It makes more sense for Ukraine to invest in creating its own network of underground fuel storage facilities than to invest in the construction of facilities for storing strategic reserves in other countries. This opinion was expressed by Serhiy Kuyun, director of the A-95 Consulting Group, according to Enkorr.
Ukrainian legislation allows for up to 50% of the minimum reserves of oil and petroleum products to be stored in countries neighboring Ukraine and up to an additional 25% in countries bordering those neighbors. This practice is common in Europe; however, finding available storage capacity in neighboring countries is complicated by the fact that EU member states themselves are required to maintain significant strategic reserves.
According to Kuyun, as a result, Ukraine may be offered the option to invest not in leasing existing facilities, but in the construction of new storage tanks abroad. Such projects will require lengthy construction periods, local permits and licenses, as well as the outflow of significant foreign currency investments from Ukraine. If a foreign partner finances the project, it may also be necessary to guarantee that the storage facilities remain filled for many years.
The expert cites another problem: the physical ability to quickly deliver strategic reserves to Ukraine in the event of a large-scale fuel crisis.
“Even if we build up reserves abroad, how would we then transport them in an emergency? The border is already strained even under normal conditions—where would we possibly fit in tens or even hundreds of thousands of additional metric tons?” Kuyun noted.
The relevance of this discussion has intensified following agreements between Naftogaz and the Hungarian company MOL. On September 20, the companies signed a memorandum to explore the possibility of storing petroleum products in Hungary near the Ukrainian border to meet the needs of the Ukrainian market. The project is still in its initial stages, and the parties must assess its technical, financial, environmental, and regulatory parameters.
According to Kuyun, a more reliable solution would be to build secure underground storage facilities directly in Ukraine. This would allow for simultaneous investment in Ukrainian infrastructure, increase the security of reserves against Russian attacks, and ensure the ability to bring fuel to market more quickly in a crisis situation.
The first government incentives for such investments have already been established. In September, the government expanded its financial support program for the fuel sector. Loan funds can be used, in particular, to bury or install underground storage tanks, pumping stations, process pipelines, and other fuel infrastructure equipment.
The maximum amount of state-backed lending is 1 billion UAH per company, including affiliated counterparties; the minimum is 100 million UAH; and for projects in combat zones, it is 30 million UAH. The state will subsidize 5.5 percentage points per annum off the bank’s base rate.
According to Kuyun, the next step should be to streamline the approval process for project documentation related to underground fuel storage facilities, as this process can currently take over a year. He noted that several private companies have already begun implementing such projects while simultaneously completing the necessary approval procedures.
“Build our own, invest in Ukraine’s infrastructure! But we need to build underground storage facilities—with a neighbor like this, we’ll always need them,” emphasized the director of “A-95.”
FUEL, INVESTMENT, petroleum product, storage facility, UKRAINE
