The annual Global Energy Show was held in Calgary from June 9 – 11, 2026. DMG Events stages the conference. According to DMG senior vice president Nick Samain the show generally serves as a good barometer of what’s going on in the energy sector – and that’s on the upswing.
Samain said “Approximately 38,000 attendees were present and there were representatives and delegates from over 100 countries. It undoubtedly was the best show in the past decade ever since the oil price collapse in 2014 – 2015”.
The three-day event included hundreds of speakers and exhibitors from around the globe. It served as a massive hub for cross-border collaboration across oil and gas, hydrogen, renewables, clean tech, nuclear and AI data centres.
Speakers included Tim Hodgson, Canada’s Federal Energy and Natural Resources Minister, who touted the country’s position as a global energy superpower. He reminded the audience that Canada was the world’s fourth largest producer of crude oil and the world’s fifth largest producer of natural gas.
Other high-ranking executives and public officials included the premier of Alberta, Danielle Smith and John McKenzie from Canada’s Cenovus Energy. Also represented was Jim Wright, chair of the Railroad Commission of Texas, a regulatory agency for oil and gas and pipeline safety in the U.S. Musabbeh Al Kaabi, chief executive of the state-owned Abu Dhabi National Oil Company was also a keynote speaker as well as Haitham Al Ghais, secretary general of OPEC. Attendance at this year’s Global Energy Show also significantly increased due the attendees’ concerns about global energy security. Concurrent with this event, was the closure of the Strait of Hormuz amid the war in Iran which sent global oil prices through the roof and raised serious about global energy supply.
Ekperikpe Ekpo, Nigeria’s minister of state for petroleum resources (Gas), was part of a panel on The New Global Oil and Gas Order: Power, Alliances & the LNG Super-Cycle. Minister Ekpo told a crowd of hundreds “There are immediate and practical opportunities for Canada and Nigeria to partner on liquified natural gas-related projects”. He invited Canada to partner with Nigeria “at this very point in time” to address global energy security. “We need you now more than ever. Our message is simple: partner with Nigeria to build infrastructure, deploy technology and mobilize capital”.
Ekperipe Ekpo, Nigeria’s Minister of State for Petroleum (Gas), addressing an attentive audience in Calgary, Canada
Nigeria was ably represented by Lagos and Port Harcourt-based companies having booths including Well Fluid Services, Geoplex Drilling Limited, Goddie Chemicals International Limited, Offshore Petroleum and Marine Logistics, Jeshawn Engineering Limited, McKian Energy Solutions Limited, Poseiden Energy Services Limited, and Odekole International Services Limited. Also represented was NipeX – Nigerian Petroleum Exchange as well as the Petroleum Technology Association of Nigeria (PETAN). I interviewed Kevin Nwanze, Executive Director of PETAN and he told me that approximately two hundred Nigerians were present at this year’s event. Many of them first attended the Offshore Technology Show (OTC) in Houston, Texas in May and then travelled north to Calgary to be at the Global Energy Show. He said that “Being here was worthwhile for Nigerians to assess business opportunities in Canada and elsewhere. It is also an opportunity to build business relationships”. In 2027, the Global Energy Show will be held June 8 – 10.
In front of the NipeX booth is Tako Koning with Biyi Ishola (left) who represents U-Lead Multiservices Limited in Calgary. Their headquarters are in Lagos.
Tako Koning is a Senior Geologist based in Calgary. Koning has a B.Sc. in Geology from the University of Alberta and a B.A. in Economics from the University of Alberta. He was employed by TEXACO from 1973 – 2002 in Canada and also in Indonesia, Nigeria and Angola. In Nigeria, from 1992 – 1995, he was Assistant Managing Director (Exploration) for Texaco Overseas Production Limited (TOPCON). From 1996 – 2015 he worked in Angola for Texaco, Tullow Oil and Gaffney, Cline & Associates. He has been an active member of Africa Oil + Gas Report’s International Advisory Board for twenty-four years since the publication was founded in Lagos in 2001.
An Open Letter to the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, Federal Republic of Nigeria
His Excellency President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces Federal Republic of Nigeria State House, Aso Rock Villa Abuja, Nigeria
Good Afternoon, Mr President, Sir.
With the utmost respect and humility, I write this open letter to Your Excellency.
This is my first open letter to you since you assumed office as President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
I have chosen to write now because I firmly believe that, after the Almighty God, the Creator and Sustainer of all things, the next greatest earthly responsibility rests on the shoulders of a nation’s President.
The office you occupy carries not only immense constitutional authority but also the sacred responsibility of taking decisions that shape the destiny of millions of Nigerians.
It is from that deep conviction, and from my sincere love for our country, that I respectfully seek Your Excellency’s attention on a matter of profound national importance.
I write this as a patriotic Nigerian who still believes that leadership is sometimes proven not by what a President builds, but by what he has the courage to cut away.
You started by belling the cat through the removal of fuel subsidy and the liberalisation of the foreign exchange market, which no Nigerian President had ever succeeded in doing.
Mr President, NNPC Limited has four diseased fingers attached to the body of Nigeria. These four fingers are the government-owned crude oil refineries: Port Harcourt Refinery I, Port Harcourt Refinery II, Warri Refinery and Kaduna Refinery.
For decades, these refineries have failed to deliver dividends to the good people of Nigeria. Since the 1980s, they have consumed money, consumed hope, consumed public patience and consumed the proceeds of our upstream oil and gas sector. Yet they have failed to provide the nation with reliable refining security.
Mr President, these four fingers have become a burden Nigeria can no longer afford to carry.
Every year, substantial revenues are earned from our upstream oil and gas sector. Yet a significant portion of those resources disappears into the endless cycle of maintaining failed downstream assets.
Funds that should strengthen healthcare, education, security, roads, electricity and critical infrastructure are instead swallowed by refineries that continue to underperform.
This cannot continue.
The fifth finger used to be Eleme Petrochemicals. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo demonstrated courage by removing that asset from government control through privatisation.
Today, under Indorama’s management, Eleme has grown into one of Nigeria’s leading petrochemical success stories.
It stands as clear evidence that when government steps back from running commercial enterprises and allows competent investors to manage them, value is created, industries expand and jobs follow.
So why is NNPC Limited still holding on to the remaining four dead refinery fingers?
Why are Nigerians still being told the same refinery story after more than two decades of disappointment?
Why do we continue to hear of turnaround maintenance, rehabilitation, technical partners, inspection visits, foreign experts, mechanical completion and yet another promise that operations will begin within the next 24 months?
Why should Nigerians believe another refinery promise when previous promises have consistently ended in silence?
Mr President, God and history have placed before you a rare opportunity. Your journey from humble beginnings to the highest office in our land is remarkable and inspiring.
But legacy is not built by avoiding difficult decisions.
Legacy is built by taking the decisions others feared to take.
The future of these four refineries is one of those decisions.
Mr President, I respectfully urge Your Excellency to direct the leadership of NNPC Limited to transfer these four refineries to the National Council on Privatisation and the Bureau of Public Enterprises for a lawful, transparent and competitive privatisation process to be concluded within one year.
Let the Bureau of Public Enterprises advertise the assets openly.
Let qualified transaction advisers be appointed.
Let reputable local and international investors compete on equal terms.
Let the valuation be transparent.
Let the terms of sale be made public.
Let Nigerians know who is buying these assets, what they are paying, what they intend to invest, how they plan to operate the facilities and the guarantees they are prepared to provide.
