Expanding and Extending the Frontiers of Power Generation in Nigeria

By

Abubakar Atiku Nuhu-Koko

aanuhukoko@yahoo.com

Friday, August 10, 2007

“For all the energy resources that lie under the Nigerian’s feet, the fitful power supply dips at times to levels last seen when the country became independent nearly half a century ago.”[1] This was how the internationally very influential and highly regarded The Economist Magazine graphically summarized the current state of affairs in Nigeria’s power sector. Fitful power supply is hence, one of the ugly images of Nigeria in the eyes of the world! For over fifty years or so, Nigeria depends on generation of its bulk of electric power from three conventional sources: hydro power via large water reservoirs or dams with the Kainji and Shiroro dams in Niger State as the principal hydropower stations; coal and later gas and diesel-fired thermal power generation with Egbin as the main thermal power station. Therefore, convening a national summit on energy and power sectors is a critical step and challenge before the “Servant-leader towards expanding and extending the frontiers of energy and power needs of Nigeria. The Federal Ministry of Energy and Power and the Energy Commission of Nigeria (ECN) can be asked to prepare the grounds for the proposed Summit. Present and future challenges demand it and the time is long overdue.

By omission or commission, successive governments in Nigeria since independence, do not seem to tackle appropriately, the problems posed by the power sector or indeed all other national social and economic infrastructures. It is now widely recognised and accepted that Nigeria’s power and energy sectors are grossly insufficient, inefficient and unsustainable, and that the present path of continuous and continuing development and growth in the nation’s infrastructural sectors are unacceptable. This understating is crucial to the rethinking of development policies of the nation’s power and other vital infrastructural sectors. Although there is common understanding and agreement by the policymaking elites on the nature and scale of the problems, little is being done to change the direction of policies in a fundamental way.[2]

No wonder therefore, there is absence of continuous maintenance culture, presence of serious underinvestment, ineptitude and corruption - all largely responsible for the very poor state of the nation’s general infrastructural sectors, including the electric power sector. There is no doubt whatsoever, that, one vital infrastructure in Nigeria that is in need of sprucing is electricity. Therefore, to overcome this national gridlock, shame and embarrassment, Nigeria need to move towards embracing and investing in alternative sources of electric power generation as the country has dangerously over relied on very few conventional electric power supply sources for ages.

Although in the existing electricity generation situation in Nigeria today, the mix is between non-renewable fossil fuels-based (gas, diesel and coal) and renewable hydro (water) sources respectively, they are both geographical concentrated in a relatively small number of places in the country – many of which are at best, unreliable for reasons of changing weather and climatic variables and, at worst, open hostilities by the local communities to the development of the local energy resources particularly in the Niger Delta oil and gas rich region. For example, over the years, global weather and climate change have affected the flow and volume of water in the nation’s man-made water reservoirs for hydroelectricity generation in the country, thus affecting the threshold levels of the quantities of water that are needed to optimally generate electricity from these reservoirs.

At the moment government has little or no control over the seasonal water-level fluctuations affecting Nigeria’s hydrological cycle and regime. As mentioned earlier above, the hydrological cycle problems are related to the human-induced global climate change problems. Whereas, the Niger Delta problem is a political issue that the three tiers of government and the oil companies need to address frontally in order to bring peace and sustainable development to the region and the country as a whole.

Therefore, the urgent need to reduce Nigeria’s dependence on conventional/traditional fossil fuels and hydropower-based electric power generation presents opportunities in the alternative renewable solar, wind and biofuels sources. In the case of Nigeria, it is not the case of fossil fuels running out but the issue of having the right and sustainable mix of electricity generation sources for sustainable socio-economic development. For example, according to the Nigerian government official sources, a whooping US$6.5 billion was expended in trying to revamp the ailing sector between 1999 and 2007 but without any appreciable and tangible improvement. Instead, Nigeria’s electric power continues to degrade with every fresh infusion of additional investment in generation, transmission and distribution.

