₦airaland Forum

Omode o mo ogun, o n pe ni efo - A child being ignorant of medicinal herbs, trivializes them as vegetables.

Kekere ni at n pe eka Iroko; to ba dagba tan, apa o ni ka - From a sapling, one begins the pruning of an Iroko tree; when fully grown, it will be out of reach.

Adaba ko nooni a sun igbe; ina n jo, eioye n lo - The dove is unconcerned at the bush burning; As the fire burns, the bird simply flies away.

ayobobble:
PLease could someone translate:
OMO O TI JO O

Cheers

Omo, o ti ti jo o
Depending on intonation and context:
1. Child/pal/guy/person, you have lost weight
2. Child/pal/guy/person, you have failed/missed the point (more of a colloquial use)

Case study: A set of students have been cheating in previous exams, and by not getting caught, did much better than students that actually prepared honestly for the exam. Everyone on the outside perceived them as star pupils. A new invigilator takes over, and the students can no longer cheat, subsequently failing their exams. Who do you blame for the failure? 

When Soludo came into office, in his first speech he highlighted the problems in the banking sector as

a) weak corporate governance, evidenced by high turnover in the Board and management staff, inaccurate reporting and non-compliance with regulatory requirements, falling ethics and de-marketing of other banks in the industry;
b) late or non-publication of annual accounts that obviates the impact of market discipline in ensuring banking soundness;
c) gross insider abuses, resulting in huge non-performing insider related credits;
d) insolvency, as evidenced by negative capital adequacy ratios and shareholders’ funds that had been completely eroded by operating losses;
e) weak capital base, even for those banks that have met the minimum capital requirement, which currently stands at N1.0 billion or US$7.53 million for existing banks and N2.0 billion or US$15.06 million for new banks, and compared with the RM2.0 billion or US$526.4 million in Malaysia.
f) Over-dependency on public sector deposits, and neglect of small and medium class savers.

Surprisingly, he ignored the first four problems, and instead he went after the last two (by increasing the minimum capitalization requirement for banks to N25 billion). Five years later, He left the post of the CBN governor with said 4 problems still plaguing the sector.

Now Sanusi is doing what should have been done several years ago (even before the consolidation exercise) and everyone is now crying foul. If anyone is to blame, it is Sanusi's predecessors for not tackling the problems earlier, and the bank management for doctoring their books to make themselves look more profitable than they truly were. The banks are only now cutting their coat according to the material available to them.

While it is unfortunate that some people are losing their jobs, I find it preferable to the entire bank going belly up, in which case everyone would lose their jobs and the depositors would lose most of their money.

Abeem:
Good News! With Goodluck in the saddle, good luck is trailing Nigeria. The US has entered into joint venture with Independent Power Providers Association of Nigeria to help generate up to 10,000 megawatts of electricity by 2011. Punch Newspapers http://www.punchng.com/Articl.aspx?theartic=Art201002241361743

From the article
The United States government has said it will assist Nigeria to generate 10,000 megawatts of electricity by 2011.
The US Ambassador to Nigeria, Ms Robin Sanders, said this in Abuja on Tuesday during the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between the US government and the Independent Power Providers Association of Nigeria.
She said, “I am pleased that the US government is collaborating with the government of Nigeria and IPPAN to implement one of its top development priorities by increasing electricity generation to 10,000 megawatts by 2011.
“We are honoured to help Nigeria find a way to generate its electricity requirements through the private sector.‘‘
Sanders noted that the partnership would also help in reducing gas flaring, increase the use of renewable energy and improving clean energy practices.
The envoy, who also inaugurated the Nigeria Energy and Climate Change project, said that the project was part of the US government‘s efforts to promote the generation of clean power.
Sanders said that the NECC aimed at reducing gas flaring, generating clean power, while helping to mitigate the effects of climate change in the country.
She also said that the NECC would also promote commercially viable energy projects in Nigeria.
Earlier, the Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Mr. Odein Ajumogobia, had said that the current level of power generation in Nigeria was between 2,000 and 4,000 MW per day.
He noted that this represented a mere fraction of the power that some African countries, including South Africa and Egypt, were daily generating.
Ajumogobia, however, noted that by the end of 2010, about 70 per cent of the country‘s electricity would be generated from gas-fired plants.
He said, “As we approach 2015, we expect this proportion to rise to over 80 per cent with the generation of more power from gas-fired plants.

"MW per day"? 
no wonder we have inadequate power supply 

wait make we die before u try bury us. Nobody don qualify for 1/4 yet.

eyoniggar:
biina, dead guy, poor officiation is the
best you can come up with. Abegeeeeee

When your mediocre team lost to Lyon
no1 showed up on your thread.

There is a difference between poor and biased officiating
Typical Farca fan, paranoid totally

Dis one pass white elephant, and is looking more like a voltron project

Another poorly officiated game

See as lehman wan kill Puyol!!!

The dual pivot of Yaya and Busquet is not working for Barca, as Stuttgart are bypassing the middle and going down the flanks. Also Barca's having only Xavi as the only attacking midfielder is making it more difficult for them to sustain their usual pressure, while the high defensive line has resulted in them being caught on the break on more than one occasion.

Marquez got away with a missed penalty call.

Barca should be grateful it is still only 1-0 as they could have been 3-0 down.

