View
202
Download
1
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE BUSINESS SCHOOL
Gilbert Igwe GradEI
Coal-Nigeria’s Ailing Savior: An Urgent Need For Energy Mix Recalibration
EC932: Global Energy Forum
Individual Assignment I
I hereby affirm that this is an original report and my own work.
i
Acronyms and abbreviations
OEM - Original Equipment Manufacturer
IGCC - Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle
MW - Mega Watts
JV - Joint Venture
NCC - Nigerian Coal Corporation
IPO - Initial Public Offering (Sale of stock/shares or ownership to the public)
CO2 - Carbon Dioxide
KW - Kilowatt
EIA - Energy Information Administration
KG - Kilogram
KM - Kilometer
MOU - Memorandum of Understanding
ii
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iv
INTRODUCTION 1
NIGERIAN COAL INDUSTRY - OVERVIEW 5
FACTORS THAT IMPACTED THE NIGERIAN COAL INDUSTRY 7
COAL GASIFICATION – INTEGRATED GASIFICATION COMBINED CYCLE 8
ECONOMICS OF COAL GASIFICATION & IGCC 10
PROSPECTS FOR COAL GASIFICATION 14
NIGERIAN E NERGY POLICY ON COAL 16
CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 18
BIBLIOGRAPHY 20
iii
Executive Summary
Nigeria, the most populated and a highly resource rich country in Africa, is still faced with
problems of low electricity generation capacity even with its estimated 2.8 billion tones of
coal resources and 188 trillion SCF of gas resources. This situation has created an immense
difficulty for its population, who frequently experience epileptic power supply and must,
therefore, privately generate electricity using diesel and fuel-powered plants to meet both
individual and industrial demand. The cost of privately generating electricity from diesel is
thrice the cost of grid-connected electricity in Nigeria. One of the primary causes of the power
situation in Nigeria is the regular interruption of the gas supply system by pipeline vandals.
For Nigeria to solve its electricity problems, especially constraints caused by pipeline
vandalization, coal must be incorporated into its energy mix. This paper explores the key
challenges and prospects of the Nigerian coal industry and evaluates opportunities for
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) in Nigeria. It also recommends policy
instruments consistent with Nigeria's energy policy on coal that may enable investments in
coal and IGCC
iv
1. Introduction
Nigeria, with a population of 181 million, is the most populated country in continental Africa
and the ninth most populous country in the world. (CIA, n.d.) With such a population, which
is thrice South Africa's, and a GDP of US$569 billion (2015 source), one would naturally
expect Nigeria's per capita electricity consumption to triple South Africa's 4,405kWh. (Bank,
n.d.) In reality, however, Nigeria's per capita electricity consumption stands at a mere
156kWh2, which poorly compares with peer developing nations (Figures1&2). More than
50% of its population lacks access to the power grid and the few connected to the grid
experience recurring outages. This unreliability has led many households and business entities
to resort to self-generation using diesel and petrol-powered generators. The electricity distress
Nigeria faces today has persisted for over five decades owing to mismanagement, aging
infrastructure and neglect by successive governments prior to 2005(Fig 3).
Figure 2 Source World Bank
In 2005, the government under the presidency of Olusegun Obasanjo made efforts to
resuscitate the ailing electricity industry in Nigeria by initiating a platform for sectoral reform
through the Electric Power Sector Reform Act (EPSRA 2015), which established an enabling
environment for the unbundling and subsequent privatization of the power sector in 2013. The
privatization exercise affected only the upstream and downstream subsectors while the
– Source CIA World Fact Book
1
government maintains a monopoly on the transmission network (midstream) under the
management of TCN, which is a 100% government owned enterprise.
Notwithstanding these significant achievements, there exists yet systemic problems with the
Nigerian electricity sector, chief of which is liquidity challenges facing the downstream
companies due to the low tariff structure and revenue losses to electricity theft, and persistent
underutilization of existing capacity because of fuel shortages arising from gas pipeline
vandalization.
