Submit your Article

Nepal’s electric vehicle transition has moved beyond the stage of experimentation. What was once a cautious policy-backed alternative has become a defining feature of the country’s transport landscape. The shift is visible in ordinary, unremarkable moments: cars idling silently at intersections, public vehicles stopping to recharge instead of refuel, and new buyers walking into showrooms already determined that their next vehicle will be electric contributing for a safer and cleaner tomorrow.

In just a few years, electric vehicles have gone from novelty to norm, particularly in urban Nepal. This change has delivered immediate benefits. Fuel imports have declined, reducing pressure on foreign exchange reserves. Electricity generated from domestic hydropower is being consumed locally rather than wasted or exported cheaply to our neighboring countries. Urban air quality, especially along major traffic corridors, has shown modest improvement as tailpipe emissions fall.

According to the Department of Customs, Nepal imported 11,701 electric cars, jeeps, and vans in 2023/24, marking a staggering 189 percent increase from the previous fiscal year. The trajectory did not slow. In just the first ten months of 2024/25, an additional 9,859 four-wheeled EVs entered the country — collectively worth more than NPR 23 billion. When two-wheelers, three-wheelers, and public electric transport are added, total EV imports for the same year soared to 44,534 units, a figure unimaginable only a few years ago.

The Customs data show that Nepal imported 4,286 EVs—including buses, minibuses, microbuses, cars, jeeps and vans—worth Rs10.44 billion in the first five months of the fiscal year that ended in mid-December.

A combination of policy incentives, rising fuel prices, and improvements in vehicle technology lately has reshaped the market faster than many expected. Reduced import duties made electric vehicles price-competitive with internal combustion engine models. Volatile fuel costs pushed buyers to seek more predictable operating expenses. At the same time, newer EV models offered longer ranges, better performance on steep gradients, and extended battery warranties with very reasonable prices than gasoline vehicles.

For drivers, the appeal is straightforward. Bhakta Kumar Gupta, a public van driver operating in the Kathmandu Valley, says the decision to switch was driven by daily realities rather than ideology. “It is easy to drive and much cheaper to operate,” he says. “There is no engine noise, no smoke, and fewer mechanical problems. Using electricity instead of fuel also feels better for the country in terms of going green and is also convenient and cheaper.”

As per him, lower operating costs, reduced maintenance needs, and smoother driving have helped overcome early skepticism. As per him, a 100 kWh EV can run 10 km with just one unit of electricity. Considering the cost of Nrs 10 per unit of electricity, the total operating cost of EV would be Nrs 1,50,000, while petrol one would have cost much more higher than that. Gupta is satisfied that he doesn’t need to spend additional on servicing and maintenance toolike for fuel vehicles. 

The private sector is capitalizing on the momentum. International brands from China, India, Korea, and Vietnam have entered the Nepali market in rapid succession. Chinese manufacturers — including BYD, Wuling, Xpeng, Zeekr, and Leapmotor — have captured significant market share, offering long-range models at competitive prices. MG Motor, Tata Motors, Hyundai, and VinFast continue to strengthen their portfolios as Nepali buyers grow more confident in electric alternatives. 

Nepal’s experience is distinct among South Asian countries. Unlike many countries in the region, it produces most of its electricity domestically, largely through hydropower. Every electric vehicle on the road displaces fuel that would otherwise be imported, paid for in foreign currency, and burned in congested urban centers.

Electric mobility as a national strategy

From the government’s perspective, the rise of electric vehicles aligns closely with Nepal’s broader economic and energy goals.

For decades, Nepal has depended heavily on imported petroleum products, draining foreign currency reserves and exposing the economy to global price fluctuations. Transport emissions are also a major contributor to urban air pollution, particularly in the Kathmandu Valley, where winter temperature inversions trap pollutants close to the ground and worsen public health outcomes. 

Electric vehicles offer a way to address multiple challenges at once. They reduce fuel imports, increase domestic electricity consumption, and contribute to cleaner urban air. As hydropower generation expands, electric mobility provides a ready market for surplus electricity, particularly during the wet season.

Kulman Ghising, who currently oversees both the energy and transport ministries, has repeatedly described electrification as a practical necessity rather than an abstract environmental ambition. He added how Nepal can be more prosperous and economically independent if every household adapts into electric lifestyle. 

“During my tenure in Nepal Electricity Authority, I introduced electric vehicles inside the office and electric cooking. Electric devices and vehicles in daily life are the best option to reduce Nepal’s financial burden and make the country safer and pollution-free,” Ghising remarked. 

He argued that wider use of electricity in daily life, including electric cooking and transport, helps reduce Nepal’s financial burden while making cities cleaner and safer.

This thinking has shaped policy priorities. Investments in charging infrastructure, grid upgrades, and electric public transport have increased. Import incentives have remained favorable. 

