Summer 2019

Fundamentals

Cautionary statements

The information in this presentation includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements. The words “anticipate,” “assume,” “believe,” “budget,” “estimate,” “expect,” “forecast,” “initial,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “potential,” “project,” “should,” “will,” “would,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements in this presentation relate to, among other things, gas resources, production and costs, infrastructure needs and costs, LNG export and pipeline capacity, LNG bunkering, LNG prices, future demand and supply affecting LNG, and general energy markets and other aspects of our business and our prospects and those of other industry participants.Our forward-looking statements are based on assumptions and analyses made by us in light of our experience and our perception of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments, and other factors that we believe are appropriate under the circumstances. These statements are subject to numerous known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which may cause actual results to be materially different from any future results or performance expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include those described in the “Risk Factors” section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 and our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are incorporated by reference in this presentation. Many of the forward-looking statements in this presentation relate to events or developments anticipated to occur numerous years in the future, which increases the likelihood that actual results will differ materially from those indicated in such forward-looking statements.

The forward-looking statements made in or in connection with this presentation speak only as of the date hereof. Although we may from time to time voluntarily update our prior forward-looking statements, we disclaim any commitment to do so except as required by securities laws.

Reserves and resourcesEstimates of non-proved reserves and resources are based on more limited information, and are subject to significantly greater risk of not being produced, than are estimates of proved reserves.

Forward-looking statements

Disclaimer

Contents

3

Short-term fundamentals – updated monthly

U.S. natural gas – plentiful, low-cost U.S. natural gas supply

Global LNG – global gas market is growing and becoming commoditized

2019 U.S. dry gas production (bcf/d)

4

9.3 9.7

Jan Jul

9.7 10.0

Jan Jul9.4 9.9

Jan Jul4.8 4.8

Jan Jul

10.4 10.5

Jan Jul

Midcontinent(1)

Permian

Eagle Ford

Haynesville

30.0 31.3

Jan Jul

Appalachia

88.1

90.0

Jan Jul

U.S. Lower-48(2)

Source: IHS Markit.

Notes: (1) Includes Anadarko, Fayetteville, Cherokee, Mississippian, Ardmore Woodford, Arkoma Woodford, Cana Woodford, and Granite Wash.(2) Due to relative magnitude of production, production axis not at scale with other basins.

The use of this content was authorized in advance. Any further use or redistribution of this content is strictly prohibited without written permission by IHS Markit.

Rockies/Williston

25

27

29

31

33

35

37

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

MT per month

LNG demand is growing 13.6% y/y in 2019

Sources: IHS Markit, Tellurian analysis.

The use of this content was authorized in advance. Any further use or redistribution of this content is strictly prohibited without written permission by IHS Markit.

5

2019 expected capacity

2018 LNG demand2019 LNG demand+13.6% y/y LNG demand H1

LNG capacity H1 +13% y/y

Utilization rate +600 bps y/y

2019

Firm LNG capacity forecast

Source: Tellurian Research, Wood Mackenzie.

6

292 318 347 377 408 412 412 412 412 406 401

4 24 35 48 51 67 93

248 264298

324

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Global LNG capacity and output (mtpa)

Under construction capacityCapacityLNG output

Firm LNG capacity schedule mtpa

Source: Tellurian Research, Wood Mackenzie.

7

Project Country CapacityEst. start

date 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025Elba Island LNG Export T1-6 US East 1.5 8/1/2019 0.6 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Ichthys T2 Australia 4.5 10/1/2019 1.1 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Vysotsk LNG Russia West 0.7 9/1/2019 0.2 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7

Sengkang LNG Indonesia 0.5 10/1/2020 – 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Freeport Train 1 US East 5.1 9/1/2019 1.7 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 Portovaya LNG Russia West 1.5 9/1/2019 0.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

Elba Island LNG Export T7-10 US East 1.0 1/1/2020 – 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Cameron LNG Export T2 US East 4.0 2/1/2020 – 3.7 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Freeport Train 2 US East 5.1 5/1/2020 – 3.4 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 Freeport Train 3 US East 5.1 10/30/2020 – 1.3 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1

Cameron LNG Export T3 US East 4.0 9/1/2020 – 1.3 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 PETRONAS FLNG 2 Malaysia 1.5 1/1/2021 – – 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Tangguh Phase 2 Indonesia 3.8 10/1/2021 – – 1.0 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8

Coral FLNG Mozambique 3.4 1/1/2022 – – – 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 Corpus Christi LNG Train 3 US East 4.5 1/1/2022 – – – 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5

