Column

NDDC Probe: Matters Arising

Published

14 years ago

August 3, 2011

Dissatisfied with the running of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), a coalition of youth groups in Rivers State recently asked the Federal Government to dissolve both the board and management of the commission. The youth bodies, alleging corrupt practices in the commission, in an interview with newsmen in Port Harcourt, accused the Managing Director of NDDC, Mr. Chibuzor Ugwuoha of financial impropriety, and called for his removal. Specifically, a spokesman of one of the youth groups, Mr Robertson Jack said “Niger Delta youths are not happy with the way and manner the commission is being managed”, and asked for its complete overhaul.

Perhaps, moved by the allegations and actions of the youth groups, as well as other stakeholders, the Federal Government, last Thursday, constituted a seven-man, Presidential Committee to look into the problems facing the NDDC. Inaugurating the committee in Abuja, Senator Anyim Pius Anyim, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, urged the probe panel to properly investigate the problems facing the NDDC, and recommend how best the commission could forge ahead in order to develop the Niger Delta region.

Responding, chairman of the seven-man committee, Steve Oronsaya, former Head of Service of the Federation, said the panel would unravel the mystery affecting the smooth running of the commission. He expressed the profound gratitude of the committee members for the appointment, and assured the Federal Government that the body would live up to its expectations.

Viewed against this backdrop, it would be recalled that the NDDC, established to fast-track the development of the Niger Delta region, has literally nose-dived. Why? Projects initiated by the authorities of the commission, designed to give meaning to the life of Niger Deltans, have been dumped due largely to poor funding of the agency by the federal authorities, as well as the internal wranglings within the agency.

Since its inception, the commission appears to be impacting positively on the lives of Niger Deltas. Indeed, nearly all the 185 local governments in the oil-rich region have benefited. Yes, out of all its projects, about 1,250 have reportedly been completed. Regrettably, the rest projects, which would have lifted the life of Niger Deltans, are begging for attention following the non-release of funds due the commission, and the in-fighting in the commission.

Piqued by the sad development, Pastor Power Aginighan, Executive Director, Finance and Administration of NDDC in May, 2010, wailed over the unfortunate situation. His words: “The commission has received N561,918 billion since its inception in July 2000, and is currently being owed N477 billion by the various statutory bodies.

Addressing guests when the Presidential Monitoring Committee visited the commission’s head office in Port Harcourt, in May, last year. Aginighan lamented that the N477 billion being owed the commission was truncating the operations of the agency, especially the execution and completion of projects already initiated. He would want the authorities concerned to have a rethink on the poor funding, considering the huge projects the commission was handling currently.

As it were, a breakdown of the amount so far released to the NDDC since its inception shows that the commission has been getting about N50 billion yearly from the federal authorities. What this translates to, is that, a little above N9 billion is being spent annually for the execution of projects in each of the nine states in the Niger Delta region. This, to say the least, is tantamount to gross under-funding of NDDC, given the array of projects planned in the region by the commission.

Therefore, the National Assembly should prevail on the authorities to ensure that the NDDC gets all the money due to its statutorily to be able to increase the tempo of its activities. Yes, the lawmakers, should spearhead the struggle for the release of the outstanding NDDC funds. The whopping N477 billion being owed the commission will, in no mean way, give some assurance concerning the development of the oil-rich region.

Happily, the immediate past National Assembly, consistently demonstrated a better understanding of the plight of the people of the Niger Delta region than the executive arm of the Federal Government. Unlike the executive, that appears unsure of what to do to solve the serous problems of the region, the lawmakers showed commendable commitment to facilitate the rapid socio-economic transformation of the region that produces over 90 per cent of the country’s wealth. This has been evident from the very time the bill for the establishment of NDDC was being processed into law. Although the bill was the second to be sent to the National Assembly by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, he refused to assent to the bill because of some disagreements. The lawmakers vetoed him by voting overwhelming for its passage. Thus, it was not surprising that the legislators showed keener interest in the survival and success of the NDDC than the federal executive, right from Obasanjo’s administration.

What’s more, it is common knowledge that former President Obasanjo starved the agency of its statutory funding. This is responsible for the N477 billion that the federal government owes the commission up till date. But since late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, placed emphasis on respect for the rule of law, there was hope that the withheld funds would be released. But that was not to be. Yar’Adua’s inclusion of the Niger Delta in the Seven-Point Agenda of his administration and the creation of the Ministry of Niger Delta Affairs, also created the impression that the late president placed high premium on the development of the oil-rich region. Sadly, all that yielded no desired result.

