can proceed with coal mining, there are several important issues that need attention. Coal is a dirty fuel, and if not done properly, coal mining can negatively impact on the landscape, soil, surface water, groundwater, air, and human health during all phases of exploration and use. Therefore, strict regulations and enforcement of laws are essential during all phases of coal mining.

Currently, Bangladesh lacks proper environmental rules, regulations, acts, policy, standards, institutions, and expertise to deal with all the phases of coal exploration, monitoring of environmental degradation that can result from coal mining, and compliance with the environmental laws. Since Bangladesh does not have prior experience in coal mining, a proper legal framework that will guarantee transparency, accountability, monitoring of environmental health, and compliance, is virtually non-existent.

Bangladesh can learn from international experience, both positive and negative, of coal mining. India and the US, for example, have been involved in coal mining for over 200 years. Both of these countries have developed a well-defined legal framework to deal with various aspects of coal mining. Coal is a nationalised resource in India, and Coal India Limited is the overseeing entity.



As a part of national capability building, Bangladesh should create a similar organisation. There are several acts, rules, and regulations directly applicable to coal mining in India, including the Mines Act 1952, Coal Mines Regulations 1952, Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act 1957 (with amendments), and Coal Mines (Conservation & Development) Act 1974. In addition, the Indian constitution provides necessary directives and powers to frame and enforce environmental legislation. The State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) of India requires a mandatory public hearing before environmental clearance is issued for coal mining.

Similarly, there exist numerous acts, rules, and laws in the US to deal with all phases of coal mining, and the most important one coal is the Surface Mining Conservation and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) of 1977. The SMCRA has five major components, namely standards and performance, permitting, bonding, inspection and enforcement, and land restrictions to mining. The Office of Surface Mining Environmental Protection Agency (OSMEPA) and various state agencies are involved in making rules, monitoring standards, and compliance with the standards by coal mining companies, and enforcement of laws.

Despite strict rules, regulations, and laws, severe damage to the environment was done by open-pit coal mining in both India and the US. For instance, the state of Pennsylvania in the US is the fourth largest coal mining state, which has been practicing mining using various methods for over 200 years.

Currently in Pennsylvania, more than 285,000 acres of abandoned coal mining land faces the need for an environmental clean up that will cost $16 billion. The number one water pollution problem in this state is related to acid mine drainage (AMD) that resulted from open-pit coal mining. More than 3,000 miles of rivers are void of aquatic life in Pennsylvania due to AMD. Can Bangladesh afford to have fish-less rivers because of AMD?

The most relevant question that the people of Bangladesh should ask before granting permission for open-pit coal mining is, what guarantee can a country like Bangladesh provide to her citizens about the unavoidable damage to the environment, when a country like the US, which has a set of mining laws in place, could not escape severe long-lasting water and soil quality damage? Bangladesh should formulate legal and organisational frameworks similar to those in the US and India before considering active coal mining, and being one of the most densely populated countries in the world it cannot afford to make the same mistakes that other countries made with regard to open-pit coal mining.

Currently, there is a proposed coal policy under review by the government. This policy was drafted by a private organisation, to promote export of coal and mining by foreign companies. The proposed policy advocates the export of two-thirds of the mined coal for the first 10 years, and one-third afterwards. As per the policy, the government will receive a royalty in the range of 6 to 16% (varies across different versions submitted to the government) for export of coal by foreign companies.

However, the fact is that Bangladesh cannot afford to export her coal, given the projected future need for energy in the country, let alone giving away the ownership rights to foreign companies for an insignificant amount of royalty. Coal export in the face of severe shortage of commercial energy resources and increasing demand will go directly against the interests of the people and national energy security. Furthermore, what Bangladesh does not need is a coal policy that contradicts the existing national energy policy of 2004. Instead, the national energy policy needs to be revised to incorporate a coal policy that will help achieve national energy security.



The most pressing issue is the method to be used for coal mining in Bangladesh. Based on publicly available information on socio-economic and environmental feasibility studies done on the possibility of open-pit coal mining in Phulbari and other coal fields in Bangladesh, it is safe to conclude that open-pit coal mining will cause huge economic loss, social unrest, and environmental degradation of unprecedented nature. There are several other viable alternatives to open-pit coal mining that are being practiced in various countries in the world. Given the socio-economic, cultural, and environmental settings, Bangladesh should consider a combination of underground coal mining, extraction of coal bed methane, and underground coal gasification (UCG) projects.

The UCG should be of particular interest for coal fields where coal seams are located at considerable depths, as in Phulbari and Jamalganj. The UCG has been used in the former USSR since the 1950s, and currently this process of mining is being applied in Australia, US, Europe, and Africa. Since UCG does not involve coal removal from underground, there is no need for relocating a huge number of people living in the coalfields. In addition, no damage is done to the environment. Although the amount of recovered coal may not be as high as it is for open-pit coal mining, considering the economic, social, and environmental losses, Bangladesh should seriously consider UCG for the deep coalfields. As per information provided by a leading organisation involved in UCG, this method is clean and cost effective.

Bangladesh is facing a serious challenge in terms of meeting the demands in the energy sector. To meet the national energy security needs, Bangladesh needs to build national capability, formulate legal and organisational frameworks, and mine coal so that she can retain and use the entire quantity to meet domestic energy needs. Finally, in such a national capability-based coal mining, Bangladesh needs to use coal mining methods that best suits the socio-economic, cultural, geologic, and environmental settings.

Md. Khalequzzaman is Associate Professor of Geology, Department of Geology and Physics, Lock Haven University, Pennsylvania, US.

URL: http://www.thedailystar.net/forum/2007/september/coal.htm