By Ahmed Balarabe Sa’id
Noneone of those present could hold any doubt, when, for another time, industry experts recently converged to boldly affirm that, climate change remains a critical distortion, driving policy shifts, and reshaping industrial and commercial activities in a way never imagined when President Barack Obama acknowledged in Copenhagen, Denmark, 2009. What was then described as “the greatest challenge of our time” by the former U.S President, returns to scrutiny within the stark linkages to the inevitable dilemma of energy transition, foremost of which is global politics. If it was necessary to interrogate the world order in any appraisal of the journey to net zero, carbon-neutral realities consistent with the 1.5 degree pre-industrial temperature; only a few would hazard the guess that, Africa’s place would be of any advantage. There are many reasons for this. There has been more than enough reference to Africa as wielding the short end of the stick in the global threat from continued emission of greenhouse gases, especially fossil fuels, estimated already in the region of 80%.
With only a tokenistic four percent share (average of 1 ton of carbon dioxide emitted annually by each individual) of the global greenhouse gas emissions, in contrast to China’s 23%, United States’ 19% or the European Union’s 13%; Africa retains the big chunk in an ugly bouquet of harsh impacts and consequences arising from a warmed globe. Extreme weather events, wildfires, rise in sea levels and consequent intense floods complemented by droughts in other areas have eaten far too deep, already. In Nigeria, the social challenges imposed from displacements induced by insurgency are only minimal, in comparison to those triggered by climate-induced hunger. Only few years ago, the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) reported that, floods had displaced approximately 19 million Nigerians. Agricultural activities such as farming, fisheries and forestry have been plagued by droughts and excessive flooding. Food scarcity has pervaded most Nigerian communities, with consequent stunted crop growth widely recorded in instances where premature harvests had been imposed by excessive rain. These have all combined to portend adverse effects on livelihoods of communities and wellbeing of people from the breeding grounds that have birthed the burden of malaria, respiratory illnesses and other preventable ailments.
Curiously, consolidation on previous global consensus on reversing Africa’s loss in the climate change dynamics have neither offered hope nor reprieve in the estimation of many observers. For the takeaways from the December 2015 Paris Climate agreement, targeting milestones in 2050 has inspired hope for Africa on the global climate problem, including other previous global ratifications that followed the 1977 Kyoto Protocol, remain within the interrogation of analysts and observers, within the context of global politics specifically, where Africa is situated within the mix. In what may appear as an instructive push from within, African leaders and delegates in Nairobi, this September, gathered for the continent’s first Climate Summit to consider resilience, financing and other enablers towards a climate-compatible vision for Africa. While deliberations from the 2023 Nairobi-declaration deliberations affirmed that “greater commitment is needed to end energy poverty and fight climate change both in Africa and globally”; the overwhelming burden remains the fact that, Africa requires 2.8 trillion dollars to meet the emission reduction targets outlined by the Paris Agreement, for which only approximately 26 billion dollars have already been pledged.
Beyond the impact on environment and other related concerns of the global climate challenge, lie the complex relationships between energy producing and consuming nations and the options they each secure from this complexity. Clean energy, as observed by many stakeholders, is not a done deal, yet. Even as skyrocketing oil prices continue to influence the push for alternative energy, there is a renewed attention on emerging nations, regarding the search for new frontiers in the energy ecosystem, where they can be both productive and globally competitive. It is against this backdrop that, stakeholders emerged in unanimity to acknowledge the global alignments identified with the climate challenge and the crucial role of politics in defining the problem, without a doubt. This was at the 12th Emmanuel Egbogah Legacy Lecture Series, which held at the Emerald Energy Institute, University of Port Harcourt, Rivers state, with the theme “Climate Change and the Geopolitics of Energy Transition”. Among many issues, energy security, affordability and sustainability were identified as pathways for navigating developing nations like Nigeria through a safe operating space, within the current global realities. Citing Nigeria’s recent admittance into the forum of international economic cooperation, Group of 20 (G20), the Keynote Speaker, Prof. Chidi Ibe identified the development as a potential asset for the nation’s positioning towards securing leadership of the region’s energy security in the emerging transition.
Prof. Ibe stressed that, the current global reality of the dynamics of the energy transition and the effects of climate change has led to the realization by many nations that, circumstances outside their control should not threaten their energy security and economy. Nigeria, he noted, cannot be an exemption in this regard, as the membership of the G20 in particular, offers the opportunity of diversifying the nation’s energy value chain and radical pursuit of the national gas policy. He acknowledged that, the politics of self-preservation among nations will continue to create disruptions amidst markets and economies, citing struggles between major economies like United States and China affecting the patterns of transition in lesser economies.