A practical ownership structure could allocate 85 per cent to core investors, five per cent to the respective host states and retain 10 per cent for the Federal Government.
Such a structure would minimise political interference, attract long-term capital, protect host community interests, preserve a strategic national stake and give investors the confidence required to commit significant resources.
If the reported Chinese partners are genuinely interested, they should participate openly in the bidding process.
Let them compete fairly with every other qualified investor. Let them demonstrate their financial capacity, technical competence, refinery experience and commercial plans before the Nigerian people.
But national assets should never be transferred through the back door.
Do not call privatisation a “technical partnership.”
Do not call asset transfer an “evaluation.”
Do not call control “collaboration.”
Do not disguise a concession as a Memorandum of Understanding.
Nigeria has suffered too much from opaque public asset transactions. An arrangement that lacks transparency today may become tomorrow’s litigation.
A poorly structured transaction may expose Nigeria to arbitration, prolonged legal disputes and the possible seizure of national assets abroad.
We must not create another avoidable national embarrassment.
The lawful route already exists through the National Council on Privatisation and the Bureau of Public Enterprises.
That is the path to transparency.
That is the path to investor confidence.
That is the path that best protects Nigeria’s long-term interests.
Mr President, NNPC Limited should not continue dragging Nigerians through another endless refinery journey. The corporation has had decades to prove that government ownership can work.
It has spent enormous public resources. It has made countless promises.
The refineries remain the verdict.
They are not monuments to industrial achievement.
They are monuments to failed public management.
Mr President, this is a defining moment.
Release Nigeria from the burden of these failed assets.
Allow competent investors to rebuild them.
Allow the host states to participate in their future.
Allow the Federal Government to retain a strategic minority interest.
And allow NNPC Limited to focus on what it should be doing, expanding upstream production, securing crude supply, protecting national reserves, strengthening pipeline infrastructure and creating value for the Nigerian people.
Nigeria can no longer afford to spend productive upstream revenues sustaining unproductive downstream assets.
Those resources belong in our hospitals, our schools, our roads, our power sector, our security institutions and in creating opportunities for millions of young Nigerians.
The time for endless rehabilitation has passed.
The time for decisive reform has arrived.
Mr President, this is a legacy decision.
Privatise them transparently.
Concession them transparently where appropriate.
Liquidate those that can no longer be economically justified.
Above all, let every decision be guided by the law, openness and the national interest.
The Chinese are welcome to compete.
Nigerian investors are welcome to compete.
Investors from every part of the world are welcome to compete.
But the process must belong to the law, not to administrative discretion.
History will record what is done with these four refineries.
Future generations will judge whether this administration finally ended decades of waste or merely prolonged them.
Mr President, the Nigerian people are watching with hope. They look to your administration not simply for another promise, but for the courage to make the decision that others postponed.
Sometimes, healing begins only when a diseased part is removed.
With courage, transparency and fidelity to the law, Your Excellency has the opportunity to remove these four diseased fingers, restore strength to the Nigerian economy and leave behind a legacy of bold reform that generations yet unborn will remember with gratitude.
BP’s recent decision to eliminate its standalone Low Carbon Energy division and reorganize around upstream and downstream hydrocarbons is more than a corporate restructuring.
It is one of the clearest signals yet that the assumptions underpinning the global energy transition are being reassessed.
For much of the past decade, BP positioned itself as the oil major most determined to reinvent itself. Under its previous leadership, the company sought to transform from a traditional oil and gas producer into an integrated energy company, reducing emphasis on hydrocarbons while expanding investments in renewable energy and other low-carbon businesses.
Today, that strategy is being recalibrated.
Some observers see this as evidence that the energy transition is failing. Others view it as vindication for those who argued that oil and gas would remain dominant for decades.
Both interpretations miss the deeper lesson.
BP’s restructuring does not signal the end of the energy transition. Around the world, investments in renewable energy, battery storage, grid modernization, electric mobility, hydrogen, biofuels, and energy efficiency continue to grow. Electrification remains one of the defining trends of the twenty-first century.
What BP’s decision reveals is something else entirely.
The greatest challenge facing the energy transition is no longer technology.
It is financing.
For years, many policymakers, investors, and activists assumed that major oil companies would become the primary vehicles through which the world transitioned away from fossil fuels. BP embraced that vision more aggressively than most of its peers.
Yet investors increasingly questioned whether low-carbon investments could consistently generate returns comparable to those available in traditional oil and gas businesses. At the same time, global energy demand continued to rise, oil and gas markets remained resilient, and concerns about energy security returned to the forefront of policymaking.
The result is not a rejection of energy transition.
It is a recognition that energy transitions are ultimately constrained by economics.
BP’s decision should not be interpreted as an industry-wide retreat from lower-carbon energy. Companies such as Chevron, Shell, and TotalEnergies continue to invest in carbon reduction technologies, renewable power, biofuels, hydrogen, and other transition-related opportunities. The difference is increasingly one of emphasis rather than direction.
Across much of the industry, the emerging consensus appears to be that hydrocarbons will finance the transition rather than be rapidly displaced by it.
This reality reinforces an argument I advanced in an earlier article: the future of energy will not be built without hydrocarbon-generated capital.
That statement is often misunderstood.
It is not an argument against renewable energy.
Nor is it an argument for perpetual dependence on fossil fuels.
Rather, it is an acknowledgment of a simple reality. The capital required to build the future energy system must come from somewhere.
Today, a significant portion of that capital continues to originate from hydrocarbons.
Oil and gas revenues fund government budgets.
Oil and gas revenues fund sovereign wealth funds.
Oil and gas revenues support infrastructure development.
Oil and gas revenues strengthen corporate balance sheets.
Even many investments associated with the energy transition continue to depend, directly or indirectly, on wealth generated from fossil fuel production.
This reality is especially important for Africa.
The continent’s challenge has never been choosing between hydrocarbons and renewables.
Its challenge is financing development.
For many African countries, hydrocarbons remain among the few available sources of large-scale investable capital capable of funding electricity access,
industrialization, transportation infrastructure, human capital development, and economic diversification.
Yet history offers an important warning.
Hydrocarbon wealth is not development.
It is development capital.
History demonstrates that resource wealth alone creates neither prosperity nor industrialization. Numerous countries have earned enormous revenues from oil and gas while achieving limited economic transformation. The difference between success and failure has never been the existence of resource wealth itself. The difference lies in institutions, governance, policy discipline, and the ability to convert natural capital into productive capital.
Hydrocarbon revenues can finance transformation.
They cannot substitute for it.
This distinction is critical because the debate is often framed incorrectly.
The choice facing Africa is not between producing hydrocarbons and pursuing energy transition.
Nor is it between economic development and climate responsibility.
The real challenge is using today’s resource wealth to build tomorrow’s economy.
That means investing hydrocarbon revenues in power infrastructure, manufacturing capacity, transportation networks, technology ecosystems, educational institutions, and globally competitive industries.
In short, it means transforming finite resource wealth into enduring economic capability.
BP’s decision also highlights a broader shift in how the energy transition itself should be understood.
For much of the past decade, many discussions assumed a future in which renewables would rapidly replace hydrocarbons. Reality is proving more complex.
Across much of the world, energy demand continues to grow faster than new energy sources can fully displace existing ones.
Renewables are expanding. Electricity demand is expanding. Natural gas remains essential in many markets. Oil demand remains substantial. Developing economies continue to require increasing amounts of affordable and reliable energy to support industrialization and rising living standards.
The emerging reality is not simply one of energy replacement.
It is one of energy addition.
