The Federal Government says new eastern and western electricity grids could begin delivering benefits within two to three years. But an ageing transmission network, weak power generation, rising transmission losses and questions about project funding threaten to turn another ambitious promise into a costly test of delivery.
Nigeria’s latest electricity rescue plan carries an uncomfortable question: can the Federal Government build a more reliable power grid before the weaknesses of the existing system continue to undermine businesses, households and industrial growth?
The administration of President Bola Tinubu has approved the commencement of plans to develop new eastern and western electricity grids, with procurement preparations under way and Nigerians expected to begin seeing benefits within two to three years.
Minister of Power Joseph Tegbe announced the proposal at the Harvard Business School Association of Nigeria (HBSAN) Energy Conference in Lagos, presenting it as part of a broader effort to address recurring national grid collapses and decades of underinvestment in transmission infrastructure.
Yet the most important test of this announcement will not be the number of new transmission towers erected. It will be whether the government can demonstrate that the projects address the actual causes of electricity failures, deliver measurable improvements and justify the money eventually committed to them.
Tegbe has acknowledged that the challenge is more complicated than simply replacing old equipment.
“We have clustered Nigeria into three energy zones. The first one is the one that demands 50 per cent. If you fix Lagos and you fix the Abuja corridors, you’ve solved more than half of the problem of Nigeria. Because you can’t do that alone based on operational efficiency, you also have to build out your grid.
“The President has approved that we commence the process of building out the grid: East and Western grid. We’re going through the procurement process, but it’s something you’ll see the benefits in two to three years,” the minister said.
The announcement establishes a new direction for the government’s transmission ambitions. It does not yet, in the details publicly provided, establish the projects’ total cost, precise routes, financing arrangements, engineering specifications or delivery milestones.
Those details matter because a procurement process is not the same as a completed project, and approval to begin the process does not guarantee that electricity users will experience a more dependable supply within the promised period.
The ₦-billion question behind Nigeria’s grid rescue
Nigeria’s electricity crisis is an economic problem as much as an engineering one.
When grid electricity fails, manufacturers must decide whether to reduce production, suspend operations or rely on alternative power sources. Small businesses face a similar choice, often with less financial room to absorb the extra costs of running generators or purchasing other electricity supplies.
The consequences extend beyond higher operating expenses. Unreliable electricity complicates investment decisions, undermines productivity and makes it harder for businesses to forecast production costs.
A stronger transmission network could help move electricity more reliably from generating stations to distribution networks. But transmission expansion alone cannot guarantee that enough electricity will be generated, delivered and distributed to meet demand.
The latest available quarterly figures from the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) illustrate the scale of the wider challenge.
During the second quarter of 2026, the average available generation capacity of grid-connected power plants was approximately 4,454 megawatts. The plants’ average availability factor was just 32.69 per cent, meaning that a substantial share of installed capacity was unavailable for dispatch during the period.
The same report put the average transmission loss factor at 8.44 per cent, above the 7 per cent target for 2026. That measure captures energy lost in transmission or used at transmission substations rather than delivered to distribution companies and bilateral customers.
These figures expose two distinct problems: insufficient available generation and losses within the transmission system.
A larger grid may improve the movement of electricity, but it will not automatically resolve plant outages, inadequate fuel supply or other constraints affecting generation. Nor will it guarantee that distribution companies can deliver additional electricity reliably to customers.
The government therefore faces a question that goes beyond the proposed eastern and western grids: how will transmission expansion be coordinated with improvements in generation, system operations and electricity distribution?
A nationwide audit could prevent another expensive mistake
Tegbe says the government has begun a technical audit to identify the precise faults affecting electricity infrastructure across the country.
The minister argues that interventions must be based on engineering evidence rather than assumptions about which equipment needs replacing.
“We have started a technical audit across the entire country to say where do we have issues, and what issues specifically do we have. I don’t want to fix transformer issues where I have conductor and relay problems. I don’t want to fix insulators where the challenges I actually have are towers. So, we will finish that technical audit in the next couple of weeks. When we finish it, we then target our prioritised areas,” he said.
That approach could help reduce waste if the findings translate into properly targeted repairs, replacements and new construction.
But the audit’s value will ultimately depend on what happens after inspectors complete their work. Nigerians need to know which assets are defective, which projects have been prioritised, how the choices were made and what improvements each intervention is expected to produce.
There is also an important regulatory question.
On 20 July 2026, NERC announced guidelines establishing a standardised framework for technical audits of the transmission system and validation of network data. Under those guidelines, the Nigerian Independent System Operator must engage qualified consultants to conduct comprehensive audits of the 330kV and 132kV transmission network at least once every five years, or as otherwise directed by the commission.
The guidelines also require transmission service providers to prepare performance improvement plans based on audit findings and submit annual progress reports.
