Petroleum Storage in Morocco: From Physical Capacity to Economic Value

Petroleum Storage in Morocco: From Physical Capacity to Economic Value

ANFAXIS Energy Intelligence · Research cut-off: 23 September 2026

Executive takeaway

Petroleum storage creates value when it makes compliant product accessible in the right place, at the right time and at a justified cost. Announced capacity proves neither that product is present nor that a buyer can withdraw it at the required rate. Choosing between third-party reservation and an owned facility requires a comparison of throughput, commitments, cash tied up and protection actually delivered. The two worked scenarios below make those trade-offs explicit without presenting assumed inputs as market tariffs.

What does the available evidence say about storage in Morocco?

The capacity figures used here come from accounts of the Council's reporting, not a direct reading of its original PDF. The figures were cross-checked in two publications dated 19 June 2026. [1][2] That provenance limitation does not allow an end-2025 snapshot to be treated as an inventory of capacity available in September 2026.

For a buyer, the implication is straightforward: verify access rather than assume it. For a developer, the question is not simply whether more tanks are needed. It is which commercially viable requirement remains underserved, for which product, corridor and delivery schedule. The assessment starts with demand and constraints, not the dimensions of a proposed asset.

How do capacity, inventory and availability differ?

Capacity is the ability to hold product; inventory is a quantity of product actually held. Availability adds quality, ownership, access and movement conditions. In its US methodology, the Energy Information Administration distinguishes shell capacity from working capacity, constrained by maximum safe fill and volumes below effective pump suction. This technical distinction is not a Moroccan tank-design rule. [4]

This is a verification framework, not a sequence of automatic deductions. Restrictions can overlap: do not deduct the same lot twice. Nor should tonnes be converted into cubic metres without appropriate density and reference conditions. Article 03 addresses how usable inventory and replenishment time determine industrial continuity; this article focuses on the economic decision behind the storage arrangement.

Where does storage's economic value come from?

It comes from the service delivered to the supply chain, not the volume of concrete and steel. Storage can separate shipment size from daily consumption, absorb scheduling differences and position product closer to its point of use. Each benefit still has to be demonstrated in the proposed logistics design. An additional depot can also add a handling step and a detour.

Four questions structure the assessment. Does storage reduce an identifiable logistics cost? Does it protect a critical use over a documented interval? Does it provide contractual flexibility that can actually be exercised? Does its location improve delivered cost after the final journey is included? Add only distinct benefits, net of the costs necessary to activate them.

Empty space can perform a useful function. The EIA notes that storage may be kept available to receive incoming cargoes. [4] Conversely, a substantial inventory may remain inaccessible because loading, quality or withdrawal rights are blocked. The appropriate test is therefore whether the facility can execute the operating programme, not whether it can remain as full as possible.

Which metrics distinguish occupancy from performance?

Specify the numerator, denominator and period before comparing facilities. The following management definitions are proposed for this analysis; they are not a universal regulatory classification or a claim about how every operator reports its metrics.

Count the selected flow once. Adding receipts and dispatches for the same product would artificially double the denominator. Precautionary storage can have low turnover without being pointless: it should be judged on protection provided, accessibility and cost. Conversely, high activity does not establish profitability if handling charges, losses or access constraints absorb the benefit. No target occupancy ratio is prescribed here.

How should the full cost be calculated without double-counting capital?

Separate three layers: infrastructure, cash tied up in product and consequences of residual risk. This extends the delivered-cost approach in Article 02 while isolating the storage-specific levers. It also prevents a low headline rental charge from obscuring a costly inventory or an expensive final delivery leg.

The infrastructure layer includes reservation charges or an equivalent annual asset cost, operations, maintenance, inspections, relevant insurance, movements, energy and end-of-life obligations. For an owned asset, the capital annuity depends on investment, useful life, residual value and the chosen rate. Do not add a second financing charge on the same capital when it is already captured in the annuity.

The inventory layer concerns cash actually committed to product, not empty reserved space. In a simplified model without supplier credit: annual inventory financing cost = average inventory × financed unit value × annual rate. A real assessment must also address payment terms, guarantees and tax timing. A recoverable tax may tie up cash without constituting a permanent expense.

A wholly hypothetical example: 1,200 m³ of average inventory × MAD 8,000/m³ × 8% = MAD 768,000 a year. At annual dispatches of 60,000 m³, that equals MAD 12.80/m³, excluding infrastructure charges. Neither the assumed product value nor the financing rate represents a current market quote or a financing offer.

Third-party reservation or an owned facility: where is the crossover?

The crossover depends on actual throughput and comparable service. An arrangement with lower fixed costs may suit uncertain demand, whereas a more capital-intensive option needs stronger volume visibility. That comparison does not remove the need to evaluate location, authorizations, delivery timing and execution risk. A cheaper theoretical facility may not be available when the business needs it.