The world is still transitioning, but it increasingly appears to be transitioning from a hydrocarbon-dominated system toward a hydrocarbon-plus-electricity system rather than rapidly eliminating hydrocarbons altogether.
That distinction has profound implications for Africa.
It suggests that the continent may have a longer window than many anticipated to convert hydrocarbon wealth into productive assets before global demand eventually peaks and declines.
But a longer window should not be mistaken for an unlimited one.
The opportunity remains significant, but it is not permanent.
Countries that use hydrocarbon revenues to build productive economies will be better positioned for the future.
Those that merely consume resource wealth will find themselves increasingly vulnerable as the global energy system evolves.
Ultimately, BP’s restructuring is not a story about the failure of energy transition.
It is a story about the economics of transition.
It is a reminder that aspirations must be financed, infrastructure must be funded, and transformation requires capital.
The future of energy may well be lower carbon.
But for much of the world, and especially for Africa, the capital required to build that future will continue to come from hydrocarbon-generated wealth for decades to come.
The real question is not whether Africa should produce hydrocarbons.
The real question is whether Africa can convert hydrocarbon wealth into the infrastructure, industries, and institutions that ultimately make hydrocarbons less necessary.
Oil is not Africa’s future.
But for much of Africa, oil may still be the capital that finances it.
Sola Adebawo is an energy industry executive and strategic advisor with nearly three decades of experience across Africa’s oil and gas sector. He is the Chief Executive Officer of Hyphen Partners Limited, a specialist advisory firm focused on policy and regulatory intelligence, market entry, stakeholder strategy, and executive positioning in complex and highly regulated industries. He writes on energy, industrialization, development sovereignty, and Africa’s economic transformation.
Nigeria’s Upstream Crisis Is No Longer About Oil. It Is About Liquidity.
Nigeria’s oil and gas sector is confronting a dangerous contradiction. At the precise moment indigenous operators have assumed unprecedented control of national production assets, the financial infrastructure supporting the supply chain beneath them remains structurally fragile. The consequence is increasingly visible across the industry: delayed projects, contractor insolvencies, inflated operating costs, and avoidable production disruptions, all driven not by a shortage of work or capital, but by the inability of money to move through the system efficiently.
This is not fundamentally a regulatory crisis. Nor is it merely a procurement inefficiency. It is a liquidity infrastructure failure.
Across the upstream sector, billions of naira in contractor receivables remain trapped within elongated approval and payment cycles. Indigenous service companies routinely wait between six and twelve months for invoices to clear, despite contracted work already completed, verified, and operationally recognised. Multiple contractor groups estimate outstanding receivables across the industry now exceed ₦1Trillion at any given time.
The effects ripple far beyond delayed payments. Rigs are demobilised while approved invoices sit inside approval chains. Technical manpower is lost as contractors struggle to retain skilled personnel during prolonged cashflow gaps. Suppliers inflate bids to absorb financing risk and currency volatility. Entire projects become more expensive before execution even begins.
What appears administratively inconvenient at the surface is, in reality, quietly eroding the economics of Nigerian production.
The instinctive response has been predictable: calls are being made for more regulation. Mandate payment timelines. Impose penalties. Increase reporting obligations. Strengthen compliance provisions.
“What Nigeria requires is a coordinated industry-wide liquidity framework built around shared digital supply-chain finance infrastructure, standardised invoicing protocols, transparent approval systems, and pre-qualified financing institutions operating within common governance standards.”
Yet Nigeria’s upstream sector is already heavily regulated, and still operates payment cycles several multiples above international norms. Adding additional layers of procedural enforcement to a system already congested by approvals and reconciliations risks worsening the very bottlenecks reform is supposed to solve. Compliance accumulation is not the same as institutional efficiency.
The deeper issue is that the industry continues to treat contractor payments as an administrative obligation rather than what they truly are: production infrastructure.
This distinction matters enormously.
In most mature energy jurisdictions, liquidity is deliberately embedded into the supply chain architecture itself. Operators understand that financially distressed suppliers eventually become operational risks. As a result, the strongest energy ecosystems increasingly use digital supply-chain finance platforms not as optional fintech enhancements, but as strategic resilience mechanisms.
The model is straightforward. Once an operator validates that contracted work has been completed and an invoice approved, a financing institution pays the supplier immediately at a competitive discount rate. The operator then settles the financier on its normal payment cycle.
The implications are transformative.
The supplier gains immediate working capital without relying on punitive commercial borrowing. The financier assumes exposure based primarily on the operator’s creditworthiness rather than the contractor’s balance sheet. The operator protects operational continuity across its supply chain while reducing hidden inflationary costs embedded within contractor pricing.
In effect, the system removes the weakest financial participant from carrying the largest financing burden.
That correction is urgently needed in Nigeria.
Today, many indigenous contractors borrow at commercial rates exceeding 25% to execute projects for operators whose effective cost of capital sits at a fraction of that level. In a volatile FX environment, delayed payments effectively force contractors to absorb multiple cycles of naira depreciation while simultaneously financing ongoing operations. Unsurprisingly, suppliers respond rationally: they build financing risk into bid prices, inflate contingencies, and transfer liquidity costs back upstream into project economics.
Nigeria’s payment culture has therefore created a hidden production tax across the industry.
Global operators recognised this structural problem years ago. Chevron operates supplier financing arrangements that allow approved invoices to be discounted for early payment. Shell, BP, TOTALEnergies, and Petrobras have adopted comparable structures across multiple jurisdictions. More recently, ADNOC partnered with Comera Financial Holdings to launch an intelligent financing platform that converts approved procurement obligations into accelerated supplier liquidity for SMEs across the UAE energy ecosystem.
These are not corporate social responsibility initiatives. They are operational risk management systems.
The logic becomes even more compelling within Nigeria’s evolving production landscape. Indigenous companies now account for more than half of the country’s oil output. That transition fundamentally changes the nature of the payment crisis. This is no longer primarily a question of how international majors treat local vendors. It is now a strategic test of whether Nigerian operators can build financially resilient supply chains capable of sustaining long-term production growth.
That challenge cannot be solved through fragmented interventions.
What Nigeria requires is a coordinated industry-wide liquidity framework built around shared digital supply-chain finance infrastructure, standardised invoicing protocols, transparent approval systems, and pre-qualified financing institutions operating within common governance standards.
This is where industry associations and operator groups become critical. Organisations such as the Petroleum Contractors Trade Section (PCTS), the Petroleum Technology Association of Nigeria (PETAN), and the Independent Petroleum Producers Group (IPPG) are uniquely positioned to drive sector-wide coordination around payment digitisation and supply-chain liquidity architecture.
The objective should not be regulatory compulsion. It should be institutional alignment.
A properly designed platform would require neutral governance arrangements involving operators, contractor associations, financial institutions, and regulatory observers to ensure transparency, auditability, dispute management, and financing integrity. Technology itself is no longer the barrier. The larger challenge is collective coordination and industry willingness.
But the incentives for cooperation are already overwhelming.
A functional digital SCF ecosystem would dramatically strengthen indigenous contractor sustainability by lowering working-capital costs and improving cashflow predictability. It would reduce project delays linked to supplier distress. It would improve procurement transparency and generate data visibility across the supply chain, enabling operators to identify performance risks, cost leakages, and operational bottlenecks in real time.
Most importantly, it would strengthen production resilience in a sector increasingly competing for globally mobile capital. Investors no longer merely evaluate reserves. They evaluate execution ecosystems. Jurisdictions that can move projects efficiently, finance suppliers sustainably, and coordinate operations now enjoy a significant competitive advantage in attracting long-cycle investment.
