Hello, welcome to the Royal Vopak Q2 2026 results update. Throughout the call, all participants will be in listen only mode. Afterward, there will be a Q&A session. This call is being recorded. I am pleased to present Dick Richelle, CEO of Vopak. Please go ahead with your meeting. Thank you very much. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to our Q2 2026 results analyst call. My name is Dick Richelle. I'm the CEO of Vopak, and I'm joined here by Michiel Gilsing, our CFO. We will guide you through our latest results. Before we start, I'd like to refer to the disclaimer content of the forward-looking statement which you are familiar with. I would like to remind you that we make forward-looking statements during the presentation, which involve certain risks and uncertainties. Accordingly, this disclaimer is applicable to the entire call, including the answers provided to questions during the Q&A session. With that, let's move on to the presentation. Before diving into the results, I'd like to start off with a brief recap of our strategy, which is anchored by three integrated pillars: improve, grow, and accelerate. The execution of our strategy has been strong. We have improved our financial and sustainability performance and invested in gas, industrial, and energy transition infrastructure that support evolving needs of our customers. Let's move to our results. We delivered a strong first half of the year, driven by healthy, sustained demand for our services, reflected in an occupancy rate of 91%. Proportionally, EBITDA grew by 5% compared to the first half of 2025. Our cash conversion remains solid at 74%, resulting in an operating cash return of 15.3% on a 12-month rolling basis. We made good progress on our growth strategy. In the Netherlands, we secured the continuation of the EemsEnergyTerminal beyond 2027. This is a vital step for enabling European energy security over the coming decade. We've also taken significant strategic steps in large-scale battery energy storage systems, or BESS. We successfully acquired Green Energy Storage, a battery development company, and reached a final investment decision on two utility-scale projects in the Netherlands with a combined capacity of 350 MW. Looking at our outlook. On the back of solid operational performance and the anticipated contributions from our growth projects, we're raising the outlook for full year 2026 for EBITDA and operating free cash flow. As always, this remains subject to ongoing market uncertainties and currency fluctuations. Last but not least, looking at our shareholder returns, we've introduced an interim dividend with the first payment of EUR 0.72 per share scheduled this September. Also, we've completed 45% of the EUR 100 million share buyback tranche, which is part of our multi-year share buyback program of up to EUR 500 million. Let's take a closer look at the breakdown of our results, specifically for the different terminal types we operate. The diversification of our portfolio across geographies and products has again proven to be a structural strength. In a market that is increasingly volatile, it enables us to meet our customers' evolving needs for energy security, affordability, and sustainability. We see an overall solid performance across the portfolio, with higher results compared to the first half of 2025. When adjusting for the impact of currency translation and divestments, our strong oil terminal performance was driven by robust activity in key oil hubs like Rotterdam, but also improved results from our oil distribution operations in South Africa. This more than offset the low activity levels we saw in Fujairah, which was impacted by the challenging geopolitical environment. The chemical segment benefited from the contribution of newly commissioned capacity in the U.S., combined with relatively stable autonomous performance. Supported by long-term contracts, gas and industrial terminals delivered a stable performance as well and achieved higher throughputs year to date. All in all, this has led to a proportional EBITDA of EUR 600 million and a healthy operating cash return of 15.3%. Over the past few years, energy and manufacturing markets have faced multiple unprecedented shocks. This had, and continues to have, a profound impact on the balance between energy security, affordability, and sustainability. Together with our partners, we provide the infrastructure that enables our customers to address these evolving needs. To start with security, recent geopolitical conflicts and trade disruptions have made the need for national energy sovereignty incredibly clear. Good example of how we play into this is with our Gate LNG terminal in the Netherlands. This terminal provides Northwest Europe with the needed flexibility to import LNG, successfully replacing the historical reliance on single source pipeline imports. To give you a sense of scale, this terminal is capable of supplying roughly one-third of the Netherlands' national gas consumption, which is primarily used for electricity generation and residential heating. In addition to security of supply, energy affordability is paramount. Maintaining access to competitively priced power is vital for safeguarding both industries and households against volatile price shocks. Through our global network of strategically located terminals, we connect supply and demand in energy and manufacturing markets. By facilitating an efficient flow of products, we provide access to diverse, competitively priced global supply sources, lowering the dependence on domestic or single-source production. Our REEF LPG terminal in Canada, currently under