Routine maintenance, conservation/energy efficiency and environmental retrofits have more often than not, been ignored in the management of the energy and power sectors. Therefore, President Yar Adua should consider re-directing the colossal amount of public money being scandalously wasted and squandered in frivolous white elephants projects and programmes such as the “Heart of Africa Project,” the 56 billion naira Abuja Tower just to mention but a few, towards routine maintenance of utilities in these vital sectors. The monies earmarked for these types of vanity projects should be put to better use in the energy and power sectors to redeem the negative image these crucial sectors give to the nation. This is a better investment in Nigeria’s image promotion than the laughable so-called “Heart of Africa” jamboree project.

According to industry and government official sources, Nigeria’s existing total installed capacity, as of May, 1999, was somewhere around 5,680 MW for the combined hydro and thermal power plants at peak performance. This could rise to 8,000 MW when capacities of the Independent Power Producers (IPPs), are added. However, it is known to all and sundry, that less than 3,000 MW of the capacity is available at the moment (i.e., August 2007). Nevertheless, the latest 2006 statistics on the power sector released by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) indicate that electricity generation declined by 5.1 per cent in contrast to the increase of 0.6 per cent in 2005. The decline in electricity generation was attributed to the low water level at the hydropower plants and the disruption of gas supply to the thermal stations following the vandalization of gas pipelines in the Niger Delta area. Energy consumption, therefore, fell in 2006. The aggregate energy consumed fell from 24.5 million tonnes of coal equivalent to 23.5 million tonnes in 2006.[3]

Therefore there is an urgent and immediate need and drive for the shift of investment to alternative power generation sources in Nigeria now. Providently, Nigeria is again, naturally very well blessed with super abundance of sunshine and wind velocity, which today, are the major alternative sources of electric power generation in many countries of the world that are similarly blessed. Therefore, with the political will and economic incentives to make a shift from the traditional and conventional way Nigeria generates electric power to a diverse mix of alternative renewable energy sources, the lingering national electric power supply conundrum will be drastically curtailed, if not totally eliminated. Moreover, building new plants and or expansion or reinforcement of existing generating plants and upgrade of grid to support electricity generation expansion takes times, so the decision to replace and or improve the nation’s aging infrastructure of electricity need to be considered and taken now.

The new thinking being proposed in tackling the national power supply malaise is one that is anchored on the premise that there is no one solution and in the short term, some options will be more successful than others but, eventually, all possible and realistic means necessary should be explored, exploited, tested and deployed. In the short term, renewable or greener energy may even mean more expensive energy but the pains of higher prices will be less painful than the pains inflected upon consumers under the present situation for a very long time. Moreover, the extra cost will be offset by supply sufficiency which may ultimately lead to lower prices in the long run. In addition to the idea of expansion and extension of the frontiers of energy supply through a number of ways or sources, the new thinking being proposed is that which also incorporates educating consumers that, in the short term, energy conservation and efficiency measures are vital ingredients for breaking the gridlock on the home front and at the work place in order to curb consumption; thereby saving installed capacity and money and protecting the environment.

Therefore, the existing spectrum of alternative renewable technologies that have been tested and found to be economically feasible and adoptable need to be considered by the Nigerian government, private players and the consuming public. This has become inevitable as renewables are the only short and long-long term solution to the existing national shame in the Nigeria’s energy and power sectors respectively. Almost all the developed countries of the world have accepted the integration of renewable sources of energy supply with the conventional fossil-based energy sources as a reality and the way forward in the 21^st century. For example, many countries have since embraced and legislated in favour of renewable energy alternatives in their national energy policies and plans.

