After thirteen years of delays, abandoned plans, and shattered hopes, Kenya has finally announced a path to commercialize the Turkana oil discoveries.<\/p>\n
The government’s plan to build a Sh220 billion railway extension from Rongai to South Lokichar overrides the long awaited and talked about crude oil pipeline, which has stalled repeatedly due to costs and financing challenges.<\/p>\n
But as the nation absorbs this news, a fundamental question lingers: who will this railway truly serve?<\/p>\n
The ambition is undeniable. By December 2031, Kenya intends to construct 640 kilometres of metre-gauge railway through some of the country’s most challenging terrain, enabling crude oil evacuation to begin the following month.<\/p>\n
Production is projected to reach 50,000 barrels per day, requiring specialized insulated rail tank cars to transport waxy crude that solidifies at 45 degrees Celsius. Before the rail is ready, Gulf Energy — which acquired Tullow Oil’s assets for $120 million — aims to start initial production as early as December 2026, using approximately 600 trucks daily as an interim measure to move oil to Mombasa for export.<\/p>\n
On the surface, the rail option makes considerable sense. Unlike a single-purpose pipeline costing billions, this multi-purpose line can carry passengers, general cargo, livestock, and minerals alongside crude oil.<\/p>\n
The flexibility argument is compelling: why build expensive infrastructure for one commodity when a railway can serve multiple needs for generations? The metre-gauge option also costs significantly less than the Sh300 billion-plus required for a standard-gauge extension, and it addresses longstanding connectivity deficits in northern Kenya’s historically marginalized counties.<\/p>\n
But beneath the technical appeal lies a troubling concern that Kiharu MP Ndindi Nyoro has courageously raised. Speaking in mid-March, Nyoro warned against what he described as the personalization of the Turkana oil project, alleging that some leaders are treating this national resource as a private enterprise.<\/p>\n
His words deserve national attention: he questioned why public funds should construct a railway to transport oil that belongs to an individual, arguing that infrastructure should first serve the people of Turkana who have waited years for development.<\/p>\n
The parliamentary documents outlining the railway plan reveal that Gulf Energy explicitly requested government funding for the Lokichar rail link. Their Field Development Plan states clearly that the company expects the government to provide a railway line in Lokichar by the second half of 2030 to support increased production.<\/p>\n
This is public money\u2014Sh220 billion of it\u2014being deployed to facilitate a private company’s extraction timetable. Proponents will argue that broader economic benefits justify the investment, pointing to estimated recoverable reserves of 560 million barrels and Kenya’s potential to become East Africa’s third oil exporter. This calls for a rigorous accountability.<\/p>\n
The contrast with neighboring Uganda is instructive. Kampala has pursued oil development through a partnership model requiring significant private infrastructure investment, with companies like TotalEnergies and CNOOC bearing substantial costs.<\/p>\n
Kenya, by contrast, appears positioned to \u201csocialize the costs of extraction while privatizing the profits\u201d. More suspicions emanate from the rushed timeline whereby Gulf Energy expects first oil by December 2026, while the parliament is being asked to ratify the Field Development Plan within ninety days.<\/p>\n
This rush can deny Kenyans opportunity to take part public debate about who benefits and who bears the risk.<\/p>\n
Technical arguments favoring rail over pipeline makes some sense. The waxy nature of Turkana crude, requiring heated transport, may actually be better managed through insulated rail wagons than through a pipeline vulnerable to cooling and blockages.<\/p>\n
This still is not a justification to curtail public participation and clarification on things like clarity on revenue shares, community benefits, and why taxpayers should underwrite a project whose primary beneficiary is a single corporate entity.<\/p>\n
According to projections contained in the Field Development Plan, the government is estimated to earn $864 million, approximately Sh111.69 billion, as its share of oil profits over the 25-year period to 2050.<\/p>\n
Of this amount, the national government would receive $648 million or Sh83.77 billion, county governments $173 million or Sh22.36 billion, and local communities $43 million or Sh5.56 billion.<\/p>\n
These figures are based on an assumed crude oil price of $60 per barrel and total drilling costs of $4.65 billion. The Petroleum Act of 2019 mandates this specific revenue-sharing formula: 75 percent of the government’s profit oil to the national treasury, 20 percent to the producing county governments of Turkana and West Pokot, and 5 percent to local communities.<\/p>\n
The funds, to be managed through established community trust funds, are earmarked for education, healthcare, water projects, and enterprise development.<\/p>\n
Beyond direct revenue, the project promises significant infrastructure investments that could outlast the oil wells themselves.<\/p>\n
These include a major water pipeline from Turkwel to Lokichar with a dedicated irrigation component for community farming, significant road upgrades, replacement of critical bridges like Kainuk, and access to reliable grid electricity brought in for the oil facilities.<\/p>\n
For a region long characterized by hardship and exclusion, these developments could prove transformative. The Turkana County government has positioned itself to ensure local participation through the Turkana County Local Content Act 2024, which aims to secure meaningful community involvement across the value chain, from employment to enterprise development.<\/p>\n
These questions become more urgent given the contestation already evident at the Coast. Leaders in Mombasa and Lamu are jostling for position, with some demanding revival of the Changamwe refinery while others insist on the original Lamu pipeline plan.<\/p>\n
The Lapsset Corridor Authority has warned that abandoning the pipeline component undermines the integrated design of the entire corridor and could affect regional cooperation with South Sudan and Ethiopia.<\/p>\n
The Lamu Port-South Sudan-Ethiopia Transport corridor, envisioned as Africa’s most ambitious infrastructure project, was designed to include an oil pipeline as a core component. Its removal creates coordination challenges that extend beyond Kenya’s borders.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
After thirteen years of delays, abandoned plans, and shattered hopes, Kenya has finally announced a path to commercialize the Turkana oil discoveries. The government’s plan to build a Sh220 billion railway extension from Rongai to South Lokichar overrides the long awaited and talked about crude oil pipeline, which has stalled repeatedly due to costs and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":999,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-998","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-blue-economy-sustainability"],"yoast_head":"\n