Hleb wan kill farca!!!

agathamari:
70–95% of the total biodiesel production cost arises from the cost of raw material; that is, vegetable oil or animal fats (depends on how dirty the oil is). many places will actualy pay you to take it off thier hands if you know what your doing. many large scale farms, diarys, orchards, ranches manufacture thier own for thier generators, trucks and farm tractors. many companies sell kits to do it at home. if you recieve free oil (or if someone pays you to remove it) the total production cost is bewtween 85 cents to $1 a gallon though some places offer kits as low as 70 cents a gallon.

algae prodution does not take place in the ocean rather in tanks where conditions can be controled. being that nigeria in land mass is larger then 90% of the worlds countries, i would say yeah there is plenty of room for such.

The cost of the raw materials is low because there is low demand. The moment there is substantial demand, the price is likely to go up accordingly. The main argument would still remain for entities/industries that generate the raw materials as a by-product of their regular production, essentially eliminating it as a waste.

Large scale processing e.g. refineries is a different ball game entirely.

A bit off topic, but just to shed light on why WG are not going to solve the bar beach problem, here is a report that gives a brief outline of the problem as at 2002
http://iodeweb1.vliz.be/odin/bitstream/1834/540/1/AssWA_BB2002.pdf
On shore WG will not stop ocean storms, and the increased interference from WC installations could actually make things worse.

Beaf:
Seriously, I have ignored a lot of your questions and arguments, because most would win the trophy for daftness (and I just can't be bothered). Take this one for example;

meaning you couldnt find counter arguments.

Even a secondary school student with the most rudimentary knowledge of physics would know that, when you take energy out of a system, it remains taken out. Wave power plants can reduce the power of waves on the shore. In fact, several systems are designed for that exact purpose. Here are some answers for you. [size=14pt]Olodo![/size]

Even a secondary school student should know the meaning of x>>y

"The Mighty Whale is a floating OWC that has the double purpose of extracting wave
energy and providing a calm waters area behind it. It was tested in the Tokyo Bay until
May 2002, being dismantled afterwards."
http://www.wave-energy.net/Library/WaveNet%20Full%20Report(11.1).pdf

"Devices that are on-shore can have environmental benefits, such as helping to reduce the erosion of the landscape. Any devices off shore can have an effect on the aquatic life in that area but this again is very site specific and hard to predict. But anchoring systems can become almost like artificial reefs, creating a place for new colonisation."
http://www.esru.strath.ac.uk/EandE/Web_sites/01-02/RE_info/wave%20power.htm (University of Strathclyde in Glasgow)

"During standard operation Pelamis machines will be extracting energy from the sea state (and turning it into electricity) which will result in a reduction of wave energy in the direct lee of the project."
http://www.pelamiswave.com/content.php?id=154

"Thus while a noticeably calmer area might develop immediately in the lee of an ofshore wave power plant, the waves would be substantially re-established by diffraction 3 to 4 km shoreward of the plant"
http://oceanenergy.epri.com/attachments/wave/reports/007_Wave_Envr_Issues_Rpt.pdf

Wave power can indeed save bar beach with the added benefit of generating electricity.
But, left to dinosaurs like you, the Earth would be flat.

For on shore devices it is a moot point, as sections of the beach are replaced by the generators. You no longer have your beach. Yet this does not stop a tidal rise and subsequent erosion,
For offshore devices the effect is local (and i have already stated this). The bold part of your posts supports this. In fact the last ref you quoted summarizes it well.
When you have hard evidence, and not conjectures,you can then claim to be right.
So, No, there is no 'indeed' in it.

I am still waiting for you to provide details and/or answers to my question on your 'decentralization' solution 

Beaf:
Charlie, stop disgracing yourself! Damn!!!!!!!!!
You love talking, don't you? I'm not a talker.
You are talking more crap. You convert your energy into electricity through the piezoelectric effect. Its all neat and efficient.

Can you please provide your technical source (not wikipedia) that has shown that piezo-electric crystals can be combined efficiently to a thermoacoustic generator and state its capacity and efficiency?
FYI the two main forms of acoustic to electrical energy conversion used in TAEGs are magneto-hydrodynamic and linear alternator.

I've taught you something new in thermoacoustics today (a word that you had never heard about), now you want to start blabbing about stuff you've glanced at and don't understand. Today, you have learnt that you can convert solar energy to electricity (that would have increased your brain cells by at least one  ), it is your duty to go and read up on thermoacoustics, because that is the future (not your batteries and solar cells).

By the nature of my job, I learn new things everyday, but not from the likes of you in this field. Possibly there are other fields in which you are quite knowledgeable, as who knows, the sun shines even on a dog's behind once in a while

I am a bit late in the delivery of a technology website I promised here on NL, but I will release enough stuff there to shame one way thinkers and willing dinosaurs like yourself.

Mr Know-all who knows nothing.

. . .If I say more, I might blow your mind.

I am sure to anyone who knows anything about electrical power and energy/power generation, it is clear who the charlatan is.

That you have failed to respond to my questions on your proposed 'decentralized' solution just underlines the point I made earlier, that you think you know what you don't know.

Beaf:
What a ridiculous statement from our "expert"!
Stop posing, you are only wounding yourself and talking rubbish with confidence.
There is no point addressing the tonnes of verbage you dropped to confuse the unwary, I'll just finish you off with this;

"With a wire screen [10] or parallel-plate [11] regenerator, the engine of[b] Fig. 5 has produced acoustic power of 710 W or 1750 W[/b], respectively, each with an [size=14pt]efficiency of 30%[/size]."

http://www.lanl.gov/thermoacoustics/Pubs/ICSV9.pdf - Los Alamos National Lab (you might want to stop here to educate yourself on the origins of the atomic bomb). Even the earlier link I posted said they are as efficient as an internam combustion engine. Where in God's good name did you get 3.5% from? Youtube?

