Shell swings to record quarterly loss in 2Q: Update

Market: Crude oil, Natural gas, Oil products
30/07/20

Updates throughout

Shell suffered a record loss of $18.38bn in the second quarter when it took a hefty impairment charge.

The loss, which excludes inventory effects, compares with a profit of $2.76bn in the first quarter and a profit of $3.03bn in the second quarter of 2019.

Shell booked a $16.8bn impairment charge on a post-tax basis in the three months to 30 June. This was at the lower end of the range it indicated last month, when Shell and peer BP flagged impairments triggered by revisions to oil and gas price assumptions and cuts to longer-term refining margins.

"Second-quarter 2020 results reflected lower realised prices for oil, LNG and gas, lower realised refining margins, oil products sales volumes and higher well write-offs, compared with the second quarter 2019," Shell said today.

The impairments helped pushed Shell's gearing — or net debt-to-capital ratio — up to 32.7pc at the end of June, from 28.9pc at the end of March. The company expects its gearing to remain "around or even higher than" the top-end of its 15-25pc target range in the current environment, chief executive Ben Van Beurden said today.

Gearing was also affected by a sharp fall in free cash flow to just $243mn in the second quarter, from $12.13bn in January-March and $6.87bn a year earlier. This meant Shell had to lean on its balance sheet to cover dividends, which pushed net debt up by $3.43bn from the end of March to $77.84bn at the end of June.

The second-quarter loss was "partly offset by very strong crude and oil products trading and optimisation results as well as lower operating expenses", Shell said. The firm's refining and trading operations made a profit of $1.5bn in the second quarter, excluding one-off items and inventory effects. This compares with a profit of just $52mn a year earlier.

Shell's oil and gas production was 3.38mn b/d of oil equivalent (boe/d) in April-June, of which 904,000 boe/d was from its integrated gas segment. Total production was down by 6pc on the year but slightly above Shell's previous expectations of 3.18mn-3.31mn boe/d.

Oil product sales reached 4.0mn b/d, down from 5.3mn b/d in the first quarter and 6.6mn b/d a year earlier. Second-quarter sales volumes would be 4.7mn b/d on a comparable basis with 2019, but Shell has changed its reporting basis. Refinery utilisation was 70pc in April-June, compared with 76pc a year earlier.

Shell expects third-quarter oil and gas production to reach 2.9mn-3.3mn boe/d, of which 820,000-880,000 b/d is from the integrated gas segment. It expects oil products sales volumes to reach 4mn-5mn b/d during the period, and refinery utilisation to be 68-76pc. It expects chemical sales volumes at 3.6mn-3.9mn t.

But the company cautioned that uncertainty surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic may require it to take measures to reduce production, LNG liquefaction and utilisation of refining and chemicals plants, which will "likely have a variety of impacts on our operational and financial metrics".

Shell lowered its dividend in April for the first time since 1945 in response to the oil price crash.

Looking further forward, global oil demand may never return to pre-pandemic levels, according to van Beurden, although the second quarter was probably "a low point" in terms of disruption, he said. "I believe it is likely to assume that demand will take a long time to recover, if it recovers at all." Van Beurden said he expects jet fuel demand to reach just 50pc of pre-crisis levels "at best" by the end of the year.

By Rowena Edwards

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News

10/04/25

Norway plans to cut GHGs, but remain oil, gas producer

London, 10 April (Argus) — Norway's government has proposed a greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction of a minimum 70-75pc by 2035, from a 1990 baseline, but has also committed to the country remaining "a stable and predictable supplier of oil and gas produced with low emissions". The government today set out plans for a 2035 GHG reduction target, as well as a wider climate plan for the country. The 2035 GHG reduction targets build on Norway's 2030 goal of "at least" a 55pc reduction in GHGs, again from 1990 levels. Norway has a legislated goal of "a low-emission society" by 2050 — GHG reductions of 90-95pc from the 1990 baseline. Norway's government underlined its commitment to Paris climate agreement goals and phasing out the use of fossil fuels "towards 2050", but also said that it would "not prepare a strategy for the end phase of Norwegian oil and gas". "The government's plan is about phasing out emissions, not industries", it said, noting that Norway is "a significant contributor to Europe's energy security". Norway is the largest producer and only net exporter of oil and gas in Europe. "The government will further develop the petroleum industry and facilitate the future provision of fields… production will continue to be efficient and with low emissions," the government said. It aims for the country's oil and gas sector — the country's highest-emitting industry — to bring emissions from production to net zero in 2050. The bulk of oil and gas emissions are from downstream use — known as scope 3. Norway plans to achieve the majority of its proposed 70-75pc GHG cuts through national measures, including reduced fossil fuel use and both technical and nature-based carbon removals. It also plans to purchase emissions reductions from outside the EU and European Economic Area. This refers to internationally transferred mitigation outcomes (ITMOs) — emission credits — under Article 6 of the Paris climate agreement. Norway's parliament will consider the proposals. Once legislated in the country's climate act, Norway plans to communicate its updated plans to the UN. Signatories to the Paris climate agreement are expected to submit updated climate plans — known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) — to UN climate body the UNFCCC every five years. The deadline for NDCs setting out climate goals up to 2035 was in February, but many countries have yet to submit plans . By Georgia Gratton Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more