The government should clarify whether Tegbe’s newly announced nationwide exercise is the same audit, a separate diagnostic exercise or a complementary review.
That distinction matters. Two overlapping assessments would be of limited value if the resulting recommendations were not translated into funded projects, clearly assigned responsibilities and enforceable implementation deadlines.
A public account of the findings would also help citizens and investors assess whether spending decisions reflect verified infrastructure needs rather than political visibility.
The 50-year infrastructure problem
Tegbe has attributed some of the transmission network’s weaknesses to ageing infrastructure, saying that certain facilities date back several decades.
“This government has inherited a problem of 50 years. Before I became the Minister of Power, honestly, I used to think that everybody in the power sector just didn’t know their left from right. But the reality is, some of the towers have gone down with some of the transmission lines there.
“When I went to the site, I saw some of them carrying the logo of ECN. Many people in this room might not know what ECN is. ECN predated NEPA. So, some of these things were built 50 years ago. That is the reality,” he stated.
The minister’s account highlights a long-running infrastructure challenge. But the age of an asset, by itself, is not a complete diagnosis of its condition or the reason a particular component has failed.
A credible assessment must distinguish equipment that requires urgent replacement from assets that remain serviceable, while identifying deficiencies in maintenance, protection systems, system control and operational practices where evidence supports those findings.
It must also establish how much rehabilitation can be completed quickly and which projects require longer lead times for planning, land access, procurement and construction.
The government’s two-to-three-year timeline makes that distinction especially important. Nigerians may begin to see benefits during that period, as Tegbe predicts, but it should not be interpreted as a guarantee that every component of the programme will be completed or that all grid collapses will cease.
Why the eastern and western grids need clear benchmarks
The government has already outlined a wider strategy to improve electricity supply in high-demand corridors.
In an October 7 update, the Federal Ministry of Information and National Orientation identified three corridors under the administration’s 24/7 Energy Zones pilot: Lagos, Abuja–Kaduna–Kano, and Enugu–Port Harcourt.
The initiative is intended to bring together grid stabilisation, market liquidity, grid expansion and regulatory coordination.
That programme provides useful context for Tegbe’s new announcement, but the public still needs a clear explanation of how the energy-zone initiative relates to the proposed eastern and western grid projects.
Are the new grids intended to provide additional transmission routes, strengthen existing connections, improve regional resilience or deliver a combination of these objectives?
The distinction is not merely technical. It will determine how projects are designed, how much they cost, where construction occurs and how their results can be measured.
The government should publish a project framework that identifies the priority transmission corridors, estimated expenditure, financing structure, procurement timetable and delivery milestones. It should also explain how the proposed infrastructure will improve resilience when a major line or other critical component fails.
Without this information, the public cannot assess whether the proposal represents a coordinated system upgrade or a collection of projects whose individual benefits may not add up to a more reliable national network.
What success should look like
Nigeria’s power sector needs more than another declaration of intent. It needs evidence that planning, spending and implementation are changing the experience of electricity consumers.
That evidence should begin with measurable targets.
The government should establish a baseline for major transmission failures, system frequency and voltage performance, transmission losses and the time required to restore supply after a disruption. It should then publish regular progress reports showing whether the new projects are improving those indicators.
Procurement records and project milestones should be transparent, with clear responsibility for delays, cost overruns and technical underperformance. The results of the nationwide audit should guide investment priorities, while subsequent audits and performance reports should establish whether completed interventions are working as intended.
The latest NERC report recorded no national-grid system disturbance during the second quarter of 2026. That is useful context, but one disturbance-free quarter does not establish that the structural weaknesses of the electricity system have been resolved.
The test is sustained reliability over time, supported by sufficient generation, effective transmission, sound system operations and dependable delivery to consumers.
For businesses, success should mean fewer interruptions, lower reliance on expensive backup power and greater confidence in production planning. For households, it should mean electricity that is more consistent and predictable.
For government, it should mean being able to show how much has been spent, what has been delivered and whether the network performs better than it did before the investment.
Tegbe is right to emphasise the need to identify the actual causes of infrastructure failures before directing money towards repairs. The harder test is whether the administration will make those findings, spending decisions and results open to public scrutiny.
Nigeria may need new eastern and western electricity grids. But it also needs a transparent plan for delivering them, reliable generation to feed them and clear accountability for every naira committed.
The real measure of this promise will not be whether Nigeria builds new towers. It will be whether those towers help keep the lights on.
Follow us on our broadcast channels today!
- WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VawZ8TbDDmFT1a1Syg46
- Telegram: https://t.me/atlanticpostchannel
- Facebook: https://www.messenger.com/channel/atlanticpostng
Join the debate; let’s know your opinion.