Tortue FLNG Senegal 2.4 3/1/2022 – – – 2.0 2.4 2.4 2.4 Sabine Pass LNG T6 US East 4.7 6/1/2023 – – – – 2.7 4.7 4.7

LNG Canada T1 Canada West 7.0 4/1/2024 – – – – – 5.3 7.0 Golden Pass LNG T1 US East 5.2 5/1/2024 – – – – – 3.5 5.2 Golden Pass LNG T2 US East 5.2 10/30/2024 – – – – – 1.3 5.2

LNG Canada T2 Canada West 7.0 1/1/2025 – – – – – – 7.0 Golden Pass LNG T3 US East 5.2 7/2/2025 – – – – – – 2.6

Mozambique Area 1 T1 Mozambique 6.4 6/1/2024 – – – – – 3.8 6.4 Mozambique Area 1 T2 Mozambique 6.4 1/1/2025 – – – – – – 6.4

4.2 24.0 35.4 48.1 51.3 67.0 93.1 –

20

40

60

80

100

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Cumulative new LNG capacity by country (mtpa)

US East MozambiqueCanada West IndonesiaMalaysia Russia WestAustralia Senegal

LNG capacity growth should peak in 2019Incremental LNG capacity (mtpa)

Sources: Wood Mackenzie, Tellurian analysis.Notes: (1) Percentage change of incremental volumes compared to previous year’s total capacity expected to be online.

8

26 37

18 9

4 (2) (1)

(8) (8)(2) (5) (2) (3)

–

3

12

8 8 14

26

3 – – – –

9%

12%

8%

4%

3%

(0%)

3%4%

(1%)(0%)

(1%)(0%) (1%)

(2.0%)

–

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

(20.0)

(10.0)

–

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030Existing Under construction Y/Y change

26

40

30

1712

(2)

13

18

5

(2)(5)

(2) (3)

(1)

Contents

9

Short-term fundamentals – updated monthly

U.S. natural gas – plentiful, low-cost U.S. natural gas supply

Global LNG – global gas market is growing and becoming commoditized

82 99

135

17

53

Plentiful, low-cost U.S. natural gas

10

Production growth and resource base from selected U.S. unconventional basins

Source: EIA 2019 Annual Energy Outlook, DrillingInfo, RBN, Tellurian analysis.Note: (1) RBN high case – extrapolated from 2024 to 2025 by Tellurian.

411

112

74

23

52

Resource size, Tcf

Marcellus-Utica< $1.00

Haynesville< $1.50

Eagle Ford$0 - $1.50

Permian< $1.00

Anadarko$0-$1.00

29.2 36.0

2018 2025

3.6 7.4

2018 2025

4.9 7.9

2018 2025

8.6 9.4

2018 2025

Total U.S. lower-48 dry natural gas productionBcf/d

EIA

RBN(1)

2018 2025 Production growth

9.6 16.9

2018 2025

BasinWellhead cost, $/mmBtu

6

10

14

18

22

26

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Permian gas outlook – range of forecasts

Sources: Rystad, Wood Mackenzie, RSEG, IHS, DrillingInfo, BP, EIA, Tellurian Research.Notes: (1) Estimates based on guidance from Pioneer Energy. See https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/trending/ymld4hxz_zriyxkwqxdgmg2.

(2) Assumes 20% initial production (“IP”) improvement per year and flat completion activity levels.(3) Assumes flat seasonally adjusted rig drilling and completion activity, and 2% upward shift in basin wide type curve per quarter.(4) Current type curves (no improvement over time) and flat rig count based on current levels.

11

2025 YE production (Bcf/d)

Pioneer(1)

Rystad/BP/EIAWood Mackenzie/IHS(2)

RSEG(3)

Scenario – $70/bbl WTI(4)

Permian dry gas production• Permian gas supply

driven by oil production economics

• Gas-to-oil ratios in the Basin are increasing, meaning wells are getting “gassier”

• Consolidation and more investment from the majors underpins resilient production outlook2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Permian by the numbers

Sources: Rystad, EIA, World Bank, Platts via Marketview, and BTU Analytics.

12

2.5-4.0Gas-to-oil ratio

(“GOR”)

~1bcf/d

4.1million bpd

Average GOR in the Permian with higher GORs in the Delaware, the recipient

of most investment

One of the most prolific oil basins in the world with

extremely low oil breakevens and negative

breakevens for gas production

Estimated natural gas flared in the Permian Basin every

day in Q2 2019

The United States is among the top 4 flaring countries,

behind Russia, Iran, and Iraq

-$0.90$/mmBtu

3-year avg. basis

3-year average basis for gas prices in West Texas

compared to Henry Hub; as of August 2019, forward

curve averaging -$0.55 mmBtu for 2023

#4ranking

+7

+4

+7

+1

+3

Looming challenge of U.S. gas oversupply

13

U.S. natural gas must be exported

Sources: DrillingInfo, EIA, Tellurian analysis.Note: (1) Assumes $70/bbl oil price and $3/mmBtu Henry Hub price; incremental supply comes from Permian, Scoop/Stack, Haynesville, Eagle Ford, and Appalachia.

