For decades, Nepal has viewed its rivers primarily through the lens of how many megawatts of electricity they can generate. It is now time to change that thinking. Nepal's future cannot be measured only by how many megawatts of hydropower have been developed, how many kilometres of transmission lines have been built, or how many generation licences have been issued. Nepal must understand its rivers, glaciers, glacial lakes, sunlight, forests, mountains and geography as an interconnected national asset. Renewable energy is not merely a means of generating electricity; it is a strategic asset that can be produced, stored, traded and used to transform the national economy. Nepal's energy debate must now rise above the narrow question of how many hydropower projects have been built and connect energy with renewable resources, environmental security, regional trade and national sovereignty.
The devastating floods that struck Rasuwa and Nuwakot in August 2026 brought this necessity painfully into focus. Hydropower projects that had become symbols of Nepal's economic potential suddenly became the centre of a major search-and-rescue operation. Nearly 1,000 workers were feared trapped in hydropower tunnels and project areas, while major power projects, roads, bridges and other infrastructure suffered extensive damage. Among the affected projects were the 216 MW Upper Trishuli-1, the 60 MW Upper Trishuli-3A and the 37 MW Upper Trishuli-3B. Preliminary assessments indicated that around 15 hydropower projects, both operational and under construction, were affected in Rasuwa and Nuwakot, representing a combined capacity of approximately 753 MW, with around 394 MW still under construction. These facts are not an argument against hydropower. They are a warning that Nepal must seriously reconsider how, where and under what risk conditions hydropower infrastructure is developed.
The question before Nepal is no longer simply how many megawatts can be extracted from Himalayan rivers. The question is what kind of energy system Nepal can build that is resilient enough to withstand a changing Himalayan climate, glacial lake outbursts, extreme rainfall, floods, landslides, avalanches and geological hazards. This is where Nepal's next great opportunity begins-the transition from hydropower generation to renewable energy trade.
A new era of Himalayan climate and energy security
For generations, Nepal's natural power has been understood in simple terms. Snow and glaciers in the mountains feed the rivers, those rivers descend rapidly from great elevations, and this enormous difference in altitude creates exceptional potential for hydropower generation. That remains the fundamental basis of Nepal's hydropower potential. But the Himalayan environment that makes these rivers an energy resource is itself changing rapidly. Glaciers are retreating, permafrost is weakening, glacial lakes are expanding, extreme rainfall events may become more destructive, and landslides and avalanches can suddenly alter river flows and surrounding terrain. An event in the mountains can reach villages, roads, bridges, transmission lines, hydropower projects and local economies downstream within hours.
The events in Rasuwa and Nuwakot demonstrate the risks created when infrastructure becomes heavily concentrated in narrow Himalayan valleys. This is not simply an engineering problem affecting one hydropower project. It is a matter of national infrastructure planning, climate policy, environmental management, insurance, disaster preparedness and national security. Nepal cannot build tomorrow's infrastructure using yesterday's climate data. An energy project designed only on the basis of historical rainfall, river flows and geological conditions may not be adequate for the risks of 2050 or 2075. Climate risk must therefore become a central component of the economic calculation of every major infrastructure project. It should not be an obligatory paragraph at the end of an environmental impact assessment. Climate risk must be at the centre of decisions about where a project is built, how large it should be, how it should operate, how it should be insured and what alternative technologies should be available when necessary.
Nepal's preference for run-of-river hydropower development is understandable. The country's steep geography allows river flows to be converted into substantial electricity generation while reducing the need for large reservoirs, which can make social and environmental impacts more manageable in many projects. But its fundamental weakness is equally clear. Although rivers form the natural foundation of Nepal's energy system, Nepal cannot control how much water flows through them in every season. Rivers carry enormous volumes of water during the monsoon, while flows can decline significantly during the dry season, reducing electricity generation. Thus, even with enormous hydropower potential, Nepal faces a seasonal imbalance in electricity supply.
