Nigerians dont need more than one point agenda from Mr Goodluck Jonathan, if i read our mind, it is 24/7 ELECTRICITY SUPPLY.
What is your take on this?

U got it right, cos if our epileptic power supply is fixed, all other sectors will naturally take appropiate shape.

abodundef:

Nigerians dont need more than one point agenda from Mr Goodluck Jonathan, if i read our mind, it is 24/7 ELECTRICITY SUPPLY.
What is your take on this?

Supported! I will even employ thousands. And so will many others. They should analyze the task and pour in as much money as needed. Get it up and running. Every other thing will fall in line.

egift:

Supported! I will even employ thousands. And so will many others. They should analyze the task and pour in as much money as needed. Get it up and running. Every other thing will fall in line.

It is not so much about money since we have seen billions expended in the past without even a single Megawatt gained. The main issue remains the removal of  the corrupt and inept hand of the federal Government from our power sector through full deregulation  .

@Gbawe I totally agree with you or else we will be on this power issue till vision 2030

Full deregulation will only move us from the frying pan into the fire.
It was the same argument that was made for the down stream oil sector, and we have all seen how well that worked as we no longer have fuel scarcity
What we need is competent people in charge, and Nigerian giving them the support they need to be effective, not people who are unwilling to pay their bills demanding for uninterrupted supply. Its a 2-way street.
Partial deregulation of the generation and/or revenue collection are worth exploring. The agency should be made autonomous (not privatized) to improve accountability.

Sorry to say Electric Generation and Supply is very,very hard. Nigeria should try to buy than plan to generate. Nigeria could start buying and gradually learn to generate.
Do no forget Ajaokuta iron and steel and that Aluminium plant
Nigeria cannot because of politics and norther contractors who just pick up cheques for doing nothing.  No one actaully question them about the contract. pay is pay.a
Acountant General said you must pay for the contract not finished.
You must pay or you losses your job. This is Pay Office experience. The same applied to the Central Bank. Contracts payments. Just pay
So just advice nigeria to buy than to generate to avoid white elephants.

formunt:

[b]Sorry to say Electric Generation and Supply is very,very hard. [/b]Nigeria should try to buy than plan to generate. Nigeria could start buying and gradually learn to generate.
Do no forget Ajaokuta iron and steel and that Aluminium plant
Nigeria cannot because of politics and norther contractors who just pick up cheques for doing nothing.  No one actaully question them about the contract. pay is pay.a
Acountant General said you must pay for the contract not finished.
You must pay or you losses your job. This is Pay Office experience. The same applied to the Central Bank. Contracts payments. Just pay
So just advice nigeria to buy than to generate to avoid white elephants.

Are you sure you know what you are talking about?
For your information, generation is the easiest of all the phases.

biina:

Full deregulation will only move us from the frying pan into the fire.
It was the same argument that was made for the down stream oil sector, and we have all seen how well that worked as we no longer have fuel scarcity
What we need is competent people in charge, and Nigerian giving them the support they need to be effective, not people who are unwilling to pay their bills demanding for uninterrupted supply. Its a 2-way street.
Partial deregulation of the generation and/or revenue collection are worth exploring. The agency should be made autonomous (not privatized) to improve accountability.

I will not be drawn into a debate over this as that will mean we will be here for the next few days. Suffice to say I think that it is unlikely you are correct considering that full deregulation is backed by Fashola, many progressive administrators, many Nigerian technocrats, many power analysts and now the CBN Governor .

Full deregulation does not mean arbitrary madness and rogue conduct . The Government will still regulate the sector. Guidance regulatory laws is probably the most important factor that will determine the success or failure of any deregulation excercise. If regulatory laws are robust, well thought out, clearly defined and vigorously implemented then full deregulation of the power sector will mean constant electricity for Nigerian States with well-intentioned leadership. It will also facilitate tailor-made solutions for Nigerian States that will work best for a nation where States with progressive leadership are deliberately slowed down because of mediocrity elsewhere when it should be the other way round i.e the indolent should be shamed into keeping up with the best with policies , like full deregulation, that enables those who know what they are doing to move forward unimpeded.

Gbawe:

I will not be drawn into a debate over this as that will mean we will be here for the next few days. Suffice to say I think that it is unlikely you are correct considering that full deregulation is backed by Fashola, many progressive administrators, many Nigerian technocrats, many power analysts and now the CBN Governor .