2
Figure 3 - Source Nigerian Govt
Nigeria's electricity portfolio consists of a mix of gas thermal and hydro, with a total installed,
available and operational capacity of 12,522MW3, 7141MW, and 3879MW respectively. Gas,
at 85% of installed capacity, is the primary fuel of the electricity mix. This dependence of the
electricity value chain on gas thermal implies a huge reliance on the domestic gas resources
located in the Niger Delta basin, an area marred by resource control struggle and recurring
3
vandalization of oil and gas infrastructure. The consequence is manifest in the constraint of
available capacity by approximately 1,995MW(See Fig.4) (Govt, n.d.). The effect of gas
supply disruptions in the Nigerian electricity value chain could be ameliorated if an
alternative source of electricity is introduced into the energy mix to balance the reliance on
gas. Renewable energy could have been an attractive option because of its low operational
cost, negligible carbon emission and consistency with the global initiative of reducing
emissions. However, renewable energy technology is still in its infancy in Nigeria and cannot
be easily deployed. Therefore, the most viable option is coal, which is distributed abundantly
in more than 13 states of the nation. (Africa, n.d.)
Figure 4 - Source Fed Govt of Nig
4
Epitomic of a Dutch disease, the coal industry with estimated reserves up to 2.8 billion tons
has remained abandoned following the discovery of oil in Nigeria leading to a perpetual
dearth of production. Coal, although with a huge environmental cost, is a reliably affordable
fuel source for electricity production. Other developing countries like South Africa, India, and
China, and even developed nations like the United States and Japan, significantly employ coal
for power generation because it satisfies the need for cheap and reliable electricity, which is
necessary to promote a globally competitive industrial economy. (Department, n.d.) (EIA,
n.d.) (Min., n.d.) (EIA, n.d.) (EIA, n.d.)
Typified by China's remarkable rapid economic growth, electricity is a crucial resource for
technological revolution and economic development (Shiu, n.d.). So if Nigeria must attain its
inherent economic potentials, it must begin to produce adequate electricity to meet existing
and latent demands, and coal, which is a readily available domestic resource, will be useful in
accomplishing this aim. (Mckinsey, n.d.)
The objective of this paper is to review the opportunities for coal in electricity generation in
Nigeria, with a focus on Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC), which is a clean
coal technology.
We will consider a range of issues in doing so, these include:
a. A brief overview of the Nigerian coal industry
b. The main challenges facing the Nigerian coal industry
c. Description of the IGCC and Current Global Deployments
d. The economics of coal gasification and IGCC
e. Potential Benefits of coal gasification in Nigeria
f. Energy Policy on Coal in Nigeria
g. Conclusion and Recommendations
5
2. Nigerian Coal Industry – Overview
The history of coal in Nigeria is traceable to 1909 when coal was discovered in Enugu, and
the subsequent establishment of the Ogbete open cast mine in 1915.
The Nigerian Coal Corporation (NCC) was instituted in 1950, as a public monopoly to
develop and market coal resources in Nigeria. Before the discovery of oil, coal served as the
primary fuel for the railway and electricity sectors in Nigeria, who were the largest consumers
of coal. The advent of oil and gas in Nigeria resulted in the abandonment of coal as the
railway corporation replaced its coal-fired trains with diesel trains, and the electricity industry
adopted gas and diesel as its primary fuel. In addition to the switch from coal to alternative
fuels by the railway and power sectors, the Nigerian civil war equally impacted the decline of
coal production, because after the war production capacity never returned to its pre-war
levels. In 1999, the coal industry was partially liberalized as private players were granted the
right to operate coalfields while ownership was constituted on JV basis with NCC, with the
long run intention of corporatizing NCC. The proposed corporatization ownership structure
was 40% private, 20% IPO, and 40% government.
By the end of 2003, NCC operated mines had stopped operations and had accumulated so
much debt, while the government once again promulgated its intention to rejuvenate the coal
industry as it announced plans to constitute a technical advisory committee that would initiate
the revival process of the ailing coal sector. In 2004, NCC liquidated some of its assets as it
faced impending bankruptcy due to increasing debts. In 2005, Nigeria's Ministry of Solid
Minerals Development in collaboration with the United States Trade and Development
Agency contracted Behre Dolbear Inc. to conduct a Feasibility Assessment on coal prospects
in Nigeria. As at December 2015, there exists no reliable information or evidence on practical
measures adopted to revive Nigeria's coal industry.
Coal resources found in Nigeria are mainly of the sub-bituminous and lignite types and are
concentrated in about 22 fields in the central, middle-belt and eastern regions. The states with
the most significant reserves are Anambra, Kogi, Benue, and Enugu.
