Dirty Games: How Corporations Profit from the Energy Crisis
Published on: May 2, 2025
Dirty Games: How Corporations Profit from the Energy Crisis
Crises are rarely accidental. While politicians often point to “unpredictable events” as the cause of turmoil in energy markets, a closer look at the data reveals a more calculated reality. The European gas crisis of 2022, for example, was marked not just by geopolitical tensions and supply disruptions, but by deliberate actions from major energy corporations. These actions included reducing production, holding back supplies, and engaging in speculative trading on energy exchanges. As a result, while ordinary people were encouraged to take shorter showers and cook by candlelight, corporations were amassing windfall profits. This article explores how corporations use energy crises to maximize profits, the mechanisms they employ, and the broader societal impacts of these dirty games.
The Anatomy of an Energy Crisis
Energy crises are complex events, often triggered by a combination of factors such as geopolitical conflicts, natural disasters, and market imbalances. However, the role of corporate strategy in exacerbating or even engineering these crises is frequently overlooked. In the case of the European gas crisis, the initial shock was caused by reduced gas flows from Russia due to the war in Ukraine and subsequent sanctions. Yet, as the crisis unfolded, evidence emerged that major energy companies were not simply passive victims of external shocks. Instead, they actively contributed to the crisis through a range of profit-driven strategies.
- Deliberate reduction of production capacity
- Withholding of existing supplies to manipulate prices
- Speculation on energy futures and spot markets
- Lobbying for favorable regulations and subsidies
These tactics are not new. Historically, large energy firms have wielded significant influence over both supply and pricing, often at the expense of consumers and smaller market players.
Deliberate Reduction of Production
One of the most effective ways for corporations to drive up prices is to reduce the amount of energy they produce. By cutting output, companies create artificial scarcity, which in turn pushes prices higher. During the European gas crisis, several major producers announced maintenance shutdowns or technical issues that conveniently coincided with periods of high demand. While some of these shutdowns were legitimate, industry analysts and watchdogs noted that others appeared to be strategically timed to maximize price spikes.
For example, in the summer of 2022, Norwegian and Dutch gas producers scheduled maintenance that took significant capacity offline. At the same time, liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals in the United States reported “unplanned” outages, further tightening global supply. These reductions were not always justified by technical necessity; rather, they aligned with periods when spot prices for gas were surging.
Withholding Supplies
Another common tactic is the deliberate withholding of supplies. Instead of releasing stored gas or oil onto the market when prices are high, companies may keep these reserves back, betting that prices will rise even further. This speculative behavior was documented during the 2022 crisis, when European storage facilities were not emptied as quickly as expected, despite soaring prices and public calls for increased supply.
Major energy traders and suppliers, including some of the world’s largest oil and gas firms, were found to be holding significant amounts of inventory in anticipation of higher future prices. This practice not only exacerbates shortages in the short term but also fuels price volatility and uncertainty in the market.
Speculation on Energy Markets
Speculation plays a central role in the dynamics of modern energy markets. Corporations, hedge funds, and trading houses buy and sell energy contracts on futures and spot markets, often with the goal of profiting from price fluctuations rather than supplying physical energy. During crises, speculative activity tends to intensify, amplifying price swings and making it harder for regulators to maintain stability.
In 2022, the European Energy Exchange (EEX) and other trading platforms saw record volumes of gas and electricity contracts being traded. Many of these trades were not linked to the actual delivery of energy but were purely financial bets on future price movements. This speculative frenzy contributed to the extreme volatility seen in European energy prices, with some contracts rising by more than 400% in a matter of months.
The impact of speculation is not limited to the energy sector. Higher energy prices feed into broader inflation, affecting everything from food to transportation. For ordinary citizens, the result is a sharp increase in living costs, while corporations and traders who bet correctly enjoy massive profits.
Corporate Profits and Windfalls
The financial results of major energy firms during the crisis period provide a stark illustration of who benefited from the turmoil. According to Bloomberg and other financial news outlets, companies such as Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, and TotalEnergies reported record profits in 2022. These windfalls were not solely the result of higher demand; they were also driven by the strategic actions described above.
