Oil Giant BP Surprises With Better Than Expected Earnings
The British group's return to profit in the second quarter contrasted with weaker results from energy rivals, as lower exceptional charges offset falling oil prices.
Profit after tax came in at $1.63 billion in the April-June period, compared with a net loss of $129 million in the second quarter of 2024, BP said in an earnings statement.
Stripping out exceptional items, underlying net profit was down nearly 15 percent.
"This has been another strong quarter for BP operationally and strategically," chief executive Murray Auchincloss said in the earnings statement.
BP on Monday said it made its biggest oil and gas discovery in 25 years off the coast of Brazil.
In February, BP launched a major pivot back to its more profitable oil and gas business, shelving its once industry-leading targets on reducing carbon emissions and slashing clean energy investment.
However, energy prices have come under pressure in recent months on concerns that US President Donald Trump's tariffs will hurt economic growth, while OPEC+ nations have produced more oil.
BP managed to post a profit for the second quarter thanks to impairments which were lower than one year earlier, along with a revaluation of assets -- notably in relation to liquefied natural gas (LNG) -- and divestments.
By contrast, US rivals ExxonMobil and Chevron, along with French group TotalEnergies, posted heavy falls to their net profits in the second quarter.
As did oil giant Saudi Aramco, which on Tuesday announced its 10th straight drop in quarterly profits as a slump in prices hit revenues.
The average price for Brent North Sea crude, the international benchmark, stood at $67.9 per barrel in the second quarter, down from $85 one year earlier.
British rival Shell still managed to post a slight increase to its profit after tax for the latest reporting period.
As for BP, Auchincloss said the company was launching "a further cost review and, whilst we will not compromise on safety, we are doing this with a view to being best in class in our industry".
Shares in BP gained 2.2 percent in London morning deals following its results and news of a fresh dividend and share buyback.
"A slick turnaround plan pumped up BP's second-quarter results," noted Derren Nathan, head of equity research at Hargreaves Lansdown.
"Despite lower oil and gas prices, it's managed to push underlying profits up by nearly $1 billion from the first quarter to $2.4 billion, well ahead of analyst forecasts."
Nathan added that "shareholders will be glad to see this matched with financial discipline".
BP already announced plans this year to cut cleaner energy investment by more than $5 billion annually and offload assets worth a total of $20 billion by 2027.
It recently agreed to sell its onshore wind energy business in the United States, while Shell has also scaled back its climate objectives.
BP last month named Albert Manifold as its new chairman, replacing Helge Lund, whose departure was announced amid the strategy reset.
The group's net profit plunged 70 percent in its first quarter, hit by weaker oil prices.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
an hour ago
- Int'l Business Times
Accumulating Bitcoin A Risky Digital Rush By Companies?
US President Donald Trump's media group and Tesla, the electric carmaker owned by tech billionaire Elon Musk, are among an increasing number of companies buying huge amounts of bitcoin. The aim? To diversify reserves, counter inflation and attract investors, analysts say. Companies frequently own bitcoin -- the largest cryptocurrency by market capitalisation -- to take part in sector activities such as "mining", which refers to the process of validating transactions in exchange for digital tokens. Tesla has previously accepted payments in bitcoin, while Trump Media soon plans to offer crypto investment products. Other players who had core operations totally unrelated to cryptocurrency, such as Japanese hotel business MetaPlanet, have switched to buying bitcoin. US firm Strategy, initially a seller of software under the name MicroStrategy, holds more than three percent of all bitcoin tokens, or over 600,000. Its co-founder Michael Saylor "created real value for its original set of investors" by offering the opportunity to invest in shares linked to cryptocurrencies, Andy Constan, chief executive of financial analysts Damped Spring Advisors, told AFP. This was five years ago when other financial products allowing investment in cryptocurrencies, without a need to directly own tokens, were not permitted. Companies collect bitcoins "to diversify" their cash flow and "counter the effects of inflation", said Eric Benoist, a tech and data research expert for Natixis bank. Some struggling companies are riding the trend in a bid to "restore their image" by "backing themselves with an asset perceived as solid and one that appreciates over time", he added. Strategy's current focus is on accumulating bitcoin, simply to attract investors