One expert estimates that gas escaped from this well at a rate of 15 million cubic feet per day (mmcfd) for 1,185 days. This totals about 1.77 billion cubic feet (bcf) gas, which is worth Tk 200 crore in local price.

The loss was calculated on the basis that till April this year, the well was producing 15 mmcfd gas. After the Bapex took some remedial actions, production shot up to 32 mmcfd. Therefore prior to April, the well was losing 15 to 17 mmcfd gas from December 2003, when the authorities detected anomalies there for the first time.

Two other experts however dismiss this assessment as too unrealistic, while admitting that the field has lost a substantial quantity of gas in the last few years. Increase of gas production by 17 mmcfd does not necessarily mean that gas was leaking out at this rate earlier.

"This is a huge gas leakage. If such a leakage was taking place, the situation would have been visibly worse," said one of them.

But all of them say this wastage of national resource could have been stopped long ago if Bangladesh Gas Field Company Ltd (BGFCL) was not just a production company, or if the country just had one single gas exploration and production company like Chevron or Cairn.

The BGFCL and Sylhet Gas Field Company Ltd (SGFL) have to depend on external expertise to handle their technical problems.

"The idea of separating exploration from a gas company through creation of Bapex in 1989 was wrong. The idea of creating Sylhet Gas Field Company (SGFL) was also wrong. There should have been just one company," said a senior official.

"If we had just one company to oversee all gas resources of the country, we would not have to go for tenders to get a consultant for a simple technical operation. The overhead cost would have been also very low. Operation of the fields would have been more efficient," he added.

But as the BGFCL now plays the role of a manager only, it must depend on expertise of Bapex and get approval from various ministries for any technical job and thereby lose vital time and money to address a problem. "This is what happened with the Titas field," said an official.

The BGFCL detected a sharp drop of gas flow pressure in well-3 in December 2003, which caused gas production from that well to halve. But the BGFCL officials did not realise that this drop in pressure was an indication of leakage of gas, which was already surfacing two to four km off that well.

Based on the experience of a similar incident, the BGFCL assumed that pressure had dropped due to narrowing down of the well casing due to carbon accumulation. To resolve this, the BGFCL prepared a proposal for a well work-over programme in early 2004.

"It took about a year for the planning ministry to approve this project. Then it took another year for the BGFCL to complete a tender process in compliance with the Public Procurement Regulation. Finally, the BGFCL late last year chose Bapex for the job, and materials required for it started arriving at the site," says a high official.

If the plans had not changed in March, Bapex would have proceeded with the work-over programme for yet another year.

"This is so bureaucratic. This is not how a gas company should work. We work with natural resources. There are situations which need immediate technical action. We cannot operate like other government machinery. The BGFCL may be a company but it functions like an ordinary government office," he adds.

For a production and exploration company like Bapex (which was given the right to produce in recent years under pressure of public opinion to make it profitable), such a situation can be handled easily. For example, Fenchuganj well-2 under Bapex has been shut down due to excessive sand flow recently. To handle this, Bapex has deployed its own experts. "There is no need to take permission from external authorities or to float any tender at this point," noted a Bapex high official.

Experts now say the Titas incident should make the government reassess the way gas companies operate, and go for necessary changes. "We cannot afford such wastage of resources because of the cumbersome operational structure of Bapex, BGFCL and SGFL," said a retired Petrobangla high official.

In Titas field, production of gas from well-14 stopped recently following excessive flow of water. There are problems in wells 4, 9 and 10.

"The original concept of separating exploration from production through creation of Bapex was that exploration activities are costly. If we have an idle rig, this is a wastage since rigs are costly. But over the years, Bapex itself became marked as a loss-making organisation. So, Bapex has been given gas fields to produce in late 90s. Thus we moved out of that concept on the basis of our experience," noted the retired Petrobangla official.

"The whole idea was not based on any understanding of gas sector. After Bapex was separated on ground of cost, it did not go abroad to explore. It has been doing BGFCL and SGFL's jobs through time consuming tenders. So what is the point? If Bapex was part of a single body, it would have done the same more efficiently," he added.

Another high official pointed out that as exploration and maintenance work are now split between the BGFCL and Bapex, nobody takes the onus of any mistake, and therefore there is a lack of accountability.

"A company should function like a company. Chevron or Cairn can take a decision within a day, why can't we do it?" he asks.