Padma barrage: Let data, not geography, decide
Muhammad Rashed Khan
The Padma Barrage Project is not merely a water-management scheme. For Bangladesh’s south-western and north-western regions, it could become a historic, strategic and transformational national mega project, with far-reaching implications for water security, agriculture, river flows, ecological balance, connectivity, industrialisation, employment and tourism.
The government has already approved the first phase of the project. At an ECNEC meeting on May 13, 2026, the project was approved at an estimated cost of Tk34,497.25 crore. Its objectives include restoring major river systems, increasing dry-season water availability, expanding irrigation, reducing salinity intrusion and maintaining ecological balance.
Under the current plan, a barrage around 2.1 kilometres long is proposed at Pangsha in Rajbari, with a storage capacity of approximately 2,900 million cubic metres.
Given the enormous investment and potentially century-long consequences, the selection of the barrage site is arguably one of the most important decisions in the entire project.
This is why, before full-scale implementation begins, the proposed Thakur Bari–Shilaidaha Kuthibari point in Kushtia should be independently reassessed alongside Pangsha. The decision should be based on science, engineering, economics, environmental considerations and, above all, national interest.
An established alternative, not a new regional demand
The call to reconsider Shilaidaha is neither a new proposal nor an attempt to advance narrow regional interests. The 2002 WARPO pre-feasibility study reportedly identified both Pangsha in Rajbari and Thakur Bari in Kushtia as potential sites for the Padma Barrage. The water resources minister also confirmed the matter in Parliament in 2026.
Therefore, the issue is not about choosing one district over another. It is about determining which site is technically and economically superior under today’s conditions.
The principle should be simple:
Pangsha versus Shilaidaha — let the data decide.
Sedimentation deserves serious scrutiny
One of the principal objectives of the barrage is to ensure controlled dry-season flows in the Gorai-Madhumati and other connected river systems. The project also aims to restore flows in the Ichamati-Mathabhanga, Chandana-Barasia, Baral and Ichamati river systems.
In this context, the distance between the Gorai offtake and the barrage site is a critical hydrological and morphological consideration.
At Pangsha, the impact of the barrage on flow velocity, water retention and sediment transport along the river should be carefully assessed. If reduced flow velocity causes excessive sediment deposition, it could affect river capacity, navigability, water intake into the Gorai, water distribution and the barrage’s long-term effectiveness.
This is not an assertion that such problems will necessarily occur. Rather, the potential risks must be established through modern hydraulic, sediment-transport and morphological modelling.
The same assessment should be applied to Shilaidaha. Both sites must be subjected to identical scientific scrutiny.
The real cost goes beyond the barrage
The financial comparison should also go well beyond the cost of the main barrage structure.
Approach embankments, guide bunds, river-training works, embankments on both banks, connecting roads, land acquisition, rehabilitation, drainage, dredging and long-term operation and maintenance can substantially alter the project’s actual cost.
The potential short-distance connection between the Shilaidaha point and Pabna also deserves detailed engineering assessment. Rather than relying on estimates or assumptions, the government should conduct detailed engineering estimates, quantity surveys and lifecycle-cost analyses for both locations.
A project costing more than Tk34,000 crore should be judged not simply by its initial construction cost but by its total economic cost over 50 to 100 years.
Connectivity can transform regional economies
A Padma Barrage could eventually serve as more than a water-control structure. It could become a major north-south transport corridor.
If located at Pangsha, some areas of Kushtia and the wider south-western region could face longer routes to cross the Padma and reach Pabna and northern Bangladesh. Preliminary local calculations suggest that, depending on route alignment, some journeys could involve an additional 70–80 kilometres.
If independently confirmed, such additional distances could translate into higher fuel consumption, vehicle operating costs, freight charges, travel time and marketing costs for agricultural and industrial products.
The government should therefore conduct an Origin-Destination Traffic Study, Vehicle Operating Cost Analysis and National Economic Benefit Assessment to compare the two sites objectively.