Scenario 1 — annual throughput changes the comparison

All inputs are educational assumptions. Option A reserves a third-party service for MAD 720,000 a year plus MAD 12 per cubic metre dispatched. Option B uses an owned facility with an equivalent annual fixed cost of MAD 1,200,000, including capital and fixed operations, plus MAD 4/m³. Both options are assumed technically capable of providing the same service over the volume range examined.

With Q representing annual dispatched volume, A's unit cost is 720,000 / Q + 12; B's is 1,200,000 / Q + 4. The two are equal at (1,200,000 − 720,000) / (12 − 4) = 60,000 m³ a year.

The crossover is not an investment recommendation. Inventory costs, assumed identical, are excluded from this infrastructure comparison. Adding the earlier inventory-financing assumption raises MAD 24.00/m³ to MAD 36.80/m³ at 60,000 m³, before other unmodelled costs. The distinction matters: an infrastructure tariff is not the complete economics of storing and delivering fuel.

Next, test lower demand. At 48,000 m³ a year, 20% below the comparison point, A costs MAD 27/m³ and B costs MAD 29/m³. This is not a forecast of Morocco's fuel market. It demonstrates why an owned facility should be tested against prudent volumes, realistic maintenance and a delayed start, rather than assessed solely at the central utilization case.

Before commitment, replace the annual screening calculation with discounted cash flows: initial outlay, ramp-up, outages, tax, replacements, exit value and restoration obligations. An assumed annualized cost is neither a construction quotation nor evidence of bankability. The feasibility study must establish the inputs that this teaching example deliberately holds constant.

When is additional inventory economically justified?

When it protects against a documented risk at an acceptable cost without creating a larger exposure elsewhere. Separate continuity protection from a view on commodity prices. Buying additional product can increase price exposure, quality risk and cash requirements; physical protection does not guarantee a trading gain. The alternative may also be a shorter response time rather than more inventory.

Scenario 2 — calculate a threshold instead of inventing a probability

An additional average buffer of 500 m³, valued at MAD 8,000/m³ and financed at 8%, ties up MAD 4 million and costs MAD 320,000 a year in financing. Adding MAD 180,000 a year for incremental reservation and services gives MAD 500,000 a year. Other incremental costs are assumed to be zero for this example; any that exist must be added in an actual appraisal.

If one hour of downtime actually avoided preserves MAD 250,000 of net contribution, the break-even threshold is two hours a year: 500,000 / 250,000. This is neither a customer result nor an estimate of incident frequency. It states what would have to be achieved under the specified cost and consequence assumptions.

Two validations remain essential. The buffer must actually prevent the hours counted: autonomy, throughput, quality and access must make that possible. The contribution figure must then reflect a permanent loss genuinely avoided, without adding revenue and margin for the same volumes. Production that is merely deferred requires a different calculation from sales that are permanently lost.

This threshold never replaces safety requirements or applicable obligations. It helps compare additional, permissible protections. Where incident probabilities are not defensible, retain explicit scenarios rather than publish a spurious expected return. A threshold can frame a management decision without pretending to predict how often the reserve will be used.

What commitments should a storage provider document?

Capacity without movement rights is an incomplete promise. The agreement should make permitted products, reserved space, timing, loading windows, throughput and responsibilities explicit. Qualified advisers should review the enforceability of relevant clauses. The economic analysis should not assume a contractual remedy will immediately restore access or replace an interrupted service.

A hybrid arrangement may combine an on-site buffer with upstream reserved capacity. Do not count the same product twice or assume the two reserves are independent. The remote depot provides protection only if delivery from it remains possible within the scenario being tested. A second location is not automatically a second viable route to the consumer.

Which regulatory and HSE issues condition the project?

They should be resolved before the timetable and economics are locked. The Ministry distinguishes, among other procedures, authorization for new storage capacity, creation or transfer of specified depot categories, and commissioning. [5] This overview is not an exhaustive permit list for a particular plot, product or port interface, nor does it establish what a specific company is authorized to operate.

On the technical side, the World Bank Group/IFC petroleum-terminal guidelines address installation integrity, overfill prevention, containment, inspections, fire hazards and spill response. [6] They are an international reference dated 2007, not a Moroccan authorization or ANFAXIS certification. Applicable standards and project-specific requirements must be validated separately; no engineering dimensions or operating limits are prescribed here.

The economic model should allow for inspections and outages, residue management, insurance, competent personnel and environmental exit obligations. A saving achieved by removing a required control is not an optimization. For an existing facility, commission a technical and environmental review before treating its nominal capacity as a readily available commercial asset.

What should the decision dossier contain?

It should support acceptance or rejection of a commitment, not merely compare tank sizes. Assemble monthly demand by product, peaks, receipts and dispatches, access rights, HSE constraints, average financed inventory and the costs of each option. The underlying quantities and commercial boundaries should reconcile so that decision-makers can trace the headline result back to operating evidence.

