Features
The questionable wisdom for pursuing LNG
by Eng Parakrama Jayasinghe
I have been advocating the need for a rational evaluation of the need if any, and the wisdom of adopting LNG as an option for our energy needs, since 2019. The following have been published in the national papers.
The LNG Saga
–http://epaper.island.lk/paper/2021/10/04
The LNG Option –Need for a deeper re-think urgently – Dec 4, 2019
http://island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=215420#
What do we need? LNG or NG or neither? – Nov 8, 2019
I am led to wonder if I have been just wasting my time and efforts, judging from the recent events, as we hear the same inadequately analyzed and ill conceived and outdated proposals being aggressively pursued in total disregard to the significant changes which have been happening throughout the world in the interim. Now a cabinet paper has been submitted citing massive savings, which a commentator has claimed to be overstated by 100% using the data in the same expert report, based on which the Cabinet Paper has been drafted.
LNG switch: Cabinet paper contains flawed projected savings | Print Edition – The Sunday Times, Sri Lanka
If this is true, it would only continue the familiar trend ever since the idea was first put forward many years ago, cherry picking of data to fit the notion including patently erroneous or unsubstantiated assumptions.
It will be recalled that the use of LNG as a source of fuel for power generation was proposed as a transitional fuel about ten years ago. Since no one wanted to openly object to the growing and successful development of renewable energy, LNG was proposed to be the intermediate solution until the solar and wind energy became financially viable and technically reliable. That was over ten years ago.
However, the fact that much has changed even in Sri Lanka, in the adoption of both these technologies and it is now universally accepted that Renewable Energy is more economical than any fossil fuel based power in addition to being environmentally benign. There are dozens of references, including the International Energy Agency ( https://www.iea.org/ ) confirming this status.
But unfortunately, the same old outdated arguments are being trotted forward in total disregard to the much changed ground realities. The primary culprit is the Ceylon Electricity Board planners who find it impossible to get rid of their bias for continued dependence on imported fossil fuels and the prejudice against the indigenous renewable energy (RE) resources contrary to the often repeated assurance of their support for the development of RE. Perhaps due to the fear of losing their strangle hold on the electricity sector as the state monopoly or some other agendas which I will leave the readers to judge.
A few years ago the attraction of LNG was understandable, both due to the fact that the world LNG prices were at a historical low, and there was hope of our own Natural Gas in the Mannar basin being developed, so that any local investments to adopt the LNG option both in way of the infrastructure and generation facilities appeared justifiable.
The circumstances have changed so much that such justification can no longer be done with the much increased price of LNG and the highly depreciated Rupee, proving once more the danger of dependence on imported fossil fuels, on supply of which we have no control on one side and the continued enhanced drain of FOREX on the other. The long petrol and gas queues and hours long power cuts not long ago were the direct result of such dependence. Replacing oil with LNG is certainly not the solution now, when the alternatives have proven commercially viable even in Sri Lanka and in the rest of the world .
But does the CEB or their consultants or their masters in the Ministry of Power and the government , give any consideration to these altered circumstances, let alone the undeniable and encouraging progress made in the adoption of RE resources which do not require any imported fuels and are cheaper and environmentally benign? It is a great national tragedy that this is hardly the case.
The present government of the NPP, appears to have been sold the same recipe of the now mythical essential need and the value of LNG, as even their policy documents have listed LNG as the option for the future.
The CEB with the support of the newly appointed Minister and the Secretary has pounced upon this as an imperative in total disregard for the other established policies of
· Reaching 70% RE contribution by 2030 and Carbon neutrality by 2050
· Adopting least economic cost mode of generation
· None dependence on imported energy sources for future energy security and thereby the National Security
· Cease building of new coal-fired power plants. A new policy is added
· New addition of firm capacity will be from clean energy sources such as re-gasified liquefied natural gas (R-LNG).
This last statement is highly contestable as LNG is not clean in consideration of the entire supply chain and is reported to be 33% higher emitter of Carbon Dioxide than coal.
The falsity and Lack of Coherence of CEB Arguments in support
And CEB continues to pursue their lopsided arguments and have proposed addition of over 3,500 MW of LNG based power in their Long Term Generation Plan from 2025 to 2044. Now the Chairman has advocated to the government, that the stalled tender for the development of a Floating Storage and Re-Gasification Unit ( FSRU) be reactivated. But no mention has been made of any arrangement to source LNG and the reliability of such supplies in the long term, which one would have thought is the primary requirement before any steps are taken in building user end facilities.
