₦airaland Forum

When people think of billion-dollar commodities or international trade negotiations, charcoal rarely makes the list. It evokes images of open-air markets, village kilns, and weekend barbecues , not oil rigs and OPEC meetings. Yet imagine if Nigeria treated charcoal with the same seriousness as crude oil, complete with production quotas, export benchmarks, and even a national revenue allocation formula.

In Nigeria, the word “sector” almost always points to oil and gas. And for good reason. We have the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC), the Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), and the almighty NNPC Limited, all under the Petroleum Industry Act and benchmarked against Brent crude. Every barrel is tracked from wellhead to wallet.

Cocoa also has its ecosystem: the Cocoa Farmers Association of Nigeria (CFAN), the Cocoa Research Institute, and the International Cocoa Organisation guiding prices and production. Gas has its Decade of Gas initiative, complete with aggregators, export targets, and policy blueprints.

But where does that leave charcoal?
Nigeria has the National Charcoal Producers, Dealers, Exporters and Afforestation Association of Nigeria (NACPDEAN) , an umbrella body advocating order in the trade. Yet beyond this, the sector is largely informal. What’s missing is a structured framework clear rules, enforceable standards, and a value chain that could transform charcoal from a rural hustle into a national asset.

How Other Countries Treat Charcoal
Nigeria is not alone in producing charcoal, but it stands out for not knowing exactly where the commodity belongs. Other African nations have already given it a home.

Kenya: Charcoal is part of the Forestry sector, regulated by law through Charcoal Producer Associations. Licenses are required for production, transport, and sale, with strict sustainability enforcement. Kenya sees charcoal not as a by-product but as a managed forest resource.

Uganda: Charcoal falls under the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development. A National Charcoal Strategy links it to household energy, employment, and climate goals treating charcoal as energy, not just smoke.

Tanzania: Charcoal is jointly managed by Forestry and Energy because it provides over 80% of household cooking fuel. In Tanzania, charcoal is the kitchen’s lifeline—an essential energy commodity, not an informal trade.

Namibia: Charcoal is an export commodity under the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. The Namibia Charcoal Association ensures global quality certification, branding, and international sales. Namibia’s charcoal is packaged, standardized, and shipped worldwide.

Nigeria’s Grey Zone
In Nigeria, charcoal floats in limbo , not quite forestry, not quite energy, not quite agriculture. Officially, it sits under the Ministry of Environment for licensing, but there’s no dedicated policy framework or regulatory clarity.

If Nigeria borrowed models from Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, or Namibia, it could finally “house” charcoal properly.
Forestry could claim it , tying it to afforestation and sustainability.
Energy could regulate it as a domestic fuel source.
Agriculture could oversee it as an agro-commodity.
At the very least, it deserves a defined home.

The Missed Opportunity
According to the FAO, the global charcoal market is worth about $5 billion annually. Nigeria exports roughly 1.9 million metric tons of charcoal (both legal and illegal) each year, earning an estimated $75–100 million. Compare that to crude oil’s $45–50 billion in annual revenue and it becomes clear: Nigeria is allowing a potentially valuable commodity to slip through the cracks of informality.
But charcoal isn’t just about money. Formalizing the trade could promote sustainable forestry, create rural jobs, and strengthen environmental governance in producing states like Kogi, Kwara, Oyo, and Nasarawa. Imagine headlines like:
“Federal Government Launches National Charcoal Strategy — Producing States to Receive 13% Derivation.”

Of course, challenges would arise. Overharvesting could trigger environmental concerns, and illegal exports would still demand enforcement. But with the right policies, monitoring, and incentives, these issues are manageable.

The Bigger Picture
Nigeria has a pattern of regulating only after a resource has already been abused. Oil theft drains billions. Cocoa and cashew flounder under weak policies. Charcoal, legalized for export since 2023, now suffers from poor communication and enforcement fueling underground trade instead of sustainable growth.

So, what if Nigeria gave charcoal just 20% of the seriousness reserved for crude oil?
We wouldn’t need an NNPC for charcoal. We’d just need clarity:

Assign it to a specific sector.
Define responsibilities.
Set standards.

Communicate and enforce consistently.
Charcoal doesn’t need to be the new oil. It only needs structure, transparency, and sustainability. Because in the end whether for cooking, heating, or export black gold doesn’t always come in liquid form.

...Exporting Value, Importing Loss: Fixing Nigeria’s Broken Charcoal Chain

BY MR. EBENEZER AKARAH

The recent clarification by the National Charcoal Producers, Dealers, and Exporters Association of Nigeria (NACPDEAN) confirms what many have misunderstood: charcoal exports are legal, provided exporters meet the regulatory requirements. Yet confusion persists among stakeholders and the public. This reflects a larger national problem, policies that exist on paper but are poorly communicated and weakly enforced. Instead of fueling growth, such ambiguity stifles opportunity.

Contrast this with Namibia, a country with a fraction of Nigeria’s economy. By adopting clear regulations, transparent licensing, and robust monitoring, Namibia has turned its charcoal sector into a structured, profitable industry. Producers there can plan long-term, investors trust the system, and the government reaps steady revenue. Nigeria, meanwhile, continues to stumble through a haze of unclear rules and missed opportunities.