According to the survey by Behre Dolbear Inc. (Odesola, n.d.), based on Australian Code for
Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources, and Ore Reserves (JORC Code), Kogi
region has economically viable resources, or Demonstrated Coal Resources, of 233 million
tons and 600 million tons of non-reportable resources.
6
Similarly, the Benue region is estimated to have 124 million tons of Demonstrated Coal
Resource and 380 million tons of non-reportable resources. The Enugu coal district is
estimated to have 49 million tons of Demonstrated Coal Resource and 111 million tons of
non-reportable resources.
7
3. Factors That Impacted The Nigerian Coal Industry
In addition to government's loss of interest and decline of investments in the coal industry due
to the advent and growth of the oil and gas sector, other factors negatively impacted the coal
industry. The most salient issues were technical failure, logistical bottlenecks, and lack of
competition.
3.1 Technical failure
The coal industry suffered frequent, widespread technical failure because of obsolete
equipment. The lack of modern machinery resulted in reduced efficiency and, therefore,
increased costs, which vaporized the economic gain from coal. (Odesola, n.d.)
3.2 Logistical bottlenecks
Poor transport infrastructure hugely impacted coal operations, as stockpiles of coals left in the
bunkers caused disruptions, because of short supply of railway wagons needed to transport
coal to consumers. The transportation system was incapable of sustaining the coal shipping
requirements. Power outages also created severe production losses and caused flooding
problems because pumps remained inoperative most of the time. (Odesola, n.d.)
3.3 Lack of competition
One particular factor that many studies have omitted is the effect of public monopoly on the
coal industry. The NCC, with poor technical expertise and financial resources, held a
monopoly of the domestic coal industry from 1950 to 1999 and during this period, there was a
consistent increase in the global demand for coal (fig below). As the local industry lacked
competition, the private capital and assets required to develop the technology and
infrastructure for increasing production could not be introduced into the system. Had there
been a sustenance, or increase, of production capacity during this period, Nigeria could have
benefited from the potential export revenue of the global coal market. Consequently, the
economic gains from a free market, such as innovation, improved efficiency, productivity,
sectoral growth and the multiplier effect on the macro economy, eluded Nigeria.
Figure 5 – World Coal Consumption 1965 - 2010
8
4. Coal Gasification – Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle
Integrated gasification combined cycle refers to a coal gasification technology which converts
coal into synthesis gas or syngas that is burned in a gas turbine to produce electricity, with a
heat recovery system that produces steam from heat emitted by the turbine exhaust, which
drives a steam turbine. Simply put, the syngas and heat recovered are used to generate
electricity just as in the case of natural gas combined cycle.
Coal, air, and steam are heated together to produce syngas with hydrogen, carbon monoxide,
carbon dioxide and methane as constituents. The syngas is treated to extract sulfur
compounds, mercury, and particulate matter before it is burned in a gas turbine to produce
electricity.
The derived sulfur or sulfuric acid can serve as raw material for the chemical industry, such as
fertilizer production, drugs, and detergents. The gasification technology can reduce
conventional non-greenhouse pollutants associated with coal combustion, like sulfur,
nitrogen, and particulate matter. It also provides a potentially low-cost solution compared to
conventional coal for capturing produced CO2 for geological storage or enhanced oil recovery
for the oil and gas industry (see fig 5).
The gasification technology can utilize different grades of coal and even municipal waste and
biomass as feedstock. Its ability to generate relatively cleaner electricity from coal and its
compatibility with lignite and other non-fossil feedstock may make it viable for deployment
as a major technology for the global energy and industrial markets, especially Nigeria.
4.1 Current deployments of IGCC
Presently, some IGCC power plants have either been deployed or in preparation stages. See
(Fig 6) for a list of some IGCC assets and their current status.
9
Figure 6 Source Duke Energy
Figure 7 Global IGCC Projects - Source Climate Tech
10
5. Economics of Coal Gasification and IGCC
5.1 Cost
Coal based IGCC plants are still not considered commercially viable thus majority of plants
sited in Europe and the US have been built with financial support from the government. The
US pilot projects have cost estimates of $1600/kw-1700/kw while the technology OEM
estimate future projects to cost up to $1200/kw. In the EIA 2013 study on capital costs for
electricity plants, IGCC is estimated to cost $3784 - $6599/kw while pulverized coal is in the
range of $2934 - $5227/kw. Both technology estimates are respectively with and without
carbon capture (See Fig 7).