construction, exemplifies this. This terminal leverages a significant geographic advantage, reducing LPG transit times from Canada's west coast to Asia to just 10 days, compared to 25 days or more from the U.S. Gulf Coast. By reducing the shipping times, the terminal contributes to lower costs for end consumers in Asia, a region where affordable energy is vital to sustaining economic growth and improving living standards. There's an urgent systemic need to decarbonize, not just to meet national emission mandates, but also to provide energy independence from traditional energy sources. Our entry into battery energy storage systems will enable the ongoing electrification of the energy mix while securing the long-term resilience of the power grid. To summarize, the infrastructure that we own and operate and the projects that we are developing continue to be highly relevant in the fast-evolving landscape of energy and manufacturing markets. With our diversified portfolio of strategically located terminals, we enable the secure, affordable, and sustainable flow of products, meeting our customers' evolving needs. Let's take a look at BESS, because this quarter, we took significant steps in developing energy transition infrastructure with our investments in battery energy storage systems. BESS is today's fastest-growing power technology, driven by the rising penetration of renewables in the energy mix. The ongoing addition of renewable energy sources creates a structural need for storage to stabilize power grids and to manage source intermittency. BESS offers significant potential to deploy capital in line with our return ambitions, while positioning our portfolio for another frontier of energy storage. With our investment in this space, we pursue a develop, own, operate strategy for utility-scale batteries connected to high-voltage grids. We will develop projects which consist of acquiring the land, securing the grid connections and permits, and designing the infrastructure. From a commercial point of view, we're aiming to lock in the majority of the revenues through tolling agreements, which are comparable to the take-or-pay contracts in our existing business. For the remainder of the capacity, we will benefit from exposure to the market. We believe our core capabilities provide a competitive edge in the BESS market, and we have proven capabilities in infrastructure development, strong relationships with key stakeholders, and experience in developing high CapEx projects. Taking this all into account, we view BESS as an exciting opportunity for future growth. That brings me to the BESS investment commitments we've announced this quarter. We've committed EUR 371 million for the acquisition of Green Energy Storage and the development of two utility-scale projects in the Netherlands with a combined capacity of 350 MW. Through GES, we gain access to a proven BESS development platform and a robust pipeline of projects. We see this as a crucial step in the development of a BESS growth platform. The subsequent projects that we've taken FID on in Veendam and Oosterhout in the Netherlands are expected to come into operation in 2028, after which they will generate an attractive cash return that supports our long-term cash return ambition. These investments mark a significant strategic step that we are excited about. Let's take a look at all the developments in our network this quarter. Notwithstanding the volatility and uncertainty on the market during Q2, we continue to execute on our growth strategy. In the Netherlands, we secured the continuation of EemsEnergyTerminal for the period 2028- 2036. We made good progress on the construction of the fourth tank in the Gate Terminal, which is expected to be commissioned at the end of Q3 this year. In South Africa, at our Durban terminal, we're expanding the capacity for the storage and handling of diesel. In India, good progress has been made on the construction of the Greenfield terminal for LPG and liquid products in JNPA Port in Mumbai. In Canada, at REEF Terminal, we're also making good progress, with more than 90% of the onshore infrastructure now being complete. Due to adverse weather conditions and marine-related operating constraints, commissioning of the terminal is expected in Q1 2027. Additional resources deployed to support jetty construction activities, the total project costs are now expected to be approximately CAD 1.5 billion. For Vopak, our investment is expected to remain unchanged at around EUR 462 million due to favorable foreign currency developments and applicable contractual terms. The project returns remain consistent with those mentioned at the time of the FID. We've committed a total of EUR 2.3 billion to investments in gas, industrial, and other terminals, as well as energy transition infrastructure. More than EUR 25 million of this EUR 2.3 billion has been committed since the beginning of 2026. We're well-positioned to achieve our ambition of investing EUR 4 billion by 2030, supporting our long-term operating cash return ambition of 13%-17%. Looking ahead, we remain well-positioned to achieve our long-term ambitions. We've shown strong business performance in the recent years, which we continued in the first half of 2026. The market indicators for storage demand remain firm, supporting the delivery of growth projects and the resilient performance of our existing business. This is reflected in our long-term ambitions of operating cash return ambition between 13% and 17% on a rolling 12-months basis. In addition, we're well on track to invest EUR 4 billion growth CapEx through 2030. During our full year results in February this year, we