Storage hydropower can play an important role by providing electricity during the dry season, regulating river flows and making the energy system more flexible. But storage projects also carry environmental, social, geological, financial and displacement-related risks. Therefore, it would be simplistic to conclude that run-of-river projects are good and storage projects are bad. Nepal needs an intelligent combination of both. Run-of-river hydropower, storage projects, solar energy, energy storage, modern transmission infrastructure and regional electricity trade should not be viewed as competitors; they should become complementary components of one integrated energy system.
The idea that solar development diminishes the importance of hydropower is also outdated. In reality, solar energy can be an excellent partner for hydropower. Nepal's rivers are strongest during the monsoon, while solar power can generate electricity during daylight hours. When river flows decline during the dry season, solar energy can provide additional supply. Energy storage can allow surplus electricity to be used when it is needed. Modern transmission systems can move electricity from areas of production to areas of demand. Regional electricity markets can transform surplus generation that might otherwise be wasted into export revenue. Nepal should no longer debate whether it is a hydropower country or a solar-energy country. Nepal should define itself as a renewable-energy nation.
Glacial lakes and the ecological security of the Himalayas
Nepal's energy policy cannot be separated from the condition of the Himalayas. Studies associated with ICIMOD and UNDP in 2020 identified potentially dangerous glacial lakes across the Koshi, Gandaki and Karnali river basins in Nepal, China and India. The study identified 47 potentially dangerous glacial lakes, including 21 in Nepal, 25 in China and one in India. If such lakes burst, glacial lake outburst floods, or GLOFs, can destroy downstream structures within a very short period. A glacial lake does not distinguish whether the structure below it is a hydropower project, a bridge, a road, a transmission line or a village. Once the flood arrives, the river system exposes all of them to the same danger.
Nepal therefore needs a continuously updated national Himalayan risk map. It should integrate satellite information, glacier movement, glacial lake size and expansion, rainfall, temperature, geological instability, seismic risk, river flows and the location of critical infrastructure. This should not become another report prepared and forgotten in a drawer. It must become a real-time early-warning system capable of helping the government, local communities, hydropower companies, insurance sector, rescue agencies and security forces make timely decisions.
Because glaciers and rivers do not recognise international borders, Nepal and China need deeper, real-time cooperation on glacial lakes, glaciers, weather, river flows and natural hazards originating upstream. The ecological security of the Himalayas cannot be confined within the borders of one country. Physical construction in Tibet, tunnels in major river-source areas, roads and other large infrastructure can affect river ecosystems and downstream risks. Nepal should therefore rise above emotional accusations and pursue scientific information-sharing, joint research and mechanisms for managing transboundary risks with its neighbours.
Not stopping development, but changing its form
Nepal has long created a false conflict between development and the environment. One side argues that the country must build as many roads, buildings, projects and structures as possible for development. The other argues that development should be stopped in order to protect the environment. Both approaches are incomplete. Nepal does not need to stop development; it needs to change the way development is conceived.
In the mountains, we should not always begin by asking, "Where should we build a road?" Sometimes the first question should be, "Do we need a road here at all?" Building roads by cutting into high mountain slopes can require enormous quantities of rock and soil to be removed, lead to deforestation, increase landslide risks and create high long-term maintenance costs. In some geographical areas, ropeways, cable cars and other aerial transport systems can connect villages and markets with far less physical intervention. Nepal should seriously invest in technologies that allow people and goods to move above natural forests by designing ropeway and cable-car structures at appropriate elevations rather than cutting through forests simply to build roads. Development does not mean cutting through every mountain; development means connecting people to opportunity, education, healthcare, markets and employment.
Trees are being cut in the name of cable cars. The mandatory requirement to construct tall towers before cutting trees has itself been swallowed by policy corruption. This issue must now be brought within the scope of a serious investigation, and the process should be redesigned so that new projects can move forward on a more sustainable basis.