His message aligns with Nepal’s broader ambitions to cut fuel imports, stabilize energy use through hydropower, and position the country as a leader in clean mobility in South Asia. The government has continued investing heavily in charging networks and grid upgrades, and public-private partnerships are being explored to accelerate deployment.

However, most of this focus has been on accelerating adoption, with far less attention given to managing the full lifecycle of electric vehicles.

Dealers across Nepal report that customer attitudes toward electric vehicles have changed fundamentally. They have not just started trusting brands and ready to switch into it, but also questioning about long-term durability. 

At Hyundai Nepal, junior manager Ariya Dhakal says EVs are no longer treated as experimental purchases. “Earlier, electric vehicles attracted only a small group of customers who were interested in new technology,” she explains. “Now, many people walk in already asking about electric models. For some buyers, petrol or diesel vehicles are not even part of the discussion.”

The questions customers ask reflect a more mature market. “Battery life, warranty coverage, and long-term reliability come up almost immediately,” Dhakal says. “People understand that the battery is the most expensive component of an EV. They want to know what happens after five, eight, or ten years, and also ask about the safety issues while charging at home.”

This shift in consumer thinking shows that electric vehicles are now seen as long-term investments rather than short-term experiments. Buyers are planning ownership across a decade or more, and their concerns extend well beyond the purchase price.

Concern of Battery Life 

Beneath the momentum lies a challenge that remains largely unresolved. Electric vehicles may not emit exhaust fumes, but the batteries that power them have a finite life. As Nepal accelerates toward an electric future, the question of what happens to these batteries at the end of their use is becoming increasingly important. 

According to industry experts, the way the country addresses battery disposal and recycling will determine whether the EV transition remains environmentally sound or simply relocates pollution from the streets to less visible spaces.

Lithium-ion batteries, which power most electric vehicles, contain materials that require careful handling. Over time, batteries degrade and eventually fall below the capacity needed for vehicle use. At that point, they must be reused, recycled, or disposed of safely. Nepal does not yet have a comprehensive system to manage this process at scale.

Environmental expert Bhusan Tuladhar warns that the country has a limited window to prepare. “Most of the batteries entering Nepal today will reach the end of their automotive life within eight to twelve years,” he says. “If systems are not built in advance, the problem will arrive suddenly and at scale.”

As per studies, battery replacement costs for EVs over a 20-year lifespan range from NPR 11,00,000 to NPR 22,00,000, posing financial burdens on consumers and the country. 

Electric vehicle battery waste poses challenges unlike many other waste streams Nepal have dealt with. Lithium-ion batteries contain heavy metals and reactive chemicals. If damaged or improperly stored, they can leak toxic substances into soil and groundwater or pose serious fire hazards.

Informal recycling, which is common for electronic waste in Nepal, adds further risk. Workers often dismantle components without protective equipment or technical training, increasing exposure to hazardous materials. Fires linked to battery mishandling have been reported globally, highlighting the dangers of unregulated processing.

Nepal’s geography amplifies these risks. Many cities and towns are located near rivers that feed major watersheds. Poorly managed waste can travel quickly through water systems, affecting agriculture, drinking water supplies, and hydropower infrastructure downstream.

Unlike air pollution, which is visible and immediate, the impacts of battery contamination are slow and cumulative. They may not provoke immediate public concern, but over time they can undermine ecosystems and public health in ways that are difficult and costly to reverse also leading to environmental degradation.

Nepal’s existing waste management laws were drafted before lithium-ion batteries became common. The Solid Waste Management Act and related regulations do not clearly classify EV batteries as hazardous waste, nor do they assign responsibility for collection, transport, or recycling.

As a result, there is no nationwide requirement for importers or sellers to take back used batteries. There is no dedicated lithium-ion battery recycling facility operating at scale. There is also no formal tracking system to monitor what happens to batteries once they are removed from vehicles.

For now, the absence of visible battery waste allows the issue to remain largely outside public debate. However, as EV numbers continue to grow, this policy gap will become increasingly difficult to ignore.

Companies operating in Nepal’s EV market acknowledge the battery challenge but point to regulatory uncertainty. Sahil Shrestha, CEO of Cimex Inc. Pvt. Ltd an executive from the sector has spoken about sustainability and battery recycling as part of industry efforts toward responsible end-of-life battery management. He says the issue is widely recognized within the industry. “Serious companies know battery waste is coming, but without clear government rules, investing in recycling systems is risky. One company alone cannot build the entire ecosystem.”

This uncertainty creates uneven incentives. Companies that invest in responsible practices may face higher costs, while others avoid them entirely. Without regulation, voluntary initiatives are likely to remain fragmented and insufficient.

In many countries, battery waste is managed through Extended Producer Responsibility, or EPR. Under this framework, producers or importers are legally responsible for managing products after consumer use, including collection, recycling, and safe disposal.