While lamenting the “trilemma” of energy security, energy affordability and energy sustainability, all of which huge deficits combine to scuttle Nigeria’s potential for regional leadership position, the renowned scholar admitted that, the efforts by nations to pursue alternative energy should not lose sight of the need to build resilience for their existing energy resources, as fossils fuels will not go away in another 100 years. He recalled historically that, energy transitions from origins have mainly been factored on preference, especially combustibility, and it is therefore difficult to accept that, any energy source, including fossil fuels can be marked for complete extermination. Citing several examples, the scholar stated that, effective fabrication process in the renewable energy configuration still requires the use of fossil fuels, noting that, aviation fuel, for instance, is yet to secure any alternative, even as penetration of energy alternatives in the adoption of Electric cars in the US have raised concerns about altering the lifestyles of users.
Prof. Ibe decried the imbalance in unfair global politics which has underscored the global energy transition, putting Africa at the receiving end of a lamentable dilemma of giving up her major energy resources to embrace transition wholly, whereas other countries have only identified best practices which protect their peculiar interests, within their national ideologies of self-preservation. He emphasized that, the struggle for supremacy between China and the United States will continue to shape and define the pattern of transition in the search for alternative energy. He hinted that the Russia-Ukraine war had created a significant panic and consequent attention to energy switch, while nations like Germany, Norway, United Kingdom have tilted to expanding their capacities for adoption of coal as an alternative, with notable expansion of production licenses for improved oil exploration, as in the case of Norway.
He informed that, China, a leading producer of Lithium, has taken a conscious leap to dominate the European Union market in the supply and export of rave earth-wind turbines and solar panels, having identified its comparative advantage as a global player.
Speaking exclusively to Valuechain after his presentation, the renowned Professor of Oceanography and Blue Economy advocated a transition which combines conventional and renewable options. According to him, “to attain energy security, we need a rational mix of conventional and renewable energy. There are however a lot of impediments to it. To get out of this smoothly as we intensify the gas to power amidst other renewable options, we must build our refining capacities to at least 1.3 million barrels a day and retain oil for the purpose of economies of scale in the global order, because “oil will not go away soon”.
He, therefore, charged Nigeria to galvanize the continent to “interrogate the global imposition of a monolithic strategy for a viable world”. Among several policy options, Prof. Ibe recommended the scaling up of local refining capacity to 1.3 MBPD, including enhancing of industrial and manufacturing capacity to optimally utilize oil and gas. While admitting that funding is crucial to the success of the options identified, he canvassed for Nigeria’s reliance on the Sovereign Wealth Fund to drive transition. Prof Ibe’s concerns about funding corroborate a major, significant outcome of the Nairobi declaration. The forum, it would be recalled, had widely advocated for the establishment of a carbon market initiative to fund renewable energy infrastructure, including reforms of multilateral lending institutions, which have traditionally viewed climate investments in Africa as risky due to regulatory uncertainties, climate–related threats and high financing costs.
Also speaking to Valuechain at the event, Executive Director, Emmanuel Egbogah Foundation, Prof. ‘Wumi Iledare, while admitting that, Nigeria’s energy transition plan requires retooling, pointed out that, there’s no direct transition of energy resources from one to another, and so, Nigeria must adopt a mixed strategy supported by technological adaptation, education, and public policy. He added that, for the nation to get it right, “we must disabuse transactional mindsets which have prevented proper and effective planning in our national life”. On the crucial issue of funding, he noted that, government cannot fund energy transition and must therefore rely on research and development, through building the capacity of the nation’s universities and research institutes, as “energy resources evolve dynamically”.
One of the panelists of the discussion session of the event, Mrs Oluseyi Afolabi, decried poor incentives as a major impediment for large-scale investments in the oil and gas industry. Citing multiple taxation and policy summersaults as major drawbacks, she observed with concerns the exit of major international oil firms from Nigeria, with factors such as stringent regulations cited in cases of some other countries losing investors. Like Mrs. Afolabi, several other stakeholders are worried about new frontiers and incentives that may have attracted exiting firms elsewhere and the consequence of such development for Nigeria. In the overall, there are deafening calls for advocacy and enlightenment in relation to securing the appropriate governance structure for the country’s energy transition policy. How much of this is within immediate reach, remains the issue in contention, as it is with the many dilemmas identified with the transition.