Shilaidaha offers a wider development opportunity
The Shilaidaha option deserves particular consideration because it could help create a shorter and strategically important corridor between Kushtia and Pabna:
South-western Bangladesh → Kushtia → Shilaidaha → Padma Barrage → Pabna → northern Bangladesh.
Such connectivity could facilitate the movement of agricultural produce, food, industrial goods and raw materials while encouraging new economic activity.
Agricultural processing, food industries, cold storage, warehouses, logistics hubs, light engineering, SMEs and commercial centres could develop along the corridor.
In other words, the site decision should also be viewed through the lens of regional economic transformation.
A unique tourism and cultural opportunity
Shilaidaha is much more than a potential infrastructure site. It is one of Bangladesh’s most important literary and cultural heritage locations.
Rabindranath Tagore spent an important period of his life at Shilaidaha Kuthibari, where he produced significant literary works. The wider Kushtia-Pabna region is also home to the heritage associated with Lalon Shah, the legacy of Mir Mosharraf Hossain, Banshitola battlefield and numerous Liberation War sites.
Improved connectivity could link these attractions with the Padma Barrage and create an integrated Historical, Cultural and River Tourism Corridor.
This would provide opportunities for hotels, tourism services, river-based recreation, cultural centres and other businesses, while generating employment and strengthening the local economy.
Kushtia’s long-standing identity as a centre of language, literature and culture could thus become an asset for modern tourism, education, research, industry and commerce.
Industrialisation and employment
A new economic corridor around the barrage could stimulate industrialisation in Kushtia, Pabna and neighbouring areas.
Potential sectors include agro-processing, food processing, jute and textiles, fisheries processing, cold storage, warehousing and logistics, light engineering, steel manufacturing, economic zones, EPZ facilities and tourism and hospitality.
The resulting investment could generate substantial direct and indirect employment.
Therefore, the barrage site should not be treated solely as a hydraulic-engineering decision. It should be incorporated into a broader strategy for regional economic development.
An independent comparative study is essential
We are not calling for the immediate rejection of Pangsha.
We are calling for Pangsha and Shilaidaha–Thakur Bari to be reassessed using the same modern standards.
The comparison should include hydrology, hydraulic modelling, hydro-morphology, sediment transport, long-term siltation, riverbank stability, foundation conditions, construction costs, embankment development, land acquisition, rehabilitation, dredging, operation and maintenance, navigation, road connectivity, travel-time savings, agricultural benefits, environmental impacts, tourism, industrialisation, employment, climate resilience and national economic benefit-cost analysis.
The study should also calculate lifecycle costs over 50–100 years.
Why reassessment matters now
Rivers are living and constantly changing systems. River courses, sediment patterns, riverbeds, erosion, water flows, land use, climate conditions and traffic patterns evolve over time.
Therefore, decades-old studies should be supplemented by updated satellite imagery, bathymetric surveys, sediment analysis, river-morphology studies, climate projections, land-use data, current traffic patterns and updated economic information.
An independent reassessment would not necessarily delay the project. It could instead protect Bangladesh from making an irreversible decision without adequately considering all available alternatives.
Bangladesh First
Once a mega barrage is built, relocating it would be extremely difficult and prohibitively expensive. Its location could influence Bangladesh’s water management, agriculture, transport, tourism and economic geography for generations.
The objective, therefore, should not be to satisfy one district or another.
The objective should be to determine: Which location will provide the greatest benefit to Bangladesh over the next 50 to 100 years?
We want the Padma Barrage to become a symbol of water security for farmers, restoration of river systems, improved connectivity between the north and south-west, industrialisation, tourism, employment and long-term economic prosperity.
If Shilaidaha–Thakur Bari proves more advantageous after a transparent and independent assessment, the government should have the courage to consider it. If Pangsha proves superior, that conclusion should also be accepted.
Let science decide. Let economics decide. Let national interest decide.
For a project of such historic magnitude, there should be only one overriding principle: Bangladesh First.
[Muhammad Rashed Khan is a businessman having experience in steel sector.]