For instance, Shell’s adjusted earnings for the second quarter of 2022 reached $11.5 billion, the highest in the company’s history. BP reported profits of $8.5 billion for the same period, while ExxonMobil posted $17.9 billion. These figures were far above pre-crisis levels and reflected the extraordinary margins made possible by tight supplies and soaring prices.
At the same time, many of these companies returned billions of dollars to shareholders through dividends and share buybacks, rather than investing in new production or renewable energy projects. This emphasis on short-term shareholder value further fueled public anger and political debate across Europe and beyond.
The Role of Government Policy
Government policy can either amplify or mitigate the effects of an energy crisis. In some cases, policymakers have been accused of enabling corporate profiteering through lax regulation or poorly designed subsidies. For example, in response to the 2022 crisis, several European governments introduced subsidies and price caps intended to shield consumers from the worst of the price increases. However, critics argued that these measures often ended up benefiting energy companies more than households.
Subsidies for gas imports, for example, allowed suppliers to charge higher prices while shifting the cost burden onto taxpayers. In other cases, governments provided direct financial support to energy firms to prevent bankruptcies or ensure continued supply, further boosting corporate profits. Meanwhile, efforts to tax windfall profits or impose stricter regulations were often watered down or delayed due to industry lobbying.
Market Manipulation and Regulatory Failures
Market manipulation is a longstanding concern in the energy sector. Regulatory agencies such as the European Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) and national watchdogs are tasked with monitoring trading activity and investigating potential abuses. However, the complexity of modern energy markets, combined with the global reach of major firms, makes effective oversight challenging.
In the aftermath of the 2022 crisis, several investigations were launched into allegations of price manipulation and anti-competitive behavior. While some cases resulted in fines or settlements, many more went unresolved due to the difficulty of proving intent or tracing the flow of trades across multiple jurisdictions.
Regulatory failures are not limited to enforcement. In some cases, the rules themselves are inadequate to address the realities of contemporary energy trading. For example, loopholes in market design allow companies to engage in “capacity withholding” or “phantom bidding,” artificially inflating prices without violating the letter of the law.
The Human Cost of Corporate Profiteering
While corporations counted their profits, ordinary people bore the brunt of the crisis. Across Europe, households faced unprecedented increases in energy bills, with some countries seeing prices triple or quadruple within a year. Vulnerable groups, including the elderly and low-income families, were hit hardest, with many forced to choose between heating and other essentials.
Governments and charities scrambled to provide support, but the scale of the crisis overwhelmed many safety nets. Food banks reported record demand, while public health officials warned of increased risks from cold homes and fuel poverty. The social fabric in many communities was stretched to the breaking point, exposing deep inequalities in access to affordable energy.
Corporate Narratives and Public Messaging
Throughout the crisis, energy companies and their trade associations sought to shape the public narrative. Advertising campaigns and press releases emphasized the challenges of global supply chains, the need for investment in infrastructure, and the role of external shocks. At the same time, companies downplayed their own role in driving up prices or profiting from the turmoil.
Some firms went further, launching initiatives to promote energy conservation among consumers. While these campaigns encouraged responsible behavior, they also served to shift the focus away from corporate actions and onto individual responsibility. The message was clear: if only people took shorter showers and turned down their thermostats, the crisis could be managed. This narrative conveniently obscured the fact that corporate strategies were a major driver of the price spikes.
Calls for Reform and Accountability
The scale of profiteering during the energy crisis has led to renewed calls for reform and greater accountability. Civil society organizations, consumer groups, and some policymakers have demanded stronger regulation of energy markets, increased transparency in trading, and the introduction of windfall taxes on excess profits.
In some countries, governments have responded by introducing temporary taxes on energy company profits or tightening rules on market conduct. However, the effectiveness of these measures remains a subject of debate. Critics argue that without fundamental changes to the structure of energy markets and the incentives facing corporations, similar crises will continue to occur.
