Connect with us

Column

EFCC Should Be Thorough

Published

4 years ago

on

Nigeria’s anti-graft agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), said it would as from June 1, 2021 begin to look into the banking industry with regard to financial crimes. Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Abdulrasheed Bawa, said this is in a bid to ensure transparency in the banks and that bankers would be declaring their assets in obedience to extant laws.
He also said that the focus on bankers is aimed at achieving financial sanity and to track illicitly acquired funds.
The EFCC can do this but even recently, the agency under the leadership of Bawa, started a move to check some former public office holders reportedly involved in money laundering, till now no news.
One wonders if the EFCC will be able to carry out such role because it has investigated and interrogated many with alleged misappropriation of public funds without results. But if it can implement what they have to do, I think it will make a change because it is through the banks that illegitimate funds are got.
The truth is that every financial transaction involving several thousands, millions, billions and trillions are not carried as cash, but moved through the banks across the country.
When an individual goes to withdraw certain amounts of money, the banker should be able to scrutinise that customer using relevant regulatory identification cards and bearing in mind that such person cannot possess such money. Even in the case of a group account, they should be interviewed to find out the source of the money.
The bankers have a big role to play when it comes to huge sums which may be claimed by a suspected fraudster. The managers should be able to detect when a particular amount of money cannot belong to a person. These, I think are the kinds of cases that give them bad names.
The bankers may be innocent of allegations and may not be collaborating with fraudsters to engage in bank fraud.
I recall a situation where an individual was asked to present a regulatory identification card in a commercial bank before she could have access to money deposited in her account. The reason for this was to really ascertain from where, who and perhaps how the money was generated.
That can be done to other accounts that have larger funds deposited in them. They should be able to know their customers through proper bank documentations. They have regulations on how much an individual should withdraw at a go.
Issues of money laundering like looted funds, as we have heard and seen, are not done through cash handling but electronically. It is expected that they raise alarm when huge amounts are discovered.
Some persons have argued whether the declaration of assets by the bankers will help in reducing financial crimes. The EFCC. as an agency saddled with such responsibility, would have done their homework before coming up with such move.
There is nothing wrong with bankers declaring their assets, after all, every public servant, from time to time, is mandated to declare to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), depending on where they work.
According to Bawa, “We are going to see a very new EFCC in terms of the way we investigate, the way we prosecute, the way generally we execute our mandate. We will do our best to ensure that this country is free of economic and financial crimes.
“We understood that the tail end of every financial crime is for the criminal to have access to the funds that he or she has illegitimately gotten and we are worried about the roles of financial institutions and we have discussed, God willing, we hope that all financial institutions particularly the bankers will declare their assets as provided for by the law in accordance with the bank employees declaration of asset act,” he expressed.
There have been allegations that financial institutions and bankers help or aid fraudsters in committing financial frauds. This move by the EFCC is a step in the right direction as it will prove whether it is true or not at the end of investigations into the bankers’ financial activities.
It may not be only bankers that are allegedly involved in financial crimes. There are others who involve in illicit movement of cash. They should not focus on the banks alone.
They should look at other loopholes that may not be available to the public, because smart people may device other means of escaping with heavy amounts of money.
In fact, anybody who decides to involve in any form of financial crime should be dealt with if found guilty of the crime.
It is a good policy but to what extent it is going to work is worrisome. So many persons in the society today have declared their assets before now but we still hear and read about their unwholesome financial activities.
Some persons are smart so the EFCC and the financial institutions should also be smart to checkmate those who are associated with larger sums of money.
The EFCC should try to rekindle the hope of Nigerians through this development. I urge the financial institutions, particularly the bankers, to be wary of the kind of customers they come in contact with. A banker should be able to identify a fraudster with the amount of money either to be deposited or withdrawn from an account, even if a joint account, to avoid running into financial crimes.
A banker may be lured into problem but being smart on his or her job can solve such problem. They should be able to raise alarm when there are suspected cases of financial crimes. For me, it doesn’t matter and it is not wrong for bankers to declare their assets if they don’t have any skeleton in their cupboards. It is better, so that they will be free of accusations from different quarters. There can be innocent persons in the bank.
I am not unaware that, before now, the EFCC had made several moves to track financial crime offenders but the outcome of the exercises is yet to be made public. The exercise should be fruitful.
I think with the youthfulness of the new EFCC boss and having risen through the ranks in the Commission, there is no doubt that Nigerians’ expectations will be met.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Column