Lazard Consulting, in their most recent Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis, estimated IGCC
to have a capital cost of $4,000-$9,800/kw with the higher end of the estimate incorporating
carbon capture and compression, compared to supercritical coal with cost estimates of $3000 -
$8400/kw. The extreme of the estimate includes carbon capture and compression. The
Levelized cost of energy for both IGCC and conventional coal is estimated at $96-$183/MWh
and $65 - $150/MWh respectively (Fig. 8 & 9). (Lazard, n.d.)
As observed from the cost information, a significant barrier to the adoption of the IGCC
technology is cost. The capital cost of IGCC is high compared with natural gas combined
cycle, meaning its viability may depend on government support measures in the form of
subsidies or low-cost finance, especially for projects with carbon capture and storage. In
addition to government assistance, another entry cost reduction option could be integration or
retrofit. A successful retrofit may also pose other problem like knowledge gap for operators,
who may require further training on how to run the modified system.
Figure 8 Overnight Cost of IGCC - IEA 2013
11
Figure 9 Capital Cost – Lazard
Figure 10 Levelized Cost of Energy & Assumptions - Lazard
5.2 Environment:
Conventional coal combustion emits nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, particulate matter and
mercury, which are known to be hazardous to human health. In the gasification process, sulfur
compounds in the feedstock are transformed into hydrogen sulfide and carbonyl sulfide, from
which sulfur is extracted either as sulfuric acid or elemental sulfur, both useful byproducts.
12
For highly efficient IGCC plants, less fuel is used to generate rated power, resulting in the
formation of lesser carbon dioxide than conventional coal. For example, a 60%-efficient
gasification power plant can reduce carbon emission by 40% compared to a conventional coal
combustion plant. Also, when oxygen is used instead of air in the gasifier, carbon dioxide
produced can be efficiently and economically separated and captured compared to
conventional coal. http://energy.gov/fe/how-coal-gasification-power-plants-work
IGCC requires significant amounts of water depending on whether carbon is captured or
released. A typical IGCC plant (at 80% capacity factor) without carbon capture would require
3757-4003gpm and 4135-4579gpm with carbon capture. (John, n.d.)Therefore, it must be
sited close to a reliable water source to reduce the cost of water transportation by pipeline.
5.3 Public Perception
A potential barrier to coal gasification is the established public perception that coal is harmful
to health and the environment. Therefore, to drive investments in gasification technology,
necessary information should be provided to educate the public and investors on the
environmental performance of coal gasification compared to conventional coal. Especially
since studies have shown that the coal resources in Nigeria can sustain up to 45,000MWof
electricity production.
5.4 Availability of Technology
GE (USA), Siemens (Germany) and Mitsubishi (Japan) dominate the global IGCC market.
These organizations supply IGCC technology, with technical expertise that includes coal
gasification and syngas turbines for power generation. Recently, though, China seems to have
made significant progress in mastering the IGCC technology. Based on the mandate of the
National Development and Reform Commission and under the GreenGen Plan, in 2004,
China Huaneng Group (CHNG) in collaboration with generation and coal-producing firms
began researching the technology for coal gasification and IGCC power plant. In 2012, the
research syndicate completed a 250MW IGCC demonstration power plant, and in 2014, the
plant was operated for 72 hours with another 24 hours of operation at full capacity. They used
domestically sourced components. (Institute, n.d.)
5.5 Syngas Transportation:
The cost of transporting gas from the gasification point to the power plant depends on the
distance between both points. Usually, however, both the gasification and the power plant are
13
co-located thus negating the cost impact of transportation. One example is Duke Energy's
Edward Sport IGCC Project in Indiana (Fig 10).
Figure 11 Duke Energy Plant Co-Location. Source - Duke Energy
5.6 Carbon Capture and Storage Cost
The economics of IGCC is negatively impacted by the cost of capturing, transporting and
storing CO2 because it increases water usage and decreases efficiency. In 2012, (Marek, n.d.)
conducted a study on cost estimates of coal gasification. He found that a gasification plant
with an hourly input capacity of 750 tons of coal, with sequestrated CO2 up to 883,660 KG
per hour and an underground storage unit requiring a 40KM pipeline would cost
$146,082,000 and $47,601,000 for the pipeline and CO2 storage facility, respectively. The
combined cost of carbon transportation and storage amounts to approximately 5% of the total
capital cost of the project.
