26 July 2026 Operating today: ~17 MTPA • New capacity pipeline: ~61 MTPA Evolution: Purpose-built → Barge-based → LNG Carrier Conversion → Deepwater Expansion → Standardised Multi-FLNG Export Hubs Generation I – Purpose-built FLNG 🇲🇾 PFLNG Satu (Malaysia, 2017) — 1.2 MTPA First commercial FLNG. Generation II – Barge-based FLNG 🇦🇷🇨🇬 Tango FLNG (Argentina, 2019 → Republic of Congo, 2023) — 0.5–0.6 MTPA First commercial deployment in Argentina (2019). First commercially re

23 July 2026 Low-cost pioneers → Scale-up → CAPEX inflation → A new optimisation phase Over six decades, LNG plant CAPEX has traced an inverted U-curve. $140/tpa (1964) — small, simple first-generation LNG plants. $2,500/tpa (2016) — Australian megaprojects set the CAPEX record. $610/tpa (2026/27) — North Field East sets today's lowest publicly comparable benchmark for world-scale LNG plants. CAPEX evolution 🔹 1964–1983 | Low-cost pioneers Smaller trains, mature locations an

10 September 2026 Evolution: Oil → Gas → LNG → Power → Power for AI Key Points $1.8tn — contracted future business $700bn+ — planned CAPEX (2026) 17 GW — AI data-centre capacity delivery gap $1.8 Trillion — Contracted Future Business $678bn — Microsoft $638bn — Oracle $514bn — Google Cloud [1–3] $700+ Billion — Planned CAPEX in 2026 $200bn+ — Amazon $200bn — Alphabet $175bn — Microsoft $130–145bn — Meta [4] 85 GW — In Development (458 Facilities) 24 GW — fully secured 68 G

8 September 2026 LNG: Modular vs Stick-Built? Modular is favoured at remote sites with limited labour, infrastructure and supply access. Key Points CAPEX 🟢 ↓ Potential saving: 5–10% (1) Project Duration 🟢 ↓ Up to 20% shorter (2) Overall Plant Weight 🔴 ↑ 20% higher (3) Modular Advantages Site Construction Hours 🟢 ↓ Less on-site work Camp Cost 🟢 ↓ 41% lower (3) Fabrication-Yard Productivity 🟢 ↑ 25–30% higher (1) Fabrication Cost 🟢 ↓ 28% lower (3) Weather: Reduced site ex

19 August 2026 Capacity balance: Regasification vs Liquefaction — 2.1× → 0.9×. Why? 2025: Liquefaction capacity 525 MTPA vs regasification capacity 1,114 MTPA — 2.1× Future additions: Liquefaction capacity 250 MTPA vs regasification capacity 230 MTPA — 0.9× Projects: 94 MTPA | 25 projects Under construction: 64 MTPA — 14 projects Advanced pre-FID: 25 MTPA — 8 projects Early-stage concepts: 5+ MTPA — 3 projects Innovations Phased terminal development Shared port and pipeline i

28 August 2026 FSRU vs Onshore → Flexibility vs Scale CAPEX Advantage: ~25% FSRU: $130/tpa | 155K m³ storage | 7 buffer days Onshore: $210/tpa | 830K m³ storage | 10 buffer days FSRU or Onshore? FSRU advantages: Fast-track Redeployment Charter option Onshore advantages: Lower weather-related operating exposure Larger scalable capacity Phased expansion — tanks, regasification trains and berths Lower OPEX — no vessel crewing, classification surveys, periodic drydocking or towag

14 August 2026 Onshore Gas Pipeline CAPEX (2005–2030) Key facts: • Conventional: $4.5M/km (15 projects) • Mountains: $15.1M/km (4 projects) • Arctic/Sub-Arctic: $7.9M/km (4 projects) Conventional 🇺🇸 2008 — Southeast Supply Header | 435 km | 42″ | $3.6M/km 🇺🇸 2009 — Gulf Crossing | 568 km | 42″ | $3.0M/km 🇺🇸 2011 — Tiger Pipeline | 282 km | 42″ | $5.5M/km 🇺🇸 2011 — Fayetteville Express | 301 km | 42″ | $4.8M/km 🇺🇸 2017 — Trans-Pecos + Comanche Trail | 544 km comb