Tema Oil Refinery’s renewed use of Ghanaian crude has opened a wider debate about how the country can retain more value from its petroleum resources while reducing the foreign-exchange pressures associated with importing refined products.
At the Government Accountability Series on October 26, 2026, TOR Managing Director Edmond Kombat outlined a longer-term ambition to increase domestic refining and eventually allow the refinery to purchase Ghanaian crude in cedis.
He said the government was considering changes to the legal framework governing payments for crude sourced from the Ghana National Petroleum Corporation (GNPC) and its partners.
The proposal links three parts of the petroleum value chain that have often been discussed separately: upstream crude production, domestic refining and the supply of finished products to the local market.
The economic logic is that refining more Ghanaian crude locally could reduce the need to import some finished products, retain more processing activity within the country and create a more direct connection between domestic production and domestic consumption.
But the potential foreign-exchange benefit depends on the details of the commercial arrangements.
Paying for domestic crude in cedis would not automatically eliminate the need for foreign currency elsewhere in the petroleum value chain, and it would not guarantee lower prices at the pump.
Kombat said government was examining the possibility of changing the current payment arrangements.
“The Minister is working very hard to go to Cabinet and then Parliament for them to change that law and allow us to be able to buy the crude in cedis.”
The proposal remains a policy intention described by the managing director, rather than evidence that the legal change has been approved or implemented.
Connecting Ghana’s Petroleum Value Chain
Ghana produces crude oil offshore, but a substantial share of its domestic fuel requirements has historically been met through imported refined products.
TOR’s renewed refining activity creates an opportunity to process at least some locally produced crude within the country.
Kombat said the refinery had received several crude cargoes since the recovery programme began, including Ghanaian Jubilee crude and a subsequent supply delivered through GNPC.
The presentation described these deliveries as part of an effort to connect upstream production with domestic refining and downstream supply.
The potential benefits extend beyond the refinery itself. Domestic processing can create demand for engineering services, maintenance, storage, transport and other support activities. It can also retain some refining-related expenditure within the Ghanaian economy.
However, the amount of value retained depends on the terms under which crude is purchased, the cost of processing, the products obtained and the commercial arrangements governing sales.
If a refinery processes crude under a tolling arrangement in which a trading partner supplies the feedstock and receives an agreed fee or share of the output, the refinery’s exposure to crude financing may be reduced.
But the share of the overall value chain retained domestically will differ from a model in which the refinery purchases crude, finances processing and sells the finished products itself.
For this reason, increased domestic refining should be assessed through the complete transaction structure rather than the origin of the crude alone.
Would Cedi Payments Reduce Foreign-Exchange Pressure?
Kombat argued that a system allowing TOR to pay for Ghanaian crude in cedis could help reduce the pressure associated with petroleum imports. He linked the proposal to the country’s wider foreign-exchange requirements and the cost of purchasing petroleum products from international markets.
The issue is economically significant because petroleum imports can require substantial foreign-currency payments. Where domestic refining can competitively replace a portion of those imports, the country may reduce some of the foreign exchange needed to pay for finished products.
But a cedi-denominated crude purchase would not automatically remove every foreign-currency requirement. Petroleum companies may still need dollars to pay for imported equipment, specialist services, financing costs, chemicals, parts and other operational inputs. The currency arrangements used by suppliers and crude producers would also matter.
The effect on foreign-exchange demand would therefore depend on the extent to which domestic refining displaces imports, the proportion of crude purchased locally, and the currency obligations that remain elsewhere in the supply chain.
It would also depend on whether domestic crude can be supplied at prices and on terms that allow TOR to compete with imported products. A payment mechanism that reduces one form of currency demand but raises costs elsewhere may produce a smaller net benefit than anticipated.
The proposal requires a clear assessment of its likely effect on foreign-exchange flows, the refinery’s cash position and the commercial interests of GNPC and its partners.
Legal Changes Must Preserve Commercial Credibility
Kombat said the current framework requires payments for crude sourced from GNPC and its partners to be made in dollars, and that government was considering a change to allow cedi payments.
Any amendment would need to establish how the new arrangement would operate in practice. Questions include the exchange-rate mechanism, the timing of payments, how prices would be calculated, how producers and partners would be compensated, and how the arrangement would affect the petroleum revenue framework.
The details matter because crude transactions involve international market benchmarks and contractual obligations. Changing the currency of payment does not necessarily change the underlying economic value of the crude or the costs borne by producers.
A credible system would need to protect the financial position of GNPC and its partners while allowing TOR to purchase feedstock on terms it can sustain.
It would also need to make clear how exchange-rate risks are allocated and what happens if cedi movements affect the real value of payments.
Without these safeguards, a policy designed to reduce foreign-exchange pressure could shift financial risk from one state-owned institution to another rather than remove it from the system.
Domestic Refining Must Be Commercially Viable
The foreign-exchange argument is strongest where local refining can supply products at competitive cost and reduce the volume of finished products that Ghana would otherwise import.
TOR’s current processing rate, the cost of crude supply, plant reliability, product yields and the availability of buyers will determine how much of that opportunity can be realised.
The refinery must also finance maintenance and ensure that the products it produces meet market requirements.
The proposed expansion of processing capacity could increase the potential contribution of domestic refining, but higher capacity requires additional investment and reliable feedstock.
It should therefore be supported by transparent cost estimates, credible financing arrangements and a clear assessment of demand.
The same discipline should apply to claims about price stability. Local refining can provide an additional source of supply, but pump prices are influenced by crude prices, exchange rates, taxes, margins, transport costs and other factors. The presence of a domestic refinery does not, by itself, guarantee cheaper fuel.
Measuring The Real Benefit
The proposal to purchase Ghanaian crude in cedis could become part of a broader effort to connect domestic petroleum production with local industrial activity. But its value should be assessed against measurable outcomes.
These should include the volume of Ghanaian crude refined locally, the quantity of imported finished products displaced, the net foreign-exchange effect, the refinery’s operating margins and the financial implications for GNPC and its partners.
The government would also need to disclose the legal changes required and explain how the proposed arrangement would protect the petroleum revenue system and maintain commercially credible transactions.
Ghana’s petroleum value chain can retain more value domestically only if the different parts of the system operate on terms that are financially sustainable.
Local crude processing and cedi payments may contribute to that objective, but neither is a substitute for efficient refining, reliable feedstock supply and transparent commercial arrangements.
The decisive question is not simply whether Ghanaian crude can be purchased in cedis. It is whether the arrangement can reduce net foreign-exchange pressure while preserving the financial health of the institutions that produce, process and distribute the country’s petroleum resources.
READ ALSO: Emmy Winner Eric Bauza Dies at Age 46
