DETERMINANTS OF MARKET ACCESS TO LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS (LPG) AMONG URBAN HOUSEHOLDS IN ABIA STATE, NIGERIA

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00008207

No of Pages: 96

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

$12

ABSTRACT


The study analyzed the determinants of market access to LPG use among urban households in Abia State, Nigeria. The objectives is to: Measure the effect of income on market access of LPG, evaluate the impact of price to availability to market access of LPG, determine the influences of product availability of LPG and identify the preference pattern of selected cooking energy sources outside LPG. The study was done in the urban areas of Abia State. In this case, two urban areas of Aba and Umuahia were chosen, after which 120 households were selected from each these areas, making a total of 240 households. Objectives were analyzed using descriptive statistics and probit regression model. The results showed that income, price and availability were all significant in accessing the LPG products. Major constraints to access were cost of starting and explosion. It was also observed that kerosene was the major preferred cooking energy in urban area. The study recommends that price of LPG should be made affordable and product highly available. Also safety and public sensitization campaigns should be organized to educate the households on the use of LPG.





TABLE OF CONTENT

Title page                                                                                                            i

Declaration                                                                                                         ii

Certification                                                                                                       iii

Dedication                                                                                                          iv

Acknowledgement                                                                                              v

Table of Content                                                                                                vi

List of Tables                                                                                                     x

List of Figures                                                                                                    xi

Abstract                                                                                                              xii

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1   Background of the Study                                                                      1

1.2   Statement of Problem                                                                           6

1.3   Objective of the Study                                                                          8

1.4   Research Question                                                                                9

1.5   Research Hypothesis                                                                             9

1.6 Significance of the Study                                                                             10

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Emergence of Nigeria’s Natural Gas Industry                                             11

2.2 The Exploration and Production of Natural Gas in Nigeria                              14

2.3 Theoretical Framework                                                                                 23

2.3.1 Gas Flaring and Environmental Pollution                                                25

2.4 Fuel Substitution and the Energy Ladder model                                          31

2.5 A critique of the Energy Ladder Model                                                       38

2.6 The Energy Mix Model                                                                                43

2.7 Formal Presentation of the Energy Mix Model                                           50

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction                                                                                                  56

3.1 Research Design                                                                                           56

3.2 Area of the Study                                                                                         56

3.3 Population for the Study                                                                              57

3.4 Sample Size Determination                                                                          57

3.5 Sampling Technique and Method                                                                58

3.6 Sources of Data                                                                                            58

3.7 Validity and Reliability of Instruments                                                        58

3.8 Data Analysis                                                                                               59

3.9 Model Specification                                                                                     59

CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Socio-Economic Characteristics of the Respondents                             62

4.1.1    Household size distribution of the Respondents                                      63

4.1.2    Educational attainment of household heads                                             64

4.1.3    Marital status  of the Respondents                                                           65

4.1.4    Income distribution of the respondents                                                    65

4.2 Problems Associated with the use of LPG                                             67

4.3 Preference pattern of selected cooking energy sources outside LPG               68

4.4 Determinants of Access to Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) among               Household in Abia State                                                                     69

CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Summary                                                                                                      72

5.2 Conclusion and Recommendation                                                               73                          

References                                                                                                          75

 

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Gas Produced and flared, 1959-1994                                                 17

Table 2.2: Value of gas produced, utilized and flared (N billion),  

1961-1998                                                                                                18

Table 4.1 Age distribution of the respondents                                                   62

Table 4.2 Household size distribution of the Respondents                                63

Table 4.3: Education of Respondents                                                                64

Table 4.4 Marital Status of the respondents                                                       65

Table 4.5 Income distribution of the household head (respondents)                   65

Table 4.6: Problems Associated with the use of LPG in the study area              67

Table 4.7: Preference pattern in the use of selected cooking energy                    sources outside LPG in order of preference                                                   68

Table 4.8: Estimates of the determinants of market access to LPG by                  households                                                                                               69

 

 

 

 

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Schematic illustration of the Energy Ladder Hypothesis:

Change in Fuel with Increasing Income Level                                                  33

Figure 2.2: Schematic Representation of the Energy Ladder Hypothesis   34

Figure 2.3 Conceptual Framework of the Energy Mix Model                               47

Figure 2.4 Schematic Representation of the Energy Mix Model in terms of Expenditures                                                                                              50

 

 

  

 

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION


1.1 Background of the Study

Issues bordering on climate change and variability, mitigation and adaptation measures have be cone topical and occupy the centre stage of many scientific studies and discussions (Mbanasor et al., 2010; Agwu et al., 2012). Although impact of climate change is global, but its severity is huge and appeared to have made its nest in Africa’s social and economic development because of poor adaptation capacities and measures by government and individual (Nwafor, 2007; Jagtap, 2007); especially those that concerns attitude aimed at creating a sustainable environment by reducing greenhouse gas emission such as carbon emissions from the consumption of energy.