Sri Lanka certainly cannot claim to be out of bankruptcy, although some measure of stability has been attained only by postponing the repayment of massive amount of foreign loans, which will come to haunt us in the near future as close as 2028. Thus, understandably the government is very keen to increase the FOREX earnings to reduce the continuing gap between cost of imports and the export earnings. Therefore, without a much broader and deeper analysis of the claimed advantages and savings and as the panaceas for resolving the technical issues faced by the CEB, a hasty decision to opt for addition of LNG could hardly be considered wise.
This is a matter of great national concern and such a decision which will only exacerbate the Balance of Payments cannot be left to the CEB or even the Ministry of Energy without intense in-depth analysis . This should cover all aspects of costs , reliability in the long term of supplies and costs and other economic considerations approved after a much wider stakeholder consultation. Hitherto there has never been such a comprehensive study or consultation. The present promise of lower cost of generation yet to be proven and in total disregard to the above issues is certainly not acceptable.
The issues which a has come to light both during the earlier instances when such hasty decisions were mooted and also in the analysis of the Draft Long Term Generation Expansion Plan 2025-2044 are discussed below.
· The cost of LNG based power generation.
This must include not only the cost of the LNG itself but also all other costs involved in the deployment of the FSRU and regassification process and the piping of the re-gassified LNG to the coast as well as the added pipe network required to reach the power plant. While some numbers can be quoted on the world prices of LNG and the historical trends, there are no established costs of the other aspects. The reality in respect of the world prices then and now are shown below .
The change in world market price of LG and its impact on Sri Lanka can be compared as below
As such how can anyone even contemplate a flat trajectory for future prices as childishly shown in the above chart used in the LTEGP? Even a simple private businessman would not plan any future venture based on such impossible projections. But then the CEB is not held responsible for any disasters they have been causing over the years and plans to plunge the entire country to anther disaster.

Fig 3 – CEB prediction of LNG prices The change in world market price of LG and its impact on Sri Lanka can be compared as below
The LTGEP reveals that that the annual natural gas consumption will remain at a very low level (below 0.6 MTPA) till 2035. This will add a substantial cost to the capacity charge of the FSRU which has to be accounted for when the total LNG fuel costs are calculated and thus further increase the cost of generation.
The demand will remain low at about 0.6 MTPA which is well below the capacity of a FSRU that would interest any investor. There is an attempt to blow this up by planning totally unacceptable plans to increase demand by converting the aging plants at Kelanitissa and even to use if for transport.
It is quite unlikely that any investors would be interested in catering to such low volumes unless there is provision for substantial premiums on the sale price. This added to the current East Asia price of $ 15.04 plus the other charges have already made this option none viable. Using even the declared price of $ 11.90 the cost of generation would be over Rs 55.00 /kWh. https://view.argusmedia.com
For Sri Lanka , the governing factor is the cost of generation which must include the entire supply chain and infra structure costs development and operation, including any take or pay provisions or premiums for lower scope of supplies. These considerations have been swept under the carpet by erroneous data and plainly misleading numbers such as assuming that the price of LNG will be none variable in the future. This was done in case of coal and is still being practiced.
Promise of a Clean Fuel
It is futile to try and paint LNG as clean and low in carbon emission. The carbon emission has to be gauged across the entire supply chain. There are studies to say that LNG is has 33% higher carbon emission than coal.
Green washed: LNG emits 33% more carbon than coal, new report finds
As such the promise of LNG already fails on both counts based on which it has been promoted. That of economical cost of generation and the green house emissions. This is without any consideration of the totally avoidable additional drain of foreign exchange.
What does the CEB expects to gain by this addition of LNG?
The only reason for the CEB to pursue this goal is only to perpetuate the dependence on imported fossil fuels, now that their former goal of adding more coal power has been soundly rejected even by the previous government. There is no way that this can be considered a progressive move on one hand because of the continued drain on foreign exchange for the import of LNG and the impact on the long term energy security of the country with dependence on a source completely outside the control of Sri Lanka.
They hide these dangers by citing issues of a need for Base Load power and spinning reserves and the none firm nature of the two renewable energy sourced of solar and wind.
All these problems have been well resolved by other countries and the CEB chooses to turn a blind eye to promote this nationally disastrous move even going to the extent of citing patently false data.
The Ministry and the Government must take urgent action to understand the truth and prevent this disaster being perpetuated.
Conclusion
The Government has several promises to keep.
· Build up the FOREX reserves to face the debt repayment challenge in 2028
· Reduce the consumer tariff by 35%.
