HOW much more money must Nigeria spend reforming electricity before Nigerians actually get it? That question has become unavoidable following reports that about ?10 trillion in public finance has either been spent, committed or trapped in various interventions across the electricity-sector value chain. Yet, after all the reforms, bailouts, guarantees, loans and infrastructure programmes, Nigeria’s electricity generation has remained around an average of 4,500 megawatts (MW), nowhere near the 20,000 MW repeatedly targeted, much less the estimated 30,000 MW the country requires.
Since the November 2013 privatisation, successive governments have deployed intervention funds, payment guarantees, debt-settlement schemes, multilateral loans and infrastructure financing to address liquidity problems and improve electricity supply. But the more money Nigeria appears to throw at electricity, the harder it becomes to identify corresponding improvements in electricity delivered to Nigerians. We have addressed this problem repeatedly on this page because when a country of more than 230 million people remains stuck around 4,500 MW despite trillions of naira in interventions, we must keep asking questions. At a national media roundtable on July 31, the Minister of Power, Joseph Tegbe, said the Federal Government was ‘resetting’ the electricity sector by addressing structural weaknesses that had held it back. The measures include a comprehensive technical audit of the national transmission network, harmonisation of federal and state electricity regulations, a Grid Stabilisation Programme, measures to address sector liquidity, strategic asset centralisation, and a Super Grid Programme. Tegbe said that within the next two to three years, Nigerians should see a stronger grid, lower technical losses, improved market discipline, greater investor confidence, expanded electricity access and significantly higher operational capacity. These are admirable objectives. But where is the engineering plan?
When Tegbe assumed office, he said he needed to understand the sector he had inherited. That was reasonable. Nigeria’s electricity system is too complicated for instant solutions. But having studied the system, the minister is now making promises extending two or three years into the future. Nigerians are therefore entitled to measurable details. What does ‘significantly higher operational capacity’ mean: 6,000 MW, 10,000 MW or 15,000 MW? What percentage reduction in technical losses is expected? What transmission capacity will exist by 2028? Without numbers and milestones, another reform programme can easily become another collection of aspirations. There is also a political calendar that cannot be ignored. Nigeria will hold another general election in 2027, before the minister’s two-to-three-year horizon expires. No one needs to accuse him of electoral motivation. But Nigerians should insist that commitments extending beyond an election be accompanied by published engineering milestones that survive ministers and administrations.
More importantly, what does the minister mean by a ‘stronger grid’? Is the government strengthening the existing national transmission architecture, substantially redesigning it, or building the proposed super-grid alongside it? Where are the engineering drawings, capacity targets, regional transmission corridors, financing plans and implementation schedules? A technical audit can identify weaknesses, but an audit is not a transmission system. This is also why Nigeria must reconsider how it appoints and empowers leadership in such a technically demanding ministry. Power is simultaneously an engineering, economic and regulatory challenge. Professor Barth Nnaji, whatever controversies attended his tenure, brought substantial engineering knowledge to the ministry. The country needs ministers capable of interrogating technical recommendations rather than being entirely dependent on the bureaucracy they inherit. Otherwise, each new minister arrives, spends months studying the sector, consults essentially the same institutional machinery that administered earlier programmes, announces another reform, and eventually leaves the unresolved system to successors.
Transparency is equally important. What exactly constitutes the reported ?10 trillion committed to the sector? How much represents subsidies? How much went to GenCos? How much financed transmission assets, debt settlements, guarantees and loans? Which projects were completed, and what additional generation or transmission capacity did each produce? Government cannot continue repeating aggregate figures without allowing Nigerians to follow the money through the electricity value chain.
Is there a secrecy clause in the Nigerian power sector? There should not be. You cannot credibly reform a sector with public money while keeping the public inadequately informed about how that money has been deployed. The Federal Government should publish a comprehensive account of major interventions since privatisation, their beneficiaries, project status, assets delivered and measurable effect on electricity supply. Nigeria must equally look beyond its borders when redesigning the grid. Large modern electricity systems are deliberately engineered around resilient regional and interconnected networks. The United States, for example, operates through three major electrical interconnections. Other large systems, including those in Canada, Britain and China, demonstrate different approaches to regional coordination, interconnection and electricity trading. Nigeria need not copy any country blindly, but it should learn from them.
As we have argued repeatedly, Nigeria should consider at least three strongly interconnected regional transmission systems operating within one national electricity market. States should participate alongside the Federal Government and private investors, particularly now that states can establish their own electricity markets. Electricity generated in one state or region should be capable of moving efficiently to another where demand exists. Decentralisation should strengthen interconnection, not create 36 electricity islands.
Renewable energy must fit into that architecture too. Solar energy is essential to Nigeria’s future, but scattering imported panels and batteries across the country cannot substitute permanently for a functioning electricity system. Those panels, inverters and batteries eventually become distributed waste that will be difficult to manage. Nigeria has vast land suitable for properly planned utility-scale renewable generation. Large solar installations can be strategically located and integrated with gas, hydroelectricity, storage and strengthened transmission networks. The objective should be an electricity system, not an endless collection of disconnected projects.
After more than a decade of privatisation, Nigerians need results, not more announcements of audits, interventions, loans and resets. Minister Tegbe may succeed where others struggled, but success must be measured in electricity delivered, losses reduced, and transmission capacity expanded. The government must account for the trillions already committed to power reforms, publish the architecture it intends to build, and attach measurable milestones to its promises.