announced a shareholder distributions program of around EUR 1.7 billion through year-end 2030, consisting of progressive dividends and a multi-year share buyback program. With that, I'd like to hand it over to Michiel to give more details on the Q2 2026 results. Michiel. Thank you, Dick. From my side, good morning to all of you. As Dick mentioned, we have had a strong performance in the first half year of 2026. We reported a healthy occupancy rate, increased our EBITDA, and further improved our free cash flow generation. These results highlight the strength of our well-diversified portfolio, particularly in times of increased uncertainty and volatility. Simultaneously, we continue to invest in attractive and accretive growth projects while returning value to our shareholders. Let's take a closer look at the performance of the portfolio. Our operating cash return on a 12-months rolling basis slightly increased to 15.3% compared to 15.2% in the first half of 2025. This reflects the structural ongoing trend of improved cash generation. Demand for our services remained strong, which is reflected in an occupancy rate of 91%. Our operating free cash flow decreased slightly compared to the first half of 2025. As we will highlight throughout the presentation, this is primarily driven by adverse currency translation effects, divestment impact, and specific material one-off recorded in the first half of 2025. Moving to our business unit performance overview. Here we can see the impact of currency translation and divestments on a year-on-year basis, which amounts to EUR 20 million. A large part of this growth can be explained by the strong EBITDA contribution of EUR 19 million from our growth projects, particularly in the U.S., China, and India. Taking into account the EUR 22 million related to the one-off out of 2025, we arrive at an autonomous growth of approximately 5% for the whole portfolio. The performance across the existing network was strong, primarily driven by strong oil markets, which benefited our Europoort oil hub terminal in the Netherlands and oil distribution terminal in South Africa, partly offset by the weaker performance in Asia and the Middle East due to geopolitical tensions. The performance of the other BUs is primarily driven by lower claims of our captive insurer. We are continuously focused on generating predictable growing cash flows to create value for our shareholders. In the first half of 2026, we showed a further improvement in our EBITDA to cash conversion, which is now around 74%. This improvement was driven by decreased operating CapEx and IFRS 16 lease expenses compared to the first half of 2025. The 2.4% decrease in EBITDA was therefore partially offset by higher cash conversion, leading to a decrease in operating free cash flow of 1.6%. If we subtract from the operating free cash flow the taxes and financing costs, we arrive at the proportional free cash flow, which would be available for shareholders. Based on the EUR 317 million of free cash flow generated in the first six months of this year and the existing market cap or actual market cap at the end of Q2, our free cash flow yield currently stands at around 12%. This yield is supporting our robust shareholder distributions in a period of increased growth investments. A brief reminder on the capital allocation framework. Our capital allocation framework consists of four distinct pillars. Aiming to maintain a robust balance sheet is our first priority. Second priority, distribute value to shareholders via a progressive dividend. Thirdly, invest in attractive growth opportunities. Last but not least, deliver additional shareholder value through a multi-year share buyback program of up to EUR 500 million through year end 2030. Moving on to our first priority of the capital allocation, the balance sheet. Our proportional leverage, which reflects the economic share of the joint venture debt, increased to 2.87x, reflecting a ramp-up of our growth investments. If we exclude the impact of assets under construction, which do not contribute yet to our EBITDA, the proportional leverage of the running assets is at 2.17x, which has remained stable over the last years. Our ambition for the proportional leverage range is still between 2.5x and 3x. To facilitate the development of growth opportunities that enhance our operating cash return, Vopak's proportional leverage may temporarily fluctuate between 3x a nd 3.5x during the construction period, which can last two to three years in our business. This is all in line with our disciplined capital allocation framework. Moving on to the second pillar of our capital allocation policy, our progressive dividend. As disclosed in our full year 2025 results, we are increasing the payment frequency of our dividends with the introduction of an interim dividend. We will pay out our first interim dividend of EUR 0.72 per share on 24th of September 2026. This amount of EUR 0.72 is equal to 40% of the prior year final dividend, which was EUR 1.80. This is all in line with our progressive dividend policy, under which we intend to grow the dividend per share by at least 5% per year. The annual dividend growth rate over the last five years has been close to 10%. The third priority of our capital allocation policy is investing in growth opportunities, which are a key part of our value creation. We have the ambition to invest EUR 4 billion on a proportional basis by 2030 to grow our base in gas and industrial terminals and to accelerate towards energy transition infrastructure. At this point, we have already committed around EUR 2.3 billion to growth investments since 2022, of which