Energy Crisis Should Not Turn out to Be Education Crisis

At a time when Bangladesh is struggling to keep its lights on, we must be careful not to dim the future of the children. The government’s proposal to split schooling into three days online and three days in-person, effectively stretching the school week to six days, emerges from a very real and urgent crisis. The country, heavily dependent on imported fuel, is grappling with supply disruptions fuel oil triggered by geopolitical instability. According to a report published in Reuters on 3 April 2026, fuel rationing, reduced office hours, and restrictions on commercial activity are already in place. Against this backdrop, the government’s intention behind hybrid schooling is clear: to reduce electricity use and ease traffic congestion. However, intention alone does not guarantee impact. If anything, this proposal risks shifting the burden of a national crisis onto the youngest members of society, while offering uncertain gains in energy savings.
The logic behind hybrid schooling assumes that keeping children at home reduces energy consumption and saves fuel. However, in the Bangladeshi context, this assumption may not hold. In a typical classroom, 20 to 40 students or more, share a single cooling system. At home, each child may require separate electricity for fans or air conditioning, lighting, and devices. Instead of consolidating energy use, the system disperses it. The result may well be higher overall consumption, not lower. Moreover, Bangladesh has already experienced the limitations of online learning during the pandemic. Unequal access to devices, inconsistent internet connectivity, and varying home environments created significant learning gaps. These structural inequalities have not disappeared. 
For younger learners, the concern is even more serious. Early childhood education depends on interaction, play, and guided engagement. Replacing this with prolonged screen-based instruction is not just ineffective; it is developmentally unsound. If the government’s goal is to reduce fuel consumption, then the real problem is not schools alone. It is traffic. Dhaka’s chronic congestion leads to long hours of idling vehicles, burning fuel without movement. Any serious energy-saving policy must address this inefficiency. This is where a more effective alternative emerges: area-based scheduling combined with staggered working hours. Rather than bringing schools to an online and offline hybrid model, Bangladesh can reduce simultaneous movement. A practical model could include: a five-day school weeks with reduced hours (i.e., from 8:00 AM to 12:00PM) depending on the schools and the grades. Focus may be given on core subjects, with creative disciplines assigned as structured home-based work. Some office hours can be shifted to 11:00 AM to 6:00 PM and some shifted to 1PM to 8:00 PM, separating school and office traffic. 
Meanwhile, cities can be divided into two or more operational zones. For example, Zone A can operate from Sunday to Thursday, while Zone B operates from Monday to Friday or Saturday to Wednesday. Within each zone, working hours can be staggered further, with some institutions operating earlier and others later. This model reduces the number of people moving at the same time without shutting down essential systems.
Separating school and office hours alone significantly reduces peak traffic. Having different office hours zone-wise will also have a very big impact on fuel consumption as there will be less traffic congestion. Less idling means less fuel wasted in traffic jams.
This approach aligns with global practice. Cities such as Beijing have, at various times, implemented staggered working hours to ease congestion and manage peak demand, reflecting a broader approach in China to reduce pressure on urban infrastructure. Japan adopted the “Cool Biz” campaign, encouraging reduced air-conditioning use and behavioural change rather than shutting down operations. During the pandemic, countries such as the United Kingdom and France implemented staggered work hours and hybrid office systems to reduce congestion. Singapore has consistently applied strong demand-management strategies while also encouraging flexible and staggered working hours to ease peak-time pressure.
If hybrid models must be introduced, the first step, even on a trial basis, should be to transition offices to remote work. Many sectors are well equipped for this. Entire industries, such as IT, can operate effectively from home, while departments within larger organisations should be encouraged to do so. Schools, particularly those serving younger learners, should be the last to be disrupted.
Energy conservation must be shared across sectors. Structured, zone-based “energy-saving hours” could be introduced, where non-essential lighting and air-conditioning are reduced in different areas at designated times. Unlike symbolic campaigns, this distributes load reduction across the grid and avoids sudden disruptions. The responsibility cannot rest on schools alone. Offices, businesses, and households must all be part of the solution.
The current proposal, while well-intentioned and aimed at addressing a pressing national concern, may require further reflection on its overall effectiveness. In particular, a six-day schooling structure may not necessarily deliver the intended outcomes. More careful and inclusive deliberation is therefore needed to explore alternatives..
The question is not whether sacrifices must be made, but how those sacrifices are shared. Closing classrooms, even partially, may appear to be a quick fix, but it calls for far more careful thought. School principals and education leaders should be invited to the table alongside policymakers, think tanks, and government officials to deliberate on practical and balanced alternatives. 

___________________________________________
The writer is Principal, New Horizon Crescent International School, and former Academic Advisor, Cambridge Schools in Bangladesh