Applied to Nepal’s EV market, EPR could involve mandatory battery take-back schemes, recycling targets, reporting requirements, and enforcement mechanisms. Such a system would shift responsibility away from municipalities and informal handlers toward companies best positioned to manage battery lifecycles.

Gopikrishna Nyaupane, Managing Director and former General Secretary of Nepal Automobiles Association (NADA) said – '' Electric vehicle batteries typically lose 30–40% of their capacity over time, after which they need to be properly recycled to prevent environmental harm. Nepal has great potential for reusing EV batteries. Used batteries can still serve as energy storage solutions. "

While discussions around EPR have taken place within policy circles, no binding framework has yet been adopted for EV batteries in Nepal, as per the experts. 

Battery management infrastructure

According to the Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport, it has commissioned a technical study to develop an action plan for EV battery management — including “second life” reuse and future handling frameworks. Ghising is of view that the outcome of this study is expected to inform future policy options but no regulations have yet been promulgated.

Academic and policy research titled "A Transformative Policy Strategy for Sustainable Waste Management published in Tribhuvan University Journal Volume 39, No. 2 (2024) confirms that EPR is seen as a potential tool to address broader waste challenges. The academic article argues that EPR could transform Nepal’s waste management landscape, promote a circular economy, and reduce environmental pollution — but it also highlights regulatory gaps and implementation challenges.

Electric vehicle batteries often retain significant capacity after being removed from vehicles. In other countries, these batteries are repurposed for stationary energy storage, backup power systems, and grid balancing.

For Nepal, second-life batteries could support solar installations, rural electrification, and seasonal energy management. However, reuse requires testing standards, safety certification, and regulatory oversight as well as orientation on proper handling, Tuladhar adds.

Without clear rules, second-life use risks becoming informal and unsafe, extending battery life without addressing environmental risk. As Tuladhar notes, “reuse can be beneficial only if it is properly regulated and monitored.”

EV adoption has been strongest in Kathmandu and other major cities, where charging infrastructure and service centres are available. Rural areas lag behind due to weaker grids and limited technical capacity.

Battery management infrastructure is likely to follow the same pattern unless addressed deliberately. Concentrating facilities in cities could leave rural districts exposed to unsafe storage or disposal practices as electric vehicles gradually spread nationwide.

A sustainable transition must account for geography as well as market demand.

A UNFCCC technical report on Nepal’s waste policy published in November 2024 notes that while the Solid Waste Management Act 2011 recognizes integrated waste management, enforcement, effective regulations, and coordination between government, private sector, and NGOs are urgently needed to actually implement provisions for segregation, recycling, and coordination with communities and private actors.  

As electric vehicles are now firmly embedded in Nepal’s transport system. They are reducing fuel imports, supporting domestic energy use, and contributing to cleaner urban air. These gains are real and widely acknowledged.

Whether they endure long-term will depend on how responsibly the country manages what comes next. Batteries may be out of sight, but their environmental impact will not remain out of reach. As Nepal continues its shift toward electric mobility, the systems it builds today to manage battery waste will play a decisive role in determining whether this transition remains genuinely sustainable in the decades ahead.

Note: This report was prepared with the support of Internews Earth Journalism Network and the Nepal Forum of Environmental Journalists (NEFEJ).

A total of 64 political parties have submitted closed lists for the proportional representation election to the House of Representatives (HoR) scheduled for March 5.

Of the total, 54 submitted the closed lists with their own election symbols while 10 others in four common symbols, according to the Election Commission.

The Constitution of Nepal has the provision that 165 members of the HoR are elected under first past the post (direct election) and 110 under proportional representation.

Meanwhile, the Election Commission has made public the list of documents required for the National Assembly election scheduled for January 25.

As 2025 comes to an end and 2026 begins, the distance between what is possible and what is practiced feels both close and painfully far. The past year has taught us lessons not through speeches or strategy documents, but through lived realities.

If one force clearly shaped 2025, it was Nepal’s GenZ. Across campuses, streets, and digital platforms, young people questioned corruption, exclusion, climate inaction, and the widening gap between political promises and daily life. Their expressions were not always polished, but they were deeply sincere. Unlike earlier movements, this generation did not organize only through political parties. They mobilized through social media, art, satire, frustration, and shared hope. They were not rejecting the nation they were refusing to inherit broken systems.

What stood out was not just protest, but clarity. Young people were asking for dignity, participation, and fairness. As we step into 2026, the real question is no longer whether young people are ready for leadership, but whether our institutions are ready to listen and adapt.

For decades, development in Nepal has leaned heavily on foreign assistance. In 2025, that reliance began to feel increasingly fragile. Global political shifts particularly renewed foreign aid cuts from the United States under the Trump administration sent shockwaves across development sectors worldwide. In Nepal, projects slowed, priorities shifted, and civil society organizations faced sudden uncertainty. Decisions made thousands of kilometers away affected health programs, governance initiatives, and social services at home.