Nigeria therefore stands at an important inflection point. The country has spent years expanding indigenous participation within upstream operations. But ownership without liquidity resilience creates fragile growth. A supply chain starved of working capital cannot sustainably support national production ambitions.
The industry does not lack capital. It lacks financial mechanisms capable of moving liquidity efficiently through the operational chain.
That is why digital supply-chain finance matters.
Not because it is fashionable. Not because it is technologically impressive. But because in a capital-constrained upstream environment, liquidity itself has become production infrastructure.
The operators that recognise this early will not simply build healthier contractor ecosystems. They will build more resilient barrels, more competitive project economics, and ultimately a more investable Nigerian energy sector.
Having spent years working across supply chain strategy, procurement systems, sustainability governance, and industry coordination within the energy ecosystem, I strongly believe this transition is both achievable and overdue. The sector already has the operational actors, financial institutions, and digital capabilities required to make this work. What is needed now is alignment, convening, and execution discipline.
“In most mature energy jurisdictions, liquidity is deliberately embedded into the supply chain architecture itself. Operators understand that financially distressed suppliers eventually become operational risks. As a result, the strongest energy ecosystems increasingly use digital supply-chain finance platforms not as optional fintech enhancements, but as strategic resilience mechanisms.”
Should industry stakeholders, operator groups, financial institutions, or policymakers choose to advance this conversation, I would be pleased to contribute, facilitate engagement, and support the development of practical frameworks to help translate this concept into an operational industry solution.
Dr. Emeka Eboagwu, CMILT, fACSC, is a global social sustainability expert and energy economist based in the United Kingdom whose work focuses on petroleum sector governance, supply chain sustainability and energy policy reform. Contact: eeeboagwu@gmail.com
In April 2026, the World Bank repeated a familiar prescription, one of many that have never guided any developing nation toward genuine success. The pattern is predictable: a prescription, followed by confusion, and ultimately chaos. This time, it urged Nigeria to reopen petrol imports to moderate inflation. The argument was wrapped in technocratic language, but the message was unmistakable. Nigeria is being asked to return to the very trap that weakened its economy for decades. This recommendation is not reform; it is regression. It is unacceptable and should not even be entertained by the country.
Nigeria must be especially cautious about the World Bank’s longstanding neoliberal globalization doctrines, which dominated the 1980s through the early 2000s. These principles have now been significantly disrupted by a rising wave of economic nationalism, epitomised by President Trump’s aggressive tariff regimes. It is telling that the World Bank would never offer this kind of advice to China, Brazil, Indonesia, or the United States.
Nigeria heeded the World Bank’s calls for FX liberalization and the removal of fuel subsidies, yet the consequences have been severe: rising poverty, social strain, and economic hardship, largely because the country lacks strong domestic production capacity. Nigerians supported those reforms because they seemed rational and necessary. Against this backdrop, it is baffling that the World Bank now recommends reopening Nigeria’s petroleum products market to foreign dumping. The contradiction is as striking as it is unacceptable.
Nigeria’s history with fuel importation is a history of dysfunction. It produced chronic scarcity, inflated costs, a corrupt subsidy regime, and persistent foreign exchange crises. Every litre of gasoline imported drained the nation’s reserves. Every spike in global crude prices delivered immediate economic pain. Import dependence was never a temporary inconvenience; it was a structural failure. I have analyzed, reviewed, and criticized these systemic flaws extensively in several of my previous writings. Through my experience in the oil and gas sector, I witnessed this rot from the front row, and I repeatedly advocated and pushed for reforms even when such efforts seemed futile.
Today, however, Nigeria stands at the brink of a different future. The Dangote Petroleum Refinery has already begun reshaping the country’s energy landscape. Since fuel imports were curtailed, the refinery has become the primary source of petrol in Nigeria, significantly increasing domestic supply and expanding exports across Africa. This capacity is measurable and undeniable. The refinery confirmed producing 50Million litres of PMS in January 2026. The product is also of higher quality than what was previously imported.
Allowing widespread fuel imports to return at this moment would not increase competition. It would destabilise a sector that is only now beginning to find its footing. The Dangote Refinery has stabilised domestic petroleum prices at levels significantly below those prevailing in neighbouring, import-dependent African countries. The assertion that reopening imports will automatically lead to lower prices is factually untenable and unsupported by recent evidence.
Import dependence drains scarce foreign exchange, weakens the naira, and exposes the entire economy to global volatility. Nigeria has already been warned that rising global crude prices, intensified by geopolitical tensions, could add roughly 3.1 percentage points to national inflation. The Dangote Refinery has helped stabilise the naira, with the exchange rate strengthening from over NGN 1,600 per US dollar to below NGN 1,400. Reopening fuel imports would exert renewed pressure on the currency, triggering depreciation and leading to cost‑push inflation.
The World Bank’s recommendation focuses narrowly on theoretical competition while ignoring the consequences of undermining a strategic national industrial asset just as its benefits are beginning to materialise. The Dangote Refinery is not merely a fuel supplier; it is the anchor of a broader industrial resurgence. Aliko Dangote built Africa’s largest cement company. He built the continent’s largest fertilizer plant. He has established manufacturing footprints far beyond Nigeria, including significant operations in Ethiopia, where Dangote Cement stands as one of the largest producers and employers. These enterprises transformed entire value chains, reduced imports, strengthened domestic supply, and created industries that now serve multiple regional markets.
Nigeria’s own experience in cement is deeply instructive. Dangote Cement eliminated Nigeria’s dependence on imported cement by building robust local capacity. Beyond Nigeria, the company replicated this achievement in countries such as Ethiopia, Zambia, and Senegal. The same transformation is underway in the fertilizer sector, where Nigeria is emerging as a continental hub through the Dangote Fertilizer Plant. If Nigeria reopens fuel imports now, it will effectively sabotage its opportunity to replicate this success in the petroleum sector.
It is particularly ironic that the author of the World Bank report is from Ethiopia, a country where the Dangote Group is currently conducting surveys to identify a suitable site for a petroleum products tank farm and pipeline infrastructure to support Ethiopian energy security. The World Bank, by contrast, has not undertaken any comparable project to strengthen Africa’s energy capacity in more than four decades. It is therefore unsurprising that the institution’s influence continues to diminish across developing nations. If the World Bank had been asked to recommend investment in the Dangote Refinery during its inception, it is highly likely it would have declined. One must hope that this recommendation is not part of a coordinated effort, aided by local collaborators, to push Nigeria backward, as occurred with the collapse of the textile, automobile, and agricultural industries.
The refinery is already exporting to Ghana, Togo, Cameroon, Tanzania, and other markets, and several African governments, including South Africa, are pursuing long‑term supply contracts. This is not dominance; it is integration. It represents a gravitational pull toward Nigerian industrial capacity. There is no scenario in which Nigeria enhances its economic sovereignty by sidelining its own refiners in favour of foreign suppliers.
The argument that fuel imports will reduce inflation is shallow. It presupposes that cheaper fuel is available, that imported fuel is of comparable quality, and that the long‑term costs of sustaining import dependency are justified by short‑term relief. Fuel imports not only transmit global shocks directly into the domestic economy, but they also place permanent pressure on foreign exchange reserves and weaken the naira. Even the World Bank’s own report acknowledged that recent price spikes were driven by global tensions, not domestic constraints. Reopening imports would simply import these shocks wholesale.