Both these will be highly doubt full if the CEB is continued these unviable proposals. Their claim of inability to reduce the consumer tariff was soundly debunked by highly researched presentations made during the recent public consultations. It was also pointed out that the consumer tariff can be reduced significantly reduced by eliminating the use of oil for power generation as early as possible. The CEB now proposes to replace such positive trend by committing the country to perhaps even more damaging introduction of LNG.
The CEB is driven only by their inability and unwillingness to change their Frog in The Well attitude and assimilate the more progressive developments in the RE sector in the best interests of Sri Lanka and its citizens. The question has to be asked, is the CEB or even the Ministry of Energy can be trusted to make such decisions which affects the entire country without a wide ranging public consultation?
The Ministry and the Govt should at least now officially assign the responsibility and accountability of achieving the national objectives, of much reduced consumer tariff and goal of reaching the 70% RE target by year 2030.
This is the right of the People of Sri Lanka , who are the true owners of the Energy Sector and Resources and are the major Stake Holder and not the CEB
Features
Ranking public services with AI — A roadmap to reviving institutions like SriLankan Airlines
Efficacy measures an organisation’s capacity to achieve its mission and intended outcomes under planned or optimal conditions. It differs from efficiency, which focuses on achieving objectives with minimal resources, and effectiveness, which evaluates results in real-world conditions. Today, modern AI tools, using publicly available data, enable objective assessment of the efficacy of Sri Lanka’s government institutions.
Among key public bodies, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka emerges as the most efficacious, outperforming the Department of Inland Revenue, Sri Lanka Customs, the Election Commission, and Parliament. In the financial and regulatory sector, the Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL) ranks highest, ahead of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utilities Commission, the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission, the Insurance Regulatory Commission, and the Sri Lanka Standards Institution.
Among state-owned enterprises, the Sri Lanka Ports Authority (SLPA) leads in efficacy, followed by Bank of Ceylon and People’s Bank. Other institutions assessed included the State Pharmaceuticals Corporation, the National Water Supply and Drainage Board, the Ceylon Electricity Board, the Ceylon Petroleum Corporation, and the Sri Lanka Transport Board. At the lower end of the spectrum were Lanka Sathosa and Sri Lankan Airlines, highlighting a critical challenge for the national economy.
Sri Lankan Airlines, consistently ranked at the bottom, has long been a financial drain. Despite successive governments’ reform attempts, sustainable solutions remain elusive.
Globally, the most profitable airlines operate as highly integrated, technology-enabled ecosystems rather than as fragmented departments. Operations, finance, fleet management, route planning, engineering, marketing, and customer service are closely coordinated, sharing real-time data to maximise efficiency, safety, and profitability.
The challenge for Sri Lankan Airlines is structural. Its operations are fragmented, overly hierarchical, and poorly aligned. Simply replacing the CEO or senior leadership will not address these deep-seated weaknesses. What the airline needs is a cohesive, integrated organisational ecosystem that leverages technology for cross-functional planning and real-time decision-making.
The government must urgently consider restructuring Sri Lankan Airlines to encourage:
=Joint planning across operational divisions
=Data-driven, evidence-based decision-making
=Continuous cross-functional consultation
=Collaborative strategic decisions on route rationalisation, fleet renewal, partnerships, and cost management, rather than exclusive top-down mandates
Sustainable reform requires systemic change. Without modernised organisational structures, stronger accountability, and aligned incentives across divisions, financial recovery will remain out of reach. An integrated, performance-oriented model offers the most realistic path to operational efficiency and long-term viability.
Reforming loss-making institutions like Sri Lankan Airlines is not merely a matter of leadership change — it is a structural overhaul essential to ensuring these entities contribute productively to the national economy rather than remain perpetual burdens.
By Chula Goonasekera – Citizen Analyst
Features
Why Pi Day?
International Day of Mathematics falls tomorrow
The approximate value of Pi (π) is 3.14 in mathematics. Therefore, the day 14 March is celebrated as the Pi Day. In 2019, UNESCO proclaimed 14 March as the International Day of Mathematics.
Ancient Babylonians and Egyptians figured out that the circumference of a circle is slightly more than three times its diameter. But they could not come up with an exact value for this ratio although they knew that it is a constant. This constant was later named as π which is a letter in the Greek alphabet.