Full deregulation does not mean arbitrary madness and rogue conduct . The Government will still regulate the sector. Guidance regulatory laws is probably the most important factor that will determine the success or failure of any deregulation excercise. If regulatory laws are robust, well thought out, clearly defined and vigorously implemented then full deregulation of the power sector will mean constant electricity for Nigerian States with well-intentioned leadership. It will also facilitate tailor-made solutions for Nigerian States that will work best for a nation where States with progressive leadership are deliberately slowed down because of mediocrity elsewhere when it should be the other way round i.e the indolent should be shamed into keeping up with the best with policies , like full deregulation, that enables those who know what they are doing to move forward unimpeded. 

You should make up your mind. You do not regulate a fully deregulated sector. Under full deregulation, the government has no say in how business is done in the sector e. g.the road side groundnut selling market.

Most people in Nigeria that talk about the power sector know little about what they are saying. Most of them dont even know the problems with NEPA. The unusual nature of the commodity makes it difficult to apply the usual economic and business models. A typical example was the failed electrical energy market and subsequent enron scandal of the US, despite several people flaunting it as the next step in the evolution of the market.

What we all want is the delivery of predictable electrical energy, and an efficiently run National system, and not a profit driven ad hoc market that follows full deregulation, is better suited to delivering that without compromising the interest of the public.

jonathan is only an acting president and not a president just as the senate as declared so he will be working on the dumb 7 point agenda of his boss who is on a medical vacation to arabia.

biina:

You should make up your mind. You do not regulate a fully deregulated sector. Under full deregulation, the government has no say in how business is done in the sector e. g.the road side groundnut selling market.

Most people in Nigeria that talk about the power sector know little about what they are saying. Most of them dont even know the problems with NEPA. The unusual nature of the commodity makes it difficult to apply the usual economic and business models. A typical example was the failed electrical energy market and subsequent enron scandal of the US, despite several people flaunting it as the next step in the evolution of the market.

What we all want is the delivery of predictable electrical energy, and an efficiently run National system, and not a profit driven ad hoc market that follows full deregulation, is better suited to delivering that without compromising the interest of the public.

like I said before , a fully deregulated sector does not mean arbitrariness. Entrants to a fully deregulated sector have operational guidelines they will have to strictly adhere to . That is what I mean by "regulatory laws" . These guidelines, enforceable by law, will ensure that everyone is protected . Many argue as you do i.e a fully deregulated power sector means anything goes . That could not be further from the truth. Essentially , in a fully deregulated power sector , competion and choice flourish. Safety, efficiency, value for money, market descent into monopoly and other consideration concerning suppliers and consumers are essentially taken care of by the guiding regulatory provisions. A convened board would still have to screen entrants into the market and subsequently approve licence for those who meet required conditions and pledge to abide by supervisory laws. Stating that a fully deregulated market needs regulation is not contradictory at all. It simply means that participants at all levels must be made to operate within certain parameters .

for example , many sectors are fully deregulated in the UK but the Government , through its various regulatory agencies , ensure that consumers and end users are protected . We can understudy what has worked well elsewhere when full deregulation has occured.

"Oftel The Office of Telecommunications (Oftel) (the telecommunications regulator) was a department in the United Kingdom government, under civil service control, charged with promoting competition and maintaining the interests of consumers in the British telecommunications market. It was set up under the Telecommunications Act 1984 after privatisation of the nationalised operator BT".

Gbawe:

like I said before , a fully deregulated sector does not mean arbitrariness. Entrants to a fully deregulated sector have operational guidelines they will have to strictly adhere to . That is what I mean by "regulatory laws" . These guidelines, enforceable by law, will ensure that everyone is protected . Many argue as you do i.e a fully deregulated power sector means anything goes . That could not be further from the truth. Essentially , in a fully deregulated power sector , competion and choice flourish. Safety, efficiency, value for money, market descent into monopoly and other consideration concerning suppliers and consumers are essentially taken care of by the guiding regulatory provisions. A convened board would still have to screen entrants into the market and subsequently approve licence for those who meet required conditions and pledge to abide by supervisory laws. Stating that a fully deregulated market needs regulation is not contradictory at all. It simply means that participants at all levels must be made to operate within certain parameters .

for example , many sectors are fully deregulated in the UK but the Government , through its various regulatory agencies , ensure that consumers and end users are protected . We can understudy what has worked well elsewhere when full deregulation has occured.

"Oftel The Office of Telecommunications (Oftel) (the telecommunications regulator) was a department in the United Kingdom government, under civil service control, charged with promoting competition and maintaining the interests of consumers in the British telecommunications market. It was set up under the Telecommunications Act 1984 after privatisation of the nationalised operator BT". 

