Connect with us

Column

Place Of Agricultural Sector In National Economic Development

Published

on

The agricultural sector, unarguably, constitutes the most neglected sector of the Nigerian economy. Until the country joined the league of oil and gas producing countries over five decades, (precisely in 1958), the country largely depended on agricultural sector for her survival.

Agriculture was, indeed, the mainstay of our economic survival, both at the local, regional and national levels. But shortly after the civil war, in the early ‘70s, agriculture fell out of grace and took the back burner position in the scheme of things. It no longer gets priority attention as subsequent dispensations, military or civilian relegated the sector to the dustbin of history.

One still recalls with nostalgia how agriculture contributed over 65 percent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and raked in substantial chunk of the nation’s foreign exchange earnings.

In pre-independence Nigeria and shortly after the country became liberated from British imperialists, Nigeria was a net exporter of cash and food crops, namely; cocoa, groundnut, palm products, cassava, among others, which earned her good money. That was in the old good days. Now, not so anymore.

When some well-meaning Nigerians remember the prime place of agriculture in those days, they weep for the country. The reasons are not far-fetched.

Since the discovery of crude oil in 1958, first in Oloibiri, Bayelsa State, agriculture has persistently suffered serious setback and neglect from the three tiers of government. Unlike in the ‘50s and ‘60s, when agriculture was on top, oil has now taken over, garnering over 85 percent of the country’s foreign exchange.

Agriculture has been relegated to the background, at great national and domestic cost. This ugly development has cost present crop of Nigerians, and indeed, those unborn untold hardship.

Obviously, the negative impact of the negligence of agriculture is better imagined than experienced. Apart from impacting negatively on our table menu, government’s desire and capacity to create jobs for the teeming unemployed youths, especially graduates from tertiary institutions is virtually at zero level.

Moreso, poverty rate, increased productivity, diversification of the economy, food security and unemployment rate culminating to higher ate of criminality, have become the order of the day. The reverse would have been the case if the country had paid adequate attention to the agriculture sector and therefore, put the nation on the path of sustainable economic development.

It is generally believed that any country that is not self sufficient in food production cannot pride herself as a progressive nation. Perhaps, that is why the United Nations (UN) and other developed countries place so much premium on agriculture.

It is therefore, disturbing that Nigeria cannot be classified as self-sustaining and self sufficient in food production. Statistics from various world bodies and civil groups paint an ugly scenario of our dwindling agriculture sector. Nigeria, from estimates, has over 53 million hungry people which is about 30 per cent of the country’s 150 million population.

Similarly, 52 percent of the populace live under poverty line whereas less than 10 per cent constituting those commanding the nation’s economy, including politicians, oil magnets, contractors among few others, live stupendous and flamboyant lifestyle only comparable to multi-millionaires and billionaires in the Arab world.

The position of the nation’s agriculture sector constitutes a matter of grave concern largely because Nigeria was self-sufficient in food production and indeed a net exporter of goods to other countries in 1950s and 1960s. However, things changed dramatically for the worse following the global economic crisis that rocked developing countries from 1970s to date.

In fact, the discovery of crude oil and the rising profile in revenue earnings from the country’s petroleum sector occasioned official neglect of the sector and thus turned Nigeria into a net importer of food, importing virtually every agricultural product and bye-products.

Even worse is the fact that Nigeria now operates a monolithic economy which solely depends on oil and gas for her national survival and sustenance. What an irony!

Nigeria does not meet UN’s standard for agriculture sector. Federal government budgets less than 10 percent of its annual budget to agriculture while other less important sectors of the economy receive lion’s share.

Misapplication, or better still, under-funding has been the bane of agricultural development. It explains the persistent poverty ravaging the Nigeria’s landscape. Food production and food security must be cardinal in our national priority if we must get things right and beat our chest among the comity of nations.

Nigeria’s loss of food sovereignty and our dependence on food importation as well as total absence of food security will make the country susceptible to food crisis and thus vulnerable to other available social vices. And Nigeria cannot afford that now, particularly against the backdrop that we are craving to join the league of 20 strongest economies in the world by the year 2020, which is just 11 years away.

I consider it a big national shame that the country spends over N155 billion annually on rice importation while we boast of over 79 million hectares of arable land with diversified ecological conditions, abundant water resources and adequate rainfall and warm temperature.

Why should Nigeria spend over N500 billion annually on food importation if God has blessed the country with such enormous favourable natural endowments. All we require is for government at all levels to have the political will-power to reverse the anomally in our agriculture sector.

If Nigeria spends all her oil money on food importation, then, we shall end up impoverishing the nation; our children and indeed children unborn. The arable land we have cannot grow food no matter how fertile it is except of course we prepare the land to grow food. Only weeds will grow in the arable land if we fail to till or prepare it for agricultural purposes.

Continue Reading

Column

Are the Bears Wrong About the Looming Glut in Oil?

Published

on

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.
Continue Reading

Column

Renewable Energy Faces Looming Workforce Crisis

Published

on

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
Continue Reading

Column

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

Published

on

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
Continue Reading

Trending