It was the Greek mathematician Archimedes (250 BC) who was able to find an upper bound and a lower bound for this constant. He drew a circle of diameter one unit and drew hexagons inside and outside the circle such that the sides of each hexagon touch the sides of the circle. In mathematics the circle passing through all vertices of a polygon is called a ‘circumcircle’ and the largest circle that fits inside a polygon tangent to all its sides is called an ‘incircle’. The total length of the smaller hexagon then becomes the lower bound of π and the length of the hexagon outside the circle is the upper bound. He realised that by increasing the number of sides of the polygon can make the bounds get closer to the value of Pi and increased the number of sides to 12,24,48 and 60. He argued that by increasing the number of sides will ultimately result in obtaining the original circle, thereby laying the foundation for the theory of limits. He ended up with the lower bound as 22/7 and the upper bound 223/71. He could not continue his research as his hometown Syracuse was invaded by Romans and was killed by one of the soldiers. His last words were ‘do not disturb my circles’, perhaps a reference to his continuing efforts to find the value of π to a greater accuracy.
Archimedes can be considered as the father of geometry. His contributions revolutionised geometry and his methods anticipated integral calculus. He invented the pulley and the hydraulic screw for drawing water from a well. He also discovered the law of hydrostatics. He formulated the law of levers which states that a smaller weight placed farther from a pivot can balance a much heavier weight closer to it. He famously said “Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I will move the earth”.
Mathematicians have found many expressions for π as a sum of infinite series that converge to its value. One such famous series is the Leibniz Series found in 1674 by the German mathematician Gottfried Leibniz, which is given below.
π = 4 ( 1 – 1/3 + 1/5 – 1/7 + 1/9 – ………….)
The Indian mathematical genius Ramanujan came up with a magnificent formula in 1910. The short form of the formula is as follows.
π = 9801/(1103 √8)
For practical applications an approximation is sufficient. Even NASA uses only the approximation 3.141592653589793 for its interplanetary navigation calculations.
It is not just an interesting and curious number. It is used for calculations in navigation, encryption, space exploration, video game development and even in medicine. As π is fundamental to spherical geometry, it is at the heart of positioning systems in GPS navigations. It also contributes significantly to cybersecurity. As it is an irrational number it is an excellent foundation for generating randomness required in encryption and securing communications. In the medical field, it helps to calculate blood flow rates and pressure differentials. In diagnostic tools such as CT scans and MRI, pi is an important component in mathematical algorithms and signal processing techniques.
This elegant, never-ending number demonstrates how mathematics transforms into practical applications that shape our world. The possibilities of what it can do are infinite as the number itself. It has become a symbol of beauty and complexity in mathematics. “It matters little who first arrives at an idea, rather what is significant is how far that idea can go.” said Sophie Germain.
Mathematics fans are intrigued by this irrational number and attempt to calculate it as far as they can. In March 2022, Emma Haruka Iwao of Japan calculated it to 100 trillion decimal places in Google Cloud. It had taken 157 days. The Guinness World Record for reciting the number from memory is held by Rajveer Meena of India for 70000 decimal places over 10 hours.
Happy Pi Day!
The author is a senior examiner of the International Baccalaureate in the UK and an educational consultant at the Overseas School of Colombo.
by R N A de Silva
Features
Sheer rise of Realpolitik making the world see the brink
The recent humanly costly torpedoing of an Iranian naval vessel in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone by a US submarine has raised a number of issues of great importance to international political discourse and law that call for elucidation. It is best that enlightened commentary is brought to bear in such discussions because at present misleading and uninformed speculation on questions arising from the incident are being aired by particularly jingoistic politicians of Sri Lanka’s South which could prove deleterious.
As matters stand, there seems to be no credible evidence that the Indian state was aware of the impending torpedoing of the Iranian vessel but these acerbic-tongued politicians of Sri Lanka’s South would have the local public believe that the tragedy was triggered with India’s connivance. Likewise, India is accused of ‘embroiling’ Sri Lanka in the incident on account of seemingly having prior knowledge of it and not warning Sri Lanka about the impending disaster.
It is plain that a process is once again afoot to raise anti-India hysteria in Sri Lanka. An obligation is cast on the Sri Lankan government to ensure that incendiary speculation of the above kind is defeated and India-Sri Lanka relations are prevented from being in any way harmed. Proactive measures are needed by the Sri Lankan government and well meaning quarters to ensure that public discourse in such matters have a factual and rational basis. ‘Knowledge gaps’ could prove hazardous.
Meanwhile, there could be no doubt that Sri Lanka’s sovereignty was violated by the US because the sinking of the Iranian vessel took place in Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone. While there is no international decrying of the incident, and this is to be regretted, Sri Lanka’s helplessness and small player status would enable the US to ‘get away with it’.