If there is no export ban, and regulations supposedly exist, why then are we not seeing growth in production, trade confidence, or foreign exchange inflows from charcoal? The answer is simple: unclear communication and weak enforcement. Unless this gap is bridged, Nigeria risks forfeiting a valuable non-oil revenue stream at the very moment diversification has become a national survival strategy. With clarity, collaboration, and proper regulation, charcoal could generate jobs, boost foreign exchange, and promote sustainable forest use.

Consider the small bakery owner in Lagos whose Instagram page was suddenly restricted. Sales collapsed, but she had no idea why. Weeks later she discovered the cause: a background music clip in one video violated an unfamiliar rule. By the time she resolved it, she had lost 40% of her revenue. That is Nigeria’s forest economy in miniature-crippled not by lack of demand, but by silent, unclear rules that cost billions.

Yes, Nigeria recorded $1.586 billion in exports and processed 27,721 containers at the Lilypond Command in the first half of 2025. But experts warn much of this “boom” is an illusion, propped up by weak institutions, currency instability, and trade distortions. Charcoal reflects this broken system. While Namibia exported 270,000 tonnes worth N$1.3 billion in 2023, at structured prices and with sustainability certification, Nigeria managed just 443 tonnes valued at $119,470, with no standard pricing or oversight. Kenya too sells at $770 per tonne thanks to community forestry and certification, while Nigeria’s poorly managed trade leaks value and delivers minimal state revenue.

The UAE still welcomes Nigerian charcoal as one of its few natural exports...a rare diplomatic opening. But where Namibia and Kenya send clean, certified shipments, Nigeria often delivers unverified consignments, leaving foreign distributors to profit at our expense.

NACPDEAN has been clear: since January 19, 2023, charcoal exports have been permitted. Exporters must obtain a support letter from the Ministry of Environment, secure Ministry of Finance approval, pay duties, and commit to afforestation. The rules exist. The problem is poor communication, inconsistent enforcement, and loopholes that push trade into informal and unregulated channels.

What Nigeria needs is a transitional framework that balances economic opportunity with environmental responsibility. A three-pronged approach is key :

Clear and collaborative regulation developed with stakeholders, environmental experts, and community leaders.

Technological enforcement through digital permits, traceability systems, and community forest management.

Export certification aligned with international sustainability standards, enabling Nigerian charcoal to access premium markets.

With proper integration...clear HS codes, sustainable certification to meet EU standards, export benchmarks tied to global prices, and training for women and youth in efficient, low-emission production, Nigeria could unlock $2–3 billion from its forest economy.

The lesson from Namibia and Kenya is straightforward: regulated supply earns higher prices and credibility. Nigeria already has the production scale; what it lacks is management, enforcement, and vision.

The forest is paying. It is time for Nigeria to collect. By investing in clarity, traceability, and fairness, we can transform this smoldering potential into a vibrant, sustainable source of national revenue.

HUMANIIST:
This are the main reason men die on time....
Seun complete the remaining character

fergie001:
https://dailytrust.com/breaking-preachers-must-submit-sermons-for-approval-in-niger-gov-bago/?fbclid=IwY2xjawM0CuxleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHlJyQ5Bobkzml9LGB9XYb-JFb5iLLL-V9wi7Sam6Yy1xNd-o3G5qekzQcR5V_aem_xtcM4PvNYhYmq6p1OaKY9w

BadNews:
https://www.instagram.com/share/reel/BAXJTSxN7X

Source: https://www.google.com/amp/s/thenationonlineng.net/phynas-sister-buried-in-ogun-after-tragic-accident/amp/

Canada has denied 1,596 asylum claims filed by Nigerians so far in 2025, fresh data from the Immigration and Refugee Board show.

Sunday PUNCH reports that the figures, updated to August 21, indicate that Nigerian nationals filed 3,548 claims so far this year, of which 2,292 were accepted.

This puts the acceptance rate at about 65 per cent, higher than in previous years when rejections cumulatively amounted to over 13,000.

An analysis by Maple Crest Law, a Canadian immigration practice, earlier estimated 3,455 Nigerian claims in early 2025, placing the country among the top sources of asylum seekers alongside Mexico, India, Haiti and Colombia.

Violence from Boko Haram, combined with economic instability, fuelled the departures, the report says.

Ontario and Alberta currently host the largest numbers of asylum seekers.

The IMRB grants refugee protection in Canada if the RPD satisfactorily confirms that an applicant or claimant meets the United Nations definition of a convention refugee, “which has been incorporated into Canadian law, or that the applicant is a person in need of protection.”
The 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees defines refugees as persons who have a substantiated fear of persecution because of their race, nationality, religion, political ideology or membership in a particular social group.

Such social groups can include sexual orientation, gender identity, being a woman and persons living with HIV/AIDS.

However, persons asking for protection in Canada must show evidence portending danger of torture, risk to their life or risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment should they return to their country of nationality.

Typically, such protection claims are made when immigrants notify the Border Services Agency at any port of entry upon arriving in Canada or report to an immigration officer.