Therefore, renewable clean energy sources are becoming firmly at the centre of new energy policy worldwide. For example, the European Union (EU) legislation requires member nations to achieve a 20 per cent of all energy sold to come from renewables by 2020. In the United Kingdom (UK) for example, the government has a Renewables Obligation (RO) legislation in its statutes that stipulates that, by 2010, 10.4 per cent of total sales of electricity must be from renewable sources, rising to 15.4 per cent by 2015. Presently, Britain generates only 4.6 percent of its electricity from solar energy but the percentage is rapidly rising. In Germany, the government makes its intention to tweak subsidies for renewable energy, which is in the region of US$5.5 billion a year.[4] Germany already generates 13 per cent of its electricity from renewables sources.[5]

Similarly, the recently passed US energy independence legislation, better known as “Renewable Electricity Standard (RES),” provides for publicly traded power companies to get 15 per cent of their supplies from renewable sources by 2020.[6] Furthermore, under the RES bill, the House of Representatives approved a shift of the sum of US$16 billion of oil and gas tax credits to alternative renewable energy sources. Thus, the broad energy legislation shifts the government’s focus to wind, solar and biomass production at the expense of traditional or conventional sources.[7]

Investment wise, the volume of investment flowing in renewable clean energy and wind sector is outstripping the ability of the still nascent sector.[8] According to industry sources it is perhaps the purest expression of the trend for “ethical” investment.[9] Furthermore, the flurry of investment in “green” energy is driven by the growing public awareness of climate change is having an effect on investment values. Therefore, the social responsibility investment has grown considerably in the fast few years and now valued at €1,000 billion in Europe.[10] However, Ashley Seager, writing in The Guardian Newspaper (UK), stated that “total global investment in renewable energy is likely to increase more than sevenfold in the next decade to reach £375billion.[11]

Furthermore, Ashley cited Ernest & Young’s review that puts demand for clean energy as surging at unprecedented rates, driven by government incentives, and had reached £50bn in 2006.[12] In addition, the Ernest & Young’s analysis puts the growth of renewables industry at 20 per cent to 30 per cent a year and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) recent report points that “investment in renewables such as wind, solar and biomass jumped 43 per cent in 2006 and may be about to increase by much more substantial amounts and that, clean energy could provide almost a quarter of the world’s electricity by 2030.”[13] A brief review of the main renewable alternative energy sources puts the picture in clearer perspective.[14]

Solar Power

The costs of production of power from solar source is drastically coming down and according to industry sources the costs can be halved in the next three to five years, even without subsidies. For example, a pioneering breakthrough in solar cell technology production that could harness solar energy in an affordable way has recently been unveiled in a factory in Cardiff, (Wales), United Kingdom (UK).[15] Also, Ralph Nader, a tenacious US-based environmental activist recently cited that the International Energy Agency (IEA) sees a 50% cost reduction for solar photovoltaics from 2001 to 2020.[16] The opportunities are clearly enormous. For example, according to the US Department of energy, America could meet its entire energy needs by covering 1.6 per cent of its land area with solar cells. Therefore, solar will have a very large role to play in the alternative energy mix of most countries in the next coming decade.

The crucial solar cell-making technology breakthrough from Cardiff was developed by a private company, Innovation G24 (G24). This company makes solar cells using materials other than conventional silicon-based raw material. The new cells can be produced for about a fifth of silicon-based version.[17] The new solar cell technology is based on a coloured dye and tiny crystals of titanium oxide – a common pigment in white paint. The new solar cell is named Graetzel cell, after the name of Michael Graetzel, a Swiss chemist who found discovered the process.[18] It is envisaged that its first commercial uses are likely to be in the developing countries.[19]

Wind Power

Wind power is rated as the second most advanced and successful renewable energy after hydro power. Most countries have large areas where the wind blows reliably and technology is developed enough to harness it. Therefore, wind has been described by industry analysts as the most viable renewable energy and it is almost competitive today – the near-term outlook is probably the strongest of all the alternatives; with opportunities right up the value chain. According to Ralph Nader, the International Energy Agency sees a 25% cost reduction for wind power from 2001 to 2020.[20]