(2) Assumes U.S. natural gas demand grows 0.6% p.a. and that the 7.4 bcf/d of LNG terminals under construction produce at a 90% utilization rate. (3) Assumes new LNG terminals produce at a 90% utilization rate. (4) Assumes new liquefaction capacity costs $1,000 per tonne plus an additional $70 billion of pipeline infrastructure to transport gas supply to the terminal.

Bcf/d total gas supply growth(1)

Bcf/d excess gas supply(2)

mtpa LNG capacity required(3)+100

~$150 - $225 billion(4) of investment required to build 100-150 mtpa of LNG and supportive pipeline infrastructure

to export excess U.S. gas supply

+12

+22

2018-2025:LegendOperating/under construction LNG

Future infrastructure required

Incremental gas supply by 2025 (bcf/d)+X

Contents

14

Short-term fundamentals – updated monthly

U.S. natural gas – plentiful, low-cost U.S. natural gas supply

Global LNG – global gas market is growing and becoming commoditized

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Global LNG demand pull

Sources: Wood Mackenzie, Tellurian Research.Notes: (1) Assumes 86.5% utilization rate.

(2) Assuming sustained 2015-2018 demand growth rate of ~9.3% p.a. post-2019.(3) Assumes estimate of 5.0% p.a. demand growth rate post-2020.

15

Under construction

In operation

Capacity required(1)

9.3%(2)

5%(3)

~100 mtpa

~250 mtpa9.3% p.a. growth rate

Key drivers

China

India

Europe

New markets

170 97

208

885

Liquid maritime fuels(HFO)

Oil burned for powergeneration (ex-North

America)

Coal burned forpower generation

(EU + JKT)

Coal burned forpower generation

(China + India)

2018 fuel consumption (mtpa LNG equivalent)

$ 0

$ 2

$ 4

$ 6

$ 8

$ 10

$ 12

$ 14

$ 16

Jan

2016

Apr

201

6

Jul 2

016

Oct

201

6

Jan

2017

Apr

201

7

Jul 2

017

Oct

201

7

Jan

2018

Apr

201

8

Jul 2

018

Oct

201

8

Jan

2019

Apr

201

9

Jul 2

019JKM Brent Newcastle

Latent LNG demand from fuel substitution There is substantial latent demand for LNG, which is competitive with oil prices and cleaner than coal

Source: ICE via Marketview, BP Statistical Review, Oxford Energy Institute Tellurian analysis. Notes: (1) Newcastle coal includes a $15 per tonne shipping fee and is heat rate adjusted.

(2) Assumes a 7,800 average heat rate for global gas-fired power plants. (3) Includes Central America, Europe, Middle East, and Asian markets.

16

LNG prices trade between oil and coal prices ~1,359 mtpa LNG equivalent latent LNG demand

Gas is cheaper than oil Gas is cleaner than coal

Coal-to-gas switching point

(1)

(2)

(3)

Natural gas demand linked to renewables

Source: UK Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy (2019), Lazard.

17

Natural gas share in UK’s power mix grew to ~50% as higher CO2 prices incentivized dispatch of cleaner fuels

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

mtoeUK power generation by fuel

Coal Oil Gas Nuclear Hydro (natural flow) Wind Solar

0 100 200

Gas CCGT

Nuclear

Coal

PV Rooftop

PV Utility scale

Wind

Levelized cost ($/MWh)

Unsubsidized levelized cost of energy (LCOE)

Gas-fired power generation is a cleaner, more affordable, and reliable backup to renewables

LNG required to offset Groningen declines

Global LNG

Netherlands capping production from the Groningen field requires ~10 mtpa of LNG

Source: NAM, Energy Aspects.

18

Gas fieldsEarthquakes

54

42

28 28 24 22

15 12 12 12

8 4 3

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

bcm Groningen yearly production

Netherlands

Mandated production cap

Forecast

$-

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

- 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

GDP/capita

Emerging consumption: China and IndiaPopulation and economic growth imply significant upside to gas consumption in China and India

Sources: IHS Markit, SIA Energy, EIA, CIA World Factbook, BP Energy Outlook.