“The officer decides whether the claim is eligible to be referred to the IRB.

“If the claim is eligible, it is sent (“referred”) to the RPD to start the claim for refugee protection process,” an application guideline by the Refugee Board reads.

By comparison, official records show that in 2024 alone, 811 Nigerian claims were rejected, while 2,230 were approved.

However, data published by the Canadian Government show applications eased slightly in 2025, with about 19,660 filed in the first two months of the year.

However, application volume remained far above pre-pandemic levels.

The IRB, which decides refugee protection claims, has faced criticism for delays as its backlog swelled in recent years.

The breakdown of the rejections since 2013 showed that 127, 241 and 248 Nigerians were denied protection in 2013, 2014 and 2015, respectively, under the new system for determining refugee protection claims made in Canada—which took effect on December 15, 2012.

A total of 476, 917 and 1,777 claims were rejected in 2016, 2017 and 2018 respectively.

BY EBENEZER AKARAH

When the federal government announced at the 2025 Forest Economy Summit its plan to unlock $2 billion from Nigeria’s forest economy, it sounded like real progress. The Vice President, Kashim Shettima, stressed urgency, warning that over 90% of our original forest cover is already gone.

Yet, there’s a contradiction at the heart of this initiative: while advocating a sustainable forest economy, the government is quietly restricting charcoal exports a forest product with huge export potential. It’s like finding treasure but blocking the path to it. We can’t talk about “trees into trillions” while sidelining the very product tied most directly to them.

True, the federal government lifted the charcoal export ban in mid-2023, but it wasn’t a full repealit was conditional. Customs issued Circular No. 8 mandating that all charcoal exports must now carry approval letters from the Ministry of Finance and identification from forest officers at ports. Exporters who fail to meet these conditions, or if Nigeria misses the EU’s December 2025 deadline for non-deforestation sourcing, risk facing another full ban. In reality, this isn’t freedom it’s regulation by exclusion.

Charcoal, though often controversial, is more than fuel. It is a biofuel, an export asset, and a source of livelihood for rural communities. In a nation battling climate change, there’s a clear paradox: our forests are shrinking, yet charcoal remains invisible in national policy. By refusing to classify it as a formal commodity, Nigeria is missing the chance to regulate its production, establish export frameworks, and set price benchmarks. The result is continued forest loss driven by decades of unsustainable practices and a lack of regulatory structure.

We must move from damage control to sustainability. That requires supporting afforestation, reforestation, and policies that recognize forest-based livelihoods rather than erase them. Ignoring these systems means losing more than treeswe lose communities, culture, and people.

The shift we need is to see forest products like charcoal not as threats but as assets: managed responsibly, regulated wisely, and integrated into a greener economy that serves everyone, especially the next generation.

Charcoal Is Powering Other Economies; Why Not Ours?

Take Namibia, a country of just 3 million people with a semi-arid landscape. In 2023, Namibia exported 270,000 tonnes of charcoal worth $80.5 million. Compare that to Nigeria with a far larger population and richer forests which exported only 443 tonnes that same year, valued at just $119,470. Of this, $54,000 went to the UAE; the rest trickled into Europe. Let that sink in: a country six times smaller is earning hundreds of times more from one forest product.

This isn’t a production problem it’s a policy failure. Nigeria has greater reserves, stronger climatic advantages, and steady demand from the UAE, EU, and Asia. Yet we don’t regulate, protect, or price the industry. Instead, we allow income to leak away through informal channels and black-market trading.

The UAE, for instance, allows very few natural exports from Nigeria and charcoal is one of them. But with weak documentation, many shipments remain unrecorded. While our neighbors formalize trade, we let ours operate in disguise.

Industry research projects the global charcoal market to hit $11.4 billion by 2030. Nigeria is losing more than 99% of its potential revenue due to the absence of a formal export policy or commodity status for charcoal.

This vacuum has ripple effects. Producers face exploitation and underpricing. Government earns no tax revenue from a booming informal export sector. Climate finance and carbon credits are out of reach because the industry isn’t tracked. Worst of all, local communities where over 70% of charcoal collectors are women and youth, particularly in the north-central and southwest remain trapped in poverty.

Towards a Smarter Policy

Instead of tightening restrictions, Nigeria should recognize charcoal as a valuable commodity central to its $2–3 billion forest economy agenda.

The recent forest economy summit showed renewed interest in land use and non-oil revenue. But unless charcoal is included in that conversation as a registered, regulated, and priced commodity, the effort risks being counterproductive. We’re producing the resource, but killing its potential through policy neglect.

The solution is not prohibition it’s formalization. Charcoal must be recognized as a legal commodity within trade and forest policies. We need clear export frameworks backed by sustainability protocols to meet global demand. Local cooperatives must be empowered with training and access to markets. Digital monitoring systems should be deployed to regulate harvesting and attract climate finance.

Charcoal is more than just fuel it is revenue, jobs, and foreign exchange. As the world shifts toward sustainable biomass, the answer isn’t restriction but smart regulation. Nigeria has the potential to lead, but only if we build a smarter and sustainable policy.