Renewable Energy Faces Looming Workforce Crisis

Published

3 weeks ago

on

August 18, 2025

By

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

1 month ago

on

August 1, 2025

By

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

Column

Why Oil Prices Could See Significant Upside Shift

Published

1 month ago

on

July 28, 2025

By

The 9th OPEC International Seminar was held in Vienna recently, wherein participants discussed energy security, investment, climate change, and energy poverty, with a particular emphasis on balancing these competing priorities.
According to commodity analysts at Standard Chartered, the summit, titled “Charting Pathways Together: The Future of Global Energy”, featured significantly greater engagement from international oil companies and consuming country governments, with discussions converging on a more inclusive shared agenda rather than non-intersecting approaches seen in previous years.
However, StanChart reported there was a clear mismatch between what energy producers vs. market analysts think about spare production capacity.
Unlike Wall Street analysts, who frequently talk about spare capacity of 5-6 million barrels per day (mb/d), speakers from several sectors of the industry noted that spare capacity is both limited and very geographically concentrated.
StanChart believes this erroneous assumption about spare capacity has been a big drag on oil prices, and the implications for the whole forward curve of oil prices could be potentially profound once traders realize that roughly two-thirds of the capacity they thought was available on demand does not actually exist.
This makes the analysts bullish about the general shape of their forecast 2026 price trajectory (Figure 32), i.e., a set of significant upward shifts as opposed to the flat trajectory seen in the market curve and in analyst consensus.
In other words, oil prices could have as much as $15/barrel upside from current levels.
StanChart is not the only oil bull here. Goldman Sachs recently hiked its oil price forecast for H2 2025, saying the market is increasingly shifting its focus from recession fears to potential supply disruptions, low spare capacity, lower oil inventories, especially among OECD countries and production constraints by Russia.
GS has increased its Brent forecast by $5/bbl to $66/bbl, and by $6 for WTI crude to $63/bbl, slightly lower than current levels of $68.34/bbl and 66.24/bbl for Brent and WTI crude, respectively.
However, the Wall Street bank has maintained its 2026 price forecast at $56/bbl for Brent and $52 for WTI, due to “an offset between a boost from higher long-dated prices and a hit from a wider 1.7M bbl/day surplus.’’ Previously, GS had forecast a 1.5M bbl/day surplus for the coming year.
Further, Goldman sees a stronger oil price rebound beyond 2026 due to reduced spare capacity.
EU natural gas inventories have climbed at faster-than-average clip in recent times. According to Gas Infrastructure Europe (GIE) data, Europe’s gas inventories stood at 73.10 billion cubic metres (bcm) on 13 July, good for a 2.31 bcm w/w increase.
Still, the injection rate is not enough to completely fill the continent’s gas stores, with the current clip on track to take inventories to about 97.9 bcm, or 84.3% of storage capacity, at the end of the injection season.
Europe’s gas demand remains fairly lacklustre despite extremely high temperatures across much of the continent in recent weeks.
According to estimates by StanChart, EU gas demand for the first 14 days of July averaged 583 million cubic meters/day, nearly 3% lower from a year ago but a 10% improvement from the June lows.
However, StanChart is bullish on natural gas prices, saying the market is likely underestimating the likelihood of more Russian gas being taken off the markets.
Back in April, U.S. senators Lindsey Graham (Republican) and Richard Blumenthal (Democrat), introduced “Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025”, with the legislation enjoying broad bipartisan support (85 co-sponsors in the Senate out of 100 senators).
In a joint statement on 14 July, the two senators noted that President Trump’s decision to implement 100% secondary tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil and gas if a peace agreement is not reached within 50 days but pledged that they will continue to work on “bipartisan Russia sanctions legislation that would implement up to 500 percent tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil and gas”.
StanChart has predicted that the Trump administration is unlikely to take actions that risk driving oil prices higher. However, Russian gas remains in the crosshairs, with U.S. LNG likely to see a surge in demand if Russian gas exports are curtailed.
StanChart estimates that the EU’s net imports of Russian pipeline gas averaged 79.8 million cubic metres per day (mcm/d) in the first 14 days of July, with all non-transit flows into the EU coming into Bulgaria through the Turkstream pipeline, with Hungary and Slovakia also receiving Turkstream gas.
There was also a flow of about 65 mcm/d of Russian LNG in the first half of July, with Russia providing 18.6% of the EU’s net imports. StanChart has predicted that we could see a strong rally in natural gas prices if Washington slaps Moscow with fresh gas sanctions.
By: Alex Kimani
Continue Reading

Trending