Nigeria has joined several other African countries in boosting planned use of fossil gas as a “transition fuel” in its updated climate plan, reflecting the continent’s struggles to quickly ramp up renewable energy output.
The West African nation aims to have 17 gigawatts (GW) of gas-fired power capacity in 2035 – nearly double the current level and more than the target for solar and hydro power combined, according to its new nationally determined contribution (NDC) plan.
Announcing the plan at the United Nations on Wednesday, Nigeria’s vice-president Kashim Shettima said gas was a “cleaner fuel”. Specifically, the NDC justifies it as a cleaner alternative to coal in electricity generation and as a replacement for diesel in transport.
Michael Ivenso, energy director at Nigeria’s National Council on Climate Change (NCCC), told Climate Home News that Nigeria has adopted the strategy because the transition to clean energy sources “will not happen overnight [and requires] a just, gradual and practical approach”.
Nigeria – Africa’s biggest oil producer – needs “time and money to build out a sufficient installed base of renewable energy sources to support growth and development”, Ivenso added.
With plans to cut emissions by 32% from 2018 levels by 2035, the country requires $337 billion to mitigate and adapt to climate change, the climate plan says, with a fifth of the money expected to come from domestic sources, including carbon markets. The rest will come from international funding, it said in the NDC 3.0 submitted to the UN earlier this week. Shettima said the plan was Nigeria’s “highest ambition level to date”.
“Risky strategy”
According to Nigeria’s plan, greenhouse gas emissions from the natural gas industry will be reduced by phasing out routine gas flaring and reducing leaks.
Nigeria, which is plagued by unreliable and patchy power supplies, has a fossil gas reserve of about 210 trillion cubic feet, which could last for up to 93 years, the government says.
President Bola Tinubu’s administration is actively exploring the fuel’s potential, courting investors and unveiling gas infrastructure across the country. After his inauguration in 2023, Tinubu said his government would seek to add value to the nation’s gas assets, saying “it is all about growing the pie so that Nigerians will benefit”.
But critics say continuing to invest in natural gas could prove counterproductive, and more costly, in the long run – as well as making it harder for African countries to meet their commitments under the Paris Agreement.
“It is unfortunate that the Nigerian government is still planning so much fossil gas in its energy mix,” said Sofia Gonzales-Zuñiga, a senior policy analyst at the global institute Climate Analytics.
This is “a risky strategy that could either lead to stranded assets, or lock it into ongoing fossil fuel emissions, when it could be reaping the benefits of much cheaper – and cleaner – renewable energy”, she added.
Those concerns were echoed by Zainab Aliyu, a research consultant at the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, who said Nigeria’s decision to keep betting on fossil gas was tying it to “a volatile industry at a time when the world is moving away from fossil fuels”.
Asked about the NDC’s proposal to scale up the use of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) for cooking, Rajneesh Bhuee, manager of the “Stop Funding Gas Campaign” at the NGO Recourse, said treating LPG as a “clean solution risks entrenching fossil dependence in households and exposing low-income communities to global price volatility”.
Africa’s “transition fuel”
Nigeria is not the only African country that has added intentions to ramp up natural gas use in the new cycle of UN NDCs.
Angola’s climate plan says it plans to use natural gas systems to progressively replace diesel generators in industry, saying that will drive down emissions significantly.
Similarly, Zimbabwe’s NDC said it will ramp up a new gas-fired power plant until 2036 as “although it is a fossil fuel, natural gas can replace coal and reduce emissions considerably”.
Earlier this month, at the second Africa Climate Summit in Addis Ababa, leaders in the final declaration identified “the role of transitional energy sources” – widely taken to be a reference to fossil gas – “in ensuring a just transition that safeguards the energy security of developing countries”.
Also, in January, at the Mission 300 energy summit in Tanzania, African leaders adopted a joint statement, citing gas as one of the energy sources needed to unlock “Africa’s full energy potential”.
Giza Gaspar-Martins, a former Angolan climate negotiator who served as chair of the Least Developed Countries group, said “it’s ok” for countries to use gas as a transition fuel “because it has less of a potential to increase global greenhouse gas emissions” compared with other fossil fuels.
Despite the general discouragement for continued investment in fossil fuel production, oil- and gas-producing countries, in particular, have adopted the same position to use gas as a transition fuel and “this is a reflection of national circumstances. It is what it is,” Gaspar-Martins told Climate Home News.
But climate campaigners say continuing to rely on fossil fuels, including gas, could hamper – not help – the continent’s development.
Aliyu urged policymakers to concentrate on renewables and green hydrogen, “rather than investing in a fuel source that is most likely to repeat the oil curse”.
The post Nigeria gives fossil gas a bigger role as “transition fuel” in climate plan appeared first on Climate Home News.
Nigeria gives fossil gas a bigger role as “transition fuel” in climate plan
Climate Change
The Land Came First
An older teaching about land acknowledgement
As I have come to understand the spirit and intention of land acknowledgement, I often return to fond memories of my grandmother and her words of wisdom. She taught that the health of the places we call home comes first, because the wellbeing of the people depends on it.
In her teaching, land acknowledgement began with the land. Long before it became a paragraph read at the start of a meeting, it was a way of recognizing a homeland: its waters, its species, its seasons, and the spirit that revealed whether the place was well.
Her teaching echoes a practice found across many Indigenous Nations. Haudenosaunee gatherings, for example, have long opened with the Ohén:ton Karihwatéhkwen, the Thanksgiving Address, often translated as “the words that come before all else.” The speaker greets and gives thanks to the people, the earth, the waters, the plants, the animals, the winds, the sun, the moon and the stars. Only after everything that sustains life has been acknowledged does the gathering turn to its own business.
