Nepal floods knock out 10% of power capacity: Why rebuilding hydropower may not be enough

Nepal’s disaster agency said on Tuesday that 987 people had died and 3,916 remained missing, according to Reuters. The missing included 583 foreigners. In China, authorities reported 16 deaths and 546 people missing, including 261 foreigners, in their latest update, Reuters reported.

The combined death toll across Nepal and China has crossed 1,000, while thousands remain unaccounted for. Rescue teams have struggled to reach affected communities after landslides blocked roads, bridges collapsed and large areas were buried under mud, rocks and debris.

The disaster has also dealt a major blow to Nepal’s hydropower sector. Floods damaged projects in the Rasuwa, Nuwakot and Dhading districts, according to AP, knocking out about 10% of Nepal’s power capacity.

The damage could have consequences beyond Nepal’s domestic electricity supply. Hydropower is central to the country’s plans to increase electricity exports to India, meaning damage to power plants, roads and transmission links could complicate those ambitions.

Rescuers have reached some remote areas and electricity has been restored in parts of the affected region. Nepalese authorities said 279 workers had been rescued from hydropower projects, while nearly 1,000 people were estimated to have been trapped at the sites.

About 900 workers remain missing from 12 hydropower projects, according to Nepalese authorities, with roughly 500 believed to be trapped inside tunnels.

Nepal Army spokesperson Brig. Gen. Raja Ram Basnet said teams, with help from foreign experts, were working at several hydropower projects, Reuters reported.

Why did hydropower suffer so badly?

Nepal has relied heavily on hydropower because its mountains and rivers provide favourable conditions for electricity generation. The sector has expanded rapidly over the past two decades, helping the country increase domestic electricity supply while creating an opportunity to export power to neighbouring India. But the same geography that makes hydropower attractive also creates significant risks.

Many hydropower projects are located along steep river valleys and depend on roads, bridges, tunnels and transmission infrastructure. These links can be particularly vulnerable to floods and landslides.

The latest disaster began with a glacial collapse high in the Himalayas. Large amounts of rock, ice and meltwater moved into the valleys, generating powerful downstream floods. The resulting surge carried mud and rocks through river systems in Tibet and Nepal, sweeping away homes, buildings, roads and bridges.

Scientists studying satellite images said the collapse appeared to involve the failure of bedrock beneath a glacier. The rockfall was powerful enough to register as a magnitude 5.2 seismic event, according to the information provided.

The flood then moved through mountain river systems towards populated areas and critical infrastructure.

Hydropower facilities were among the hardest-hit locations. Projects that were either operating or under construction suffered full or partial destruction across Rasuwa, Nuwakot and Dhading, reported AP.

At some facilities, workers became trapped in tunnels after mud and debris blocked access. The tunnels have made rescue operations particularly difficult, with rescuers having to work through darkness, water, mud and rocks.

But the damage extends beyond the power plants themselves.

A hydropower station needs roads and bridges to bring workers, equipment and supplies to the site. It also needs transmission infrastructure to deliver electricity to consumers. If a disaster damages several of those systems simultaneously, repairing the power station alone cannot restore electricity.

Nepal now has to restore damaged generation capacity while simultaneously dealing with destroyed transport links and other critical infrastructure. AP cited experts calling for a closer examination of how Nepal rebuilds infrastructure in areas exposed to natural hazards.

Jakob Steiner, a geoscientist at the University of Graz, said authorities need to reassess how they rebuild in affected areas. “Authorities have to take a hard look in the mirror now and ask how they will be rebuilding in these places,” Steiner said, according to AP.

Can Nepal simply rebuild the lost power capacity?

Ramraj Narasimhan, a senior director at the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure, told AP that Nepal should consider redundancy in essential systems. “If it gets damaged, let it get damaged, but can we build in redundancy in the system?” he said.

In practice, that could mean alternative transport routes, backup power sources and stronger connections between communities.

Early-warning systems could also play a larger role. Experts cited by AP said authorities need to consider the specific risks of individual valleys when planning infrastructure, including river behaviour, unstable slopes and locations where the failure of one piece of infrastructure could cut off several communities.

The need for such planning has become more urgent as climate-related risks increase.

Nepal’s Prime Minister Balendra Shah said the disaster highlighted the growing risks faced by the Himalayan region. “This incident has indicated that the risks we face in the Himalayan region are increasing with climate change,” Shah said in a social media post on Monday night. He also called for greater international attention to climate-related disasters in the Himalayas.

Hydropower remains an important part of the country’s economy and electricity system. But its projects operate in an environment where floods, landslides and glacier-related hazards can cause severe damage.

Why insurance and decentralised power could matter

The disaster has also brought insurance into the discussion. Reuters reported that the Nepal-Tibet disaster could renew interest in disaster insurance across the Himalayan region.

The Reuters report cited the Swiss Re Institute, which estimated that natural catastrophes caused about $100 billion in global losses during the first half of 2026. About 42% of those losses were insured.

Nepal’s Upper Trishuli-1 hydropower project has a parametric insurance policy, according to Reuters. Such policies can provide payouts when predefined conditions reach specified thresholds.

Insurance cannot prevent physical damage, but it can provide funding for recovery after a disaster. Experts have also suggested that Nepal could reduce its dependence on large, concentrated power infrastructure by expanding other sources, reported Reuters.

AP cited Himanshu Thakkar, coordinator of the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, who said Nepal should consider more decentralised solar power as part of its energy mix. He also called for stronger environmental, social and disaster-risk assessments that account for the specific risks of individual valleys.

That does not mean Nepal can quickly replace hydropower with other sources. The country’s geography gives hydropower a major role in its energy plans. The sector also supports electricity exports and economic activity.

But the floods have shown that power generation cannot be considered separately from the wider infrastructure network.

A power station may survive while the road leading to it disappears. A road may remain intact while a bridge collapses. A plant may be repaired while its transmission connection remains damaged.

That makes resilience important at every stage. The current rescue operation illustrates the problem. About 900 hydropower workers remain missing, with roughly 500 believed to be trapped in tunnels, according to Nepalese authorities.

Rescuers must first reach those tunnels. They then have to clear mud and debris and determine whether the structures remain safe. The disaster has therefore turned hydropower infrastructure into both a rescue challenge and a reconstruction challenge.