Growth by transformational

change

Forward Looking Statements

This presentation contains forward-looking statements (as defined in Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended) which reflects managements current expectations, estimates and projections about its operations. All statements, other
than statements of historical facts, that address activities and events that will, should, could or may occur in the future are forwardlooking statements. Words such as may, could, should, would, expect, plan, anticipate, intend, forecast, believe,
estimate, predict, propose, potential, continue, or the negative of these terms and similar expressions are intended to identify
such forward-looking statements. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to certain risks,
uncertainties and other factors, some of which are beyond our control and are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual outcomes and
results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in such forward-looking statements. You should not place undue
reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this presentation. Unless legally required, Golar
LNG undertakes no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future
events or otherwise.

Among the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements are:
changes in liquefied natural gas ( LNG) floating storage and regasification unit (FSRU) and floating liquefaction natural gas vessel
(FLNGV) market trends, including charter rates, ship values and technological advancements; changes in our ability to retrofit
vessels as FSRUs and FLNGVs, our ability to obtain financing for such conversions on acceptable terms or at all, and the timing of
the delivery and acceptance of such converted vessels; changes in the supply of or demand for LNG or LNG carried by sea; a
material decline or prolonged weakness in rates for LNG carriers or FSRUs; changes in trading patterns that affect the opportunities
for the profitable operation of LNG carriers, FSRUs or FLNGVs; changes in the supply of or demand for natural gas generally or in
particular regions; changes in our relationships with major chartering parties; changes in the availability of vessels to purchase, the
time it takes to construct new vessels, or vessels useful lives; failure of shipyards to comply with delivery schedules on a timely basis
or at all; our ability to integrate and realize the benefits of acquisitions; changes in our ability to sell vessels to Golar LNG Partners
LP, or Golar Partners; changes in our relationship with Golar Partners; changes to rules and regulations applicable to LNG carriers,
FSRUs or FLNGVs; actions taken by regulatory authorities that may prohibit the access of LNG carriers, FSRUs or FLNGVs to
various ports; our inability to achieve successful utilization of our expanded fleet and inability to expand beyond the carriage of LNG;
increases in costs including among other things crew wages, insurance, provisions, repairs and maintenance; changes in general
domestic and international political conditions, particularly where we operate; changes in our ability to obtain additional financing on
acceptable terms or at all; and other factors listed from time to time in reports or other materials that we have filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission, including our most recent annual report on Form 20-F. Unpredictable or unknown factors also could
have material adverse effects on forward-looking statements.

Transitioning to integrated LNG mid-stream player

Our strategy and investment proposition

Developed GoFLNG floating liquefaction concept

Golars strategic intent: integrated LNG mid-stream

services provider: - floating liquefaction, LNG shipping
and FSRU services.

GoFLNG:
- substantially lower unit cost liquefaction

Intent emanates from success in shipping & regas

- shorter lead-times

Golar owns one of largest & most modern fleets

- significantly lower execution risk profile

c.50% market share of FSRU mkt

Advantages most pronounced in remote locations &

developing economies having stranded gas reserves

Ambition: LNG liquefaction game changer

Overview of the LNG Value Chain

Exploration &
Drilling

Production &
Liquefaction

Shipping

Regasification

Power generation

LNG Midstream
FLNG

LNG Carriers

FSRU

Golars Assets
The current revenue backlog for the Golar Group is $2.7 billion
Golar LNG Limited

Golar LNG Partners LP

Old steamers
2 units at 125,000cbm

Modern steamers
1 unit at 145,000cbm

4 units between 137-145,000cbm

Tri-fuel vessels
10 units at 160,000cbm

FSRUs
1 newbuild (5bcmpa)

6 units (2-5bcmpa)

FLNG
2 units (prospective capacity of
5mtpa)

LNG shipping suffering from project delays

700
600
West Africa

500

South America
South & East Africa

400

North America
North Africa

300

Middle East

200

Europe
Asia Pacific

100

Source:
Wood Mackenzie.

2030

2028

2026

2024

2022

2020

2018

2016

2014

2012

2010

2008

2006

2004

2002

2000

Spike in spot rates in 2011/12 corresponds to delivery of big Qatari projects.