That would be something like 3 times more efficient than your run of the mill solar cell and bloody cheaper too. Damn! 

Expert, Mr Know-all. . .

and you just had to show your ignorance. 
Havent you heard that people who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Question for you: does your TV or computer run off acoustic (sound) energy? 
How much of your input heat gets to the heat exchanger? 
How much electricity can you get from your acoustic power? 

FYI There is a difference between a Thermoacoustic system and a ThermoAcoustic Electric Generator, TAEG. A TAEG is what you would use to convert  from heat via sound to electricity. A Thermoacoustic system is just a part of it. When you talk about efficiency, you look at the entire system and not just a component.

while you a busy deriding urself on a 2002 paper on thermoacoustics, here is a more recent (2008) result on a LA based TAEG  http://www.springerlink.com/content/y33h67h067146367/fulltext.pdf

From the paper:

Under 2800 W heating power, different output  electrical power could be obtained by varying the resistance of the rheostat. When Z = 100 , 97 W electrical power was obtained in the experiment.

You can compare Figure 1 in the new paper to Figure 5 in your original paper and see what happens to the bulk of your acoustic energy (wouldnt advise that you read the entire paper).

So what is 97/2800W? 

This is not your field of expertise and I really don't understand why you continue your futile attempts at pretending otherwise.

PapaBrowne:
Ah Ah Biina!!Why are your ideologies so 60s!
How on the planet can you be against privatisation/decentralisation in the power sector in a country where Government has failed in every sector it has engaged in while the private sector keeps thriving! MTel is Government and Glo is private. Thats enough of an example!

privatization does not equal decentralization. You should stop equating telecoms to the power sector, they are two different sectors with different needs. Most importantly is that you can never make the power sector a truly competitive market.

First, the Government lacks the will, the structure nor the intellectual capacity to provide adequate power for the country. Over 10 billion dollars has been spent and we are still talking about 2700MW! Doesn't that tell you already that neither the Government nor PHCN would be able to provide the power we need?

First step would be to make the PHCN autonomous and split its various phases.

Beaf and a couple other folks on here are pointing you to the future and you re arguing backwards!

Future? what evidence do you have to support your claim that this is the way forward? Has it worked somewhere?
That a technology exist does not mean that it is a viable solution in a particular situation.
Why dont you suggest that we start using electric cars, as we are always having fuel scarcity. After all electric cars are becoming popular in developed countries

The world is looking for ways to limit grid dependence, luckily we have already perfected the art of off grid living by powering our homes with  generators.

Who is limiting grid dependence? seeking renewable source of energy is different from trying to decentralize the power system. Can you tell me one developed country that doesn't have a grid? or do you think they are all stupid?

The government can take this further  by enacting legislation which would ensure that every newly built house would have solar roof tops and other possible sources of alternative energy.

So who will pay for the investments in these solar cells or all the other renewable sources? what  is the cost to benefit analysis that you have done that convinced you that it is a viable route or do you suggest we be doing trial and error? You guys should get off the renewable energy kool-aid.

mikeansy:
Binna wants to keep doing the same thing and expect a totally different result

At no point have I said PHCN should remain as it is. I simply disagree with the notion of 'decentralization'.

Beaf:
You are only pissed off at being shown up after claiming know-all status.

You have been making two deadly mistakes;
1. You pretend to know things you don’t and are dismissive when you are countered
2. You assume that you can’t possibly be talking to an expert

Most of your last post is just an attempt to confuse people with words and emptiness. You didn’t make a single worthwhile counter argument. I will deal with a couple of things I can sift from the largely meaningless post.

I dont pretend to know things that I dont, but I am dismissive of nonsensical suggestions, and from the first post you made, I am very sure you are no expert.

Why don’t Europeans consider that in their heavy investments in solar power? They get much less solar energy than us; we sit on the bloody equator. Some Northern European countries even have months of darkness (pick up your geography book). I guess they must be "daft".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Spain

The primary reason Europeans are investing heavily in solar and other renewable energy sources is not because it is economical, rather its is because most of them dont have accessible fossil fuels and don't like being held to ransom by the oil & gas producing countries, and, environmental concerns.
You are yet to tell us those countries that are heavily dependent on Solar energy, after all, if it such a brilliant idea, others should have considered it giving that solar energy is not a new development.

Have you ever been to the beach? You will notice that there are always strong winds blowing, even at ground level.

I know there are winds at the beach, I have only asked you to provide figures that make you think it is a viable source of energy and by the way, will we all have to buy a piece of land on the beach?

Mr know-all, what makes you think that any alternative power systems require batteries? Have you heard about heat storage? You might want to look that up, as well as their practical applications like storage heaters. Storing heat efficiently is very cheap.

The most efficient way to convert to/fro from electrical energy is the battery. That is why you dont use hot water/salt for your computer UPS! Heat storage is only more efficient when your final target form is the heat, like in water or space heating.

Everybody has a septic tank and a soakaway pit. They can generate electricity from waste food and human waste right where they are produced. . . Transport what?

So we should all start pumping out our unprocessed septic tanks. Thanks for the health concerns. When you are more familiar with bio fuel processing, we can revisit this.

. . .Unnecessary English.

I take it you have no idea of what I was talking about.  

Mr Know-all, why do you think the only way to generate electricity from sunlight is with solar cells?

You made reference to our solar radiation levels and I pointed you to the applicable technology.