interested in the currency's potential. Bitcoin can also have a simple practical use, as in the case of the Coinbase exchange, which uses its own reserves as collateral for its users. Bitcoin's value has soared around ninefold in five years, fuelled recently by US regulatory changes under Trump, a strong backer of the crypto sector. However, the unit's volatility is four times greater than that of the main US stock index, the S&P 500, according to Campbell Harvey, a professor of finance at Duke University in the United States. Harvey warns against using a company's cash reserves, "their safe haven", to buy crypto. Bitcoin's price, currently around $117,000, has in recent years been boosted by large holders of cryptocurrency, referred to as "whales". Harvey argues that in the case of "major buyer" Strategy, liquidating all their 600,000 bitcoin tokens is no simple task owing to the high value. "Assuming that you could liquidate all of those bitcoin at the market price is a heroic assumption," he told AFP, adding such a deal would see the cryptocurrency's price plummet. Jack Mallers, chief executive and co-founder of bitcoin-focused company Twenty One Capital, said his business embraced the sector's volatility, adding the market would need to be flooded for the token's price to crash. According to its own calculation, Strategy's stock is selling at about 70 percent above the value of its bitcoin reserves. The company -- which did not answer AFP's request for comment -- is growing thanks to bitcoin purchases, which in turn is attracting investors and pushing up its share price. But ultimately it will need to monetise these crypto assets, for example by linking them to financial products, for its business to be sustained. Should Strategy and other so-called "bitcoin treasury funds" fail to do so, Benoist fears the crypto investment bubble will burst. He points out that the strategy of accumulation runs counter to the original philosophy of bitcoin, which was conceived in 2008 as a decentralised means of payment. Today, "bitcoins end up in electronic safes that are left untouched", he said.
Local Germany
2 hours ago
- Local Germany
Which UK phone companies offer free roaming in Germany?
EU agreements mean that phone companies are banned from charging EU residents extra 'roaming' fees for data use in any country within the bloc. Additionally, all mobile phone operators in Germany continue to treat the UK as part of the EU as far as roaming is concerned – although none have ruled out introducing roaming charges at some point in the future. But for travellers from the UK to Germany, the situation is rather different. In the aftermath of the UK's exit from the EU, many British telecommunications companies have begun charging additional 'roaming' fees for people visiting the EU. Here's the latest list of companies that continue to offer free roaming, as well as those that don't (and details of what they offer instead). Free roaming in Germany O2 – O2 includes free roaming as part of their standard monthly SIM plans – Classic, Plus and Ultimate, ranging from £16 to £34. O2 customers can make calls and send texts within the Europe Zone to any other country in the Europe Zone, including the UK. Users can also benefit from their monthly data allowance – but there is a roaming limit of 25GB. COMPARE: What's the 'best' mobile phone network in Germany? When approaching the roaming limit, you will receive a text message warning that if you keep using data, you will be charged extra. BT – Although BT and EE are merging, the company still allows customers to opt for BT mobile plans, including the 50GB SIM , which starts at £13 a month. As for roaming, customers benefit from Roam like Home free roaming in Germany and the rest of the EU. The plan includes 50GB of data usage as part of their fair use policy allowance. You can make calls and send texts from the EU, including Germany, to UK landlines and mobiles at no extra charge. You should also receive a notification if you are at 80 percent of your data usage allowance. BT warns that Roam like Home is only available for people "usually based in the UK". You may face a surcharge if you have been using the Roam like Home plan for over four months in the EU. Smarty – Smarty's SIM-only plans include roaming within the EU, with free unlimited calls and texts. Customers have a 'fair use' data limit of 12GB per month for a maximum of 60 days. Advertisement To go above that, you'll have to buy a data add-on. Giffgaff – Giffgaff allows people to use their usual allowance of calls and texts in the EU "at no extra cost". As for data, the cutoff is set at 5GB. If you go over the limit, you'll have to pay 10p/MB or purchase a travel add-on. Lebara – Lebara allows free data roaming in EU countries including Germany, subject to fair use policies. Customers who remain in the EU for longer than four months will receive an sms informing them that a surcharge of €0.02618 per minute will be levied on outgoing calls, €0.00238 