Can the €23bn Nigeria-Morocco Pipeline Transform West Africa’s Energy Market?

The proposed €23bn African Atlantic Gas Pipeline would carry Nigerian gas along the Atlantic coast, connecting several West African countries before reaching Morocco and potentially linking with Europe’s gas network.

In July 2026, ECOWAS leaders signed an intergovernmental agreement supporting the project during a summit in Freetown, Sierra Leone. The agreement gives the pipeline stronger political backing, but it does not mean construction is about to begin.

The project still needs investors, commercial agreements and a final investment decision. That leaves one major question: can its promoters turn one of Africa’s most ambitious infrastructure plans into a working energy corridor?

The size of the project

The African Atlantic Gas Pipeline is being jointly developed by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and Morocco’s National Office of Hydrocarbons and Mines.

The proposed pipeline would stretch nearly 6,900 kilometres along Africa’s Atlantic coast. It is designed to transport about 30 billion cubic metres of gas annually, or roughly three billion cubic feet per day.

It would connect Nigeria’s gas resources with markets across West Africa, the Sahel and Morocco. The network could eventually connect to infrastructure supplying Europe.

The project began as a bilateral initiative between Nigeria and Morocco in 2016. It has since expanded into a regional plan involving ECOWAS countries and Mauritania.

Engineering, environmental and technical studies have been completed, according to Nigerian and Moroccan authorities. The next stage includes creating a project company in Casablanca and a Pipeline Higher Authority in Abuja. These institutions would coordinate implementation and prepare the project for its final investment decision.

That administrative structure matters. A pipeline crossing numerous borders requires common rules on tariffs, ownership, security, taxation, environmental standards and access.

Without such agreements, even a fully financed pipeline could struggle to operate.

Why Nigeria needs the pipeline

Nigeria has more gas than it can currently bring to market.

The Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission placed the country’s gas reserves at 215.19 trillion cubic feet as of January 1, 2026. At the prevailing production rate, the regulator estimated that the reserves could last about 85 years.

The problem is not a shortage of gas. It is the shortage of infrastructure needed to process, transport and sell it.

Nigeria already exports liquefied natural gas, supplies some neighbouring countries through the West African Gas Pipeline and uses gas for power generation and industry. However, weak domestic pipelines, limited processing capacity and unreliable electricity networks prevent the country from extracting the full economic value of its reserves.

The Atlantic pipeline would create another outlet for Nigerian gas. It could also encourage investment in gas production because producers would have access to a larger regional market.

But Nigeria must avoid repeating a familiar pattern in which energy infrastructure is designed mainly for export while domestic industries struggle to secure reliable supply.

For the project to deliver broad economic value, Nigeria would need to increase production while supplying local power plants, fertiliser producers, manufacturers and industrial zones.

The opportunity for West Africa

The pipeline’s biggest promise may not be gas exports to Europe. It may be the creation of a connected West African energy market.

Several countries along the proposed route have limited domestic gas resources and depend on expensive fuel imports for electricity generation. Access to pipeline gas could reduce their exposure to imported diesel and fuel oil.

Reliable gas could support power plants, cement factories, fertiliser facilities, mines, food-processing businesses and other energy-intensive industries.

It could also complement the West African Power Pool, which is connecting national electricity networks and allowing countries to trade power across borders.

More than 4,000 kilometres of high-voltage transmission lines now connect the grids of 15 West African countries. Yet the World Bank says over half of the region’s population previously lacked electricity, while many connected consumers continued to experience frequent outages.

A gas pipeline alone will not solve those problems. Countries would still need power plants, distribution infrastructure, functioning utilities and customers capable of paying sustainable tariffs.

However, the project could provide the fuel needed to support more reliable regional electricity generation.

The existing West African Gas Pipeline shows what cross-border gas infrastructure can achieve on a smaller scale. The 678-kilometre network transports Nigerian gas to Benin, Togo and Ghana, with a designed capacity of 474 million standard cubic feet per day.

The African Atlantic Gas Pipeline would be far larger and more complex. It would pass through more jurisdictions, serve more markets and require significantly more capital.