14
6. Prospects for Coal Gasification in Nigeria
6.1 Electricity generation Needs
More than 50% of Nigerians lack access to the electricity grid because of obsolete
infrastructure, and those connected to the grid experience epileptic supply mainly because of
the sabotage of gas infrastructure. Studies estimate that Nigeria needs to generate a minimum
of 25,000MW to close the gap between actual demand and available supply. Nigeria can
generate more than 10,000MW of additional capacity from its coal resources to augment the
existing gas and hydro based capacity if appropriate policies are implemented to drive
investments in coal. The government understands the need to include coal in its energy mix in
order to improve electricity supply to its citizens. In 2013, an MOU was signed with HTG-
Pacific Energy, a Chinese energy firm, for the development of a 1000MW coal-fired plant.
Although there has been no further information on the progress of the project, similar projects
should be encouraged by designing proactive measures and policies to incentivize and drive
foreign investments in the coal sector. Nigeria would experience rapid economic development
if it can generate adequate electricity to drive industrialization.
6.2 Gas Supply Disruptions
The Nigerian electricity portfolio is hugely dependent on gas as its primary fuel. This reliance
on gas exposes the electricity supply industry to any minor interruption in the gas supply
network. Nigeria's gas resources are located in the Niger Delta region from where gas is
transported to power generators by a network of pipelines traversing mostly rural terrains. The
pipelines regularly come under attack by thieves seeking to steal crude oil or resource-control
militants trying to send strong political statements to the ruling elites. Whatever the case may
be, any rupture in the gas pipelines affects the electricity industry severely, also tracing and
repairing the ruptured parts cost money and time. On one occasion of such attacks, in April
2015, the Trans-Forcados Gas Pipeline, which supplies gas to more than half of all the
nation's power plants, took ten days to repair. Such sabotage sometimes depreciates available
capacity by up to 30% of installed gas capacity, with losses running into billions of naira. This
concern for asset insecurity discourages foreign investors from the Nigerian gas industry
(Mirror, n.d.). Coal in Nigeria exists in regions with relatively clean history as regards
infrastructure vandalization. Therefore, to ensure the security of fuel supply to power stations,
15
and energy to Nigerians, an IGCC plant can be sited close to a coal seam to balance the
electricity value chain thereby curtailing the impact of gas infrastructure sabotage. In areas
with verified coal reserves and sufficient water supply, like the Kogi and Benue regions, a
grid-connected IGCC plant with capacity up to, or above, 618MW can be sited in each
location. The sulfuric acid byproduct extracted from the syngas can also sustain a chemical
industry within the coal production region. From an energy security perspective, IGCC
presents a promising possibility of providing reliable electricity to Nigeria, developing the
coal industry, and opening up the coal regions to investments and industrialization, thus
driving economic development.
In any case of deployment, it is advisable to locate the IGCC power plants within proximity to
the gasification point and a power substation to reduce investments in gas and electricity
transportation and, therefore, the overall cost.
16
7. Energy Policy on Coal in Nigeria
The coal industry in Nigeria faces systemic challenges that must be urgently and actively
addressed to drive the exploitation of, investments in, and development of, the coal resources.
The necessary measures to achieve this are dependent on policy tools that must be carefully
structured to deliver the desired results. A reliable and proactive policy is perceived as the
backbone of economic development. Nigeria in recent years has attempted to revive the coal
industry through its national energy policy framework. However, since formulating its energy
policy in 2003, little progress has been made in the implementation of its energy policy
objectives for the coal industry as evidenced by the present status of the coal industry vis a vis
its contribution to the energy mix.
Nigerian Energy Policy (Coal) (Govt, n.d.)
i. The nation shall vigorously pursue a comprehensive programme of resuscitation of the coal
industry.
ii. Extensive exploration activities to maintain a high level of coal reserves shall be carried
out.
iii. The private sector, as well as indigenous participation in the coal industry, shall be activity
promoted.
iv. The exploitation and utilization of the coal reserves shall be done in an environmentally
acceptable manner.
Policy Objectives
i. To promote the production of coal for export.
ii. To promote effective utilization of coal for complementing the nation's energy needs and as
an industrial feedstock.
iii. To attract increased investment into, and promote indigenous participation in, the coal
industry.
iv. To utilize coal in meeting the critical national need for providing a viable alternative to
fuel wood in order to conserve our forests.
v. To minimize environmental pollution arising from the utilization of coal.