Assign the validations: procurement owns commitments; operations confirms throughput; quality/HSE validates fitness and restrictions; finance tests cash and scenarios; legal advisers verify rights and authorizations. Management then accepts or rejects the residual risk. Missing evidence should remain visible, with an owner and a due date, rather than disappear into a convenient assumption.

At minimum, stress-test lower demand, higher investment, a delayed start and loss of access. Also test a horizon in which efficiency or energy substitution changes volumes, without claiming to forecast that trajectory. Exit flexibility and the cost of being wrong can be as important as the unit cost in the central case.

Frequently asked questions

Does substantial national capacity guarantee my supply?

No. A national total does not describe inventory allocated to your contract, its quality, or loading windows and delivery time to your site. The end-2025 diesel/gasoline figures presented here are capacities, not freely available reserves. Obtain local operating and contractual evidence before treating national infrastructure as a protection available to your business. [1]

Should buyers target 100% physical fill?

No. Fill must respect approved limits and leave the space required by the receipt programme. Reserved capacity can be useful even when temporarily empty. Manage accessible inventory, receiving headroom and throughput together instead of maximizing one percentage in isolation. Technical references must be adapted to the facility rather than imported as a universal operating rule. [4]

How many inventory days should be financed?

This analysis establishes no universal number. The decision depends on demand, lead times, their variability, critical uses and applicable obligations. Do not calculate days of cover by dividing national capacity by consumption from a different product perimeter. Article 03 addresses the operating calculation at site level, where usable inventory and replenishment timing can be assessed together.

Is access to third-party storage automatic?

No. An existing facility does not prove that compatible commercial capacity is offered within your time window with the necessary withdrawal rights. Verify the agreement, restrictions, accepted products and loading resources. This dossier assumes no general entitlement to access; the applicable legal and contractual position should be assessed by qualified advisers before relying on it.

Does building always become preferable at high volume?

No. In the worked example, owned infrastructure has a lower unit cost above 60,000 m³ a year only under the stated assumptions. Timing, location, authorizations, financing, demand, maintenance and exit obligations can change the conclusion. The crossover guides feasibility work; it is neither a promised return nor an investment recommendation for a real project.

Can storage be justified solely by an expected price increase?

That creates a market exposure separate from continuity needs. The anticipated price gain must cover financing, storage, quality and transaction costs, and the price move may instead be adverse. A disciplined dossier separates the physical service's value from a market-profit assumption, which requires its own risk limits, approval and monitoring rather than being embedded as a guaranteed benefit.

From analysis to decision

The right investment is not necessarily another tank. It may be clearer access rights, dependable throughput, better-positioned inventory or a more flexible contract. Before financing more capacity, demonstrate the missing service, how it will be delivered and whether its economics remain credible under stress. Storage should be evaluated as an operating capability and financial commitment, not a headline volume.

Prepare a storage requirement. Through the “Request a Solution” pathway, specify product, location, average and peak volumes, receipt windows, existing inventory, required throughput and commitment horizon. The enquiry starts a qualification discussion; it does not reserve capacity or constitute an availability commitment.

Sources and methodology

Research cut-off: 23 September 2026. The main scope is liquid-fuel storage; LPG and other products may require separate assessment. National figures are dated and their provenance is identified. The Council's primary PDF was not accessed directly: [1] and [2] are consistent secondary reports, not two independent measurements.

Management definitions, comparisons and simulations are original analysis. All figure inputs are hypothetical: no ANFAXIS tariff, quotation, customer, asset or performance result is represented. The calculations establish neither incident probability nor expected investment return. Application requires site-specific data and appropriate professional validation, including technical, financial, contractual and regulatory review.

[1] MAP dispatch reproduced by TelQuel, 19 June 2026. National diesel/gasoline storage capacity at end-2025. Secondary source attributing the figures to the Competition Council.

[2] Médias24, Haitame Kerboute, 19 June 2026. Imports, sales and storage in the 2025 fuel market. Cross-check of capacity figures from the same underlying institutional source.

[3] Morocco Ministry of Energy Transition and Sustainable Development. Fuels, 2026 key indicators; 2025 consumption table. Primary source: diesel consumption of 6,694,000 tonnes.

[4] US Energy Information Administration. Weekly U.S. and regional crude oil stocks and working storage capacity, methodology updated 1 June 2023. Technical definitions only; series discontinued in February 2024. No US capacity data are applied to Morocco.

[5] Morocco Ministry of Energy Transition. Procedures and authorizations: new storage capacity, depot creation/transfer and commissioning. Primary directory; project-specific requirements require confirmation.

[6] World Bank Group / IFC. Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines for Crude Oil and Petroleum Product Terminals, 30 April 2007, especially pp. 1, 5–6 and 8–9. International reference, not local authorization.