Egypt wants to put its oil and gas infrastructure to work for projects undertaken with other African countries. Refineries, liquefaction units, ports, storage capacity and transport networks could, according to Egypt’s minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources, Karim Badawi, help process more resources on the continent and connect producers to international markets.
This proposal was presented at the Alamein Africa forum, organized in early October by the Egyptian government with Afreximbank, the African Union and AUDA-NEPAD. It forms part of a broader debate about African countries’ ability to move beyond raw material exports and retain a larger share of the value generated by their production.
Cairo’s message highlights existing assets: the Idku and Damietta liquefied natural gas terminals, oil ports, storage facilities, refineries and maritime connections. The minister also says Egyptian oil companies operate in several countries, including Libya, Algeria, Nigeria and Angola. These capabilities could facilitate processing, blending, storage or transport of African resources.
Useful infrastructure, subject to concrete agreements
Egypt’s proposal rests on a geographical and industrial advantage: the country lies between African markets, the Mediterranean and major shipping routes linking Asia and Europe. Liquefaction facilities can serve gas exports, while ports and depots provide entry and exit points for hydrocarbons and refined products.
However, existing infrastructure does not automatically mean it will be accessible to producers from other countries. Each cooperation arrangement would need to specify available capacity, tariffs, access standards, transport costs, operational responsibilities and revenue sharing. Without these details, a pan-African hub remains a political direction rather than an established business model.
The challenge is also to define which processing stages partners wish to carry out in Egypt or in producing countries. Cooperation limited to storage or shipping can improve flows without creating a broader industrial base. Conversely, projects combining refining, petrochemicals, technical training and local suppliers could strengthen economic benefits if costs and environmental impacts are controlled.
Cairo presents the gas infrastructure at Damietta and Idku as assets for connecting African resources to external markets. Their value will nevertheless depend on gas availability, supply contracts, demand and capacity that can actually be mobilized. In a market where producing countries negotiate outlets and long-term contracts, a transit or processing role must offer a sufficiently clear advantage to attract partners.
Electricity costs as a condition for industrial development
Forum discussions also emphasized energy project costs. Azura Power CEO Edu Okeke cited his company’s experience in Nigeria, where developing a power project took six years. In his remarks, he compared the construction cost of a gas-fired plant in Africa, estimated at $1.5 million per megawatt, with approximately $1 million in other regions. These figures, attributed to a speaker, illustrate investor concerns but are not a universal average for all African projects.
Development time, the cost of capital, regulatory delays and transport infrastructure quality influence the final electricity price. For processing industries, reliable and affordable energy is as important as access to raw materials. Refining, liquefaction and petrochemicals require substantial investment and regular volumes; interruptions or overly expensive financing can make facilities less competitive.
Vanessa Baldwin Mushi, a CATA Energy executive, highlighted another tension: political pressure to keep tariffs low can reduce projects’ ability to attract private capital. Protecting households from high bills remains necessary, but poorly targeted subsidies or prices that do not cover costs can weaken operators and delay investment.
The answer lies in mechanisms that clearly allocate risks between the state, businesses and consumers. Subsidies can support vulnerable households, while transparent contracts and predictable tariffs allow viable projects to finance construction and operation. The balance between affordability and bankability is essential to any continental energy strategy.
An ambition that must create local value
Egypt presents cooperation as a way to retain more value in African energy chains. To truly benefit producing countries, partnerships must go beyond terminal or port use. They could include training commitments, market access for local companies, skills sharing, processing agreements and local content criteria suited to each country’s capabilities.
African governments must also preserve their ability to choose the solutions best suited to their resources. Access to Egyptian infrastructure may make sense for a project without local facilities, but other options—processing near the deposit, subregional cooperation or direct supply—can sometimes provide greater benefits. An independent economic comparison should include full transport costs, losses, emissions and the value added retained in each country.
The Alamein forum opened a space for discussion and networking, but public statements do not yet identify specific operational agreements arising from this proposal. The next indicators will be contracts signed between operators, announced reserved volumes, expansion investments, access tariffs and measurable local benefits.
Egypt has infrastructure capable of playing a regional role. Turning this offer into a cooperation platform will nevertheless depend on transparent access conditions and the ability to demonstrate that partnerships reduce costs while strengthening skills and processing on the continent. This concrete test must be used to assess the ambition of connecting African resources with markets.