Morocco’s strategic interest

For Morocco, the project is about energy security, industrial expansion and geographic influence.

The country is developing new gas infrastructure as it works to reduce its reliance on coal and diversify its energy supply. Morocco expects its natural gas demand to rise from about one billion cubic metres to eight billion cubic metres by 2027.

The pipeline could supply Moroccan industries and power plants while strengthening the country’s position as an energy bridge between sub-Saharan Africa and Europe.

Morocco also plans to establish a liquefied natural gas terminal near Nador and connect it to its domestic pipeline network and existing infrastructure linking the country with Spain. The Atlantic pipeline could eventually feed into that wider system.

This gives Morocco more than one reason to support the project. It would gain access to Nigerian gas while positioning itself as an important transit, processing and trading centre.

Europe is part of the plan, but not the whole story

The prospect of supplying Europe has helped raise the pipeline’s international profile.

European countries have looked for more diverse gas supplies following disruptions in global energy markets. A route connecting Nigerian gas to Morocco could offer another long-term supply option.

However, Europe’s presence should not become the project’s main justification.

The International Energy Agency says roughly half of Africa’s energy investment over the past decade went into oil and gas, often through private projects focused on exports. At the same time, around 600 million Africans still lacked access to electricity.

The pipeline’s success should therefore be measured by more than the volume of gas reaching Europe.

It should also be judged by the number of African homes connected to power, factories supplied with reliable energy, jobs created and communities linked to economic opportunities.

The financing challenge

Political support is necessary, but it cannot pay for steel, offshore engineering, compressor stations or security.

The project’s estimated cost of about €23bn makes it one of Africa’s most expensive planned infrastructure developments.

Early engineering work received support from development institutions. The OPEC Fund, for example, provided $14.3m towards the second phase of the front-end engineering design, alongside financing from the Islamic Development Bank.

Financing construction will be much harder.

Investors will want evidence that countries along the route can purchase enough gas to make the pipeline commercially viable. They will also examine exchange-rate risks, political instability, security threats, environmental concerns and the financial condition of national electricity companies.

Many African utilities already struggle with debt, low collection rates and tariffs that do not cover their operating costs. That could weaken their ability to sign long-term gas purchase agreements.

The project may therefore require a combination of government guarantees, development finance, export credit, commercial bank loans and private investment.

Security could determine the outcome

The pipeline would cross countries facing different political and security conditions.

Some sections would run offshore, while others would connect to facilities on land. Protecting the system would require cooperation between governments, security agencies, local communities and project operators.

Damage to one section could disrupt supply across several countries.

The developers must also manage environmental and community concerns. Land acquisition, fishing activity, coastal ecosystems and local compensation could become major sources of delay if they are not addressed transparently.

Large African infrastructure projects often struggle when governments treat affected communities as obstacles rather than stakeholders.

What must happen next

The ECOWAS agreement gives the pipeline a stronger legal and political foundation. It also signals that participating governments see gas as part of the region’s industrial strategy.

But the project remains before the final investment stage. In practical terms, that means financing, ownership and commercial arrangements are not yet fully settled. This is an inference from the developers’ statement that the project company and regional authority must still prepare for the final investment decision.

The next test will be whether the participating countries can move from diplomatic endorsements to binding commercial commitments.

They must agree on who will buy the gas, how prices will be set, who will finance each section and how risks will be shared.

Nigeria must also prove that it can deliver enough gas without starving its domestic market.

A pipeline or another continental promise?

The African Atlantic Gas Pipeline could become more than a route for Nigerian gas.

It could lower energy costs, support industrialisation, deepen regional trade and connect some of Africa’s most important markets.

But scale is both its greatest attraction and its largest weakness.

The pipeline crosses too many borders, requires too much money and depends on too many governments to survive on political ambition alone.

The ECOWAS agreement is an important step. It is not the point at which the project becomes real.

That moment will come when investors commit capital, governments sign enforceable agreements and construction begins.

Until then, the Nigeria-Morocco pipeline remains one of Africa’s boldest energy ideas and one of its toughest tests of regional cooperation.