around EUR 650 million has been commissioned and is already contributing to our results. Around EUR 1.7 billion of growth projects are currently under construction, with close to EUR 1 billion of them will be delivered during 2026 and 2027. In addition, for 2028 and beyond, another EUR 700 million of projects are expected to come into operation. These projects will be delivered in line with the provided CapEx to EBITDA multiple and will support our long-term operating cash return ambition of between 13% and 17%. That brings me to the outlook for the full year 2026. As mentioned by Dick, the market indicators for storage remain firm, supporting the delivery of growth projects and the resilient performance of our existing business are moving in the right direction. This gives us the confidence to increase our full year 2026 outlook with proportional operating free cash flow projected at around EUR 820 million and proportional EBITDA expected to range between EUR 1.18 billion and EUR 1.22 billion. Bringing it all together in this slide, we had a strong first half year of 2026, with solid cash generation and a portfolio that remains well-positioned to cater for increased volatility in the market. In addition, we continue investing in attractive growth opportunities while returning value to our shareholders with the recent addition of an interim dividend payment. With that, I hand over back to Dick. Thank you, Michiel. With that, I'd like to ask the operator to please open the line for the question and answers. Thank you. To ask a question, please press star one one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star one and one again. Once again, that's star one and one to ask a question. Please stand by while we compile a Q&A roster. We will now take the first question from the line of Jeremy Kincaid from Van Lanschot Kempen. Please go ahead. Good morning, gentlemen. Three questions from me. First on the Middle East. You didn't say too much about the financial impact from the ongoing war there. Obviously, you mentioned the oil market was performing quite strongly. I was just wondering if you think, net net, do you think the Middle East situation is actually having a net positive impact to your business at the moment? The second question is just on REEF. Does the additional CapEx spend on the jetty come with additional revenue associated with that? Thirdly, just on the guidance, could you maybe split out what's driving the upgrade to the guidance? I notice you changed your FX assumptions. How much does that play a role? Thank you. Let me start with the first question on the Middle East. Net net, the Middle East impact, it's a bit of a balance indeed between negative impacts, especially around the Middle East and in the Middle East. There are also some positive impacts, although it's sometimes very hard to see what is actually directly related to the Middle East or indirectly related to the Middle East. Our assessment of the second quarter was that the impact is maximum EUR 5 million negative for our results. If I combine that a bit with your third question, obviously we continuously look at the developments in the Middle East. We update our outlooks effectively every month with all the business units involved. When the crisis started at the end of February, and we did the outlook in Q1, we were more negative on the potential impact of the conflict. I think that's the thing we have seen basically everywhere in the market, because the recovery of certain markets have been stronger than maybe people expected at that time. Overall, we see a lower impact over 2026 of the Middle East conflict. Secondly, we see a stronger performance of our existing assets independent from the Middle East. We still see growth coming in in the second half of the year, and that combination has basically provided us with sufficient confidence to increase the guidance for the rest of the year, both for EBITDA as well as for free cash flow. On the REE side, effectively we have a contractual arrangement in place with AltaGas, of which I can't disclose too much, but effectively, if you look at the CapEx overrun or CapEx increase, effectively that's not leading to a lot of additional capital from our side. Effectively we're basically investing the same amount as we announced during final investment decision. It also doesn't trigger any additional revenues. What is quite clear in our mind is that the location has become more attractive. There's more expansion opportunities, especially with the Middle East conflict still existing. The opportunities for Canada to supply to the Asia market will be more favorable. As a result, the position of Prince Rupert as an export location will be more beneficial going forward. We hope that there is an opportunity for us to further expand the facility, that the volumes at the start will be relatively strong. Definitely we should be able to make, let's say, the multiples we have given to the market at FID. Very clear. Thank you very much. