Challenges for Underground Distribution in Dhaka City

 

Underground Power System Distribution in Dhaka City is a Big Challenge 

Dhaka faces high capital costs, extreme population density, very limited street footprint, waterlogging, scarce equipment space, existing utility conflicts, and poor inter-utility coordination — each of which raises technical, financial, and institutional barriers to rolling out a modern underground distribution network.

Key Challenges to Implement Underground Power Distribution in Dhaka City

• Capital intensity: Underground lines cost far more than overhead lines, creating a major funding gap.
• Population density: Extremely high density increases demand and complicates construction and access.
• Limited street footprint: Only ~6% street area restricts space for ducts, manholes, and utility equipment.
• Waterlogging and drainage: Frequent flooding risks equipment failure and raises design requirements.
• Equipment siting and land access: Lack of roadside/adjacent space and need for NOCs from RAJUK and city corporations.
• Existing utilities and relocation needs: Many buried/overhead assets must be identified and shifted without service interruption.
• Fragmented planning and coordination: Utilities plan independently, risking repeated excavations and service disruption.

Table: Challenges, Impacts, and Practical Mitigations

Challenge	Primary Impact	Practical Mitigation
High capital cost	Delayed rollout; funding shortfall	Public–private funding mix; phased pilot projects
Extreme population density	Limited construction access; high service demand	Night works; modular compact equipment; demand-side management
Very low street footprint	Insufficient space for ducts/manholes	Shared multi-utility ducts; vertical stacking; micro-tunnels
Waterlogging	Equipment damage; maintenance difficulty	Elevated/ sealed vaults; IP68-rated equipment; improved drainage
Equipment siting constraints	NOC delays; legal/land issues	Early stakeholder engagement; standardized NOC templates
Existing utilities conflict	Service interruptions; rework	Comprehensive utility mapping; coordinated relocation plan
Lack of coordination	Repeated excavations; higher lifecycle cost	Create a tunnel/utility authority; single permitting window

Institutional and Financial Approaches

• Cost-sharing model: Adopt a tripartite funding approach (utility, city authority, national government) for major corridors and pilot zones.
• Phased investment: Start with high-priority corridors (commercial hubs, critical feeders) to demonstrate benefits and attract financing.
• Regulatory enablers: Fast-track NOC processes, standardized technical specs, and right-of-way rules to reduce delays.
• Dedicated coordinating body: Establish a multi-utility tunnel authority or steering committee to manage planning, permitting, and shared infrastructure.
• Private sector participation: Use concessions, PPPs, or utility bonds for financing construction and long-term maintenance.

Technical and Operational Recommendations

• Comprehensive utility survey: Use GIS, ground-penetrating radar, and as-built verification to create a single authoritative utility map.
• Shared duct and tunnel systems: Design multi-utility ducts or shallow tunnels to host power, fiber, water, and gas, minimizing repeated digs.
• Flood-resilient design: Specify sealed vaults, elevated equipment pads, and integrated drainage for all underground assets.
• Compact equipment selection: Use pad-mounted transformers, compact switchgear, and modular substations suited to tight urban footprints.
• Construction staging and traffic management: Plan phased works with temporary supply arrangements and clear public communications.
• Maintenance access planning: Ensure manholes, access shafts, and monitoring systems are placed for safe, rapid maintenance even in dense areas.

Suggested Implementation Roadmap (phased)

Phase 1 — Planning and Pilots (0–2 years)

• Create utility inventory and GIS map.
• Form a coordinating authority and define a funding model.
• Run 1–2 pilot corridors with full monitoring and cost tracking.

Phase 2 — Corridor Rollout (2–6 years)

• Scale to priority commercial and high-risk residential corridors.
• Standardize technical specs and NOC procedures.
• Begin phased relocation of conflicting utilities.

Phase 3 — Citywide Expansion and Optimization (6+ years)

• Expand network using lessons from pilots.
• Implement long-term maintenance contracts and asset management systems.
• Integrate with urban planning for future-proofing.

Final Recommendations (prioritized)

1. Establish a multi-utility coordinating authority to centralize planning, permitting, and funding decisions.

2. Start with targeted pilots to validate technical choices, cost-sharing arrangements, and construction methods.

3. Adopt shared duct/tunnel strategies to maximize the limited street footprint and reduce lifecycle costs.

4. Secure a tripartite funding commitment (utility, city, national) for major corridors to unlock investment.

5. Mandate comprehensive utility mapping and flood-resilient design standards before large-scale rollout.