Dan Kunle is Nigeria’s most subscribed Energy Analyst
The global energy map is being redrawn, and Africa is back at the centre of it.
Since the Russia-Ukraine War, Europe has been searching for alternatives to Russian energy. That search has sharpened into urgency in recent weeks, as escalating tensions between the United States and Iran disrupt global oil flows and rattle one of the world’s most critical supply corridors.
Energy security, once assumed, is now being actively rebuilt.
African producers, from Mozambique to Senegal to Nigeria, have become newly strategic. Cargoes are being redirected. Contracts accelerated. Supply chains quietly reconfigured.
But beneath this renewed engagement sits a contradiction that is becoming harder to ignore.
The same global actors seeking long-term energy supply from Africa, including the United States and European partners, are also advancing climate financing frameworks and policy signals that constrain new fossil fuel development across African economies.
“When energy systems are stressed, priorities reveal themselves quickly. Europe is securing supply. Markets are reallocating toward stability. Capital is flowing to where rules hold.
Africa is participating in this system, but not fully on terms that support its own internal resilience.”
Africa, in effect, is being positioned as a supplier of hydrocarbons to the world, but not necessarily as a beneficiary of them at home.
That tension is no longer theoretical. It is showing up in real time.
Consider Nigeria.
In recent weeks, as global oil markets tightened following disruptions linked to the U.S.–Iran conflict, Europe has increased its pull on alternative fuel sources, including refined products from West Africa. Nigerian-linked jet fuel cargoes have moved into international markets where pricing is clearer, contracts are enforceable and payment is predictable.
At the same moment, inside Nigeria, airlines are confronting a different reality: the prospect of grounding planes for lack of affordable fuel.
Jet fuel prices have surged to levels operators describe as unsustainable. Carriers are cutting routes, consolidating schedules and modeling shutdown scenarios. In a country where aviation is not optional but connective infrastructure, the consequences are immediate. Flights do not just move passengers. They sustain commerce, coordination and continuity across distance.
The contradiction is difficult to miss: a country exporting fuel into a functioning global market while its own airlines prepare for disruption.
This is not simply a failure of local coordination, though domestic constraints are real. It is also a function of how global energy markets behave under pressure.
When supply shocks hit, commodities and capital move toward certainty. Buyers with stronger currencies, clearer pricing frameworks and enforceable contracts secure supply first. Producers, rationally, follow those signals.
Markets do not prioritize geography. They prioritize predictability.
The current crisis has only accelerated this logic.
European governments, facing immediate political and economic risk, are acting decisively to secure supply. For them, Nigeria represents resilience in a tightening market.
For Nigeria, the same dynamic translates into internal scarcity at precisely the moment stability is most needed.
Overlay this with the broader climate policy environment, and the imbalance becomes structural.
African countries are being encouraged, and in many cases financially steered, to limit long-term investment in fossil fuel infrastructure. U.S. and European-backed financing frameworks increasingly favour low-carbon projects, while support for hydrocarbons becomes more conditional or constrained.
Yet global demand for those same resources has not diminished. In moments of crisis, it intensifies.
The result is a system that pulls African energy outward while limiting its role inward.
That raises questions current policy frameworks tend to sidestep.
Can countries build reliable domestic energy systems if the most bankable uses of their resources are external? Can energy security be achieved locally when global demand consistently outcompetes domestic need? And can a transition be considered equitable if it stabilizes some regions while exposing others to deeper volatility?
These are not abstract concerns. They are visible now in flight schedules, fuel invoices and operational decisions being made in real time.
They are also not arguments against climate ambition. They are arguments about alignment.
In many African economies, hydrocarbons remain part of the infrastructure required to power industry, sustain transport systems and support economic expansion. Removing them from the development equation without viable, scaled alternatives does not accelerate transition. It redistributes risk.
The past few weeks have made one thing clear.
When energy systems are stressed, priorities reveal themselves quickly. Europe is securing supply. Markets are reallocating toward stability. Capital is flowing to where rules hold.
Africa is participating in this system, but not fully on terms that support its own internal resilience.
If that misalignment persists, it will do more than shape outcomes in moments of crisis. It will define the architecture of the global energy transition itself.
Because an energy system that exports stability and imports scarcity is not a transition.
It is a transfer of risk.
————————————————————-
Sola Adebawo is an institutional strategy and public affairs leader with deep experience at the intersection of energy, governance, policy, and strategic communication. His writing explores reform, political economy, leadership, culture, and the relationship between institutions and public life. He is an author, scholar, and ordained minister.
The rise of Namibia as one of the world’s most closely watched oil and gas frontiers did not happen by accident. Long before the wave of supermajors and billion-dollar discoveries, a small group of local pioneers were working to position the country as a serious player in global energy markets. Among them, Knowledge Katti stands out for both the scale of his ambition and the lasting imprint of his work.
Today, Katti serves as Chairman and CEO of Custos Energy and as a Director at Sintana Energy – roles that place him at the centre of Namibia’s ongoing exploration and investment story, including some of the country’s most significant recent offshore developments.
Ownership Before Access
Katti’s journey into energy was not conventional. He began his career at PwC (formerly Coopers & Lybrand), where he audited some of Namibia’s largest companies including Rössing Uranium. It was here that he developed a critical understanding of ownership structures – and a growing concern. Namibia’s resources were generating significant value, but that value was largely accruing to foreign shareholders rather than Namibians themselves.
That realization became a defining driver. From early on, Katti focused not simply on participation in the sector, but on ownership – arguing that Namibians needed equity stakes in their natural resources if the country was to fully benefit from its wealth.
Katti’s early efforts to enter the resources sector were met with resistance. At the time, local players were often told they needed foreign partners before they could secure licenses. Meanwhile, junior companies from markets like Canada and Australia were acquiring licenses first and raising capital afterward. Katti challenged this model, advocating for a system that would allow Namibians to lead projects from inception.
“Katti took a step few had attempted before: accessing international capital markets. By listing his company on the Toronto Stock Exchange through a reverse listing that became UNX Energy, he helped establish one of the first Namibian-led, internationally listed oil and gas companies.”
A turning point came in the mid-2000s, when he shifted focus offshore. Drawing on extensive research into the Kudu Gas Field and the broader Orange Basin, Katti presented a development vision to Namibia’s Ministry of Industries, Mines and Energy and NAMCOR. His efforts resulted in the award of an offshore license adjacent to the Kudu field – an important breakthrough for indigenous participation in the upstream sector.
To finance this vision, Katti took a step few had attempted before: accessing international capital markets. By listing his company on the Toronto Stock Exchange through a reverse listing that became UNX Energy, he helped establish one of the first Namibian-led, internationally listed oil and gas companies. While early drilling campaigns did not deliver commercial success, the experience laid critical groundwork for future development.
Equally significant was Katti’s role in shaping Namibia’s approach to resource governance. He was an early and vocal advocate for ensuring that the state – through NAMCOR – held meaningful equity stakes in oil and gas projects. This approach helped secure a substantial national position in the Kudu Gas Field and set a precedent for embedding national participation into the structure of future deals.
As the scale of offshore opportunity became clearer, Katti adapted his strategy. Rather than pursuing development alone, he focused on bringing in global partners with the technical and financial capacity to unlock Namibia’s deepwater resources. Through sustained engagement and dealmaking, he played a catalytic role in attracting companies such as Shell, TOTALEnergies, ExxonMobil, Chevron and Galp into Namibia’s offshore basin.