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Thijs Berkelder from ABN. Please go ahead. Morning, all. Thijs Berkelder, ABN AMRO, ODDO BHF. Congrats with the better than expected performance. Can you explain maybe the strong rise in the Dutch JV result? Can you explain what this means in terms of uptick for these terminals, and I guess these are the gas terminals, what it means for the uptick in proportional EBITDA reporting on these Dutch JVs. The second question is on corporate costs. They are much lower than usual, probably due to lower usage of your captive insurance, but maybe also because of maybe a bit of accounting change in terms of bonus accruals. Explanation there also is welcome. Relate to that, is there any impact already or expected for next year of the new pension system in the Netherlands? Third question is on, that's simply a reporting question. I missed the slide on the breakdown of proportional EBITDA per product type. Can you provide us with the proportional EBITDA per product type in hard numbers, please? I have a couple of other questions, but let's start here. Let me start with the first question on the Dutch JVs. Yeah, indeed, strong rise. The main reason here is obviously we had quite some technical challenges, if you may recall, during 2025 at our terminal in Eemshaven, the EemsEnergyTerminal. That was solved, effectively the technical challenge, beginning of this year. As a result, you see quite a bit of an uptick in the results of that joint venture. That is the main reason for, let's say, the better performance of the Dutch joint ventures. On your second question, the corporate cost, indeed, less cost in the captive because we had less damages than we had last year. That's quite a change. On the other hand, we're quite focused on making sure that we are efficient and effective as a company. What you may have noticed that over time, effectively, if you look at corporate cost, which is a combination of the global office as well as our global IT department, that cost has come down quite a bit as well, and the cash out of that has been reduced due to several measures. If you go back to 2021, 2022, approximately 20% or even above 20% of our free cash flow were corporate costs. Now we're sort of at around 11%-12%, with still an ambition to go below the 10%. On one hand, by making sure that the efficiency still is being driven, and on the other hand, obviously, we want to grow our free cash flow and create economies of scale with an efficient and effective global model. That's on the second question. On the third question, the new pension system is not going to have any impact on the results for next year. That's neutral. There was already a strong disconnect between the pension fund and the company in terms of accounting impact. By the way, also nothing changed what you said in the second question on our bonus accruals. They are still the same as we applied them in previous years. The last question on providing that information, we will do that after the call to you. Yeah. Coming back on the JV results in terms of proportional EBITDA, is there also a similar jump in proportional EBITDA for the Dutch gas terminals then, b ecause there you have the same technical challenges which have been solved? Should be, let us check on the exact numbers, Thijs, and then we will provide that to you. It is stronger, I think much stronger than previously guided, in my view. Coming back on Middle East effects. You shortly mentioned Fujairah. Can you really explain what is currently happening in Fujairah, in India and the rest of Asia? Your aggregated occupancy rate for the region goes down to 88%, but probably Fujairah is well below that 88%. Maybe your view on the structural role of Fujairah going forward. It seems with South Africa so strong now that that part of the clients maybe now are using South Africa as a kind of intermediate hub instead of locations like Fujairah. Can you maybe make more explicit what is currently happening in the LPG flows into India? Hey. Morning, Thijs. Maybe a few things on, I think, first Fujairah. First and foremost, our people and assets are safe. It has been quite a sensitive period during some moments in Q2. Let's not forget, first of all, that Fujairah is outside of the Strait of Hormuz, but the current activity for products that are flowing into Fujairah, that come from the Arabian Gulf, so have to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, is limited. Actual activity levels are relatively low. That is indeed one of the reasons for the drop in occupancy in Asia, Middle East. It's a large capacity, so indeed, that's where the drop sits. It also has to do with the fact that during the first phase of the conflict, some capacity was damaged and had to be taken out of service. That's capacity that is also taken into account when you take a look at that lower occupancy. I think that's roughly Fujairah. Maybe to immediately add to that, how do we look at maybe the longer-term perspective of Fujairah and the role of South Africa? I believe with everything going on, and if we talk to people in the region, the strategic importance of Fujairah going forward, assuming that there is some sort of a normalization in the conflict, is going to be very important. As I said, it is located outside of the Strait of Hormuz. Both from a UAE perspective, but also from a Saudi point of view, it continues to be a highly attractive location to export, and therefore, also use it as a trading location of all the products that are traded and produced in the Arabian Gulf. We have land available, are in active discussions with multiple people on what could be done in the medium to long term with the land that we have available. Second of all, we have a jetty. We have our own jetty in Fujairah that makes the location in the port of Fujairah our location also quite attractive. That is, I think, for a later moment. For now, we just have to wait for the moment that things will stabilize before we can fully concentrate on that. While it stabilizes, yes, we go through a bit of a rough period because it's obviously the activity level is just extremely low. We need to continue with the efforts that we have to keep our people and the assets safe. I think to your question about South Africa, we