As a result, a lot of people were disappointed by the provision for the Niger Delta in the 2009 budget. The allocation of only N27 billion to the NDDC and N50 billion to the ministry came to many as a shock. One does not want to believe that the intention of the late Yar’Adua administration was to merely split what was budgeted for the NDDC and the ministry.

One can recall vividly that when the House of Representatives Committee on Public Accounts visited the commission headquarters, last year, and after seeing some of the projects executed by the commission, its Chairman, Usman Mohammed, at the time, expressed satisfaction with what the commission has achieved so far. He said: “We are on a value-for-money assessment of the projects and books of the commission and from what we have seen, there is no doubt that the NDDC has performed creditably”.

Gladdened by what it saw on ground, the committee called for the release of the 50 per cent of the ecological fund due to the nine NDDC member-states as stipulated by the law setting up the agency. For some inexplicable reasons, the commission has not got a kobo from the fund since its inception, though it is a legal imperative. The ecological fund, which was set up by Decree 36 of 1984 and 106 of 1992, was meant to ensure that adequate provision was made to address environment problems in all parts of the country.

While welcoming the committee members, the former Managing Director of the NDDC, Mr Timi Alaibe, blamed the problem of the Niger Delta on the long years of neglect, occasioned by the government’s abdication of its responsibility to the citizens of the area. He told the delegation that the commission had since 2008 commenced full implementation of the Niger Delta Regional Development Master Plan, based on late President Yar’Adua’s directive. He said with adequate funding, the commission should be able to address some of the infrastructural problems like roads, bridges, among others, in the region.

All said, the probe panel must note that the problems of NDDC also borders on under-funding and unwillingness of the executive to do what is needful in the troubled Niger Delta region. The panel should therefore make recommendations that would spur the authorities concerned to release the over N477 billion being owed the commission by the Federal Government and other statutory bodes.

While this column is not holding brief for the NDDC, it believes fervently that it is only by adequate funding of NDDC, that Niger Deltans will be convinced that truly the Federal Government means business to transform the region.

Column

Are the Bears Wrong About the Looming Glut in Oil?

Published

1 week ago

September 8, 2025

The Tide

The oil market is oversupplied while demand growth is slowing down. This has become the dominant assumption among oil traders over the past two years, repeatedly reinforced by analyst outlets. Assumptions, however, are often wrong, especially when not based on physical data.

The International Energy Agency’s latest monthly report, for instance, said that the world is facing a record overhang of crude oil, set to unfold in the final quarter of this year and extend into the first months of 2026.

The expected glut was attributed to lower-than-expected oil consumption in several large developing world markets, combined with rising production in both OPEC+ and elsewhere, notably in the United States, Canada, Guyana, and Brazil.

The investment banks also see a glut, as they tend to do unless there is a war breaking out somewhere.

Goldman Sachs recently forecast Brent crude would drop below $55 per barrel next year, citing a supply overhang of 1.8 million barrels daily at the end of this year, very much in tune with the IEA.

Morgan Stanley is more guarded in its forecasts but still assumes abundant supply, as does ING in most of its regular commodity market notes. But there are some exceptions.

One of these has recently been Standard Chartered, which has bucked the trend of doomsaying among oil price forecasters, noting bullish factors that other forecasters either ignore or overlook.

The other is Oxford Energy, which this week released a report taking a close look at the physical oil market. Surprisingly, for many, the physical market does not show evidence of a glut forming anytime soon.

Crude oil inventories are always a good place to start, and that is exactly where Oxford Energy starts, noting that inventories in the OECD have only gained a rather modest 4 million barrels over the first six months of the year.

This modest increase means OECD oil stocks are still substantially below the five-year average, the research outlet noted, adding that the gap with that average was 122 million barrels.

The inventory situation is similar in the United States as well, even though the benchmarks slide every Wednesday when the U.S. Energy Information Administration reports a crude inventory draw.

Over a longer period, however, inventories have trended down, suggesting demand is pretty healthy and the threat of a massive glut may well be a bit exaggerated.

