According to a report by Jagonews24.com, the latest round of load shedding in Bangladesh left Dhaka with the highest level of power cuts and Barishal with the lowest. For small and medium enterprises in the capital, this means a higher risk of interrupted production, lost sales and extra costs for backup generators.
Load shedding, also known as scheduled power outage, is a measure utilities use when supply cannot meet demand. It is usually announced in advance, but the exact timing and duration can vary. In a city like Dhaka, where many businesses rely on continuous electricity for refrigeration, manufacturing and digital services, even a short outage can translate into lost revenue.
Barishal, by contrast, appears to have escaped the worst of the cuts. While the report does not give numbers, the relative difference suggests that firms there may enjoy a competitive edge, at least temporarily, over peers in the capital.
South African readers will recognise the familiar pattern. The country has been managing load shedding for years, and many SMEs have invested in diesel generators or solar panels to stay afloat. Bangladesh’s situation highlights a similar dilemma: the cost of backup power can erode profit margins, especially for businesses that cannot afford large capital outlays.
What is not clear from the Jagonews24.com piece is how long the outages lasted, what time of day they occurred, or whether the pattern is expected to repeat. The article also does not explain the underlying cause, whether it is a shortfall in generation capacity, transmission bottlenecks or fuel supply issues.
For entrepreneurs watching the story, the practical takeaway is to assess the reliability of power in the regions they operate. In Dhaka, diversifying energy sources or negotiating flexible supply contracts may become a priority. In Barishal, the lower exposure could be a factor when deciding where to locate new facilities.
Both Bangladesh and South Africa face the broader challenge of upgrading grid infrastructure to meet growing demand. Until that happens, load shedding will remain a cost of doing business, and the companies that plan for it will be the ones that stay resilient.
Why these comparisons show up so often in SA coverage
Dhaka and Barishal’s gap is a useful illustration of a pattern that also shapes South Africa’s own load-shedding experience: outages are rarely distributed evenly across a country, since utilities typically protect the highest-demand, highest-political-visibility areas first, or conversely ration supply to whichever grid segment is easiest to cut without destabilising the wider system. A capital city’s businesses often assume they are shielded from the worst of a national shortfall precisely because they are the most visible; Dhaka’s experience here suggests the opposite can also hold. For a South African reader, the practical lesson isn’t about Bangladesh specifically, it’s a reminder that any single national load-shedding stage number hides significant regional variation, and a business’s actual exposure depends far more on its specific municipal feeder than on the national schedule alone.
The generator-versus-grid calculation also compounds differently depending on business size. A large manufacturer can usually absorb the fixed cost of a diesel generator large enough to run a full production line, spreading that capital cost across substantial output. A small retailer or service business facing the same outage schedule often cannot justify equivalent backup capacity against a much smaller revenue base, which means the real burden of an uneven load-shedding schedule like Dhaka’s tends to fall hardest on exactly the businesses least able to absorb it.
None of this diminishes the value of the underlying report. Knowing which parts of a national grid are under the most strain is genuinely useful information, whether the reader is a Bangladeshi business owner deciding where to expand or a South African one simply drawing a comparison to a familiar problem at home.