don't see yet an impact that all of a sudden South Africa is already playing a kind of a hub function because of the fact that products are flowing by and hence it's being used as a staging point. We don't see that yet. What we have seen in South Africa is just a very strong fuel distribution market. We were able to cater for quite some additional volumes in our spot business in South Africa has done really well in Q2. Again, too early to say what it will do in the longer term, but still healthy and hence we're also investing in the expansion over there. Whether it's taking over as an alternative to Fujairah, I think that's not something that we foresee at this moment. Maybe on India, and the impact of the conflict on India. India has been struggling to find the necessary LPG for the country, but have found ways to either get minimal product out of the Middle East, as well as source LPG from different locations. That is first of all, having an impact on the results in Q2, because the activity levels have been lower than what we would have expected. That continues to be like that, I think, for the remainder of this year, again, depending a bit on how the flows of the Middle East for LPG will recover. I hope that provides you with a bit of color. Yeah. One add-on remark on your statements on Fujairah. I think the Iranian leadership has defined Fujairah as inside the Strait of Hormuz regarding that also. That's to be discussed upon with Oman, probably. That has been my understanding. I'm not into that part of the definition. I'm just referring to physically, geographically where it's located. It's always good to remind everyone it is on the east side of the Emirates. It's, in that sense, outside of the Strait of Hormuz. That doesn't say anything about whether it can be reached with rockets or drones. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thijs, on your EBITDA question for the joint ventures, it is a combination of EemsEnergy and also better results at the Gate Terminal, but predominantly EemsEnergy, but also some positive impact of the Gate Terminal. Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star one and one on your telephone. We will now take the next question from the line of Dirk Verbiesen from ING Equity Research. Please go ahead. Yes. Good morning to all and also, on behalf of myself, congratulations on the strong performance in Q2, despite all the turbulence globally. Maybe on the comments you made in the report on the chemicals and oil, but particularly chemicals, the performance, it looks to have been quite strong. Do you see that as maybe a structural turn to the positive, or is it more a consequence of all the disruptions globally that you may have seen a temporary lift in activity levels in the chemicals? Because if I understand correctly, that was the weak spot over the past, let's say, quarters. That's my first question. The second question on the contract renewal discussions. Also, given the quite satisfactory level of occupancy despite all the disruptions here and there. The third question I have is, let's say on the EBITDA run rate and also appreciating your lift in the full year guidance. Now with EUR 305 million or so in Q2. What kind of assumptions do you foresee? Why would it drop below EUR 300 million? Particularly because of the additions of this EUR 300 million in projects that come on stream somewhere in the second half. Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks to me that given where you are now and the run rate going forward in the second half, it appears that, let's say EUR 300 million should be some kind of a bottom level in EBITDA on a quarterly rate. Thanks. Hey, Dirk, maybe I'll take the first two, Michiel will take your last question. On the chemical side, indeed, we've seen a bit of an uptick in Q2. That's more on the temporary side than that is a structural fundamental change in that market. Because of a lot of the disruptions, we've seen a bit of spot inquiries in both Singapore as well as to a certain extent in Belgium. That's what we've seen. That's quite temporary, I would say. I think the only location which is kind of benefiting in terms of activity level and therefore ancillary revenues for us, is the U.S., because the U.S., no matter how you look at it from a petrochemical point of view, is and has been quite a competitive producer. We see that in Deer Park mostly, that was a relatively healthy performance. I think that's on chemicals. On the contract renewals, I understand the question. With 91% occupancy, it's a very regional discussion. We see healthy opportunities for renewals in some products in, for instance, ARA, so in Europoort. For oil, we see it for some products in Asia as well, in Singapore and in Pengerang. It may not surprise you that if you then talk about potential contract renewals in Fujairah, we don't have the strongest hand over there to go through those discussions. It's a bit of a mixed bag. I think that's all been taken into account when we also talk about outlook. Maybe with that over to Michiel for the outlook and some of the assumptions there on the run rate. Clearly, let's say the EBITDA run rate has been quite strong in the first half year. In the second half, what we assumed effectively, obviously we will add, let's say, some of the growth there, but the major impact there is Q4, where we bring the Gate Terminal Tank 4 on stream. That's one quarter of additional growth. We also factor in that the conflict between Iran and the U.S. in that region of the Middle East will take longer than expected. That is still obviously quite volatile. We don't know exactly where it ends, we factor that into our outlook as well. If the conflict would be over quite soon, and the impact is far less than what we expect, obviously we will end at the higher end of the range. If the conflict worsens, there is still a risk that the conflict worsens because also around the Suez Canal, there might be challenges going forward, there is still a risk that we end up at the lower end of the range. That's how we looked at it from an outlook point of view. Thanks for clarifying. You're welcome. