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 forward-looking 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.

1

Our strategy and investment proposition

Transitioning to integrated LNG mid-stream player

Golars strategic intent: integrated LNG mid-stream services provider: - floating liquefaction, LNG shipping and FSRU services. Intent emanates from success in shipping & regas Golar owns one of largest & most modern fleets c.50% market share of FSRU mkt Ambition: LNG liquefaction game changer

2

Developed GoFLNG floating liquefaction concept GoFLNG:

- substantially lower unit cost liquefaction - shorter lead-times - significantly lower execution risk profile

Advantages most pronounced in remote locations & developing economies having stranded gas reserves

Overview of the LNG Value Chain

Exploration & Drilling

Production & Liquefaction Shipping Regasification Power generation

FLNG LNG Carriers FSRU

LNG Midstream

Golars Assets

3

Old steamers Modern steamers

Tri-fuel vessels

FSRUs

FLNG

2 units at 125,000cbm 1 unit at 145,000cbm 10 units at 160,000cbm 1 newbuild (5bcmpa)

2 units (prospective capacity of 5mtpa)

4 units between 137-145,000cbm

6 units (2-5bcmpa)

The current revenue backlog for the Golar Group is $2.7 billion

Golar LNG Limited Golar LNG Partners LP

LNG shipping suffering from project delays

4

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

2022

2024

2026

2028

2030

West Africa

South America

South & East Africa

North America

North Africa

Middle East

Europe

Asia Pacific

Source: Wood Mackenzie.

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

5

FSRU Growth Story Continues

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

6

Strong growth in FSRU demand

FSRUs account for much of this

2000 2013: +190%

Our observations and our mission in FLNG

Globalisation of Gas and Demand for Power

Energy demand will grow Gas abundant, cost effective, environment friendly Gas will grow as proportion of overall energy mix LNG market will grow & globalize Stranded & associated gas needs low cost FLNG

2

Power demand in developing countries is growing fast Location mismatch: gas reserves vs power demand GoFLNG offer bridge: low cost gas to power GoFLNG to monetize stranded & associated gas Golar solutions to small and large resource owners

Overview of the LNG Value Chain

Exploration & Drilling

Production & Liquefaction Shipping Regasification Power generation

FLNG LNG Carriers FSRU

LNG Midstream

GoFLNG

GoFLNG Mk I

existing LNG vessel - 125,000 m3 LNG storage - 2.5 to 2.8 mtpa liquefaction capacity.

First GoFLNg (Hilli) under construction, delivery Feb 2017, earmarked for Cameroon.

Second GoFLNG (Gimi) delivery Q1 2018

Gimi is sister ship to Hilli

GoFLNG based on proven B&V technology

7

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

8

The Floating Cost Advantage

The FSRUs substantially cheaper than land based terminals

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

9

GoFLNG unit capex USD400-500/Mtpa Onshore liquefaction USD1000-2000/Mtpa

(greenfield)

An FSRU is Substantially cheaper than a Land-Based Alternative FLNG Costs are less than half recent greenfield onshore terminals (Source: Arctic sec)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

mU

SD/M

TPA

FSRU substantially cheaper than land based

Land based

FSRU

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

mU

SD/M

TPA

FLNG costs superior in recent time

Onshore

FLNG

Source: Arctic Securities, Company

FLNG Comparison Economics

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.

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

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.

13

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

All-in Breakeven Costs

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

Supply Chain Cost Breakdown

Associated gas (USD/Mmbtu) 1.50 Tolling fee (USD/Mmbtu) 2.00 Shipping (USD/Mmbtu) 1.30 Regasification cost (USD/Mmbtu) 0.45 All in cost (USD/Mmbtu) 5.25 Energy equivalent oil price (USD/Boe) 31.5 Implied USD/MWh (USD/MWh) 35.0 Power plant cost (USD/MWh) 18.0 Total USD/MWh (USD/MWh) 53.0

Crude oil substitution potential is vast

15

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

Source: Pira Energy

NAV support strong liquidity position

16

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

US$ millions Balance sheet cash position as at 4Q14 192

GMLP units secondary offering proceeds 207 GMLP revolver 20 Newbuild equity release 180 Cash released from restricted balance since 4Q14 25 Cash available now and within the next three months 624

Eskimo sale proceeds 227 Pro-forma cash position after all amounts due are received 851

Cash position strengthened in recent months NAV support today of USD26/share (Arctic Securities)

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

Capex vs. EBITDA

$900

$300

$1.200

$250 $450

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1.000

$1.200

$1.400

Conversion Jetty etc. All-capex EBITDA Low EBITDA High

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

This compares with all-in estimated conversion cost of $1.2bn.

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

~3x5x

$mm

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.

GoFLNG The Potential Economics for Golar

17

FLNG project pipeline growing

Growing Portfolio of Projects fast & cheap are their competitive advantages

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

FLNG # Operator Capacity (Mtpa) Duration Potential start-up 1 Perenco Up to 2.5 8 years 2017 2 West Africa 2.5 Life of field 2018 3 Rosneft 2.5 Life of field 2018 4 Rosneft 2.5 Life of field 2019 5 Cedar LNG 2.8 Life of field 2020 6 Cedar LNG 2.8 Life of field 2020 7 Cedar LNG 2.8 Life of field 2021

Slide Number 1Slide Number 2Slide Number 3Slide Number 4Slide Number 5Slide Number 6Slide Number 7Slide Number 8Slide Number 9Slide Number 10Slide Number 11Slide Number 12Slide Number 13Slide Number 14Slide Number 15Slide Number 16Slide Number 17Slide Number 18Slide Number 19