Rate drop from Mid-2012: termination of Egyptian export, multiple force majeures
(Nigeria & Yemen), Angola delays & commissioning of newbuilds end 2013.
Little additional liquefaction since 2011 but next wave just around the corner

Shipping Market Set to Improve

FSRU Growth Story Continues

Strong growth in FSRU demand
FSRUs
account for
much of this

2000 2013: +190%

FSRUs substantially cheaper than land based terminals

Gas demand growing in riskier countries: floating, low capex unit even more
attractive.
Since 2007, around 75-80% of new markets for LNG opened by an FSRU.
Floating infrastructure has and will fundamentally alter LNG market dynamics

Globalisation of Gas and Demand for Power

Our observations and our mission in FLNG

Energy demand will grow

Power demand in developing countries is growing fast

Gas abundant, cost effective, environment friendly

Location mismatch: gas reserves vs power demand

Gas will grow as proportion of overall energy mix

GoFLNG offer bridge: low cost gas to power

LNG market will grow & globalize

GoFLNG to monetize stranded & associated gas

Stranded & associated gas needs low cost FLNG

Golar solutions to small and large resource owners

Overview of the LNG Value Chain

Exploration &
Drilling

Production &
Liquefaction

Shipping

Regasification

Power generation

LNG Midstream
FLNG

LNG Carriers

FSRU

GoFLNG
GoFLNG Mk I

Second GoFLNG (Gimi) delivery Q1 2018

existing LNG vessel - 125,000 m3 LNG

Gimi is sister ship to Hilli
storage - 2.5 to 2.8 mtpa liquefaction capacity.
GoFLNG based on proven B&V technology
First GoFLNg (Hilli) under construction,
delivery Feb 2017, earmarked for Cameroon.

33% finished delivered by Q1 2017

GoFLNG Model
GoFLNG value proposition:

Low unit cost of production.

Short lead time.
Reduced execution risk.
Underpinned by a growing demand globally for LNG.

GoFLNG business model is based on targeting:

Relatively dry and clean gas.

Associated gas that currently has no opportunity cost is a focus area.
Located offshore in benign to moderate met-ocean conditions.
With a reserve base above 500 Bcf.

GoFLNG commercial model:

Vessel employed on tolling basis.
Primary exposure to commodity price sits with the resource holder.
Golar mindful of security of project cash flow, project timing & risk

The Floating Cost Advantage

An FSRU is Substantially cheaper than a Land-Based Alternative

FLNG Costs are less than half recent greenfield onshore terminals (Source: Arctic sec)

FSRU substantially cheaper than land based

FLNG costs superior in recent time

300

2500
Land based

Onshore

2000

FSRU

200

mUSD/MTPA

mUSD/MTPA

250

150
100

FLNG
1500
1000
500

50
0
1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

0
1960

2020

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

Source: Arctic Securities, Company

The FSRUs substantially cheaper than land

based terminals

GoFLNG unit capex USD400-500/Mtpa

Onshore liquefaction USD1000-2000/Mtpa

(greenfield)

Floating infrastructure has and will continue fundamentally to alter LNG market paradigm
9

FLNG Comparison Economics

Notes: Dotted lines represent capital cost range; assumes LNG delivery to Tokyo Bay Harbour (FOB Destination, seller pays for LNG transport); 25 year project life; Western Australia liquids yield of 15 bbl/mmcf and price realization of $102bbl.
Source: Company Reports, IHS CERA, RBC Capital Markets

Global liquefaction costs (15% pre-tax IRR, 20 years) range from $2.88 to c.$7.0 (includes OPEX).
Golars model can deliver superior returns at the lower end of this cost range with added benefits of:

Scalability: maintains cost advantage even on smaller projects (1.0-2.5 MMTPA).

Reliability: simple proven technology to mitigate unplanned outages and start-up delays.

Predictability: controlled environment of shipyard gives confidence on schedule and cost (relatively
inflation proof compared with in-situ LNG construction projects).

Financeability: Golar plan to execute projects without cumbersome pre-FID project finance overlay.