According to Richard Anderson, at present, wind’s contribution to global energy is about 1 per cent but is expected reach 4 per cent by 2015.[21] For example, in the UK, Wind power currently accounts for 1.5 per cent of total energy sales, but this should rise to 6 per cent by 2010, according to the British Wind Energy Association. In order for Britain to meet the EU target of 20 per cent renewable energy sales by 2020, 33 per cent of electricity may have to come from renewable sources, a sizable chunk of which will have to come from offshore wind.[22]

Micro-Hydro Power

Hydro power is the most advanced and important sources of renewable energy, contributing 19 per cent of the world’s electricity supply.[23] Indeed, 24 countries depend on it for 90 per cent of their electricity needs. The Three Gorges Dam in China is now the largest man-made hydro electric dam project overtaking the Itaipu, between Brazil and Paraguay that has a capacity 10 times bigger than a nuclear station.[24] The “Three Gorges Dam” will produce one-and-a-half times more electricity than Itaipu when completed.[25]

Hydro power involves a very efficient conversion of moving water to energy and, although power stations are expensive to construct and take very long time to design and commission, they are relatively cheap to maintain. They can, however, create serious environmental problems by damming rivers, which destroys valuable farmlands or ecosystems downstream. Fast-running rivers in mountainous areas, or rivers carrying a large volume of water, are prerequisites for hydro power, which is why not every geographically location has the opportunities in Nigeria.

Biofuels

Biofuels are beginning to make their mark in the energy mix. Ethanol, for example, the main biofuel used as an alternative to petrol and diesel, is made from corn in the US, sugar cane in Brazil – where it accounts for 40 per cent of fuel used by cars – and rapeseed in the UK. The next generation of biofuels is going to be made from wood and plant matter (i.e. celluloid materials). According to industry sources, the big oil companies favour biofuels over wind and solar power.[26] The reason for favouring biodiesel over wind and solar power by the big oil companies has been attributed to their experience in refining hydrocarbons. This makes it easy for them to understand how to process plant and animal matter into fuel.[27]

The draw back of biofuels is that it also takes away land for growing food, and this may have adverse impact on food prices. There is also the issue of just how green current biofuels are, because so much energy is used up to growing and transporting the crops. Furthermore, corn-based ethanol and biodiesel production in the US is boosted by “economically-questionable help from state and federal governments, including subsidies and a high tariff that keeps out cheaper foreign ethanol. For example, the US federal government offers ethanol producers a subsidy of 51cent per gallon (13.5 cent per litre).”[28]

Another controversy that has recently surfaced regarding the development and use of biofuel is the claim by some user-groups that contrary to the expectations, they fear that biofuels could do more harm than good to the environment. For example, the National Express, one of Britain’s leading transport groups halted its trial of biodiesel in its UK fleet of buses because it was worried that biofuel production might destroy natural habitats and increase the cost of food farming in poor developing countries.[29] While moving away from the “first generation” biofuels however, the National Express transport company still expressed its interest in the “second-generation” biofuels that would use non-food crops such as scrubs, straw and wood chips.[30]

Therefore, Nigeria’s additional and alternative power needs can be sourced from the above renewable sources (i.e. solar, wind, micro-hydro and biofuels). The nuclear option outlined below provides almost endless opportunities; however, there are serious issues to address before Nigeria can join the nuclear power elites club.

Nuclear Energy

Paradoxically, one of the most efficient energy sources is the controversial nuclear fission energy. It requires uranium, which, just like fossil fuels, is finite – the industry’s figures show that global proven reserves of almost 4.75 m tonnes, even at current consumption rates, will run out before this century ends.[31] Nuclear power stations take at least 10 years to build, by which time the energy needs gap for Nigeria becomes absolutely critical if the country is going to chose it as an option. France remains committed to nuclear power, which for example, currently produces 80 per cent of its electricity. France also exports both electricity and nuclear power reactors.[32] While in the UK, for example, almost 20 per cent of electricity is supplied by 10 nuclear plants, most of which are being decommissioned. Other European countries with interest in nuclear power include: Finland, Italy, Germany and Sweden, for example.[33]

The nuclear option is an option that many Nigerian people may feel disappointed to see as an option that is not highly recommended for Nigeria. There are a number of reasons that work against Nigeria’s quest for electricity generation from nuclear source. For example, in addition to very huge capital investment required and the long gestation time for a nuclear plant to come on-stream as mentioned above, there are other numerous very important concerns regarding the construction of a nuclear power plant, especially in a developing African nation.