It is so important not to be a technological dinosaur and keep up with developments. Have you ever heard of thermoacoustic heat engines? They are much more efficient than solar cells, they are also very cheap, extremely reliable, easy to manufacture and will provide a source of living for Nigerians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermoacoustic_hot_air_engine
http://www.lanl.gov/thermoacoustics/

Thermoacoustic engines are used to convert between heat and sound. In your solar case you would want to convert the sound produced into electricity using a piezoelectric or similar device that produce an EMF in response to pressure. The efficiency of the system is very low, with recent research results producing just 100W from 2800W of heat. i.e. 3.5% efficiency, while solar cells are typically around 12%

Now your negativity surfaces.

“The Spanish government is committed to achieving a target of 12 percent of primary energy from renewable energy by 2010 with an installed solar generating capacity of 3000 megawatts (MW).” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Spain

. . .That sounds like all of Nigeria’s current power output as solar energy in a European country!

So a target of 12% for all renewable energy sources is major?
1. Spain has the most sunshine of all european countries and subsequently they are the fourth largest producer of solar energy
2. The 3GW solar output is less than 3% of Spain's electricity demand
So if 12% is coming from renewable sources (solar, wind etc), where are they getting the remaining 88% from? why arent they getting the 100% from solar?

Simple physics says that when you take away some of the oceans energy, there will be less damage caused when it breaches shores, in fact it might never have enough left to flood the place anymore. Simple physics.

Unfortunately it is not that simple. The problem with the bar beach has as much to do with the topography of the beach itself as the force exerted by the wave. Secondly, the fraction of wave energy extracted is minimal and local i.e. the generator is a small unit that causes diffraction of the irregular wave, it does not mean a substantial change in force of the wave at the front.
I have not seen any research that correlated wave intensity at beach fronts to the installation of wave power generators, and I dont see how it would. Its like saying installing a wind wave reduces the amount of wind blowing.

When you decentralise, what would be the use of a grid, except to deliver energy to industrial areas or excess domestic requirements? The grid gets de-emphasised in many ways. Let that be your homework.

So there will be no grid in your decentralized system? I guess you dont know the purpose of the grid itself.
Quite an 'interesting' idea though. Please indulge me and describe in detail how this your decentralized system will work. A few questions to start us off
1. Will each individual house be responsible for its own power generation? if yes, how much do you estimate the average home will consume and which sources do you intend to use to meet this demand. Please provide cost estimates.
2. Will the industries and commercial users also have decentralized power generation or will the government still be supplying them off the grid?
3. How do you intend to get excess generation to domestic consumers who are no longer on the grid?
4. What about small scale industries and companies that are not collocated in industrial areas?

Beaf:
^
I gave the US example because you do not believe in the ability of Nigerians, you have been preaching that we copy others. Not only that, but you started out like some smug know-all dismissing decentralisation as nonsense, whereas that is the direction in which all sensible individuals and nations are looking.
Smug know-alls are the problem with Nigeria, they dismiss those who are talking sense, while talking bullsh!t and pulling us backward with all confidence.

Believe in the ability of Nigerians to do what?
I do not preach blind copying, rather that we look into the approaches used by others and learn from it. There is no such thing as a know-all, as nobody know it all, but it is not too difficult to know a lot about a particular issue.
You talk about decentralization solving our problems, yet you seem to have no idea about the infeasibility of the approach in the Nigerian context.  I ask you how many countries have adopted successfully the decentralized power sector that you are preaching?
I still repeat that a decentralized power sector in Nigeria is nonsense. We have a problems that have clear solutions, we dont need to create new problems

Nigeria's power sector is already decentralised (even if in a negative way), everyone has a generator. Why not take advantage of this and replace most of the energy from generators / PHCN with FREE solar energy and bio-energy from food / human waste (biogas) or FREE energy from wind or microturbines? This is simple forward thinking commonsense. This firm generates power from waste in the UK http://www.selchp.com/
With so much of consumtion taken care of, govt will be much freer and nimbler to provide and plan for all important industrial power supply.

Not every one has a generator like you claim, nor can everyone afford to maintain one. If the individual owned generators were working for us, why are you complaining?
You talk about solar energy, do u know what the expected power output per unit area is, particularly  in the south? Have you thought about the capital cost and lifespan of the installation?
Did you think about how much power power you can generate from wind turbines, at what wind speeds they are feasible, and if we have such wind speeds in Nigeria?
Have considered the environmental and cost for the auxiliary items, particularly batteries, that go with this irregular sources?
Did you think about the status of waste transportation and processing in Nigeria before suggesting Bio energy and did you consider the efficiency of the system?
Do you know what a power profile is, the importance of peak to average ratio in power generation, and how the residential and industrial area complements each other, before suggesting you allocate one to individuals and the other to the government?
Which do you think is more important - industrial/commercial or residential needs? It is the industrial, and yet you want to allocate same to a government you claim is incapable of providing the needed supply?

There is no greater insentive to the population than "FREE". We get several times more solar insolation that Europe, in fact, some parts of Northern Europe, it can be dark for months, in others daytime is between 10AM and 4PM. . . YET, they are leaders in solar energy use. All over the UK, there are solar powered lamps, railway utilities etc. But here in Nigeria, you're bullsh!ting people suggesting these things. Clap for yourself.
Practically every year, bar beach breaches its shores, wave power is another glaring example of FREE, easy to harness energy that is wasted in Nigeria http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_power

Free what? Will you get the solar cells for free? Do you know that the total average cost/watt for all this techhnology are much higher than fossil fuels, and even worse in a place like Nigeria when the NG is practically free?
All these examples you point to, where has solar been used as a primary source of power? Do we not have solar installations in Nigeria?
Wave power is unrelated to bar beach overflowing. Yet I doubt you have looked at the current state, pros and cons of the technology you are suggesting.