19

China7 mcf/capita

India2 mmcf/capita

United States87 mcf/capita

Size indicates relative volume of gas consumed per capita in 2018 (mcf/capita)

Argentina38 mcf/capita

Natural gas’ share of 2018 energy mix

6% 7%

23%31%

49%

India China EU U.S. Argentina

European Union38 mcf/capita

Population (millions)

203

330 391

74

108

120

2018 2025 2030

Growing demand in China Economic growth and emerging environmental policy drives demand growth

Source: SIA.

20

277

438

510

LNG

Domestic production & pipeline imports

Chinese gas demandbillion cubic meters per year

6.1% CAGR (2018-2030)

4.5% CAGR (2018-2030)

668721

751777

830 850 868

26

29

3034

3940

42

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Number of importing countriesGlobal regascapacity (mtpa)

Growing number of importers accessing LNGThe number of LNG importing nations has grown by ~60% in the last 7 years

Source: GIIGNL, IGU (2019), IHS Markit.Notes: Includes Lampung, Nusantara, and Tanjung Benoa (all in Indonesia) and Northeast Gateway (United States).

21

33 total floating storage and regasification units (FSRUs) represent ~130

mtpa of global regasification capacity as

of May 2019

New demand from LNG bunkering

LNG offers shippers a smart way to meet existingand upcoming maritime emissions regulations

LNG bunkering expected to grow substantially over the long term as marine and transportsectors seek a cleaner fuel alternative― Unlike conventional marine fuels, LNG emits

near-trace levels of SOx, NOx, and PM

Total addressable market of 170 mtpa, based on today’s global marine fuel oil consumption

Over 120 LNG-fueled vessels already in operation, with over 130 on order or under construction

Cleaner burning LNG is becoming more popular as a fuel for marine vessels for IMO 2020

Sources: OIES 2018, DNV-GL.

22

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2025 2030 2035 2040

mtpa Comparison of LNG bunkering forecasts

IEA Sustainable Development IEA New PoliciesENGIE/PWC Lloyds Register maxWood Mackenzie

Physical and financial liquidity is growingFinancial derivatives Physical liquidity

Sources: Platts, GIIGNL.

23

59.2 65.0

69.6 68.4 74.6

77.6

99.3

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Spot and short-term LNG trade

Total trade (mtpa)Share of total trade (%)

25%28%

28%29%28%

27%

32%

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 YTD2019

JKM futures traded (10,000 mmBtu/lot)Lots

2019 annualized JKM swapsJKM swaps

Mtpa LNG equivalent 0.06 0.08 0.35 0.58 2.60 9.62 35.2 41.1

U.S. emerges as the world’s largest LNG exporterBased on firm capacity

Source: Wood Mackenzie, Tellurian Research. Notes: Includes existing and under construction projects.

24

Triangle of low-cost supply

30.6

88.8

77.8

Current capacity (mtpa) (producing and under

construction)

92.4

Current LNG buildout has experienced cost overruns Announced total capex cost increases for selected Australia and Papua New Guinea projects

Announced liquefaction EPC cost increases for selected existing and under-construction U.S. projects

Source: IHS Markit, Tellurian Research.

25

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000

Queensland Curtis LNG T1-2

Pluto LNG T1

GLNG T1-2

PNG LNG T1-2

APLNG T1-2

Gorgon LNG T1-3

Wheatstone LNG T1-2

Ichthys LNG T1-2

Total capital costs ($ per tonne)

Cost at FID Cost increase

– 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000

Sabine Pass LNG T3-4

Sabine Pass T1-2

Corpus Christi LNG T3

Sabine Pass LNG T5

Corpus Christi LNG T1-2

Freeport LNG T3

Freeport LNG T1-2

Cameron LNG T1-3

Cove Point LNG

Golden Pass LNG

Total capital costs ($ per tonne)

Estimated sunk regas costs Cost at FID Cost increase

Natural gas and LNG

To:1 billion cubic meters of natural gas (bcm)

1 billion cubic feet of natural gas (bcf)

1 million metric tonnes LNG (mt)

1 trillion British thermal units (tBtu)

1 million tonnesof oil equivalent (mtoe)

From Multiply by1 billion cubic meters of natural gas(bcm) 1 35.3 0.72 35.7 0.9

1 billion cubic feet of natural gas (bcf) 0.028 1 0.021 1.01 0.025

1 million tonnes LNG(mt) 1.38 48.7* 1 52 1.22

1 trillion British thermal units (mmBtu) 0.028 0.99 0.019 1 0.025

1 million tonnes of oil equivalent (mtoe) 1.11 39.2 0.82 39.7 1

Conversion factors

Conversion factors26

*includes 6.3% losses in transportation for international LNG trade

1 MWh = 3,412 mmBtu = 3.412 mmcf