per minute on incoming calls, €0.00476 per text message and €1.85 per GB. Additional roaming fees Vodafone – Some of Vodafone's mobile plans include roaming in Germany, which falls into their 'B destination list'. For instance, you can opt for the 5GB Xtra Euro Roam , which costs £27 a month. Otherwise, you can purchase a plan that does not include roaming and pay an extra daily charge of £2.57 a day when roaming, or purchase an eight-day European Roaming Extra pass . EE Mobile – EE Mobile has been changing its approach to roaming following Brexit, with some of the contracts it offered before July 2021 no longer available. Roaming: Where can I use my German mobile abroad without being charged? The company, however, still has several plans that do include EU roaming (the Max Plan, Full Works, Essentials Plus, and All Rounder). For customers whose plans do not include roaming, they can purchase temporary passes, with fees of £2.59 per day, £15 per week, and £21.50 per 12 days. Advertisement Calls, texts and data would be available at your normal UK allowance. You can decide which pass to purchase upon arrival, as you will receive a link listing the available options. Tesco Mobile – Customers who joined Tesco Mobile before June 16th, 2022 will continue to be able to use their UK plan allowance in the EU, including Germany. However, those who have changed contracts or joined after June 16th, 2022 will "be subject to roaming charges from 2026," the company warns on its website. Customers should receive 30 days' notice before the changes are implemented. For the time being, people on monthly Tesco Mobile SIM plans will still be able to have roaming in Germany included in their standard bill. Three – Similarly to EE Mobile and Vodafone, Three offers some plans (like Value and Complete) which include roaming in the EU. Customers whose plans do not include roaming can pay a daily charge of £2 for the 'Go Roam in Europe' pass. Data is capped at 12GB in any Go Roam destination. Sky – Sky doesn't offer plans including free roaming in the EU. However, customers can opt for the 'Roaming Passport Plus', which grants access to their UK data, calls and texts allowance for a £2 daily charge. With reporting by Tom Pugh. Advertisement
DW
3 hours ago
- DW
Why are investors still financing fossil fuels? – DW – 08/08/2025
Financial players who have committed to climate action continue to inject trillions into the fossil fuel industry. What happened to divesting from oil and gas? In 2016, a Danish pension fund had a change of heart that is rare in the financial sector. At the time, AkademikerPension had $1 billion in investments in what were considered the safe financial havens of oil giants like ExxonMobil, Shell and BP. But as global temperatures continued to rise, that didn't sit right with the company board. Members studied different climate scenarios available at the time and saw that continued investment in fossil energy was not going to make financial sense in the long term. "That was really the main conclusion for us driving our decision to divest the sector," said Anders Schelde, the fund's chief investor. The decision was not only about achieving "good investment results," but about doing it "in a responsible manner," he added. So, the fund pulled its $1 billion out of the oil companies with a view to using it in a more climate friendly way. The move was an active statement, but it did not dent the fortunes of the fossil fuel industry. The sector still receives an annual trillion dollars in investments and saw a bumper 2024 with oil, gas and coal use reaching global highs. In addition, new exploration licenses issued, collectively cover an area the size of Sweden. Even as global temperatures — inextricably linked to emissions from burning fossil fuels — continue to rise, predictions are for more growth in the sector. While many say they'll invest in renewables, in reality investors are slow to follow through. So, what's holding them back? Most new energy capacity now comes from solar or wind, which are both much cheaper to install than digging for coal or drilling for oil. But a report by Bloomberg's market research branch, BNEF, found that for every $100 (€88) banks invest in such renewable infrastructure, they put $112 into fossil fuels. In its latest World Energy Investment report, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said higher energy demand for artificial intelligence, data centers and the desire for energy independence is driving investment in renewables. But to meet the targets agreed in global climate talks, "the annual investment required in renewable power still needs to double," according to the IEA. At the same time, "the fossil fuel industry is still very profitable, with high returns in the short term," said Nadia Ameli, professor in climate finance at University College London. That's reflected in the investment habits of around 60 of the world's biggest banks, which have injected around $7 trillion into the fossil