News

Trump coal plant bailout renews first term fight

09/04/25

News

09/04/25

Trump coal plant bailout renews first term fight

Washington, 9 April (Argus) — President Donald Trump's effort to stop the retirement of coal-fired power plants is reminiscent of a 2017 attempt that faltered in the face of widespread industry opposition. Trump, in an executive order signed on Tuesday, directed the US Department of Energy (DOE) to tap into emergency powers to stop the retirement of coal-fired plants and other large plants it believes are critical to grid reliability. The order sets a 30-day deadline for DOE to decide which plants are critical based on a new methodology that will analyze if reserve margins, or the percent of unused capacity at peak demand, are at an "acceptable" level. The initiative shares similarities to Trump's unsuccessful effort in his first term to bail out coal and nuclear plants. In the 2017 effort, Trump backed a "grid resiliency" proposal to compensate power plants with 90 days of on-site fuel. But an unusual coalition of natural gas industry groups, manufacturers, renewable producers and environmentalists united against the idea, warning it would upend power markets and cost consumers billions of dollars each year. The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission voted 5-0 to reject the proposal. It remains unclear if a similarly sized coalition will emerge to fight Trump's latest proposal, under which DOE would use emergency powers in section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act to keep some coal plants and other large power plants operating. Industry groups have largely been avoiding taking positions that could be seen as critical of Trump. Environmentalists say they strongly oppose keeping coal plants operating using emergency powers. Doing so would mean more air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, they say, and higher costs for consumers. Environmental groups say they are hoping other industries affected by the potential bailout will eventually speak out against the initiative. "The silence from those who know better is deafening," Center for Biological Diversity climate law institute legal director Jason Rylander said. "I hope that we will start to see more resistance to these dangerous policies before significant damage is done." DOE said it was "already hard at work" to implement Trump's executive order, which was paired with other orders that were meant to support coal mining and coal production. US energy secretary Chris Wright said today that reviving coal will increase the reliability of the electrical grid and bring down electricity costs, but he has not shared further details on the 202(c) initiative. Trying to litigate the program could be "tricky", and section 202(c) orders have never successfully been challenged in court, in part because they are usually short-term orders, Harvard Law School Electricity Law Initiative director Ari Peskoe said. But opponents could challenge them by focusing on "numerous legal problems", he said, such as not allowing public comment or running afoul of a US Supreme Court precedent that prohibits agencies from attempting to decide "major questions" without clear congressional authorization. "Here DOE would use a little-used statute explicitly written for short-term emergencies in order to PREVENT a change in the US energy mix," Peskoe said. A projected 8.1GW of coal-fired generation is set to retire this year, equivalent to nearly 5pc of the coal fleet, the US Energy Information Administration said last month. Electric utilities often decide which plants to retire years in advance, allowing them to defer maintenance and to forgo capital investments in aging facilities. Keeping coal plants running could require exemptions from environmental rules or pricey capital investments, the costs of which would likely be distributed among other ratepayers. By Chris Knight Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Colombian crude gains on US tariff uncertainty