That piece of reasearch I linked to is an example of the US (the most advanced country in the World) looking seriously at decentralisation from the rural Indian viewpoint. It destroyed all the arguments you made, I can provide you a thousand and one other links. Now you are going on about India having 5x our population, what has that got to do with power generation, is it easier to decentralise for a billion people than it is for 140 million? You shock me.

For your information, demographics goes a long way in planning power delivery. The US has a region based grid system and each region is bigger than Nigeria. The problems facing India is different from that facing Nigeria, and also that facing large land masses like Russia and China. That you cannot recognize that transmission losses grow exponential when grid sizes exceed certain sizes is not my fault.

Then you go about picking on how I have used the term "bunkering". Petty.
Have you checked the true meaning of the word as against its use in Nigeria? When you find out, please take out a newspaper advert to correct all Nigerians, because you will be stunned that it doesn't mean illegal siphoning of crude oil, Mr Know-all.

Petty? you made a baseless accusation to back up your position, citing bunkering (which means to store) is a legitimate concern with Natural Gas, whereas in reality it is the opposite. One of the problems with NG is that it is almost impossible to store for transportation unless in liquefied form. You are not going to be carrying it around in tankers like fuel.

It is nothing personal, but I get pissed at everyone who are clueless about the power sector coming online to proffer solutions like they were experts in the field, while the only thing they know about the problem is that they dont have light at home. I am not saying people should not make suggestions (like I said earlier, nobody knows it all) but do not make declarative statements unless you know your onions. Example, someone raised a good point about the use of coal.

If you are still adamant on your 'decentralized solution', we can start discussing in detail with you clearly defining how it will be set up, and be ready to provide facts and figures to back up your position. Otherwise stop with the nonsense.

Dede1:
It is an unpardonably disingenuous and outright treacherous act for contributors to run around the forum with multiple handle names. I can satisfactorily declare that you are Kyuubi that gave me the link to 1960 constitution of Nigeria. I am grateful you gave me the link but pal you do not need to switch your forum handle names to make a point.

I do not 'run around' with multiple IDs and at no point have I denied owning two. This is my main ID, and I only use the other handle when this one is temp banned by the useless spam bot (last time was for a long post in the sports section). You wont me see using both simultaneously.

It is very interesting that you agreed with me that 1960 constitution was mirror image of 1963 constitution except the changes in the offices of Governor-General and Privy Council. Now I suggest you go beck to Section 63 Subsections 4C that dealt with the vacancy of the office of Prime Minister.

1. Dissolution of parliament is different from handing over power to the military. Dissolution is the dispersal of a legislature at the call of an election i.e. force end of tenure.
2. There was no failed legal attempt at appointing a new PM, as the matter was never brought before the house, and thus there was no basis for a dissolution.
Then handover to Ironsi was unconstitutional.

It is very funny you did not indicate in your early write-ups that UPGA boycotted the election but clearly stated that UPGA was defeated by NNA in 1964 election when in fact no seat was switched. I would want you to realize that election was boycotted due to cooked figures of the census. Some of the political positions being taken by people such you in today’s Nigeria beg for disintegration of the colonial contraption.

Elections were held (in which both NNA and UPGA won seats), and even without the boycotting constituencies, the NNA won. Winning an election is about having the majority and not how many seats changed hands. You can debate about the background to the elections, but that does not change that the 198 seats won by the NNA meant that they won the elections and had control of the house.

I shall leave you to discern that coup is a different ball game from mutiny. Believe me I am getting tired of these conjectural craps being offloaded onto the forum in order to justify the political treachery committed by certain stock of people in Nigeria. The fact that countless countries recognized a junta in Lagos does not make it successful. A successful coup does not experience a spot of military opposition talk less of a war.

A coup by military officers is an act of mutiny, same way a written defamation is libel.
That a junta is recognized does make the coup successful, and the fact that certain elements within the military (who could not mount a counter offensive nor lay claim to the position of CiC) do not agree is irrelevant. What next - that a farmer somewhere in zungeru does not recognize the head of state means that he is no longer the head of state? When Ojukwu's 'insubordination' drove him to declare Biafra, he was put in his place.When all is said and done, Gowon remained head of state for sevral years while Ojukwu lived in exile.

There was no clause in 1963 constitution that granted authority to the Head of State or President or Governor-General to execute anybody on any circumstance. Where are the ingredients of education we all received in Nigeria?

Following your argument, because the constitution doesnt grant the presidency the authority to imprison armed robbers, we have no legal right to jail them?
The matter of mutiny falls under the army act of 1960 and it fully authorizes the GOC to execute mutineers. Ironsi chose not to.

If Ojukwu’s demand for succession based on seniority that is common presence in military parlance of chain of command and adherence to strict discipline was pure naiveté, why are Nigerians swearing at Babangida, Abacha, Obasanjo, Buhari, Abubaker and scores of military officers that have ruined Nigeria stemming from Gowon’s usurpation of authority?

What are you talking about? The IBBs and co were guilty of how they ran the country.
Nzeogwu and co shot their senior officers, was that Gowon's fault as well? Coup plotter do not recognize the authority of those who are not in support of their coup irrespective of their seniority, that is why they are mutineers and Ojukwu would have known that basic fact, after all, danjuma and co had killed Ironsi, the highest ranked officer

When Gowon created the 12 states out of 4 regions in Nigeria knowing fully well he did not have control of the Nigerian armed forces in eastern region of Nigeria, Gowon contravened the constitution he allegedly swore to uphold.