Could anything be done by the international community to hold the US to account over the act of lawlessness in question? None is the answer at present. This is because in the current ‘Global Disorder’ major powers could commit the gravest international irregularities with impunity. As the threadbare cliché declares, ‘Might is Right’….. or so it seems.
Unfortunately, the UN could only merely verbally denounce any violations of International Law by the world’s foremost powers. It cannot use countervailing force against violators of the law, for example, on account of the divided nature of the UN Security Council, whose permanent members have shown incapability of seeing eye-to-eye on grave matters relating to International Law and order over the decades.
The foregoing considerations could force the conclusion on uncritical sections that Political Realism or Realpolitik has won out in the end. A basic premise of the school of thought known as Political Realism is that power or force wielded by states and international actors determine the shape, direction and substance of international relations. This school stands in marked contrast to political idealists who essentially proclaim that moral norms and values determine the nature of local and international politics.
While, British political scientist Thomas Hobbes, for instance, was a proponent of Political Realism, political idealism has its roots in the teachings of Socrates, Plato and latterly Friedrich Hegel of Germany, to name just few such notables.
On the face of it, therefore, there is no getting way from the conclusion that coercive force is the deciding factor in international politics. If this were not so, US President Donald Trump in collaboration with Israeli Rightist Premier Benjamin Natanyahu could not have wielded the ‘big stick’, so to speak, on Iran, killed its Supreme Head of State, terrorized the Iranian public and gone ‘scot-free’. That is, currently, the US’ impunity seems to be limitless.
Moreover, the evidence is that the Western bloc is reuniting in the face of Iran’s threats to stymie the flow of oil from West Asia to the rest of the world. The recent G7 summit witnessed a coming together of the foremost powers of the global North to ensure that the West does not suffer grave negative consequences from any future blocking of western oil supplies.
Meanwhile, Israel is having a ‘free run’ of the Middle East, so to speak, picking out perceived adversarial powers, such as Lebanon, and militarily neutralizing them; once again with impunity. On the other hand, Iran has been bringing under assault, with no questions asked, Gulf states that are seen as allying with the US and Israel. West Asia is facing a compounded crisis and International Law seems to be helplessly silent.
Wittingly or unwittingly, matters at the heart of International Law and peace are being obfuscated by some pro-Trump administration commentators meanwhile. For example, retired US Navy Captain Brent Sadler has cited Article 51 of the UN Charter, which provides for the right to self or collective self-defence of UN member states in the face of armed attacks, as justifying the US sinking of the Iranian vessel (See page 2 of The Island of March 10, 2026). But the Article makes it clear that such measures could be resorted to by UN members only ‘ if an armed attack occurs’ against them and under no other circumstances. But no such thing happened in the incident in question and the US acted under a sheer threat perception.
Clearly, the US has violated the Article through its action and has once again demonstrated its tendency to arbitrarily use military might. The general drift of Sadler’s thinking is that in the face of pressing national priorities, obligations of a state under International Law could be side-stepped. This is a sure recipe for international anarchy because in such a policy environment states could pursue their national interests, irrespective of their merits, disregarding in the process their obligations towards the international community.
Moreover, Article 51 repeatedly reiterates the authority of the UN Security Council and the obligation of those states that act in self-defence to report to the Council and be guided by it. Sadler, therefore, could be said to have cited the Article very selectively, whereas, right along member states’ commitments to the UNSC are stressed.
However, it is beyond doubt that international anarchy has strengthened its grip over the world. While the US set destabilizing precedents after the crumbling of the Cold War that paved the way for the current anarchic situation, Russia further aggravated these degenerative trends through its invasion of Ukraine. Stepping back from anarchy has thus emerged as the prime challenge for the world community.
-
News6 days agoPeradeniya Uni issues alert over leopards in its premises
-
News4 days agoRepatriation of Iranian naval personnel Sri Lanka’s call: Washington
-
News6 days agoWife raises alarm over Sallay’s detention under PTA
-
News3 days agoProf. Dunusinghe warns Lanka at serious risk due to ME war
-
Features4 days agoWinds of Change:Geopolitics at the crossroads of South and Southeast Asia
-
Latest News6 days agoHeat Index at ‘Caution Level’ in the Sabaragamuwa province and, Colombo, Gampaha, Kurunegala, Anuradhapura, Vavuniya, Hambanthota and Monaragala districts
-
Features6 days agoThe final voyage of the Iranian warship sunk by the US
-
Sports2 days agoRoyal start favourites in historic Battle of the Blues