The lesson from 2025 is not that foreign aid has no role. It remains important. But it can no longer be the backbone of development. Aid volatility exposed the urgent need for domestic resource mobilization, stronger public institutions, and political accountability. As we move into 2026, development must be treated less as external support and more as a national responsibility rooted in public trust.

In 2025, Nepal signaled its ambition to modernize governance through technology. The government established a National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Center to ease the work of both public and private sectors through digital systems. On paper, this represents progress, efficiency, and readiness for the future. Yet alongside this ambition, important questions emerged. Who benefits from these digital systems? Who is left behind?

While digital platforms expanded access for some, many others persons with disabilities, rural populations, older citizens, and those without reliable internet continued to struggle. Technology, the year reminded us, is not neutral. It reflects choices about whose needs are prioritized. As Nepal accelerates digital transformation in 2026, accessibility, ethical use of AI, and inclusive design must be embedded from the start. Otherwise, innovation risks deepening inequalities rather than reducing them.

When resources shrink, inclusion is often the first to be treated as optional. In 2025, as funding tightened and political attention shifted, people with disabilities, women, and marginalized communities once again had to fight to remain visible. Yet across the country, organizations of persons with disabilities, parents’ groups, and community advocates continued their work often quietly, often underfunded. Their message remained firm: inclusion is not charity. Accessibility is not generosity. Both are right.

The lesson is clear. Inclusion cannot depend on favorable conditions. As we move into 2026, accessibility must be built into public transport, education, digital services, and local governance by design not added later as an afterthought.

In 2025, climate change stopped being abstract. Floods, landslides, heatwaves, and water shortages became routine realities. For many communities, adaptation was no longer about planning, it was about survival. Local governments were often the first responders, yet many lacked adequate authority, resources, and technical capacity. Climate change revealed not only environmental vulnerability, but governance gaps.

The lesson for 2026 is demanding but unavoidable: climate action must be locally led, inclusive, and adequately funded. Policies discussed in Kathmandu or global forums must translate into protection where people actually live.

Another defining reality of 2025 was migration. Remittances continued to sustain households, even as migrant workers faced uncertainty abroad and limited protection at home. Behind economic statistics are human stories of parents aging alone, children growing up without caregivers, and returnees struggling to reintegrate.

Development in 2026 must treat migration not only as an economic strategy, but as a social reality that demands dignity, protection, and reintegration pathways.

Walking into 2026 with purpose

As I think back to that December morning on my terrace in Bhaktapur, the dream I had does not feel unrealistic. It feels only unfinished. Nepal does not need louder slogans or thicker policy documents in 2026. It needs quieter courage listening to lived experiences, reforming institutions, and placing dignity at the center of development. The lessons of 2025 are simple but demanding: choose people over convenience, inclusion over shortcuts, and long-term trust over short-term gain.

As Nepal steps into 2026, this reflection coincides with a significant political moment. Early general elections are expected to be held in March 2026 to elect the members of the House of Representatives. Elections are often framed as moments of competition but they are also moments of choice. The real question is not only who will govern next, but how they will govern. Whether the lessons of 2025 on youth participation, inclusion, climate responsibility, ethical digitalization, and dignity will shape political priorities, or once again be postponed in the noise of short-term promises.

For many young people and marginalized communities, 2026 is not just another election year. It is a test of whether our democracy can respond to lived realities with honesty and courage. If development is to mean anything in the years ahead, it must be rooted in accountability, inclusion, and trust values that no election should ignore. If 2026 becomes the year we begin closing the gap between imagination and reality, then that winter-morning dream on a Bhaktapur terrace may no longer feel like a dream at all.

The Election Commission (EC) has determined the maximum amount that a candidate can spend for the House of Representatives (HoR) elections scheduled for March 5.

As determined by the EC, the spending limit is different for remote districts, and others with better access to services and connectivity networks.

According to the EC, the candidates from constituencies 1, 3, 6, 7 and 8 can spend upto Rs 2.5 million. 

Likewise, Rs 2.7 million of spending limit is set for the candidates from 17 constituencies.

The candidates from 65 other constituencies can spend a maximum of Rs 2.9 million, it is said.

EC Spokesperson Narayan Prasad Bhattarai said that the candidates from 52 election constituencies can spend upto Rs 3.1 million and Rs 3.3 million by the candidates of 26 election constituencies.

The EC has also asked the candidates to open a separate bank account in a bank and financial institution for the purpose of the HoR election and a responsible person should be named for the spending authority during the election.  

After the completion of the polls, the candidates should submit the election cost to the EC within 35 days of the polls as per the HoR Member Election Act.