Beyond transactions and policy, Katti has also invested in Namibia’s human capital. Over the years, he has supported the education of more than 120 Namibian students, reflecting a long-standing belief that the country’s energy future must be built on local expertise as much as natural resources.
Today, as Namibia enters a new phase of development – marked by large-scale discoveries and growing investor interest – the foundations laid over the past two decades are becoming increasingly visible. The country’s emphasis on local participation, its ability to attract global partners and its expanding talent base all reflect a broader vision that has been years in the making.
Katti’s contribution lies not only in individual deals or discoveries, but in helping to shape the framework through which Namibia’s energy sector operates. In doing so, he has played a central role in ensuring that the country is not just a destination for investment, but an active participant in its own energy future.
Part Three of a Three-Part Series Supporting the Presidential Petroleum Reform and Value Optimisation Taskforce
Nigeria’s petroleum reform agenda has entered a new phase. Following the structural changes introduced under the Petroleum Industry Act, attention is now shifting from institutional design to operational performance. While recent reform efforts have concentrated on speeding up project execution and enhancing financial structures, a third aspect remains vital for the sector’s long-term stability and competitiveness. That aspect is social sustainability.
Nigeria’s petroleum industry operates within complex and often fragile socio-economic environments. While it generates significant national revenue, it also functions in regions where communities directly experience the environmental and social impacts of petroleum development. In such contexts, operational stability depends not only on regulatory compliance and commercial efficiency, but on the ability of the industry to sustain trust, legitimacy and shared value across its stakeholders.
The Petroleum Industry Act recognised this reality through the introduction of Host Community Development Trusts, designed to ensure that petroleum-producing communities benefit directly from upstream activities. These trusts represent an important institutional innovation, providing a structured mechanism for funding local development, strengthening community engagement and reducing the risk of operational disruptions.
However, the long-term success of this framework will depend not on the existence of these trusts, but on how effectively their performance is measured and managed.
Development funding alone does not ensure sustainable outcomes. Without clear performance frameworks, community investments risk becoming fragmented, poorly monitored, and disconnected from long-term economic transformation. In petroleum-producing regions, expectations are often influenced by visible development results. When these results are unclear or inconsistent, mistrust can develop, increasing the chances of disruptions to operations.
For Host Community Development Trusts to deliver meaningful and lasting impact, performance must be measured against clearly defined outcomes. These should include improvements in local employment, the growth of community-based enterprises, access to education and technical training, and the delivery of critical infrastructure. Transparent monitoring and reporting mechanisms will be essential to ensure accountability and maintain trust between operators and host communities.
Equally important is the alignment of community development initiatives with the broader economic opportunities created by the petroleum sector. When host community investments are linked to workforce development, local supplier participation and technical capability building, they contribute directly to the long-term sustainability of the industry while expanding economic inclusion.
Beyond community development, social sustainability within Nigeria’s petroleum sector also depends on the strength of its human capital base.
Petroleum development is among the most technically complex industrial activities in the global economy. From deepwater subsea systems to advanced reservoir management and large-scale liquefied natural gas infrastructure, successful execution requires highly specialised expertise.
Nigeria has made measurable progress in expanding indigenous participation across the petroleum supply chain through the Nigerian Content Development and Monitoring Board. Local content policies have supported the growth of domestic service providers, fabrication capacity and engineering capabilities.
However, a deeper challenge persists. The development of advanced technical expertise in areas such as reservoir engineering, drilling systems, subsea technologies, and complex project management remains inconsistent. As experienced professionals retire and global operators restructure their portfolios, the risk of a widening technical knowledge gap becomes increasingly significant.
If this gap is not addressed deliberately, Nigeria risks becoming increasingly dependent on external expertise for the execution of complex petroleum developments. Over time, this would weaken the country’s ability to manage large-scale energy projects independently and reduce the long-term value captured from its petroleum resources.
Closing this gap must therefore become a strategic priority. Strengthening university-industry partnerships, expanding advanced technical training programmes and embedding structured knowledge transfer requirements within major petroleum projects will be essential to building a resilient and globally competitive workforce.
A further dimension of social sustainability concerns labour conditions, human rights protections and governance within petroleum supply chains.
Large-scale petroleum developments rely on extensive networks of contractors, subcontractors and service providers. These supply chains are essential to project delivery but also create potential governance risks if labour standards, procurement practices and human rights protections are not consistently enforced.
Globally, investors and financial institutions are placing increasing emphasis on these issues. Weak labour practices, unsafe working conditions and corruption within procurement systems can undermine both operational performance and investor confidence. As capital becomes more selective, jurisdictions that demonstrate strong governance across their supply chains are more likely to attract long-term investment.
Strengthening transparency, accountability and compliance across petroleum supply chains is therefore both a social and economic imperative. Clear procurement standards, effective oversight mechanisms, and enforcement of labour protections will help ensure that the benefits of petroleum development are more broadly distributed while maintaining the sector’s credibility.
The importance of social sustainability becomes even clearer when viewed alongside the structural and financial reforms required within the sector. As discussed in earlier parts of this series, a coordinated upstream project pipeline through a National Exploration and Drilling Acceleration Programme would accelerate the movement of projects from exploration to production. A strengthened financial architecture through a National Petroleum Investment Management Corporation would enable Nigeria to mobilise the capital required to support these developments.
However, without strong social foundations, these gains may not be sustained.
Operational efficiency, financial strength and social legitimacy must function together as mutually reinforcing elements of Nigeria’s petroleum governance system. Weakness in any one of these areas can undermine the entire system.
The true measure of reform will therefore lie in execution.
Progress must be visible in measurable outcomes such as the number of exploration wells drilled annually, the time required for discoveries to reach first production, the growth of domestic technical capability within the petroleum workforce and the development outcomes delivered through Host Community Development Trusts. Monitoring these indicators and coordinating institutional responses when bottlenecks arise will be essential for translating policy ambition into operational results.
Nigeria’s petroleum resources remain one of the country’s most important economic assets. Harnessing their full value will depend not only on institutional design but on the discipline with which those institutions work together to deliver results.
If the current reform effort succeeds in aligning operational execution, capital mobilisation and social sustainability within a coherent national strategy, Nigeria will be well positioned to sustain a competitive and resilient petroleum industry for decades to come. As this reform effort progresses, further technical engagement to translate these priorities into implementable delivery frameworks, performance metrics and institutional coordination mechanisms may prove valuable in supporting the work of the Presidential Petroleum Reform and Value Optimisation Taskforce.
Author
Emeka Eboagwu (Ph.D), CMILT, fACSC, is a global social sustainability expert and energy economist based in the United Kingdom whose work focuses on petroleum sector governance, supply chain sustainability and energy policy reform. He engages on the design and delivery of petroleum sector reform, investment frameworks and supply chain systems in emerging energy economies.
In January 2026, Tony Attah, CEO of Renaissance Africa Energy, made a bold claim: Artificial Intelligence could revive 300 abandoned wells in the Niger Delta. While some may see this as purely optimistic, industry insiders know it is a grounded reality provided Nigeria changes how it handles data.
The truth is that the Niger Delta has not “run out” of oil; it is suffering from a visibility crisis. The three points below outline a strategic response on how Nigeria can turn abandoned steel into flowing gold through a digital-first approach.
Ranking the ‘Quick Wins’ from Legacy Reserve Books
The fastest route to production is not drilling new wells; it is ranking the ones Nigeria already has. Companies like Shell possess massive reserve books containing decades of data on assets that were decommissioned not because they were empty, but because they were considered uneconomic under 20th-century cost structures.
