Russian energy conglomerate Gazprom, which had previously secured contracts at inflated rates under special laws, is now actively lobbying for a government-to-government (G2G) deal to construct the Bhola-Barishal-Dhaka pipeline following the repeal of those favourable provisions.
During the tenure of the previous government, Gazprom consistently obtained contracts at prices more than double the standard market rates.
While development project proposals (DPPs) are typically finalised based on estimated costs, in Gazprom’s case, the process was allegedly reversed—budgets were tailored to match the company’s demands.
Under the Awami League administration, awarding expensive contracts to Gazprom had become an open secret.
For instance, state-owned BAPEX, which can drill a gas well for Tk70-80 crore, had to cede the same work to Gazprom at an exorbitant Tk220 crore per well.
Over 20 wells were drilled in this manner, reportedly leading to thousands of crores in financial losses for the state.
Following the fall of the Awami League government, its key lobbyists went into hiding, making way for a new group of intermediaries who are now attempting to influence decision-makers in favour of high-priced contracts.
Sources indicate that pressure is being exerted on the Ministry of Power, Energy, and Mineral Resources, as well as Petrobangla, to facilitate Gazprom’s deals.
The discussion around transporting surplus gas from the island district of Bhola to the mainland has been ongoing for years.
The government has now approved a policy shift that will keep the Bhola-Barishal segment of the proposed pipeline unchanged while extending it towards Dhaka via Aminbazar instead of Khulna.
Petrobangla Chairman Rezanur Rahman confirmed to Barta24.com that the feasibility study for the Bhola-Barishal pipeline has been completed, and a consultant is being hired to assess the Barishal-Dhaka extension.
While the Barishal-Khulna pipeline remains on the agenda, the Bhola-Barishal-Dhaka section is being prioritised.
The estimated budget for the Bhola-Barishal pipeline stands at Tk2,600 crore, and Gazprom’s lobbying efforts to secure the project are conspicuous.
Reports suggest that the company’s representatives are aggressively pursuing officials at the ministry, Petrobangla, and the Gas Transmission Company Limited (GTCL), offering incentives while also exerting pressure where necessary.
Beyond the pipeline, Gazprom is also striving to reclaim five cancelled drilling projects, initially awarded under special laws by the previous government.
These projects, worth several hundred crores, were halted when the interim government repealed the special provisions.
BAPEX has since invited fresh tenders, with the submission deadline expiring on 3 February.
However, in a move raising suspicions, BAPEX has extended the deadline by 46 days without opening the submitted tenders—prompting speculation that the delay is a manoeuvre to benefit Gazprom.
In official correspondence with the ministry, Gazprom has portrayed itself as an indispensable contributor to Bangladesh’s energy security, citing its track record of drilling 20 wells since 2012.
The letter further argues that failing to award Gazprom the new contract would result in additional demobilisation costs.
However, experts point out that per contractual terms, such costs only arise when rigs are physically relocated, not by default.
Despite Gazprom’s assertions of superior expertise, internal reports paint a different picture.
A confidential Petrobangla report, dated 17 November 2016, raised concerns about the quality of Gazprom’s drilling work.
One glaring example is the Titas-20 well, which the company completed on 19 May 2013.
Within a short period, production ceased due to poor-quality drilling, with excessive water ingress disrupting gas extraction. Remedial work was required, costing an additional Tk136.63 crore.
Another well, Titas-21, began production on 30 December 2013 but faced severe issues within six months. Excessive sand and water flow led to its shutdown on 20 June 2014.
Experts believe such failures typically stem from improper tubing and cementing, both of which fell under Gazprom’s responsibilities.
Subsequent repair work by BAPEX identified tubing misalignment as a critical flaw.
One of the few officials who dared to raise concerns about Gazprom’s performance was former BAPEX managing director, Engineer Atiquzzaman, who spearheaded an investigation into the company’s subpar drilling.
However, instead of receiving recognition, he was removed from his position within six days—an event that instilled fear among officials, effectively silencing further criticism of Gazprom’s work.
As Gazprom intensifies its lobbying to reclaim lost ground, the question remains: will Bangladesh’s energy sector continue to be burdened by high-priced deals, or will accountability finally take precedence?