Its funny that you see Gowon's actions as head of state being unconstitutional, simply because some section of the military did not agree with him. Should those who disagree not be classified as the mutineers? We can debate (though I doubt there is any reason to) Gowon's intentions for creating the 12 states but Gown had the full authority to create the 12 states.

Your post highlights my problem with some people on this thread, who refuse to acknowledge any fault on the side of their kinsmen. Ironsi screwed up,period. That does not change the fact that Ojukwu, Gowon, Murtala, Obasanjo, Shagari, and all our other useless leaders, irrespective of origin, also screwed up. But you would rather be selective in your criticism.

@Beaf
Firstly, until our educational system is at the forefront of research and development,  Nigeria will always be behind the curve. that has little to do with PHCN, and more with ASUU and the Govt.
Its funny how you accuse me of preaching that we follow others, and to buttress your point you provide a research from a US firm on India (a report I doubt you read) and I wonder how much of India's power sector is now decentralized.? Keep in mind that India has over 5x our population
You want to deregulate the power sector  and put the nation at the mercy of private institutions, and yet I doubt you have done the due diligence to research the experience in various other countries.
Your funniest contribution was the suggestion of people bunkering Natural Gas. There is a difference between NG and LNG
Let us know when you have your 24/7 solar generation system.
People like you are the bane of the Nigerian society. You think you know what you do not know.

@wumiabo
The factors affecting coal v gas generation include
1. The Natural gas is already a by-product of our crude oil mining and while the coal needs to be mined.
2. Coal generates almost 2x the CO2
3. It is easier to transport the gas, than coal
I dont know the state of the coal mines in Enugu, but most communities will rather not have mining done in their backyard. I do agree that, even if as a backup, we should still maintain some coal generation systems. The good news is that transforming thermal station from coal to gas  and vice versa is quite feasible.

Beaf:
We need to decentralise power supply and all other utilities. Govt has no business running these things, it should be limited to setting, standards, guidelines and policies.

As a developing country, we need to be looking into the future, always nimble and ready to change direction with fast paced development. It is easier for the govt to enable each person generate their own energy or subscribe to an independent supplier, than be bogged down with mammoth and unwieldy utilities.
The only exception should be power supply to industry. Govt (local, state or FG) is best suited to supply this.
For residencial areas and the individual household, the govt should encourage (even subsidise) efforts in solar, wind, microturbine technology etc. Any shortfalls can be topped up by private energy companies.

We blindly copied the way things were done in the UK without giving a minutes thought to the fact that at the time of our independence, Britain was an extortionate empire; so like a dictatorship, it required strong centralisation of every controlling facility. We were neither an empire nor did we have anyone to extort, but ourselves.

Even advanced economies are beginning to realise that the centralised energy supplier system is not fit for purpose.

While i understand your disappointment in NEPA, your suggestions hint that you have little to no idea about power generation and delivery. That the Nigerian government has failed in its endeavor is not a closing argument that proves that government has no biz in utilities.

trueword:
As a developing country there is nothing wrong with nigeria looking at outside example of how the power situation is taken care of. I'm saying for one power company to supply power for nigeria. That is too much power to give to one company. But if a state wants to have its power done by a private company or state run company they should be allowed to. If some states agree to have a regioanlized power company they should be able to do so. I'm just tired of this NEPA/PHCN junk. we need to get federal government hands out because they have had their chance and have not delivered.

There is nothing wrong in looking at outside examples. In fact, either as individuals or as a nation, it is very good to learn from the mistakes of others, as life is too short to learn from your (or our) own. The problem is with blind and selective copying without any regards for the context. Each country would have made their own decision based on their history, circumstance, resources and objectives. We should be smart enough to analyze it in detail, using hindsight, and looking at examples from other developing nations and not just the developed ones.

The problem is not the size of NEPA, but the structure and its attachment to the FG. The utility needs to be made autonomous not privatized, and restructured to better highlight its shortcomings and improve transparency. People that shout privatization are often clueless about the problems that plague NEPA, nor are they aware of the consequences of privatization and/or local generation. Cost of electricity grows exponentially as you reduces capacity. A simple comparison of the cost of 15KVA from NEPA to running a 20KVA generator at 3/4 load for a month illustrates this
NEPA = NGN 3.4K while Generator=NGN 380K for only fuel and I have excluded the capital cost of buying the generator and maintenance & repair. that is over 10x increase in cost.

I dont see how you still believe that the fed. govt is capable of power generation after they have siphoned away billions in the name of bringing stable power. until political interests are removed from power, nothing is going to move forward.

I have not said that NEPA should remain in its current form, but simply disagree that privatization is the solution. NEPA should be split according to its function, with distribution and revenue collection further divided on region basis.

What blackout are u talkin about? Where u getting your info from? Which U.S. states have their government as the power company?

I am sorry but I dont have the patience to be putting up links. Google is your friend. You can start at the US EIA.
FYI nebraska doesnt even have a single private utility.

trueword:
Oh really? So a country like the U.S. has stable power because the government is the one running the power sector.  In the U.S. private companies run the power situation and everything is going fine. These companies are interested in investing in new technology to help reduce costs and improve efficiency, so they have a stake in making sure that things are working correctly in order for them to make money. These govt. people don't care if light is on or off as long as they get their cut of the money, which they will then use to buy big generator and lots of fuel.