Speed of execution: permitting and construction timeline dramatically improved with floating asset.
11

Golar is The Low Cost Producer

12

Why Africa?
West Africa offers significant high quality clean gas requiring little pre-processing
Associated gas is also plentiful Nigeria is flaring 428bcf p.a. (~9mtpa LNG)
Domestic prices significantly below international prices FLNG can add value
Incumbent majors are not pursuing fast track low cost solutions
Land based terminals in Africa require very high returns given execution, political,
inflation and currency risks. FLNG can mitigate some of these risks.

Dry Natural Gas Production in Sub-Saharan Africa: 2010 - 2040

13

All-in Breakeven Costs

Supply Chain Cost Breakdown

Associated gas
Tolling fee
Shipping
Regasification cost
All in cost
Energy equivalent oil price
Implied USD/MWh
Power plant cost
Total USD/MWh

(USD/Mmbtu)
(USD/Mmbtu)
(USD/Mmbtu)
(USD/Mmbtu)
(USD/Mmbtu)
(USD/Boe)
(USD/MWh)
(USD/MWh)
(USD/MWh)

1.50
2.00
1.30
0.45
5.25
31.5
35.0
18.0
53.0

In power short countries (Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa) power prices tend to be
above USD150/MWh - gas can clearly offer superior economics.
..and before accounting for pollution benefit of gas over coal or oil fired plants.

14

Crude oil substitution potential is vast

Power generation from crude is equal to the current total LNG market

Source: Pira Energy

15

NAV support strong liquidity position

Equity of Golar ~USD26/share, does not take account of the General Partner interest
Dividend of USD1.8/share represents a 5.5% dividend yield
Golar strengthened balance sheet to weather the challenging shipping market.
Golar can fully fund the newbuilding program & conversion of GoFLNG Hilli

Cash position strengthened in recent months

Balance sheet cash position as at 4Q14

NAV support today of USD26/share (Arctic Securities)

US$ millions
192

GMLP units secondary offering proceeds

GMLP revolver
Newbuild equity release
Cash released from restricted balance since 4Q14
Cash available now and within the next three months

207
20
180
25
624

Eskimo sale proceeds

Pro-forma cash position after all amounts due are received

227
851

US$ millions
Fleet value (analyst estimates)

4,156

GMLP M-t-M

479

Adjusted cash

851

Interest bearing debt (analyst est)

1,860

Remaining capex (analyst estimates)

1,161

NAV

2,465

NAVps

26.5

16

GoFLNG The Potential Economics for Golar

Capex vs. EBITDA

$mm
$1.400

Using U.S. Gulf

transactions as a reference
point, annual EBITDA can
be expected to be in the
$250mm - $450mm range.

$1.200
$300

$1.000

~3x5x
$800
$600
$400

This compares with all-in

estimated conversion cost
of $1.2bn.

$1.200
$900
$450

$200

$250

$0
Conversion

Jetty etc.

All-capex

EBITDA Low

EBITDA High

Equals an EBITDA-payback
of 3 - 5 years based on 4
trains.

Average FLNG project longevity is expected to be between 5 - 20 years, an ideal asset for MLP dropdown
Each project is expected to require between 2 - 5 ships to transport LNG.
Potential dropdown valuation (based on past dropdown EBITDA multiples):
FLNG $3,000-$4,000mm.
Ships $750mm.
Potential dropdown value per project $3,750-$4,750mm.

Note: U.S. Dollars in millions.

17

FLNG project pipeline growing

Growing Portfolio of Projects fast & cheap are their competitive advantages

FLNG #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Operator
Perenco
West Africa
Rosneft
Rosneft
Cedar LNG
Cedar LNG
Cedar LNG

Capacity (Mtpa)
Up to 2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.8
2.8
2.8

Duration
8 years
Life of field
Life of field
Life of field
Life of field
Life of field
Life of field

Potential start-up
2017
2018
2018
2019
2020
2020
2021

Simplified Illustration of the Economics of an FLNG Unit

Tariff: USD4/Mmbtu.
Capacity: up to 2.8mtpa.
EBITDA: up to 450mn.
MLP drop-down: 8-10x EBITDA.
Value of ~USD4bn capex of USD1.2bn = USD2.8bn.
Current market cap is USD3.2bn.

18