However, Ralph Nader reminds all those trying to rekindle the push for nuclear power generation a number of incontrovertible concerns associated with such option. For example, he points to the fact that in the process boiling of water into steam, a pretty complex chain of events takes place that consumes a lot of energy in the process. Furthermore, he reminds nuclear lobbyist of the fact that it also requires a lot of “coal and oil to be burned to enrich uranium, to transport radioactive wastes with protective highway and rail convoys and provide security since they would be a priority target for sabotage.” For example, he points to the fact that apart from nuclear industry, no “any other industry producing electricity that has to have specific evacuation plans for miles around it, is inherently a national security risk, cannot be privately insured without Congress mandating severe limited liability in case of massive casualties and requires massive taxpayer subsidies!”[34]

In addition, Ralph Nader also draws attention to the yet to be resolved issue of “the nuclear fuel cycle-from uranium mines and their deadly tailings, to the refining and fabrication into fuel rods, to the multi-shielded dome-like nuclear plant, to the necessity for perfect operation of the facility, to the still unresolved problems of the location and containment of hot radioactive wastes and contaminated material for the next 200,000 years!” He also reminds protagonists of generating electricity from nuclear power plants of the dangers of nuclear accidents by citing the Chernobyl in Ukraine, which “is still surrounded by vacant towns and villages following the 1986 tragedy. Radioactivity found its way as far as sheep in England, nuts grown in Turkey and elsewhere.” He also cites the most recent incident that happened in Japan when a magnitude 6.8 earthquake struck Kashiwazaki, and disabled a gigantic nuclear power plant”, thus,   raising "new concerns about the safety of the nation's accident-plagued nuclear industry," according to the New York Times.[35]

Furthermore, Ralph Nader was quick at buttressing his rejection of the nuclear option by citing “a most concise, authoritative case against the electric atom, which was recently released” and titled: "Why a Future for the Nuclear Industry is Risky" by a group of environmental health and social investment groups.[36] Accordingly, “in the introduction to the report, the case against nuclear energy was summarized this way: "Wind power and other renewable technologies, combined with energy efficiency, conservation and cogeneration can be much more cost effective and can be deployed much sooner than new nuclear power plants," Ralph Nader concludes.[37]

All the above issues against nuclear power option (in addition to the international politics of nuclear non-proliferations), makes Nigeria’s quest for nuclear power very gloom and looks like a mirage, to say the least. Least we forget, August 2007 is the 62^nd anniversary of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings! Hence, nuclear power generation in Nigeria appears unthinkable, more or so, judging from the past and present records of the way Nigeria manages its less risky energy supply (e.g. Refineries and Petrochemicals plants etc) and electric power generating infrastructures. For example, a country that cannot properly manage ordinary power plants, refineries and oil and gas pipelines and petrochemicals plants may find it very difficult to be trusted with managing nuclear facilities, even for security, health and safety reasons. Therefore, lack of technical and institutional capacities and competencies, issues pertaining to security, discipline, and corruption are some of the major obstacles and challenges militating against the development of nuclear power plants in Nigeria.