Over the years, many efforts of government and agencies have been directed at preventive measures rather than reactionary measures. Thus was seen as the basis for N21.6 billion flood fund by Nigerian government to reduce the impact of 2012 flood. Although this measures may have reduced the severity of the flood on agricultural GDP, however, according to Okonjo Iweala (2014), these are scare financial resources that could have been deployed to much needed public services like health, education and other key sectors, if there were measures taken to mitigate the occurrence of such huge environmental threat. In mitigating threats of climate change, what is important as a response mechanism is solid knowledge, in terms of causes. Beyond that is to obtain commitment from the people to ensure compliance. Theoretical and empirical evidence suggest that carbon pollution is the biggest causes of climate change. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are caused by human activities. One of the main human activities that emit huge volume of CO2 in Nigeria besides gas flaring is emission from household cooking energy.

Nigeria as a large developing country has a considerably high energy requirement for cooking. Cooking energy choices include liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), kerosene, electricity, charcoal, firewood or fuel-wood and other solid fuels. According to International Energy Agency (IEA) (2002), approximately 2.4 billion people in developing countries rely primarily on traditional biomass fuel for cooking and heating needs. Although Nigeria is the largest oil producing country in Africa with large natural gas reserve and renewable energy resources, more than 117.8 million Nigerians rely on wood and biomass for cooking. These biomass fuels include wood, charcoal, low dung and crop residues. In Nigeria, fuel-wood and charcoal has specially been known to be the major sources of energy for cooking and heating needs purposes for people in the rural area, while kerosene are mostly used in the urban areas. According to Ebe (2206) and Chukwu (2000), more than 70 percent of the total population in Nigeria relies on fuel wood or charcoal. The preferences for biomass fuel and kerosene among mostly poor people and developing countries is seen as a viable alternative  to high cost options in other modern energy used by household. However, new studies have found that black carbon, which is mostly “soot”, formed in the combustion of wood and fuel such as diesel and  kerosene is the second most important contributor to global climate change (Aid for Africa, 2013).

Several other studies have shown that inefficient and  traditional utilization of biomass fuel and  kerosene has several implications such as risk of low birth weight and pulmonary tuberculosis in developing countries, productivity and the environment (Epstein et al., 2013; Pokhrel et al., 2010; ESMAP, 2003). According to World Health Organization (WHO) (2002), the risk associated with air pollution from solid full accounts for 2.7 percent of global losses of healthy losses of healthy risk. Statistically, about 1.3 million people, mostly women and children die prematurely every year exposure to indoor air pollution from biomass. This is a serious global challenge which has continued to receive global attention in response to demand for sustainable development. As a measure to reduce the negative of man, scientists, policy makers and  researchers have in unionism advocated for a  clean and efficient energy alternative that is cost effective and available as a one of the resilient strategies. Many of these strategies are cross cutting and apply to home, businesses, industry and  transportation.

As a home strategy, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is mentioned in the context of sustainable development (Williams, 2007), because it is a cleaner, low carbon, gaseous duel. LPG is one of the products of natural gas and usually consists of mixture of propane (C2H8) and butane (C4H10) for standard heating and cooking purposes. Its unique properties make it a versatile energy source. In comparison with other fuels employed for household cooking around the world, LPG has clear cut benefits in terms o health, efficiency, availability and climate impact. Perhaps the most compelling argument against other energy source is either inability to even consider the fact that threat to climate change is imminent. According to Williams (2007), if average African household switched to LPG, each family would have saved 120kg of firewood annually. In addition, it  is estimated that if half of the number of household currently cooking with solid fuels switched to LPG, it can provide health and productivity gain of more than USD 900 billion over the next ten years (WHO, 2002).

Fortunately for Nigeria, she is blessed with a proven gas reserve of more than 187 trillion cubic feet (NLNG, 2011). This suggests that Nigeria can stabilize carbon emission through massive development, investment and  utilization of LPG thereby entrenching low carbon economy (LCE). According to Okonjo-Iweala (2014), the multiplier effect of investment and savings from the sale of gas and associated LPG  is estimated to yield a net present value of $7.5 billion over the next 25 years, besides the environmental impacts. Despite resources availability and other empirical benefits, only about 5 percent of Nigeria’s households use of LPG,  with total annual consumption of paltry 150,000 metric tones. This translate into 0.9kg per capita, compared, to Senegal annual per capita consumption of 13kg. without doubt, Nigeria is ranked among the lowest consumers of LPG in Africa. Given her population, Nigeria could consume more than 3.5 million MT if LPG was its major fuel for cooking but reliable data shows that Nigeria recorded about 39 percent growth in domestic consumption of LPG between 2005-2012, indicating a very slow growth over the years notwithstanding government interventions (NLNG, 2011).