The Strategy here is to implement AI-Driven Ranking: Instead of manual reviews, AI can ingest entire reserve books and rank wells using a multi-constraint model:
Proximity to Flow Stations: Can the well be tied back within 30 days?
Well Integrity: Does the casing still hold?
Recovery per Unit Cost ($/bbl): Which wells offer the highest margin under the current $65/bbl reality?etc.
The result is a “Top 40” list of wells that can be reopened with a simple intervention (workover), rather than a $20Million drilling campaign.
“For this “magic” to become reality, data cannot remain scattered in dusty basements. Success depends on a high-value National Data Repository (NDR). While the NUPRC has already centralized massive reserve books and established the Integrated Data Mining and Analytics Centre (IDMAC), the challenge remains the sheer volume and usability of information.”
Finding “Hidden” Oil Behind Casing
Many wells in the Niger Delta were produced from a single primary reservoir, often leaving marginal zones behind pipe or bypassed entirely. Traditionally, identifying these required expensive new logging runs.
The strategy here are
Automated Log Reinterpretation AI algorithms can process legacy well logs at a scale humans cannot, identifying patterns in resistivity and porosity data that were previously overlooked. AI can pinpoint zones behind casing.
Zero-Drill Reserves By utilizing existing boreholes, operators can perforate a new section of pipe to access unproduced reserves. This turns a “dead” asset into a producer at a fraction of the cost.
High-Resolution Four Dimensional(4D) Seismic & AI Inversion
The ultimate tool for a mature basin is 4D (time-lapse) seismic. Comparing seismic surveys taken years apart, operators can see exactly how oil has moved, and where it has remained trapped.
The Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) is already encouraging the use of 3D and 4D seismic. The real breakthrough happens when AI takes over the complex task of inversion converting seismic soundwaves into accurate reservoir maps.
The strategy here are
Identify ‘Sweet Zones’ In mature basins, oil often becomes trapped in pockets or unswept zones. AI compares 4D seismic surveys to determine precisely where hydrocarbons remain.
Precision Infill Drilling Instead of “hitting and hoping,” operators can deploy AI-guided sidetracks to drain trapped reservoirs with surgical accuracy.
For this “magic” to become reality, data cannot remain scattered in dusty basements. Success depends on a high-value National Data Repository (NDR). While the NUPRC has already centralized massive reserve books and established the Integrated Data Mining and Analytics Centre (IDMAC), the challenge remains the sheer volume and usability of information.
The industry does not need more human reviewers; it needs a Predictive Ranking Engine, an AI layer integrated directly into the NDR to automate filtering across thousands of shut-in wells.
The success of the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) and the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD) shows that data becomes a national asset when it is machine-readable. Nigeria has already built the library; now it needs to hire the “AI Librarian.”
To fully support the 300-well revival, the next phase of the NDR must:
Adopt OSDU Standards: Ensure all data (logs, seismic, reports) follow the Open Subsurface Data Universe framework so AI tools can ingest it without extensive cleaning.
Democratize Insights: Provide AI ready data packages to all players, including indigenous operators enabling them to innovate as quickly as the global majors.
Create a Living Digital Twin: As wells are revived, data must flow back into the NDR in real time, creating a self-improving loop of national energy intelligence.
The bottom line is that Tony Attah is right: AI can revive those 300 wells, but AI is only the engine; data is the fuel. If Nigeria builds a world-class Data Repository, it will not just revive wells, it will revive an entire economy.
Funke Taylor is an energy industry strategist and consultant operating at the intersection of infrastructure, capital, and digital transformation. With a foundation in engineering and EPC project environments, she brings field insight into the boardroom, advising executives on data-driven, future-ready upstream strategy.
She is the Host of the Energy Web Conference, convening professionals across oil, gas, power, AI, and policy to accelerate digital innovation in energy worldwide. Her work transforms legacy assets into global digital opportunity. She can be reached at funke@theenergyaxis.com
The Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited, NNPC, has been given a new Board to steer it towards national economic and energy policy. It has also come a new management team, with Engineer Bayo Ojulari as Group CEO, to recharge business performance and operational execution.
This leadership reset comes at a pivotal moment for Nigeria’s state oil company, the arrowhead of Nigeria’s position as the top oil producer in Africa, and the 12th largest resource-owning national oil company in the world by oil reserves size, and among the top 10 by gas reserves. Tectonic shifts have taken place in the operating landscape, meaning strategic outcomes must be earned, rather than flow from the status quo. The corporation has become a commercial entity, resulting from the overarching four-year-old Petroleum Industry Act. The joint venture operated fields have changed hands from international majors to emergent indigenous operators. Gasoline import subsidy has been removed, and refining is now predominantly local. Meanwhile global oil and gas prices are still sluggish, and recent tariff wars pile pressure on demand, costs, and margins. There is also the persisting push for energy transition, and the reality of OPEC quotas.
It has been widely acknowledged that the new leadership brings private-sector expertise to NNPC, and a represents a renewed focus on efficiency, transparency, and energy transition. This article provides an overview of NNPC’s corporate performance, strategic direction, and challenges under the new management leadership as of July 2025, with comparisons to leading African and emerging-market peers, while highlighting early wins which need to be sustained and scaled.
Leadership Transition and Strategic Vision
The appointment of Mr. Ojulari, an industry veteran formerly Managing Director of Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company (SNEPCo), in April 2025, has received much acclaim by industry stakeholders, who expect a sharper commercial focus and accelerated reforms, given his pedigree.
In his first address as Group CEO, Ojulari stated: “NNPC must deliver value for all Nigerians by operating transparently, efficiently, and with a clear focus on the future of energy.”
Based on Bayo’s public statements, the new management team’s early priorities include:
Driving operational efficiency through digital transformation and cost management.
Accelerating gas development for domestic industrialization and export growth.
Strengthening governance and transparency, with a commitment to timely publication of audited accounts and preparation for NNPC’s planned IPO.
Building partnerships and fostering innovation to attract investment and deploy new technologies.
NNPC’s Role in Nigeria’s Economic and Energy Agenda
NNPC remains central to Nigeria’s ambitions for economic diversification, energy security, and emissions reduction. The following are currently some of the officially declared national energy policy objectives related to NNPC’s role as a now commerialised national oil company.
– Increase oil production toward OPEC quota of 1.8Million barrels per day (MMBOPD).
– Expand domestic gas utilization for power and industry.
– Reduce fiscal reliance on crude exports by growing non-oil revenue.
– Advance energy transition with gas and renewables, targeting net-zero by 2060.
Revenue and profit have continued to grow, with H1 2025 maintaining the positive trend. Oil production has stabilized, though still below pre-2020 highs due to security and infrastructure challenges. Gas output is rising, reflecting Ojulari’s focus on gas-led growth. Overall half year performance trend is healthy, credit to new management priorities, and need to be sustained against financial, operational and quota constraints.
Given its relatively low production base, NNPC’s revenue is appreciable in absolute figures. Yet, given the volume of reserves available to be produced, compared to peers, the leadership of NNPC has its work well cut out. Early efforts at transparent and timely reporting of financial and operating results will serve the corporation’s strategies very well.
NNPC’s oil P/R ratio (1.65%) is moderate, reflecting large reserves but relatively low production rates compared to Petrobras and Sonatrach. The gas P/R ratio (0.85%) is low, highlighting significant untapped potential and room for accelerated gas development. Petrobras’s higher ratios indicate more aggressive resource monetization, while Sonatrach leads Africa in active reserve utilization. NNPC’s cautious pace provides a cushion for future growth but also underscores the need to boost efficiency, especially in gas, as Nigeria seeks to industrialize and expand exports. Moreover, consideration must go to global decarbonization risk to eventual hydrocarbon reserves development.
