Adéṣẹ́gun Ọṣìbánjọ
Introduction
Nigeria’s power sector has, over the years, experienced notable improvement in its upstream operations—especially in generation capacity and grid transmission systems. However, the downstream segment, especially the distribution level, tells a different story. The gains recorded at the national level have not trickled down evenly across the eleven Distribution Companies (DisCos). While more urbanized areas under the purview of Ikeja and Eko DisCos appear to benefit from increased investment and stable supply, DisCos with larger, less compact service areas—like the Ibadan Electricity Distribution Company (IBEDC)—struggle with inadequate infrastructure and operational bottlenecks.
IBEDC, which holds Nigeria’s largest geographic franchise, spans Oyo, Ogun, Osun, and Kwara states, in addition to parts of Ekiti, Kogi, and Niger. Given the sheer size of this territory, one would expect a proportional investment in infrastructure and service delivery. However, emerging patterns suggest a troubling disparity—both in power allocation and infrastructural development—when compared to its more urban peers.
The Electricity Distribution Cascade
To appreciate the challenges of equitable power distribution, it’s useful to understand Nigeria’s distribution architecture:
Bulk Generation and Transmission: Electricity is generated at high voltages (330/132kV) and moved across long distances via the national grid.
Transmission Stations: Managed by the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN), these facilities reduce voltage from 330/132kV to 132/33kV.
Injection Substations: Further reduce voltage to 33/11kV, allowing for last-mile delivery.
Feeder Networks and Transformers: Deliver electricity to households, businesses, and industries.
While generation and transmission capacity have expanded, bottlenecks persist at the distribution level. These are particularly evident in the IBEDC network.
Comparative Network Disparities: IBEDC vs. Urban DisCos
The most apparent challenge facing IBEDC is infrastructure inadequacy relative to its vast coverage area. For example:
Transmission Station Deficit: IBEDC operates only 22 transmission stations, servicing a region with a rapidly growing population and commercial footprint. This number falls short of what is required to ensure stable and efficient power delivery. In contrast, Ikeja Electric, which covers a smaller and more densely populated region, benefits from a more concentrated network of transmission infrastructure.
Critical Shortage of Injection Substations: IBEDC manages just 119 injection substations across its franchise, placing it at a significant disadvantage compared to urban DisCos. This shortfall has a ripple effect. Along high-growth corridors like the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, newly emerging communities often rely on just two major substations—Oke-Aro and Kobape—creating extreme voltage instability and frequent outages.
Power Allocation Gaps: Reports suggest that IBEDC receives a lower proportion of power allocation from TCN relative to other DisCos. This limits its capacity to meet demand during peak periods and contributes to frequent load shedding.
Legacy Infrastructure Challenges: Unlike more urban-focused DisCos that have attracted targeted capital upgrades, IBEDC inherited aged and limited infrastructure at the time of privatisation. This foundation has made it difficult to scale efficiently in response to demographic and industrial expansion.
Community-Funded Infrastructure and the Question of Equity
Perhaps more controversial is the trend in which communities within IBEDC’s franchise are increasingly responsible for funding key infrastructure projects. These include substations, transformers, and feeder lines. In many reported cases, electricity activation is delayed until communities agree to finance and hand over these installations to the company.
While public-private partnerships in infrastructure are not inherently problematic, the manner in which they occur matters. When communities are asked to fund infrastructure without clear terms of ownership, maintenance responsibility, or return on investment, the arrangement risks being perceived as exploitative. It raises difficult questions: Should communities in underserved regions bear the same financial burden as those in well-served areas? What frameworks exist to ensure equity, accountability, and transparency?
Consequences of Uneven Development
The operational and financial implications of this imbalance are significant:
READ ALSO: Benin, Togo Owe Nigeria $8.8m in Unpaid Electricity Bills — NERC Report
Load Imbalances and Power Failures: Insufficient injection substations and outdated feeders lead to overloading and frequent supply interruptions.
Technical and Commercial Losses: Poorly maintained or under-scaled infrastructure increases energy losses in transit, driving up costs for both provider and consumer.
Consumer Dissatisfaction: Households and businesses under IBEDC’s coverage face erratic supply, inaccurate billing, and slow response to complaints—all of which erode public trust.
Stalled Economic Growth: Electricity is the lifeblood of economic activity. When power is unreliable, local industries and SMEs suffer, dampening economic potential in regions like Oyo, Osun, and parts of Ogun.
A Call for Reform
The issues outlined above point to the need for urgent policy attention. Solutions may include:
1. Targeted Infrastructure Expansion: Federal and state collaboration is needed to fund transmission and distribution infrastructure in underserved areas.
2. Rebalanced Power Allocation: TCN, in conjunction with the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC), should ensure that power allocation reflects not just historical usage, but population growth and industrial need.
3. Transparent Community Engagement: Where communities are required to contribute to infrastructure development, agreements must be formalised, and responsibilities clearly defined.
4. Smart Grid Technologies: Adoption of real-time monitoring systems can help detect and prevent inefficiencies in power flow, ultimately improving reliability.
5. Regulatory Oversight: DisCos must be held to standards that balance profitability with public service obligations. Stronger enforcement mechanisms are needed to ensure timely service activation, fair billing, and infrastructure upgrades.
Conclusion
The electricity sector is fundamental to Nigeria’s development. While progress has been made, the reality is that some regions remain significantly disadvantaged by historical infrastructure deficits and uneven policy implementation. IBEDC’s challenges reflect a broader need for balance—between profit and public service, between urban and rural investment, and between regulation and operational freedom.
To move forward, Nigeria must be deliberate in ensuring equitable energy access. That means holding all sector players accountable, supporting DisCos in need of critical upgrades, and protecting communities from bearing disproportionate burdens in the name of reform.
Only through a fair, transparent, and inclusive approach can we deliver the promise of stable electricity to every corner of our nation.
By Engr. Adéṣẹ́gun Olútáyọ̀ Adéolú Ọṣìbánjọ BENG, MBA, MNSE, MNIEE, MCIPSMN, is the Lead Consultant, MaakBeat Transnational Ltd, Lagos
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the official position of any public institution.