Billions of dollars have supposedly been spent on power, but there is nothing to show for it. No private company that wants to stay in business would throw away billions of dollars.

So the argument that privatization won't work doesn't isn't true.

Nigerians are always quick to jump at foreign examples and never consider their local situation. US senators have no limit on tenure, should we also apply same to Nigerian senators simply because it works for the US?

Anywhere in the world, electricity is a non competitive market, and consumers have no choice in who they get their electric power from. It is simply a function of location. This essentially puts the consumer at the mercy of the provider, but the Nigerian system does not have the check and balances required to protect the interest of the people.

Looking at the US, of the 3273 electric utilities, only 210 (6%) of them are private, providing 38% of utility installed capacity, 42% of generation, 66% of sales and 67% percent of revenue. They have essentially localized themselves in the few high density cities where the high population gives them the largest profit margin, while the rest of the country are catered for by the government owned entities, who are forced to deliver at poor margins as they cannot leverage the high density areas to lower their cost. The private institutions extort money from the people when opportune with about 50% increase in less than 15yrs, and when the pricing is unfavorable they end up in bankruptcy and require government funds to bail them out e.g. PG&E was bailed out with $400 million tax payers money. The absence of a national grid has also led to local black out in major cities in different regions including California, Texas and New York. All this in a system where things are suppose to work.

There is no question that we have a problem in our power sector, but it is ill advised to think privatization is the silver bullet that would save our situation, when it would only make a bad situation worse. Rather what we need is the break up of the three phase of the network, making each unit autonomous and sectioning the distribution network. The private sector can be brought in on the generation side, and even then the risks outweigh the benefits.

trueword:
If Jonathan really wants to take care of the power situation, he needs to get government hands off of power. Look what happened to telecoms once the government let go of it stranglehold on the industry.  He either needs to allow any state that wants to come off the national grid to do so (as long as they show proof that they can provide power for their state) or he should completely let power to be handled by private companies who will be interested in making sure that facilities and equipment are running in top shape. Until one of these is done or until we get trustworthy people in government, uninterrupted power will just be a pipe dream.

Power is not telecoms. Privatization of electric power will be the ruin of the sector.

Dede1:
This is one of most ridiculous craps I have read on this forum. This conjectural nonsense that is devoid of any sound reasoning and in conjunction with many bastardized smear campaigns against a particular ethnicity in Nigeria engender the nationalistic feelings that call for disintegration of Nigeria.

If anyone wants to blame Ndigbo, I say go ahead and do so but while on it be human enough to proffer correct reasons for doing so. It is either you are simply disingenuous or ignorance of the facts.

UPGA did not loss the election but boycotted the said election. The alliance boycotted the election in order not honor the nationalistic and democratic picture such election will reflect on the government of Tafawa Balewa. The number of seats did not change in the parliament as UPGA did not field candidates in the strong hold of NNA.

Ignoring the earlier nonsense, let address the real issues.
In the 1964 elections, all the parties were under 2 alliances NNA (NPC, NNDP & co) and UPGA (NCNC, AG &co). In the first round of elections, due to UPGA organized boycotts in the eastern region and lagos , only 261 constituencies were contested (51 were boycotted) and the NNA won 198 seats (out of a total of 312) giving them the majority in the house irrespective of the result of the boycotting constituencies. Supplemental elections were held in march 1965 and the NCNC won all the 51 seats to give them a total of 108. The UPGA lost the elections.

Fielding a candidate does not equate to popularity. If you were not popular enough to have the people honor your call for a boycott, then it can be said that you could not be popular enough to win the elections. No where in the world does an election equate into a democracy as a judge of a democracy is what is done when in office and not defined by how he got into it. Azikiwe and NCNC were in bed with the NPC prior to the elections and were left with the short end of the stick when the NPC found the alliance they needed in the NNDP. Boycotting the elctions was just crying sour grapes.

Again, please educate yourself on the issues such as coup and mutiny.

I have provided you with the relevant sections of the army act of 1960 which states clearly that mutiny is punishable by death.  If you have a counter reference please provide it.

On the constitutionality of Orizu handing power over to Ironsi, I am of the view that you still have many paragraphs to read in order to start getting the wind and intrigues of parliamentary government, hence the hand the over of power.

Again, I have earlier provided you with a link to the 1960 constitution (which you also admit has minimal difference from the 1963 revision). If there is a section of the constitution that authorizes the senate president or acting president to hand over power to the GOC please point it out, else the handover was unconstitutional.

It was not the sole responsibility of Ironsi to engage in the trail and execution of the coup plotters. Besides in matters of life and death, court-marshal was not the final arbiter of such issue in 19966-Nigerian era.

At no point did I say that a court martial was final, as the military was under the commander in chief, and thus can be overruled by the head of state. Point was Ironsi had the legal right to execute the mutineers as deserved but he chose not to. In fact, they weren't even put on trial. The gowon panel you like to make reference to was constituted in June 1966, and was too little too late. Subsequent government have not waited 6 month to try and execute coup plotters.

For posterity sake, if justice was ever denied, it was not to northern region of Nigeria but to all Nigerians because the government led by Tafawa Balewa was not government of northern region of Nigeria. I think you are getting my drift by now and realizing how disingenuous you have appeared on this subject matter.

Justice was denied to the northerners when their prominent sons in the government , including the crowned prince of sokoto, and in the military were killed in cold blood, with the perpetrators not tried, talk less of being punished. You cannot claim that the Igbos felt as aggrieved about the deaths of Balewa and Sardauna like the northerners did, same as the northerners cannot claim anything similar about the pogrom or civil,war.