– NNPC’s governance reforms have accelerated, with a partial IPO still planned for 2028.
– Audited financials are now published annually and independently verified, a significant improvement from earlier years.
Strategic Initiatives and Recent Developments
– Gas Expansion: The AKK pipeline is 80% complete as of July 2025, with first deliveries expected by year-end. LNG exports are up 8% year-on-year.
– Refining: The Dangote Refinery, with NNPC as a 7% stakeholder, began commercial operations in March 2024, reducing Nigeria’s fuel import bill by $2.5Billion in the first half of 2025.
– Regional Integration: NNPC is negotiating new gas supply deals with Ghana and Benin, aiming to become a regional gas hub.
Challenges and Constraints Remain
As the new management cranks up the NNPC machine, the old challenges and legendary issue remain and will be compounded by a giddy energy market and complicated fiscal situation. Below are some of the moving parts the new captains much keep in focus and as they progress demonstrate success on.
Security and Oil Theft:
Pipeline vandalism and theft remain issues, though incidents have dropped by 30% since 2023. Losses still average 120,000BOPD.
Regulatory Uncertainty:
The Petroleum Industry Act has improved the investment climate, but delays in downstream deregulation and gas pricing reforms persist.
Capital Access:
The planned IPO is closely watched. Success will depend on continued governance improvements and investor confidence in oil and gas.
Global Energy Transition:
NNPC faces pressure to decarbonize, with international lenders tightening criteria for oil and gas financing.
Opportunities and Strategic Levers
Gas Industrialization:
Nigeria’s gas reserves exceed 206rillion cubic feet. A successful gas push could transform the power sector and create new export opportunities.
Petrochemicals and Value Addition:
NNPC’s new partnerships in fertilizer and methanol production are starting to support non-oil export growth.
Capital Market Access:
A successful NNPC initial public offer could unlock new funding and drive further governance improvements, as seen with Petrobras. As IPO’s go though, especially when there are competing investment options, success will require deftly calibrated implementation, robust investor targeting and solid fundamentals, as investors will be voting as much for potential as for capacity. And there are reputational risks to overcome.
Regional Energy Leadership:
Nigeria is well placed to become West Africa’s main supplier of gas and refined products, leveraging new infrastructure. As regional market beckons, new refining capacity sufficient for export and a renewed focus on tangible commercialization of gas will deliver on the opportunity.
Major Global Energy Events and Issues
Several major global and national energy events, issues, and deadlines in 2025 and 2026 are poised to test, and if successful, demonstrate NNPC’s new strategic direction under Bayo Ojulari’s leadership. These milestones reflect both the company’s internal reforms and its response to broader shifts in the energy landscape.
– COP30 (November 2025, Brazil)
The UN Climate Change Conference will spotlight global commitments to decarbonization and energy transition. NNPC’s participation and potential announcements on gas and renewables will signal its alignment with climate goals and international expectations.
– OPEC+ Production Policy Reviews (Quarterly, 2025‚ 2026)
OPEC+ meetings will shape oil production quotas and market stability. NNPC’s ability to meet or exceed Nigeria’s quota consistently will reflect operational improvements and its role in global supply dynamics. These metrics will be factored in as OPEC considers Nigeria’s push for quota increase. Conversely, managing the quota ceiling without losing production will require NNPC working with regulators and partners to stimulate local refining and absorb production volumes, and to diversify export revenues from products not constrained by the quota, such as condensate.
– Global LNG Market Expansion (2025‚ 2026)
As new LNG projects come online worldwide, NNPC’s progress with Nigeria LNG expansion and new gas export deals will demonstrate its competitiveness in the evolving gas market.
– International Oil Company (IOC) Divestments in Africa
Ongoing IOC asset sales in Nigeria and elsewhere present opportunities for NNPC to acquire assets, form new partnerships, or increase domestic participation‚ showcasing a more assertive commercial strategy.
Key National Energy Events, Issues, and Deadlines
– AKK Gas Pipeline Commissioning (Expected Q4 2025)
The completion and commissioning of the Ajaokuta-Kaduna-Kano (AKK) gas pipeline will be a landmark for Nigeria’s gas industrialization agenda and a core test of NNPC’s project delivery under Ojulari.
– Dangote Refinery Full Ramp-Up (2025‚ 2026)
Achieving full operational capacity at the Dangote Refinery (where NNPC holds a 7% stake) will significantly reduce Nigeria’s fuel imports and demonstrate NNPC’s commitment to domestic value addition.
– NNPC Partial IPO (Planned 2026)
Preparations for NNPC’s partial listing on the Nigerian Stock Exchange and possibly international markets will test its governance reforms, transparency, and investor appeal‚ key markers of its new commercial orientation.
– Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) Implementation Deadlines
Full compliance with PIA provisions‚ especially around host community development, fiscal terms, and deregulation‚ will be closely watched by investors and the public as indicators of regulatory discipline and reform momentum.
– Gas Pricing and Market Reforms (Ongoing, 2025-2026)
Progress on domestic gas pricing reforms and market liberalization will be crucial for unlocking investment and expanding gas-based industries, aligning with Ojulari’s gas-led growth strategy.
– Renewable Energy Project Announcements
New solar, wind, or hybrid energy projects launched or commissioned by NNPC will highlight its diversification efforts and response to global energy transition pressures.
New Tax Regime
A portfolio of four wide-ranging federal tax laws was recently signed and will take effect from January 1, 2026. Major components of the new tax regime will impact NNPC as a corporate taxpayer, a major employer of taxpayers, and a contracted partner to large operators, and suppliers. In addition, its operations are linked to revenue collecting entities such as the regulators, fiscal roles are being redefined. NNPC’s response to the new tax and non-tax revenue regime will be visibly central to successful implementation and the prospect of achieving the intended economic goals. Besides, the corporation’s fiscal behavior, already watched as a commercial entity, will be further scrutinized in the run-up to an IPO.
These events and issues will test and define NNPC’s evolving strategy‚ demonstrate transparency, commercial discipline, gas-led growth, and alignment with energy transition‚ under its new leadership.
NNPC’s new management, under the direction of a reconstituted Board, has a pivotal window for to rest NNPC Limited. As CEO, Engineer Ojulari’s private-sector experience and declared reform agenda are already driving operational improvements and greater transparency. NNPC’s production-to-reserves ratios reveal both a solid resource base and the need for more aggressive production, especially in gas, to fully realize Nigeria’s energy ambitions. While challenges remain‚ particularly around security, regulation, and the global energy transition‚ NNPC under the new management appears more transparent, increasingly competitive, and strategically aligned with the country’s goals.
The wide scope of the prevailing issues will test the new management’s ability to inspire its workforce, attract investors, constructively build trust with a broad spectrum of stakeholders and to connect purposefully with national aspirations in an era of intensified scrutiny. The company’s outlook is more optimistic than it has been in years, with the new leadership well curated and poised, offering a prospect of a true regional leader in integrated energy.
Note: Data for this article were synthesized from sources including NNPC reports and statements, NUPRC regulatory reports, OPEC reports, World Bank assessments, International Energy Agency reports, industry analytical platforms such as SBM Intelligence and Africa Oil+Gas Report, government policy statements, NOC websites, news reports, etc.
———–
Dr. Arinze is an energy policy and investment thought leader, consultant, and author.