- Enhanced market transparency
- Stronger enforcement of anti-manipulation rules
- Investment in renewable energy and diversification of supply
- Protection for vulnerable consumers
These reforms are seen by many as essential to preventing future crises and ensuring that the benefits of affordable, reliable energy are shared more equitably.
The Global Dimension of Energy Profiteering
While the 2022 crisis was most acute in Europe, the dynamics of corporate profiteering in energy markets are global in scope. Similar patterns have been observed in North America, Asia, and other regions, particularly during periods of geopolitical tension or natural disasters. The interconnected nature of global energy markets means that actions taken by corporations in one region can have far-reaching effects elsewhere.
For example, the surge in European demand for LNG during the crisis led to higher prices and supply shortages in Asia and Africa. Developing countries, which often lack the financial resources to compete with wealthier buyers, were priced out of the market, leading to blackouts and economic disruption. This global ripple effect highlights the need for coordinated international action to address the root causes of energy market volatility and ensure fair access to resources.
Lessons from History: Repeated Patterns
The use of crises to justify profiteering is not unique to the energy sector. Similar dynamics have been observed in other industries, such as pharmaceuticals, food, and housing. In each case, corporations have exploited periods of scarcity or uncertainty to maximize profits, often with the tacit support of policymakers.
What sets the energy sector apart is its centrality to modern life. Access to affordable energy is a basic necessity, underpinning everything from heating and transportation to industry and communication. When energy markets are manipulated for profit, the consequences are felt across the entire economy and society.
Historical examples, such as the oil shocks of the 1970s or the California electricity crisis of 2000-2001, demonstrate that the tactics employed by corporations have changed little over time. Each crisis has prompted calls for reform, but lasting change has proven elusive.
Emerging Technologies and the Future of Energy Markets
The transition to renewable energy and the rise of new technologies offer both opportunities and challenges for the future of energy markets. On the one hand, increased investment in solar, wind, and battery storage has the potential to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and increase market competition. On the other hand, the consolidation of new energy technologies in the hands of a few large corporations raises concerns about the replication of old patterns of profiteering.
As energy systems become more digital and interconnected, new forms of market manipulation may emerge. For example, control over key infrastructure such as smart grids or energy storage could be used to influence prices or restrict access. Ensuring that the benefits of new technologies are widely shared will require proactive regulation and oversight.
The Role of Civil Society and Grassroots Movements
In response to corporate profiteering and regulatory failures, civil society organizations and grassroots movements have played a critical role in advocating for change. Campaigns for energy justice, fair pricing, and community ownership of renewable resources have gained momentum in recent years. These movements have pushed for greater transparency, public participation in decision-making, and the democratization of energy systems.
Examples include community-owned wind farms, cooperative solar projects, and local initiatives to increase energy efficiency. By empowering citizens and reducing dependence on large corporations, these efforts offer a potential pathway to a more equitable and resilient energy future.
Media Coverage and Public Awareness
The role of the media in shaping public understanding of the energy crisis and corporate profiteering cannot be underestimated. Investigative journalism and in-depth reporting have brought many of these issues to light, challenging official narratives and holding corporations to account. However, media coverage is often fragmented, with competing interests and limited resources constraining the depth and breadth of reporting.
In some cases, media outlets have faced pressure from advertisers or political actors to downplay criticism of major energy firms. This underscores the importance of independent journalism and the need for diverse sources of information in holding power to account.
Systemic Change and the Road Ahead
The recurring pattern of corporate profiteering during energy crises highlights the need for systemic change. Incremental reforms and temporary measures may provide short-term relief, but lasting solutions require a fundamental rethinking of how energy markets are structured and governed. This includes rebalancing the interests of corporations, consumers, and the public good, as well as investing in sustainable and resilient energy systems.
The experience of the 2022 European gas crisis serves as a powerful reminder of the stakes involved. As the world faces growing challenges from climate change, geopolitical instability, and technological disruption, ensuring fair and equitable access to energy will be one of the defining issues of our time. The dirty games of the past must give way to a new era of transparency, accountability, and shared prosperity.