fuel industry since the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, according to a 2024 report published by several NGOs. In Paris, the world pledged to try to keep global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) by burning less coal, oil and gas. Whether in the form of bonds or syndicated loans — which sees several banks band together to grant a join loan — much of the cash has repeatedly come from the same financial institutions. Yet many of those banks, along with asset managers and insurers, have pledged to align their investments with reduced emissions by 2050. Ameli said commitments made in initiatives like the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, which aims to support banks in meeting the Paris Agreement goals, were voluntary and have not yet amounted to much. "Even if over time we see some banks reducing their investments, when we look at the total finance provided to the fossil fuel sector, the amount was always the same. So that means someone else stepped in," she said. Speaking off-the-record, one major investment company told DW that as long as fossil fuel demand exists, money will be invested, adding that it's up to politics, tech and consumers to make investors shift their money. Divestment from fossil fuels has grown in recent years. According to a non-profit database, more than 1,600 organizations, including churches, universities and a couple of large funds, have committed to either fully or partly withdrawing their investments from the industry. Motivated by a wish to avoid the financial risk of stranded assets in the case of declining fossil fuel use as the world continues to warm, they also want to take climate action. That means stopping the burning of oil, coal and gas, which are responsible for almost 90% of all planet-heating CO2 emissions. For AkademikerPension that meant moving the $1 billion they had tied up in oil giants, to renewable energy companies like Danish wind energy giant Orsted. Some of that money was in bonds, some in shares. Owning shares means owning a part of the company. Unlike loans or bonds — where the investor charges interest on what they lend — buying shares in a company brings more than just financial gain. Stable share ownership is a vote of confidence for a company and helps to create a buoyant market value. Shareholders in turn gain a seat at the company table, where they can exert influence on activities. To that end, critics of divestment say that rather than pulling investment out of fossil fuel companies, it's better to try and have some internal influence to steer a company's course from within. But the evidence of what is more effective —divestment or engagement — is scant. One US study that looked at ownership of high-emitting businesses, including fossil fuel companies, found reductions in greenhouse gas emissions when stock ownership by green funds increased. And concluded that "green investors make companies greener." According to an overview study, divestment can reduce a fossil fuel company's market value but doesn't seem to impact its carbon emissions. Additionally, Ameli said the overall volume of investment in the sector hasn't changed. "If an investor withdraws support, someone else is ready to step in," reiterated Ameli. Many researchers and investors suggest the best way to exert pressure on a company to cut emissions is engagement, with divestment as a backup. Overall, Anders Schelde from AkademikerPension views the divestment as profitable for their pension fund. "But if you take a short-term horizon, just measure over the last three or four years, it's been a very bad decision," he adds. In recent years, many renewable energy companies, including Orsted, have performed poorly on the stock markets. Ameli said the renewables sector faces different challenges to coal, oil and gas, in part because it is "way more fragmented," making it more difficult to invest large sums. And because it also often generates revenue in local currencies, volatility can influence the profit for investors. Binding regulation rather than voluntary divestment is needed to accelerate change, say experts. "Like a public, transparent assessment of the financial sector of a country and its exposure to the fossil fuel industry," said Katrin Ganswindt, a campaigner at non-profit Urgewald. This is something France is doing. The idea is that laying fossil fuel investments bare increases pressure to transition to renewable energy investments. France has also tightened international standards for green investments, which are often criticized for giving loopholes to fossil fuels. Similar strict rules apply to investors operating throughout the EU. "European countries are leading the way," Ameli said, adding regulations need to target the world's biggest banks to create a ripple effect. "If the biggest investors pull out of fossil fuels, this could trigger a global retreat of banks from the sector," she view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