09/04/25

News

09/04/25

Colombian crude gains on US tariff uncertainty

Sao Paulo, 9 April (Argus) — Colombian heavy sour crudes have reached their narrowest discounts to Ice Brent in at least four years, supported by uncertainty surrounding US tariffs and tight supplies of similar grades. Castilla's discount to Ice Brent was $3.50/bl on Tuesday and Vasconia's was at $1.45/bl, $4.40/bl and $3.15/bl tighter than on 2 January, respectively. Castilla has not reached that narrow of a level against the benchmark since early 2021 and Vasconia has not since mid-2019. Outright prices were $60.89/bl for Vasconia and $58.84/bl for Castilla on Tuesday. Colombian crude discounts started to narrow in January after US president Donald Trump mentioned plans for a 25pc tariff on all imports from Mexico and Canada, which produce competing heavy sours. Amid the uncertainty, buyers opted to secure supply that might not face tariffs, sources said, despite delays in tariffs implementation in early February and March. But a sweeping executive order last week excluded energy commodities from tariffs, as well as trade covered under the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement (USMCA). Then on Wednesday Trump announced he will pause many of the tariffs on other products for 90 days, but no changes have been announced for energy imports . Despite Trump's tariff exemptions on crude imports to the US, tight availability of heavy supply for US Gulf refiners could still support relative values for Colombian grades. Subbing in Colombian crudes are seen as good substitutes for heavy crude from the US' nearest neighbors, especially Mexican supplies, which are widely used by US Gulf coast refiners. Additionally, Colombia's geographical location makes shipping to the US Gulf coast quicker and less costly compared with other South American countries, such as Ecuador, which also produces heavy sour crude. Further tightening heavy supply for Gulf coast refiners, the US government announced in March that the deadline for the end of Chevron's waiver to produce in Venezuela is 27 May, stopping the flow of crude to the US from its joint venture with state-owned PdV. Chevron brought about 222,000 b/d in Venezuelan crude to the US from January-November 2024. according to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA). Even with the volume representing a fraction of Gulf coast imports, it represents almost 30pc of total Colombian output. Its production reached 760,000 b/d in January, according to oil services chamber Campetrol, citing figures from hydrocarbons agency ANH. Further US tariffs on countries that take delivery of Venezuelan oil and natural gas could also make Colombian barrels more attractive, although Ecuadorean crudes are possible regional supply alternatives too. Meanwhile, Mexico's state-owned Pemex has faced quality issues with its crude production since late last year, which could lead to Gulf coast buyers turning to Colombian barrels as alternatives. Pemex acknowledged issues with salt and water levels in its crude in February but denied that international buyers have rejected shipments because of those concerns. Mexico's policy of expanding domestic refining has also contributed to a decline in crude exports to the US in recent years. Colombian crude values have also likely been supported by firmer competing Canadian crude values at the US Gulf coast. Canadian crude differentials have firmed in part because of upgrader turnaround season in Alberta's oil sands region, slowing production. The shutdown of the 622,000 b/d Keystone pipeline from the region after a spill in North Dakota on 8 April also limited supply, buttressing prices. By João Scheller Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

What do tariffs mean for the global gas market?

09/04/25

News

09/04/25

What do tariffs mean for the global gas market?

Some countries are considering retaliatory tariffs, while others hope to reduce their trade deficit in order to negotiate lower rates London, 9 April (Argus) — Newly announced US tariffs on goods entering the country and some of the countermeasures already announced by large trade partners are unlikely to cause any direct disruptions to global gas markets. But the indirect effects on gas supply and demand may be huge, stemming from a weaker macroeconomic outlook, fuel substitution and inflationary pressures on infrastructure development. US president Donald Trump on 2 April imposed a minimum 10pc tax on all foreign imports from 5 April,with much higher tariffs on selected countries that briefly came into force on 9 April, before Trump announced a 90-day pause. China is the only exception. It has announced retaliatory tariffs that could disrupt US energy exports, resulting in an escalation that has already brought up the respective levies to 125pc in the US and 84pc in China. These are unlikely to have any direct impact on LNG trade flows, as China had already stopped importing US LNG earlier this year. But disruptions to trade between the world's two largest economies may weigh heavily on manufacturing activity in China, in turn reducing industrial gas demand. And the ripple effects of disruptions to US LPG exports to China may alter fuel-switching economics in the region and beyond. Most other countries in Asia-Pacific have opted not to follow China's lead by retaliating against US tariffs, even though many have warned about the potential for long-term economic disruption. The Japanese government intends to negotiate a better tariff deal and is considering investing in the US' proposed 20mn t/yr Alaska LNG export project as part of wider efforts to reduce its trade surplus with the US. Countries in Asia-Pacific have been hit with some of the highest of Trump's targeted duties. The EU is keeping retaliatory measures on the table, but these are unlikely to include any levy on US LNG. Europe has become much more reliant on LNG imports after losing the bulk of its Russian pipeline supply, and imposing tariffs on energy imports would only reignite inflationary pressures that European countries have tried to curb over the past three years. The bloc says it is ready to negotiate on possibly increasing its US LNG imports to reduce its trade surplus and would zero out its tariffs on industrial imports if the US agrees to do the same. But Trump says this offer is not enough, citing the EU's upcoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism as one of the "unfair trade practices" that justifies a tariff response. Nerves of steel Much greater risks for gas markets may stem from rising infrastructure costs in the US' upstream and midstream sectors, particularly as a result of earlier tariffs imposed on steel and aluminum imports. These present an immediate risk for US LNG developers, particularly for the five projects under construction and the six others expected to reach final investment decisions this year. Metals account for up to 30pc of the cost of building an LNG export plant. An LNG terminal can cost $5bn-25bn to build, depending on its size, with steel used for pipelines, tanks and other structural frameworks. US facilities can be built using some domestic metal, but higher prices for this may lead to construction and final investment decision delays for the country's planned liquefaction projects. US tariffs' primary effect on the domestic gas market stems from duties levied on non-energy goods used by the oil and gas industry, including steel and specialised pipeline components such as valves and compressors, which are imported from overseas. The US remains a net natural gas importer from Canada , but these flows are unlikely to be affected by trade tariffs given the lack of alternative supply sources available to some northern US states. US LNG project pipeline mn t/yr Project Capacity Expected start/FID Under construction Plaquemines 19.2 2025 Corpus Christi stage 3 12.0 2025 Golden Pass 18.1 2026 Rio Grande 17.6 2027 Port Arthur 13.5 2027 Waiting for final investment decision Delfin FLNG 1 13.2 mid-2025 Texas LNG 4.0 2025 Calcasieu Pass 2 28.0 mid-2025 Corpus Christi train 8-9 3.3 2025 Louisiana LNG 16.5 mid-2025 Cameron train 4 6.8 mid-2025 Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