The same principle applies to hydropower. A single project on a river may appear to have an acceptable environmental impact. But when multiple projects, tunnels, access roads, diversions, blasting, sediment management systems and other structures are added one after another along the same river system, the cumulative risk to the entire river basin can increase dramatically. Nepal must therefore stop treating individual projects as the sole unit of development and begin treating the entire river basin as the fundamental unit of planning. The question should not simply be, "How many megawatts will this project generate?" It should be, "How much infrastructure can this river basin safely sustain over the next 100 years?" That is what long-term development thinking means.
Climate justice and the economic value of the himalayas
Nepal must also raise another question with greater confidence before the international community: who should pay for the damage caused by climate change? Historically, Nepal's contribution to global greenhouse-gas emissions has been extremely small. Yet Nepal is experiencing the consequences through melting glaciers, expanding glacial lakes, increasingly destructive floods, landslides and changing ecosystems. These changes directly affect Nepal's infrastructure, agriculture, tourism, water resources, settlements and economic security.
Nepal should therefore stop treating climate diplomacy merely as a matter of requesting international assistance. It should turn climate justice into an economic and diplomatic issue. Countries and industries that have historically contributed disproportionately to carbon emissions should contribute more to protecting countries and ecosystems facing disproportionate climate risks. Nepal should more effectively advance the principle of "Polluter Pays."
This is not about emotionally demanding compensation from any particular country. Nepal should mobilise international resources for Loss and Damage Finance, Adaptation Finance, concessional finance, climate-risk insurance, glacier monitoring, early-warning systems and the protection of Himalayan ecosystems. The Himalayas are not merely Nepal's asset. The water originating from the Himalayas sustains the lives of hundreds of millions of people across South Asia. Glaciers are an important component of the global climate system, and Himalayan biodiversity has global significance. Nepal should therefore not be expected to carry the full economic burden of protecting the Himalayas alone. Nepal should present itself as a guardian nation of the world's Himalayan ecological system.
From electricity generation to renewable energy trade
Nepal's real opportunity begins here. Nepal must stop seeing itself merely as a country that wants to sell electricity to India. It should position itself as a major hub in South Asia's renewable-energy trade.
The beginning of electricity exports from Nepal through India to Bangladesh is not simply a transaction involving a limited quantity of electricity. Its strategic significance is much greater. It demonstrates that electricity can be traded across borders between Nepal, India and Bangladesh. In the future, Nepal can export surplus hydropower generated during the monsoon to India and Bangladesh. During the dry season, when necessary, it can import electricity from the regional market. Solar energy can complement hydropower. Energy storage can reduce fluctuations in supply. Modern transmission systems can connect regional markets. Electricity can then become one of Nepal's major export commodities rather than merely a domestic consumption product.
But this requires a clear national energy-trade strategy. India is one of Nepal's most important energy markets. Indian investment is welcome. Foreign investment is necessary. International financial institutions are important. Technology partnerships are also necessary. But Nepal must understand the difference between partnership and dependence. When negotiating electricity agreements, Nepal should not be satisfied simply because it has gained market access. It must negotiate confidently on pricing, market access, long-term power-purchase agreements, risk-sharing and national interests. Signing an agreement with a foreign partner is not wrong; signing an agreement without understanding Nepal's own interests is wrong. Nepal should seek friendship, but not dependence; cooperation, but not surrender.
Energy, internet and connectivity must become part of one national strategy
Nepal's future energy debate cannot be separated from digital connectivity. Nepal needs affordable and reliable internet, but the internet is not merely a tool for entertainment or social media. It is the foundation for connecting remote schools, health posts, agricultural markets, tourism businesses, emergency rescue operations, weather forecasting, hydropower operations, glacial-lake monitoring and local enterprises to the global economy.
Nepal has not taken the importance of connectivity seriously enough in the past. Western countries and international institutions have supported various programmes and grants to expand digital connectivity through the private sector. But there must be a rigorous assessment of how much of the assistance and grants provided in Nepal's name actually reached the Nepali people. Resources provided for public purposes must be transparently measured against the public benefits they create.