That order changes what an acknowledgement is for. Its purpose was to share the story of a place with neighbours and to draw them into the work of tending it. People entered the story second, as the ones responsible for what had just been named.
Understood this way, an acknowledgement does more than open a meeting. It asks us to reconsider where we stand, and what we owe the ground beneath us.
Nations among nations
In her teaching, people are one nation among many. The salmon are a nation. So are the cedars, the bison, the medicine plants, and the pollinators. Each belongs to a place, carries its own responsibilities, and offers gifts no other nation can give.
This idea of kinship runs through many Indigenous philosophies. The phrase “all my relations,” heard in ceremonies and gatherings across Turtle Island, is a reminder that family extends beyond people to the animals, plants, waters and lands that make life possible. Some Indigenous languages carry the same understanding in their grammar, speaking of many plants, animals and natural forces as living beings rather than objects.
Sovereignty, understood through this relationship, is a kind of standing more than a form of control. Each nation belongs fully to its place and carries its share of that place’s life. No nation thrives alone, and none thrives by taking over the whole.
The land is also the source of instruction. Over generations, people watched how a river valley or a stretch of prairie kept itself well: who arrived when, who fed whom, and how much could be taken before the giving stopped. In my grandmother’s telling, those observations became instructions, and those instructions helped shape law and protocol. They guided when to harvest, where to camp, how to enter a neighbour’s territory, and what was owed in return.
Indigenous legal scholars today often describe this as law that comes from the land itself, learned by watching how living systems sustain one another. A plainer name for it is knowing how to live somewhere.
The host and the guest
One of the clearest teachings in this understanding of the world is the relationship between host and guest. My grandmother invited us to recognize that relationship in the lives of plants and animals.
A host prepares the place before anyone arrives. A beaver family dams a stream, and the pond becomes a home for fish, frogs, birds and plants. A fallen tree becomes a nurse log, feeding the next generation of seedlings as it returns to the soil.
A host offers first. A flowering plant sets out nectar. A berry bush ripens fruit. These provisions come in their own season, not whenever a visitor happens to want them.
A host also makes its presence known. Birdsong, scent and the marks left along a trail tell newcomers that a place is already inhabited. The visitor does not arrive in an empty world.
The guest has responsibilities too. A guest attends to the season and to what the place can offer. A guest does not assume that everything within reach is theirs to take. A guest leaves something that helps sustain the relationship.
A bee takes nectar and carries pollen. Read through this teaching, that exchange offers an image of visiting well: receiving a gift while helping the host continue its life.
Many Indigenous harvesting protocols carry the same ethic into daily practice: ask before taking, take only what is needed, offer thanks, and leave enough for others and for the plant or animal to recover.
None of this suggests that every relationship in nature is peaceful or generous. These are ways of seeing responsibilities that people can learn to carry.
Everyone is both
No being is only a host or only a guest.
A tree makes room for other life while depending on soil, water, sunlight, fungi, and relationships beyond itself. People, too, may welcome others into their homes while remaining dependent on the larger homeland that sustains them.
The distinction between host and guest is therefore about roles, not ranks. Everyone receives. Everyone has something to give.
The question is whether the exchange sustains the place.
A visitor who takes without restraint leaves less for those who come next. A host who neglects the place has less to offer. Both have responsibilities, and neither can fulfil them alone.
This is the heart of reciprocity, a principle found across Indigenous philosophies: relationships stay healthy when gifts move in both directions. The Haudenosaunee teaching of the seventh generation extends that exchange across time, asking that decisions made today leave the place well for those not yet born.
Mutual benefit begins here, with the recognition that different beings carry different gifts and obligations.
What people carry forward
My grandmother’s teaching connects these relationships to the ways people meet their neighbours.
The host prepares a place, offers food and rest, and explains where the visitor has arrived. The guest makes themselves known, explains why they have come, listens to the terms of the visit, and brings something in return. The gift may be material. It may also be labour, knowledge, news, or a commitment to help.
Nations around the Great Lakes carried this ethic into treaty. The Dish with One Spoon, an agreement among the Haudenosaunee, Anishinaabe and allied Nations, describes shared hunting grounds as a single dish. Everyone eats from it with one spoon, takes only what they need, leaves enough for others, and keeps the dish clean. The Two Row Wampum, between the Haudenosaunee and European newcomers, shows two vessels travelling side by side on the same river, each keeping its own ways and neither steering the other.
In this understanding, acknowledgement is more than naming the people associated with a territory. It is learning enough about a homeland to behave responsibly within it.
Whose home is this? What sustains it? What laws and agreements guide our presence? What can we receive, and what must we return?
These questions make acknowledgement a relationship rather than a recital.
They also make it diplomatic. A guest who recognizes the host’s homeland recognizes that they have entered a place with its own relationships and responsibilities. A host who welcomes the guest makes room for an encounter governed by those relationships.
Neither arrives without standing. Neither arrives without obligations.
Beginning with place
I write from the shores of the Bay of Quinte. Here, the teaching asks me to begin with the water, the shoreline, and the life they sustain. Before I describe myself, I must attend to where I am.
That does not make people or history less important. It places them within the homeland that gives them meaning. The people, their laws, their agreements, and their responsibilities all belong to the place.
In a time of longer fire seasons, troubled waters, and uncertainty about what the next season will bring, this teaching asks something difficult and useful of us: pay attention before you speak.
An acknowledgement cannot tell the story of a place if the speaker has stopped noticing it.
The land came first. Beginning there again means learning to name what sustains us, and accepting that what sustains us also asks something of us.
By Rye Karonhiowanen Barberstock
Photo by Andrik Langfield on Unsplash
The post The Land Came First appeared first on Indigenous Climate Hub.