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of David Kerstens from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Good morning, gentlemen. Two questions, please, on the growth projects. I think the run rate from the EBITDA contribution from growth projects increased to EUR 19 million in the first half. Previously, your guidance included around EUR 35 million for the full year. Is that still a relevant number to use or has that now increased? Michiel, you highlighted the fourth tank of Gate LNG coming online in Q4. How do you see that contribution from growth projects for the full year guidance? The second question on the battery energy storage investment of EUR 371 million. Is it fair to assume that that amount is spent all today? I was wondering if you can give an indication on what the EBITDA contribution and the returns will be. I think from your slide, you talk about less than eight times EBITDA from 2028 and beyond, maybe a bit more guidance on how we should model that investment. Thank you very much. The second question, the EUR 371 million, it's not all spent today, it will be spent over time. It is basically we will be constructing the projects in the coming one and a half, close to two years. That's effectively happening. That cash out goes partly in 2026, mainly in 2027, maybe the last part in 2028. In 2028, these projects are going to contribute. Multiples are indeed quite close to the 8x. If you assume 8x, it's a doable number for us. We've always given a range of 6x to 8x for, let's say, any energy transition investments. That's where these investments are. In terms of EBITDA, that will also be very close to the free cash flow multiple because operating CapEx for these sites will be relatively low. On the run rate, effectively, we had EUR 35 million. We expect a bit of a higher contribution of growth to EUR 45 million. That's what we factor in now as growth contribution for the full year. Very clear. Thank you very much. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Kristof Samoy from KBC Securities. Please go ahead. Yes. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. I have three. Apologies beforehand if I repeat some questions because I got kicked out of the call quite a few times. My first one is on the strong second quarter performance and the upwardly revised outlook for the year. I was just wondering what assumptions regarding the durations of the ongoing Middle Eastern conflict are baked into the upped guidance. What events, adverse effects, would you take into account or would you consider relevant in revising your outlook downwards? Secondly, on REEF, you commented about a delay, amongst others, linked to adverse weather conditions. The in-service date is now foreseen in the second half of 2027. I know you do not give guidance or outlook statements on 2027 yet, could you give a hint on what the impact could be on incremental free cash flow or proportional EBITDA versus 2026 guidance linked to this delay? Finally on AVTL, on India and LPG, we see the proportional occupancy rates coming down in your reporting. Is the full impact there of the disturbed LPG flows already reflected in the numbers, or can we still expect a deterioration going forward? Thank you. Yes, I'll take a few and Michiel will take a few. Good morning to you. Our assumption where the conflict, how long the conflict will continue, as Michiel already indicated in the previous question. We expect on the outlook for the conflict to be around until the end of the year. At least not to be materially resolved by the end of the year. Let's call it like that. That's the way we've taken it into account. The reason still why we therefore feel there's some uncertainty for that second half of the year is that the impact of lower activity levels will always take a little bit of time before that kicks in, and that's why we're a bit cautious, especially on the Fujairah side, for that second half of the year. That's one. Your second question, or at least a sub-question on the first was, why would you revise that number downwards? It's very hard to obviously exactly quantify what the impact of that Middle East will look like and how it can all of a sudden be substantially different from how we are calculating it today. In that case, you have to look at, I would say, damage that is higher than what we see today in a terminal like Fujairah. Much more supply chain impact directly for the flows that are currently substituting some of the product that is coming out of the Middle East. We've taken a reasonable assumption in that, obviously it's such a volatile and uncertain situation, it's very hard to predict exactly how that will work. I think we have a cushion, but, we also haven't been in situations like this a lot of times before to really be able to assess exactly what the impact will be. We need to be cautious a bit on that side. Okay. Thank you. Maybe on REEF, on 2027. Well, we indeed don't give any outlook for 2027 or beyond. If you look at the CapEx investment we're going to make, then obviously you can apply a certain multiple over that CapEx, which by top of my head, we gave around 6.5x