So, what about inventories outside of the OECD and outside of the United States? China, notably, has been building up its oil in storage, taking advantage of discounted sanctioned Russian crude.

Earlier this year, media reports said Chinese crude oil inventories had hit a three-year high, suggesting demand growth was lagging behind refinery processing rates.

There have also been repeated warnings about slowing oil demand in the world’s largest oil importer—even when imports increase and so do processing rates at Chinese refineries.

Oxford Energy notes, however, that since China does not report inventory information, it is difficult to get an accurate number on oil stocks and estimates produced by data trackers vary too widely to offer reliable information.

Another factor to take into account when studying oil price prospects is floating storage, according to the analysts. This boomed in 2020 when lockdowns decimated demand and supply turned excessive.

After the end of the pandemic, oil in floating storage declined before rising again amid Western sanctions on Russia. Still, Oxford Energy notes, the level of oil in floating storage remains below the levels reached in 2022.

Then there is the matter of oil products. If there is too much supply around, some of it would go into storage—including expensive floating storage—but the rest would be turned into fuels and other products.

Once again, all eyes are on China, where another surprise is waiting. Per Kpler data cited by Oxford Energy, oil product exports from China have not gone higher.

They have actually gone down by 10% and remain weak. One reason for this is, of course, government quota-setting. Another, however, may well be healthy demand for fuels at home.

As the oil market awaits OPEC’s next meeting to start exiting its positions in anticipation of that glut, it may be wise to keep the physical market in mind, along with the fact that the IEA has repeatedly had to revise its own forecasts as physical world data comes in and refutes them.

More interesting, however, is this quote from a recent note from ING analysts: “The scale of the surplus through next year means it’s unlikely the group [OPEC+] will bring additional supply onto the market.

“The bigger risk is OPEC+ deciding to reinstate supply cuts, given concerns about a surplus.”

If there is a massive surplus on the way, any new cuts from OPEC+ should have a limited effect on prices, just as they did over the past two years. But maybe that massive surplus is not so certain, after all.

Column

Renewable Energy Faces Looming Workforce Crisis

Published

1 month ago

August 18, 2025

The Tide

Despite a discouraging political climate and unprecedented uncertainty in the United States clean energy sector, low costs of wind and solar energy continue to drive growth of the domestic clean energy sector.

However, while market forces continue to support the expansion of renewable energy capacity, the sector faces critical challenges extending beyond the antagonism of the Trump administration.

The continued growth of solar and wind power risks being hampered by several mitigating factors, including (but not limited to) intensifying competition over increasingly scarce suitable land plots, stressed and volatile global supply chains, lengthy and unpredictable development processes, Complex and overlapping permitting processes, and a critical talent gap.

The renewable energy labor shortage has been years in the making, but is no less closer to resolution. The issue spans both white collar and blue collar positions, and threatens to kneecap progress in the booming sector.

Between the years of 2011 and 2030, it is expected that global levels of installed wind and solar capacity will quadruple. Analysis from McKinsey & Company concludes that “this huge surge in new wind and solar installations will be almost impossible to staff with qualified development and construction employees as well as operations and maintenance workers.

“It’s unclear where these employees will come from in the future,” the McKinsey report goes on to say.

He continued that “There are too few people with specialized and relevant expertise and experience, and too many of them are departing for other companies or other industries.”

The solar and wind industries are suffering from a lack of awareness of career paths and opportunities, despite their well-established presence in domestic markets.

Emergent clean energies face an even steeper uphill battle. Geothermal energy, for example, is poised for explosive growth as one of vanishingly few carbon-free energy solutions with broad bipartisan support, but faces a severe talent gap and punishingly low levels of awareness in potential talent pools.

But while the outlook is discouraging, industry insiders argue that it’s too soon to sound the alarms. In fact, a recent report from Utility Drive contends that “solutions to the energy talent gap are hiding in plain sight.”

The article breaks down those solutions into four concrete approaches: building partnerships with educators, formulating Registered Apprenticeship pathways, updating credential requirements to reflect real-world needs, and rethinking stale recruitment strategies.

Targeting strategic alliances with educational institutions is a crucial strategy for creating a skilled workforce, particularly in emerging sectors like geothermal energy.