Nepal must not delay in adopting new technologies. Digital connectivity, artificial intelligence, satellite systems, GIS, weather forecasting, agricultural sensors, water-resource monitoring, energy markets and digital financial systems should be integrated into a national digital infrastructure. Nepal has already lost opportunities because it failed to understand where the world was heading. There is no time to repeat that mistake.
Nepal Must Negotiate with Foreign Partners-But Never on Its Knees
Nepal is a small country, but being small does not mean being weak. Nepal can trade energy with India, cooperate with China on Himalayan science and disaster information, work with the United States and Europe on technology, investment and climate finance, expand energy markets with Bangladesh, and work with international financial institutions on infrastructure and climate resilience. But every agreement should pass one national test: does it strengthen or weaken Nepal's long-term national interest?
If it strengthens Nepal, we should negotiate. If it requires improvement, we should renegotiate. If it is against the national interest, we must be prepared to say no. Sovereignty does not mean rejecting everything from powerful countries. Sovereignty means being able to make our own decisions while cooperating with powerful countries. Nepal must develop precisely that confidence.
Nepal's greatest shortage is strategic leadership
This brings us to the most important issue in the entire debate. Nepal's greatest shortage is not water, sunlight, mountains, natural resources or even capital. Nepal's greatest shortage is strategic leadership.
Nepal does not simply need leaders with the highest academic degrees. It needs leaders who understand the difference between knowledge and wisdom. A degree may teach someone how to calculate the cost of a dam, but leadership must determine whether the dam should be built, where it should be built, how large it should be, what risks it carries, what alternative technologies exist and how today's decision will affect future generations.
Nepal needs a leader who can negotiate with powerful neighbours without hostility but also without fear. A leader who can welcome foreign investment without allowing foreign interests to become the owners of national policy. A leader who understands that signing an international agreement is not, by itself, a success. An agreement is successful only if it improves the lives of the Nepali people over the long term.
Nepal needs leadership capable of connecting hydropower, climate change, agriculture, tourism, digital connectivity, transportation, national security, international diplomacy and economic development within one national vision. Such a leader must ask difficult questions: Why are we building this road? Why are we cutting this forest? Why are we concentrating so many hydropower projects in the same high-risk river valley? Why is there no adequate monitoring of the glaciers upstream? At what price are we selling our electricity? Why can Nepal not directly access other regional electricity markets? How much of the international assistance entering Nepal actually reaches ordinary citizens? And why should Nepal alone bear the economic cost of protecting an ecological system that serves the entire world?
Most importantly, such a leader must ask how a Nepali citizen 50 years from now will judge the decisions being made today. That is leadership. Leadership is not merely political rhetoric, a pile of academic degrees or a photograph taken with a foreign leader. Leadership is the ability to make difficult decisions today that protect the future of generations yet to be born.
The time for a Himalayan renewable-energy economy
Nepal must now make its vision much larger than hydropower development. It should aim to build a Himalayan renewable-energy economy. Hydropower should be its foundation, but it should not become the country's only identity. Solar should provide diversification. Energy storage should stabilise the system. Transmission infrastructure should connect regional markets. Digital technology should make the energy system intelligent. International trade should turn surplus electricity into revenue. Climate finance should invest in protecting glaciers, forests, rivers and Himalayan ecosystems.
Nepal should use its own renewable energy to power industries. It should develop green hydrogen, electric transportation, energy-intensive industries, agricultural processing, tourism, digital infrastructure and other emerging economic sectors around clean energy. A country that uses electricity to produce higher-value goods and services can become stronger than a country that simply sells electricity. Nepal's energy strategy should therefore not be about merely "selling electricity"; it should be about building an economy through electricity.
The disaster in Rasuwa and Nuwakot must not force Nepal to abandon hydropower. It should force Nepal to develop hydropower more intelligently. The era of rebuilding the same vulnerable infrastructure in the same risky locations and waiting for the next disaster must end. Reconstruction must become resilient reconstruction. Hydropower policy must become energy policy; energy policy must become trade policy; climate policy must become economic policy; and environmental protection must become a matter of national security.