I think you are using the wrong terms to describe things. Deregulation is the removal of government influence on the operation of market forces. Thus under full deregulation there is NO government influence on market forces i.e. government has no influence on the price, demand and supply in the sector. What you are implying ' made to operate within certain parameters'  is partial deregulation.

Under a fully deregulated regime, a power generation company is free to determine what quantity and at what price it provides energy. The fact that the sector (due to infrastructure) is not an open market and you cannot have local competitions means that under full deregulation companies can hold regions to ransom on the short term and possibly long as well. Essentially the free market forces that helps to implicitly regulate the sector are absent in the sector and thus it should never be fully deregulated.

If we want to analyze case studies, we should limit it to the power sectors, as others, like telecoms or oil & gas, are different ball games. Then we should put things in local context.

No way a fully deregulated system can work in power if that means no government intervention.

Some degree of regulation will be needed to ensure global penetration of power lines as well as
prevent predatory pricing practices.

Jonathan shld pls go ahead wit d 7point agenda cos no 1 agenda can be solved to the exclusion of the other agendas. All those clamourin 4 a 1point agenda are just sayin muddle evrythin into 1agenda which will make it dificult to identify where d govt is makin progress and where the challenges and draw backs are coming from. How can u truly address d power problem in exclusion of the Niger delta and wat wld be d value of stable power wen maternal mortality has escalated and the populace is unhealthy and there is no food to eat. Pls let's leave d fire brigade approach and give our support to this administration as they try their best or worst as d case mayb to wholistically address d multi dimensional problems of our nation

biina:

If we want to analyze case studies, we should limit it to the power sectors, as others, like telecoms or oil & gas, are different ball games. Then we should put things in local context.

I agree and to that extent I suggest that you , and anyone else interested in an enduring solution for our power supply problem, study the report below in detail. It contains many "case studies" of nations that have done what me must now do. National Models like those for Malaysia , for obvious reasons , indicate the direction Nigeria need to head towards.

http://www.ieej.or.jp/aperc/final/deregulation.pdf

"The lessons from the Malaysian case study are:
In some developing economies, the potential benefits of opening energy markets to full competition
must be balanced against competing political, social and economic policy objectives, such as
extension of electricity networks to all communities, and maintenance of tariffs at prices poorer
consumers can afford".

Gbawe:

I agree and to that extent I suggest that you , and anyone else interested in an enduring solution for our power supply problem, study the report below in detail. It contains many "case studies" of nations that have done what me must now do. National Models like those for Malaysia , for obvious reasons , indicate the direction Nigeria need to head towards.

http://www.ieej.or.jp/aperc/final/deregulation.pdf

"The lessons from the Malaysian case study are:
In some developing economies, the potential benefits of opening energy markets to full competition
must be balanced against competing political, social and economic policy objectives, such as
extension of electricity networks to all communities, and maintenance of tariffs at prices poorer
consumers can afford".

A look at the Malaysian case study shows that the sector is dominated by majority government owned companies, with complementary effort from private companies in the generation phase. Tariffs are still determined by TNB with governmental approval. This is far from a deregulated sector. Malaysia has 3 regions:

Peninsula has about 80% of the population
- TNB (a majority government owned company) has sole control of the transmission and distribution network
- Dominates the generation sector producing 11,296 MW as compared to about 6,000MW from IPPs

Sarawak has about 9% of the population
Syarikat SESCO Berhad (which is 52% state owned) controls the entire market (generation, transmission, and distribution). Total capacity is 855MW

Sabah has about 11% of the population
Sabah Electricity (which is 80% TNB and 20% Sabah state) also controls the entire market (generation, transmission, and distribution). Total capacity is 785 MW

Total generation in malaysia is 19GW where peak demand is just about 14GW. The government owned entities generate about 13GW which is over 90% of the peak demand and about 70% of the total capacity. Unfortunately, Malaysia has run into one of the pitfalls of energy markets in that, due to the power purchase agreements,  the TNB is having to pay for the excess generation by the independent power producers (IPPs) even though its of no use. The increasing cost has led to increased tariffs on the people, where the IPPs are enjoying huge profits.

Still we have to note the position Malaysia and some other countries were before they embarked on their privatization exercises. A lot of those countries needed funds from the private sector to help them increase their generation capacities, and not to solve their transmission and distribution problems. Ours is not a funding problem.

abodundef:

Nigerians dont need more than one point agenda from Mr Goodluck Jonathan, if i read our mind, it is 24/7 ELECTRICITY SUPPLY.
What is your take on this?

Gbam!!!!