Key facts
- Shell reported a 70% surge in first-half earnings, with Q2 profits at $9.84bn and Q1 profits at $6.92bn.
- Soaring energy prices, driven by the Iran war and disruptions to global supply routes, significantly boosted Shell's profits.
- The company's trading operations were a standout contributor to its financial results.
- Environmental campaigners criticized Shell for 'windfall' profits derived from conflict and the climate crisis.
- Shell's LNG production in Qatar was impacted by a missile attack, with repairs estimated to take a year.
- Calls for increased windfall taxes on fossil fuel companies were renewed in response to the profits.
Shell has reported substantial profit increases, with first-half earnings surging by 70% due to soaring energy prices exacerbated by the Iran war. The company posted profits of $9.84 billion for the second quarter, up from $4.26 billion a year prior, and $6.92 billion for the first quarter, a 115% increase from the previous quarter. These figures surpassed analyst expectations and have drawn sharp criticism from environmental campaigners.
Shell's chief executive, Wael Sawan, attributed the strong performance to the company's operational focus amidst significant disruption in global energy markets. The conflict in the Middle East, particularly disruptions to oil and gas flows through the Strait of Hormuz, led to a sharp rise in crude oil prices, benefiting Shell's trading operations. This surge in prices also impacted other energy giants like BP, which also reported doubled profits.
However, the company's operations have not been without challenges. Shell's LNG production in Qatar was halted following a missile attack on its Pearl gas plant, with repairs expected to take approximately a year. This incident contributed to an overall fall in Shell's oil and gas production.
The bumper profits have reignited calls for increased windfall taxes on fossil fuel companies. Campaigners argue that these profits are derived from conflict and a global energy crisis that is causing hardship for households, and that the revenue should fund support for vulnerable populations and investments in renewable energy. Critics highlighted the contrast between Shell's financial gains and the struggles of consumers facing high energy bills and fuel costs.