German coalition negotiations come to an end

09/04/25

News

09/04/25

German coalition negotiations come to an end

London, 9 April (Argus) — Germany's centre-left SPD and centre-right CDU parties announced a final coalition agreement today, which includes some changes to energy policy. The parties still need to sign off on the agreement. The SPD will ask its members to vote on the text, which it expects could take about 10 days. And the CDU plans to hold a small party conference on the topic at the end of this month, meaning that the new government could be sworn in by early May. The coalition still plans to abolish the gas storage levy "for all" as part of its plan to lower energy prices for households and industry. And the parties plan to introduce "suitable instruments" to ensure gas storage filling to safeguard security of supply in a "more cost-effective" way. There is a large focus on lowering energy prices for industry in the hope of turning the tide on Germany's continued industrial slump, for example through lower electricity taxes, a cap on power grid fees and special relief for energy-intensive industries "otherwise not reached by subsidy plans". The government plans to "make possible and flank diversified, cheap long-term gas contracts with international suppliers" and "use potentials of conventional domestic gas production". And while the government is "examining strategic state holdings in the energy sector, also with grid operators", it will reduce its shares in Uniper and SEFE — which it had acquired in the gas crisis in 2022 — to "strategic shares". The state needs to sell down its stake in the two companies by 2028 but will probably retain a minority share, with the EU allowing a maximum 25pc plus one share, energy ministry officials previously said . Support for gas-fired power The parties reiterated their commitment to encourage the buildout of up to 20GW of dispatchable power generation capacity, with no apparent requirement for the plants to be hydrogen-ready. The parties plan to put forward a bill to allow carbon capture and storage for hard-to-abate emissions from industry as well as gas-fired power plants "immediately after the beginning of the new parliament". The coalition said that the timing of the coal phase-out "has to be judged on how quickly it is achieved to build out dispatchable gas-fired capacities", but it still commits to ending coal burn by 2038. The government reiterated its plan to use grid reserve capacity to stabilise power prices rather than only to stabilise the grid during supply shortages. Associations have warned about the implications of letting grid reserve plants participate in the open market on investment incentives for new generation capacity. It also remains unclear how long it would take to get Brussels' approval for a new subsidy scheme for dispatchable power generation capacity, given that the EU approved the outgoing government's power plant strategy only after lengthy negotiations. Heating sector plan thin on detail The future of Germany's heating law remains unclear in the coalition agreement. The coalition agreement keeps the CDU's standpoint that the outgoing government's buildings energy act will be "abolished", which the SPD had not agreed with in the negotiation documents. But the parties said that a new buildings energy act will be more technology neutral and flexible, indicating that there will still be some legislation to reduce carbon intensity of the built environment. The parties propose a "reachable greenhouse gas avoidance" as the key variable of a new policy, instead of the percentage of renewable energy used in the system as under the existing law. This could end up supporting gas-fired over oil-based heating or providing an incentive to replace older gas boilers with newer models. But the government plans to retain subsidies for new heating systems and insulation measures, which provide large incentives for the uptake of heat pumps. Heat pump industry association BWP welcomed this commitment, combined with a pledge to reduce power prices by about €0.05/kWh, saying that these are "clear signals of an improvement in the framework conditions for the industry". The final coalition agreement again contains a reference to a possible green gas quota , which could support gas-based heating systems, for example through biomethane or hydrogen which could be used to fulfil the quota. The parties said today that they would work out a "roadmap for de-fossilised energy sources" and that it is important to "preserve gas grids which are important for a secure heat supply". By Till Stehr Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more