Home truths: Nevertheless, one of the best ways for Nigeria, should it insist in benefiting from the nuclear power option, is to contextualise this need within the regional energy supply framework of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) rather than a national undertaking. Uncomfortable as this may sound, but it is the home truths as far as this matter is realistically concerned. Nigeria, and indeed, sub Saharan African countries need to organise their entry into the elite nuclear club under existing regional arrangements and frameworks. For example, to minimise the political, technological and financial hurdles and barriers to entry into the nuclear club, what Nigeria and its West African neighbours need is a convergence of common interest on this matter. Barriers to entry into the nuclear club can be minimised by member countries of ECOWAS agreeing to work together to safely build nuclear plants for regional electric power pool. More on this strategy and model later.

Towards a holistic approach to national energy and power supply sufficiency

President Yar Adua needs to formulate national energy and power supply sufficiency strategies under his proposed national emergency on energy and power. At present, the government is without a framework to strategically operate in its efforts to reform these sectors. For example, the government continues to suffer from existing inherited bureaucratic ineptitude, nepotism, parochialism and geopolitical battles in these sectors. These rather sad situations create mixed signals and messages from the stakeholders and adding more confusion, duplication of efforts and making the sectors ever more opaque and corrupt ridden. Therefore, holistic national energy and power strategies will mark a radically different approach by the government in addressing the numerous problems facing these sectors respectively.

A National Summit on Energy and Power Sectors is therefore strongly recommended as the best starting point and approach in taking stock of the existing situation on the ground and harnessing the vast expert knowledge and experiences of Nigerians both at home and abroad and international best practices. However, I hasten to say that, during the past eight years of Obasanjo’s administration, countless summits and retreats were convened on energy and power matters among others, but majority of the lofty recommendations accepted by the government from these very expensively organised gatherings were not fully implemented. Those that were implemented were poorly done, to say the least. This crucial concern need to be kept in perspective while convening the recommended national summit to create new national strategies on energy and power supply sufficiency/security for Nigeria by the present administration.

It is against the backdrop of the challenges in the energy and power sectors – the two basket cases outlined and analysed earlier by this analyst, that the call for a national summit on energy and power supply sufficiency in order to map out new national strategies is thus timely. The summit should bring together the diverse parts of the government (e.g., ministries, agencies, parastatals and research centres etc) that work on energy and power matters, the private sector stakeholders and consumers at all levels in the energy and power supply and consumption chains or ladders.

This will, in turn, enable the articulation of a holistic approach to national energy and power supply and demand management (i.e. conservation/efficiency)[38] strategies, which could facilitate and guide the government to produce blueprint(s) and white paper(s) respectively, towards solving the present gridlock and anticipate future problems that will arise. President Yar Adua would need to remove anything that might constitute a stumbling block towards convening the proposed national summit on energy and power supply sufficiency and security. This is absolutely needed in order to grow the economy in a sustainable way and improved wellbeing of Nigerians.

This is a chance for the new administration to win the confidence, hearts and minds of Nigerians who continue to suffer from the lingering bitter plagues of electricity and petroleum products poverty for ages. It is also a chance for the new administration to prove to the traumatised and sceptical Nigerian citizens whose collective experiences under successive governments have been that of government failure in the provision of basic services among others. The government should also demonstrate to the weary Nigerians that, the outcomes of the summit will not be kept in files locked in metal cabinets to rot but will be utilised to provide for revolutionary solutions and results to the existing lingering and shameful states of affairs in these sectors to the overall satisfaction and happiness of all Nigerian citizens.

It is a chance to prove to the sceptical segment of the international community that “Mission is possible” in Nigeria even under a glaring mismatch between its actual state and its extraordinary potential; given the present new leadership that has the genuine desire towards organising the government’s responses to the national maladies afflicting Nigeria’s development processes. The task may not be that very easy, given the nature of the existing problems in these sectors and the prevailing political challenges going on in the country since the conclusion of the April 21 2007 presidential polls.

Therefore, convening a national summit on energy and power sectors is a critical step towards meeting the challenges before the “Servant-leader.” The Federal Ministry of Energy and Power and the Energy Commission of Nigeria (ECN) can be asked to prepare the grounds for the proposed Summit. Present and future challenges demand it and the time is long overdue.