Businesses can, for example, partner with and sponsor programs at community colleges, creating a pipeline for the next generation of skilled workers. Apprenticeships serve a similar purpose, encouraging hands-on learning outside of the classroom. Such apprenticeships can apply to white collar positions as well as blue collar roles.

“If we can figure out a way to educate the younger generation that you can actually have a career that you can be proud of and help solve a problem the world is facing, but also work in the extractive industry, I think that could go a long way,” said Jeanine Vany, executive vice president of corporate affairs for Canadian geothermal firm Eavor, speaking about the geothermal energy talent gap.

These approaches won’t solve the talent gap overnight – especially as political developments may discourage would-be jobseekers from placing their bets on a career in the renewables sector. But they will go a long way toward mitigating the issue.

“The clean energy transition depends on a workforce that can sustain it,” reports Utility Drive. “To meet the hiring challenges, employers will benefit from looking beyond the next position to fill and working toward a strategic, industry-wide vision for attracting talent.”

By: Haley Zaremba

Column

Is It End For Lithium’s Reign As Battery King?

Published

2 months ago

August 1, 2025

The Tide

Lithium-ion batteries power the world around us. Their prevalence in our daily life is growing steadily, to the extent that lithium-ion batteries now power a whopping 70 percent of all rechargeable devices.

From electric vehicles to smartphones to utility-scale energy storage, lithium-ion batteries are increasingly forming the building blocks of innumerable sectors.

But despite its dominance in battery technologies, there are some serious issues with lithium supply chains that make it a less-than-ideal model upon which to base our world.

Not only is extracting lithium often extremely environmentally damaging, it’s deeply intertwined with geopolitical pressure points. China controls a huge portion of global lithium supply chains, rendering markets highly vulnerable to shocks and the political will of Beijing.

China’s control is particularly strong in the case of electric vehicle batteries, thanks to a decade-long strategy to outcompete the globe.

“For over a decade, China has meticulously orchestrated a strategic ascent in the global electric vehicle (EV) batteries market, culminating in a dominance that now presents a formidable challenge to Western manufacturers,” reports EE Times.

The effect functions as “almost a moat” around Chinese battery production, buffering the sector against international competition.

The multiple downsides and risks associated with lithium and lithium-ion battery sourcing is pushing EV companies to research alternative battery models to power the electric cars of the future.

There are a litany of lithium alternatives in research and development phases, including – but not limited to – lead, nickel-cadmium, nickel-metal hydride, sodium nickel chloride, lithium metal polymer, sodium-ion, lithium-sulfur, and solid state batteries.

Solid state batteries seem to be the biggest industry darling. Solid-state batteries use a solid electrolyte as a barrier and conductor between the cathode and anode.

These batteries don’t necessarily do away with lithium, but they can eliminate the need for graphite – another critical mineral under heavy Chinese control. Plus, solid state batteries are purported to be safer, have higher energy density, and recharge faster than lithium-ion batteries.

While solid-state batteries are still in development, they’re already being tested in some applications by car companies. Mercedes and BMW claim that they are already road-testing vehicles powered by solid-state batteries, but it will likely be years before we see them in any commercial context.

Subaru is on the verge of testing solid-state batteries within its vehicles, but is already employing a smaller form of the technology to power robots within its facilities.

However, while solid-state batteries are being hailed as a sort of holy grail for battery tech, some think that the promise – and progress – of solid-state batteries is overblown.

“I think there’s a lot of noise in solid state around commercial readiness that’s maybe an exaggeration of reality”, Rivian CEO RJ Scaringe said during an interview on this week’s Plugged-In Podcast.

Sodium ion batteries are also a promising contender to overtake lithium-ion batteries in the EV sector. Sodium is 1,000 times more abundant than lithium.

“It’s widely available around the world, meaning it’s cheaper to source, and less water-intensive to extract”, stated James Quinn, the CEO of U.K.-based Faradion. “It takes 682 times more water to extract one tonne of lithium versus one tonne of sodium.That is a significant amount.”

Bloomberg projections indicate that sodium-ion could displace 272,000 tons of lithium demand as soon as 2035.

But even this does not signal the death of lithium. Lithium is simply too useful in battery-making. It’s energy-dense and performs well in cold weather, making it “indispensable for high-performance applications” according to EV World.

“The future isn’t lithium or sodium—it’s both, deployed strategically across sectors…the result is a diversified, resilient battery economy.”

By: Haley Zaremba