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