EBITDA. Please note that for this investment, let's say, the free cash flow might be higher than the EBITDA due to lease income. That is an accounting requirement. Effectively, free cash flow will exceed the EBITDA. EBITDA plus, let's say, the lease income will make free cash flow. That's at 6.5x. If you take somewhat of a delay and with an expected relatively quick ramp-up of the volumes, that's at least what is expected. I would think that at least three quarters of that cash flow I just mentioned should land in 2027. That's where we are today. I hope that gives a bit more clear picture. Maybe if I just. If I may as a follow-up? Yes. Michiel, as a follow-up, I read in the press release an in-service date somewhere in the second year half. How do you come up with three quarters of cash flow landing in 2027? There is some part of it, a smaller part, which will be commissioned in July, indeed. There is an additional investment. The major investment goes into operation Q1, and then there is a smaller investment, of which our share is around EUR 35 million. That comes online in July. You're right. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for clarifying. Maybe on India. Maybe on India. I think your question was, what is then the expectation for the second half of the year in terms of volumes in India? It's hard for us to make a comment on the India entity as it is a listed entity specifically. If you take a look at where the flows are going, it's just quite erratic, I would almost say, for India. It takes some time for India to get necessary LPG volumes to replace the ones that they're missing from the Middle East. That's what you see as an impact already, I think, in Q2. I think as long as the conflict continues, we have to get used to for the remainder of the year to that type of activity level in India when it gets to LPG. I think the other part of India, chemicals and some of the oil products continues to be quite healthy. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. There are no further questions at this time. Please continue. Apologies. We've got one further question coming from the line of Thijs Berkelder from ABN. Please go ahead. Sorry, I typed the wrong numbers. Three add-on questions. Can you maybe explain what the potential impact is of the opening of the Impala Terminals oil terminal in the port of Rotterdam, for what kind of impact you expect for your oil product operations in the port? Secondly, can you give an update on the outages in Mexico, what is happening there? Third question is on, you published for the first time for an interim dividend. What is the policy there being looked at in interim dividend, let's say, in percentage of full year dividend? Is there any read-through from interim dividend towards full year dividend? Maybe on Impala first, Thijs Berkelder. That terminal, the former HES International terminal, is still in the process of being taken into operation and quite some work has been put in. We're trying to follow that closely where we can, and obviously stay close to our customers, to make sure that we secure the right type of customers at our location. I think it's important to realize how strong the contract portfolio of the Europoort particularly is, with 25% of the entire Europoort is, in fact, industrial terminal capacity with a big refinery and everything associated to it. There's a big crude position as well. If you add the capacity at the MOT. We're comfortable with the position that we have and the position that we have been able to build over many years. Obviously, when a new competitor comes into play, which by the way, is owned by a trader. It remains to be seen how attractive that will be also for other people to pick up capacity, at a terminal that's owned by a trader, in this case, Trafigura. Let's see. We are ready and need to be ready and alert for when that comes into operation. I think the second one, outages in Mexico, I'm not sure particularly what you're referring to, but is that the outage that we have or the available capacity in Veracruz? Yeah. Correct. Yeah. Currently no indication that that capacity will be picked up by new customers. The complexity sits also in the way Mexico runs their fuel deficit and fuel pricing. It's very hard for importers in general, to build an attractive economic case for import and then selling diesel or gasoline into Mexico because the prices are being kept relatively low and the international prices are relatively high. That's the simple math that makes it just very hard already for existing operations, let alone if you try to get a new customer in. What we are doing is preparing part of the capacity to swap that into chemical and other part of the storage, which is quite successful, because there's enough market demand we expect for that. The remainder of the capacity, we just have to be a bit patient to see if and when that market situation becomes attractive and customers would be willing to pick it up. Michiel will talk about the interim dividend. Yeah. The interim dividend, indeed, what I said is around 40% of the previous dividend. By purpose, we looked at several other companies on the market which we deem comparable in terms of cash flows. We thought that it's quite common practice to pay out 40%. We don't want to give any indication for the final dividend as a result of our interim dividend. The final dividend will still be in line with our policy. At least a 5% increase, but that will be determined once we have the final year results. For now, we take around 40% of the previous dividend as interim dividend. Okay. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.