The Himalayas are changing. Nepal cannot stop that change alone. But Nepal can decide how intelligently it responds to it. Nepal has rivers, sunlight, mountains, forests, globally important water resources, a strategic geographic position between the markets of South Asia and, above all, enormous potential. What is needed now is leadership capable of turning that potential into a national strategy.
Nepal needs a leader who understands where the world is heading, recognises that the global energy system is rapidly moving towards renewables, understands climate change not merely as a subject for seeking aid but as an opportunity for strategic economic diplomacy, and can negotiate with India, China, the United States, Europe and other major powers on the basis of equal respect. Such a leader is not opposed to foreign investment, but neither is he or she a representative of foreign interests. Such a leader is not opposed to international cooperation, but will not sell Nepal's dignity in exchange for assistance.
Such leadership would not measure success only by how many megawatts have been generated. It would measure success by how much safer our infrastructure has become, how intelligently we have negotiated, how many jobs we have created, how much foreign currency we have earned, how much of the Himalayas we have protected, how many villages we have connected digitally and economically, and what kind of Nepal we are leaving for future generations.
Nepal's future can no longer be adequately described simply as hydropower development. Nepal's future is renewable-energy trade.
Nepal's opportunity is not limited to generating electricity from its rivers. Its opportunity is to transform the natural wealth of the Himalayas into energy, economic independence, regional influence and national prosperity-without destroying the very Himalayas that make that future possible.
The disaster of 2026 was a warning. But it is also an opportunity for change. Nepal can choose to make it merely another story of reconstruction. Or it can make it the beginning of a new national strategy for energy, the environment and the economy. Leadership will determine which path we take.
The Himalayas have given Nepal its geography. Now Nepal must turn that geography into strategy. We must understand our rivers not merely as sources of megawatts, but as strategic national assets. We must understand glaciers not merely as melting ice, but as global water and climate assets. We must understand sunlight not merely as solar panels on rooftops, but as another pillar of the national energy system. We must understand electricity not merely as a domestic commodity, but as a regional trading asset. And we must understand relations with foreign countries not merely as relationships in which we seek assistance, but as strategic partnerships based on mutual interest.
Nepal must now look carefully at where the world is going. The world is moving rapidly towards renewable energy. Regional energy markets are expanding. Climate change is giving the Himalayas new strategic importance. Water, energy, technology and connectivity will be among the defining sources of power in the coming decades. Nepal possesses the foundations of all of them. What it lacks is the leadership capable of bringing them together within one national vision.
Nepal does not need a leader with merely a pile of academic degrees. It needs a leader who understands the world. It needs a leader free from bribery and corruption. It needs a leader who is not a foreign agent or representative of foreign interests, but a determined representative of Nepal's national interest. A leader who can cooperate with foreign partners, but never on his knees; who can build friendships without surrendering national dignity; who can negotiate agreements without sacrificing the future of generations yet unborn.
Nepal needs a leader who, when making decisions today, can see not only the future of his or her own children, but the future of their children as well.
Such leadership can transform Nepal's rivers from mere power-generating assets into strategic national wealth. It can turn climate risk into economic opportunity. And it can transform Nepal from a country that simply generates electricity into a nation that trades energy, builds regional influence, becomes a global voice for Himalayan conservation and determines its own future.
This is the leadership Nepal needs today.
And that is why Nepal's future should no longer be defined simply as hydropower development, but as renewable-energy trade.
Because Nepal's opportunity is enormous, the world's need is even greater, and history has given Nepal a rare opportunity: to transform the natural wealth of the Himalayas into prosperity without destroying it-and to prove that even a small nation, with the right leadership, can secure an important place in the world's energy future.
Bajgain is an Entrepreneur and Former Member of Parliament, Nepal