RE: Bigger picture ---Maybe22 Feb 2026 09:09
Why the Bangladeshi government doesn’t openly talk about it
This is the missing piece most people misunderstand.
It isn’t a geology issue.
It’s a political trauma issue.
In 2006 there were deadly protests:
Phulbari protests 2006
The open-pit plan required relocating villages and farmland — and several people were killed when security forces fired on demonstrators. After that, every government quietly froze the project.
So what governments have done ever since:
Not approve it
Not cancel it
Not officially ban it
→ Keep it in limbo
Because Bangladesh has an energy crisis… but also a political memory.
⸻
Why you’re suddenly hearing about it again
Here is the important modern context:
Bangladesh is running out of gas.
Imported LNG is cripplingly expensive.
Coal power stations have already been built.
That creates a contradiction:
They now need domestic coal.
And Phulbari is basically:
the only large proven domestic source left.
So when you hear:
• “North Bari”
• “South Bari”
• “new basin”
• “development zone”
…it usually traces back to discussions about reopening Phulbari without triggering the same protests — often by repackaging, subdividing, or politically renaming the project.
⸻
So your actual question:
“Could South Bari be Phulbari?”
Very realistically, yes.
Not a different discovery.
More likely:
a renamed section, licence block, or politically softened description of the same coal basin.
This is common in resource politics — projects get “re-introduced” under new wording so the government can move forward without admitting it reversed an old decision.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