I would want you to remember that July 29, 1966 coup was unsuccessful because the eastern region of Nigeria was not under the control of the coup perpetrators. Since there was no outright authority over Nigerian armed forces, negotiation ensured. Like a true professional, brave and disciplined soldier, Ojukwu simply demanded the reign of chain of command which is the major supreme military doctrine of the armed forces of all countries of the world. While in Aburi, Ghana, Ojukwu, as a discipline soldier who did not need the salary from the armed forces to make a living, adamantly demanded that Brigadier Ogundipe (COSS), who is a Yoruba, should be Head of State and C-in-C in the absence of Ironsi. Remember Ojukwu could have easily requested for the power sharing but towed to the military doctrine.

This is hilarious. The July coup was successful as the entire world recognized Gowon as the head of state of Nigeria. To demand seniority take precedence is to be naive about the implications of a coup. A coup plotter seeks to obtain power with total disregard for seniority. Ojukwu knew his demand would not be met, and eventually, after the needless shedding of blood, Ojukwu had to go into exile while Gown remained in power. Ojukwu's wish was never granted.

Ojukwu broadcasted the resolution of the meeting at Aburi, Ghana before Nigerian side would have opportunity to tweak it into deliberate falsehood. This pre-emptive measure piqued the Gowon and Nigerian side. Gowon subsequently divided Nigeria into 12 states and Ojukwu retaliated by declaring eastern region of Nigeria an independent state of Biafra.

Gowon himself accepts that he did not follow the Aburi accord to the letter, instead claiming he had done everything in the 'spirit' of the accord. Like Adekunle said, Gowon was indolent, and Ojukwu had out-maneuvered him at aburi. He was simply trying to bully his way through his mistake.

On July 6, 1967, Gowon and Nigeria declared war on Biafra.

Ojukwu implicitly declared war when he announced an independent state within a sovereign nation without the approval of the hosting government. The police action was just a formality. Gowon had reiterated that any attempt at secession would be met with force and yet Ojukwu went ahead. What did you expect from Gowon - a thank you note?

I have no interest in try to paint one ethnic group as being responsible for the problems of Nigeria, but rather see as the consequence of poor decisions by the leaders. I however have a problem with Igbo always trying to play the victim card as if they were innocent bystanders in the events that led to the civil war, when in truth they were right there at the genesis of the problem.

6-2 bashing of Villarreal keeps the pressure on Farca. CR started it off with a superb freekick, followed by braces from Pipita and Kaka, and  Alonso got his first goal to round things up. VdV also made a comeback.

[flash=480,385]http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/rk6OOxqNo3g[/flash]

Firstly, I am not speaking about the haiti case in particular, but more on the general topic of detonations and earthquakes.

Underground detonations cause seismic waves and their magnitude is usually not large enough to solely cause an earthquake. But 'causing' an earthquake is different from catalyzing it. At present it is impossible to precisely predict the time, location and magnitude of an earthquake. What you have is a probability of occurrence. Natural causes of major earthquakes are usually tectonic and volcanic. The process usually involves a buildup of forces (strain, shear, stress, pressure etc) and the measurements of these forces (and the restraining opposition) is used to predict the probability of occurrence. Fault lines are places where the earth's crust has been 'separated' and thus are more susceptible to earthquakes (as one side can more easily move independent of the other and are opposed mainly by friction). Given a fault location that has a build up of seismic forces, it wouldn't take much of an explosion to tip it over and result in a major earthquake. Thus while you cannot just point to a spot anywhere on the earth and hope to 'create' an earthquake, it is a much easier task to facilitate it in an earthquake prone region. Like ripping a paper, once an initial tear or strain is present (e.g. from folding), the rest is much easier. You only need a matchstick, and not a blow torch, to light up a fuel tanker.

How close the detonation needs to be to become a sufficient trigger would depend on several factors including the projected epicenter, the nature of the surrounding crust and upper mantle, and how much energy is required to tip it over i.e. how 'ripe' is the location for an earthquake. Seismic waves decay as they travel and can propagate for over a 1000km underground before losing most of their energy. They lose their energy faster in air and water due to fluidity of the medium (resulting in permanent displacement) and interference from other wave sources. Radiation from the explosion on the other hand doesn't propagate well underground because of the density, with very high frequency waves like x-rays and gamma-rays not going beyond a few meters (e.g. x-ray cannot penetrate dense objects like bones).

All these being said, there are too many ifs and maybes involved to make a weapon to trigger earthquakes practical, as the first thing you want in a weapon is control of where and when the damage occurs. Also countries affected by major fault lines are not high enough in number to spend that much money in designing a weapon that might one day, if we are lucky and are at war with them at the right time, might possibly, cause an earthquake. What is possible though is for irresponsible detonations to trigger an earthquake.

On HAARP: While theoretically it is possible to heat up the earth crust (like the sun does) using EM waves like you have in a microwave oven, it is practically impossible. First major problem is the amount of power that would be required to make a significant difference in the crust temps is not available, second is the lack of directionality in the radiation reflected from the ionosphere, thirdly is that radiation does not penetrate well beyond the earth crust, and fourth is that the effect is localized around the transmitter and decays as you move away as the angle of incidence/reflection increases and the propagation path increase and hence intensity decreases.

Dis Guy:
Please what is Agbe? don't know if i got the spelling right but a word used to describe a farmer like a proper conc. farmer

Agbe = farmer ?

yep.
Aroko b'odun de!