Low consumption ang growth of LPG market in Nigeria has been attributed to many factors. The question of availability, affordability, income, government and international oil policies, other household characteristics such as price has been noted as some of the factors influencing demand for energy choices among households such as price (Williams, 2007; ESMAP, 2003; Quedraogo, 2005). It is evident  that LPG market responds to market changes in international oil prices; from primary law of demand that increases in international price of LPG affect domestic consumptions as consumers move down the energy chain towards other energy alternatives. Houthakkar and Talor (1970) argued that consumers may continue to make purchases on the basis of habit even if prices have changed. Other hindrances to the growth of LPG market include subsidization of Kerosene by successive government in Nigeria, low public awareness, poor infrastructures, and lack of investment in the gas value chain (Kalejaye, 2014). Like in other markets in Nigeria, LPG market is constrained by poor market infrastructure and logistics challenges (Alison-Madueke, 2014). The implication of poor market access is low energy utilization with adverse effect on economic growth. Therefore, the need to reverse this trend in order to fully maximize the benefits therein makes the consideration of  this imperative.


1.2 Statement of the Problem

Environmental degradation due to deforestation, desertification and the consumption of energy sources, health hazards due to consumption of biomass fuels and distribution concerns are emerging issue with the rising demand for cooking energy. These issues have en secured serious welfare impacts on households. Deforestation and despoliation of environment has made it even more difficult to secure a clean and safe environment and mitigate greenhouse effect (CSR Digest, 2004).

Arising from the problem of deforestation, many policies, campaigns and laws have been implemented and enacted by the government to decrease felling of trees and its use households as energy sources. Some of these policies include tree planting, campaigns and jail sentences to those involved rate of forest resources is still alarming. In recent years, depletion of resources has resulted in an increase of direct and indirect costs (FAO, 2003).

Archard et at (2002) reported that the rate of forest loss in Africa as about half of the rate in Southeast Asia. In Nigeria about 35.7 percent of forest cover was lost between 1990 and 2005 (Butter, 2005). Specifically, in the Southeast Nigeria, it was estimated the forest is decimated at the rate of 3.5 percent annually; which s higher than the national average of 2.5 percent (Enugu State Government and DFID, 2003).

Despite the cleaning burning usefulness, environmental friendliness and other health related advantages as well as versatility and huge deposits of natural gas from where LPG is purchased , its use and consumption still remains very low. He question of availability, affordability/price of the LPG, income, government  policies and other household characteristics has been noted variously as some  of the factors influencing the demand for energy choices among households (Williams, 2007; ESMAP, 2003; Quedraogo, 2005). It has been noted that as price of LPG fluctuates to international oil prices, so as the market change (Williams, 2007). Increase in the international price of LPG, domestic gas consumption decreases as consumers move down the energy chain towards other energy sources like coal, fuelwood, kerosene etc; which are believe to be cheaper.

However, consumption may continue to make purchases on the basis of habit even of prices have changed (Houthakkar and Talor, 1970). This according to them is costly for consumers to remake consumption decisions everyday and this result in delay responses towards price changes. The strength of this study lies in its contribution to mitigating the challenges of climate change impact in Nigeria; the need to expose the extent to which households in their bid to access LPG. Several studies in time past left these issues outside its purview and concentrates on energy preference (Quedraogo, 2005); household fuel use and fuel switching (ESMAP, 2003); LPG pricing situation and analysis of household energy use and interior air pollution (WHO, 2005).


1.3 Objectives of the Study

The board of the Study is to analyze the determinants of access to liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) among households in Abia State. The general objectives are to:

i.               Measure the effect of income on market access of LPG

ii.             Evaluate the impact of price to market access of LPG

iii.           Determine the influence of product availability to market access of LPG

iv.           Identify the preference pattern of selected cooking energy sources outside LPG


1.4 Research Question

     I.         How does income affect market access of LPG

   II.         How does price affect market access of LPG

 III.         Does availability affect access to LPG market

IV.         How does LPG affect preference pattern of other cooking sources


1.5 Research Hypothesis

The research hypothesis is stated below:

H01: Income does not have any significant effect on market access LPG

H02: Price does not have any significant effect on market  access of LPG

H03: Availability of product is not significant in accessing LPG product

H04: LPG does not affect the preference pattern of other cooking sources.


1.6 Significance of the Study

Many studies in the past in the area of cooking have been based on energy preferences (Quedraogo, 2005); household fuel use and fuel switching (ESMAP, 2003); LPG pricing , and situation; analysis of household energy use and indoor pollution (WHO, 2005). The study is different. The result of the study will:

i.               Help expose the extent to which households have access to LPG.

ii.             Help expose the problems encountered by households in their bid to access LPG

iii.           Help the government and other stakeholders in formulating policies geared towards the use of energy sources by households especially LPG

iv.           Help other researchers who may want to go into similar area in future.

 


Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects

FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!

+(234) 0814 780 1594

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.

Ratings & Reviews

0.0

No Review Found.


To Review


To Comment