The Nigerian state has set the foundation for the development of the coal industry as the
policy indicates. However, to drive the desired level of output, the policy objectives must be
17
translated into enabling policy instruments with defined targets to assure investors of security
of investment, and to the population a commitment to national development.
18
8. Conclusion and Recommendations
8.1 Conclusion
Nigeria with its large population and a huge potential for economic growth needs stable
electricity to drive activities that would foster economic development.
Having abundant unexploited coal resources and gas reserves tagged as Africa's largest,
Nigeria appears to have all the primary solution to its energy problems. However, what is
lacking is the ability to utilize these resources strategically, especially coal.
There is, therefore, a need for urgency in the development of proactive policy instruments and
initiatives to drive exploration, local and foreign investments in production, export marketing,
and electricity generation from, coal.
8.2. Recommendation
In response to the gap between the policy objectives and enabling policy instruments, the
following recommendations are offered to the government as guidelines for future coal-
related policy decisions.
8.2.1 Environmental Pollution Control
The policy instruments to control the environmental impact of coal-related activities and to
encourage energy efficiency should include a market-based environmental and carbon taxes,
and command and control approach like maximum emission allowance, equipment standard
specifications and carbon audit of coal-related activities.
8.2.2. Transparency in Licensing
The allocation of exploration and production titles to prospective investors should be well
publicized and conducted through a transparent, competitive open auction system to attract
the most technically qualified investors, to achieve effective price discovery, and to check the
occurrence of nepotic and secretive rights allocation experienced in the oil sector.
8.2.3 Local research and development
An initiative similar to China's GreenGen project must be created and supported by the
government and private sector to drive local research and development of low emissions coal-
19
based power generation technology. Such an initiative will drive local content development,
reduce reliance on imported technology and support economic development.
8.2.4 Policy Instruments to Drive IGCC Deployment
To drive investments in IGCC, the government must design incentives like clean coal tax,
low-interest development finance and long-term power purchase agreement for IGCC-based
power generators.
20
Bibliography
Africa, M., n.d. [Online] Available at: http://www.mineafrica.com/documents/A5%20-
%20Nigeria.pdf.
Bank, W., n.d. World Bank Data. [Online] Available at:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.USE.ELEC.KH.PC.
CIA, n.d. World Fact. [Online] Available at: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-
world-factbook/rankorder/2119rank.html.
EIA, n.d. [Online] Available at: https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3.
EIA, n.d. [Online] Available at: https://www.eia.gov/beta/international/analysis.cfm?
iso=CHN.
EIA, n.d. [Online] Available at: https://www.eia.gov/beta/international/analysis.cfm?iso=JPN.
Department, S.E., n.d. [Online] Available at: https://www.usea.org/sites/default/files/event-
file/497/South_Africa_Country_Presentation.pdf.
Govt, N., n.d. [Online] Available at:
http://www.nesistats.org/uploads/3/6/3/6/3636925/20150916_nigeria_energy_power_report_f
inal.pdf. Page 7.
Govt, N., n.d. [Online] Available at: http://wacee.net/getattachment/21cca4e4-ef1b-4c59-
8501-98b3e8624b88/National_Energy_Policy_Nigeria.pdf.aspx.
Institute, G.C., n.d. [Online] Available at:
https://www.globalccsinstitute.com/projects/huaneng-greengen-igcc-project-phase-3.
John, J.&., n.d. [Online] Available at: http://www.netl.doe.gov/kmd/cds/disk50/igcc
%20technology_051507.pdf.
Lazard, n.d. [Online] Available at: https://www.lazard.com/media/2390/lazards-levelized-
cost-of-energy-analysis-90.pdf.
Marek, n.d. [Online] Available at: http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/40403.pdf.
Mckinsey, n.d. [Online] Available at: http://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/middle-east-
and-africa/nigerias-renewal-delivering-inclusive-growth.
Min., I.P., n.d. [Online] Available at: http://powermin.nic.in/power-sector-glance-all-india.
Mirror, N., n.d. [Online] Available at: http://nationalmirroronline.net/new/pipeline-vandalism-
affects-gas-supply-to-power-plants-nnpc/.
Odesola, n.d. [Online] Available at:
http://eaas-journal.org/survey/userfiles/files/v4i107%20Mechanical%20Engineering.pdf.
21
Shiu, A., n.d. [Online] Available at:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421502002501.
22
Recommended