Cheniere Energy, Inc. · NYSE:LNG

Cheniere Energy — Investor Day (April 2015)

137 slides from Cheniere Energy's investor day presentation, Apr 8, 2015

1. Slide 1: 2015 Cheniere Energy Investor / Analyst Day

   April 8, 2015 2015 Cheniere Energy Investor / Analyst Day

2. Slide 2: Forward Looking Statements

   Forward Looking Statements 2 This presentation contains certain statements that are, or may be deemed to be, “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, o

3. Slide 3: Welcome & Introduction

   Charif Souki – Chairman, President, and CEO Welcome & Introduction

4. Slide 4: Executing on Strategy

   Executing on Strategy 2020 Forecast 2 Scalable, industry- leading platform $30B+ ~40.5 mtpa LNG by 2019/20 One of the largest natural gas buyers in the U.S. ~6 Bcf/d Supporting over 125,000 indirect jobs ~950 permanent jobs created One of the largest exporters of LNG on a global basis ~10% of the to

5. Slide 5: Cheniere's Key Businesses

   Cheniere’s Key Businesses  Two LNG terminals to be located along Gulf of Mexico  ~40.5 mtpa planned  Scalable platform  Underpinned by long-term contracts, competitive capital costs  LNG sales, FOB or DES, provided to customers on a short, mid, and long-term basis  >8 mtpa LNG volumes expected

6. Slide 6: 2014 Accomplishments

   2014 Accomplishments  Commercial • Signed long-term SPAs covering ~7.7mtpa of LNG volumes – Aggregate volumes covered under 20-year contracts now over ~28mtpa  Regulatory • FERC permit received for Corpus Christi Liquefaction Project • EA received on Sabine Pass Trains 5 & 6  Financing • Debt and

7. Slide 7: 2015 Goals

   2015 Goals  First LNG at Sabine Pass by year-end  Contract additional volumes to reach ~31.8 mtpa target; ~80% of capacity (~28 mtpa signed to date)  Reach FID and commence construction on: • Corpus Christi Trains 1&2 1H 2015 • Sabine Pass Train 5 1H 2015 • Corpus Christi Train 3 and Sabine Pass

8. Slide 8: Cheniere Vision

   Cheniere Vision Diversify into new energy-related businesses through a horizontal and vertical integration strategy 6 There are no “pure-plays” Create shareholder value, with focus on cash flow per share

9. Slide 9: Energy Fundamentals Outlook

   Anatol Feygin – Senior Vice President, Strategy & Corporate Development Energy Fundamentals Outlook

10. Slide 10: Durable Fundamental Trends

    Durable Fundamental Trends  What Hasn’t Changed • Global hydrocarbon demand is expected to exhibit stable growth  What Has Changed • Unconventional supply, driven by the U.S., transforming global balances • A new hydrocarbon world order  What This Means For Cheniere • This revolution is in Chenie

11. Slide 11: Global Gas and Liquids Fundamentals Overview

    Global Gas and Liquids Fundamentals Overview  U.S. transforming global hydrocarbon balances • Global demand growth steady with no major shift in expectations • Driven by Texas, Lower 48 seeing unprecedented hydrocarbon output growth • Production at sufficient scale to tip global supply and demand b

12. Slide 12: Gas & Liquids Demand Growth Expectations Remain Steady

    -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2015 2025 2035 B cf /d Avg = 7 Bcf/d = Forecast Gas & Liquids Demand Growth Expectations Remain Steady  Gas demand growth is faster than any other hydrocarbon at +1.6% p.a. • LNG demand is growing even faster  Oil demand growth fueled by no

13. Slide 13: Shale Revolution Reversed Trend in U.S. Gas Supply

    Shale Revolution Reversed Trend in U.S. Gas Supply 5 Source: EIA, LCI Consulting 1. Pre-shrink U.S. Gross Gas Production1 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 B cf /d Conventional Production Shale Production 2000-2006: -3% 2007-2

14. Slide 14: U.S. Stands Alone as Unconventional Hydrocarbon Producer

    U.S. Stands Alone as Unconventional Hydrocarbon Producer 6 Technically Recoverable Shale Gas Resources (Tcf) Total Shale Wells Drilled as of June 2014 U.S. 1,161 >100,000 China 1,115 >200 Argentina 802 >200 Algeria 707 0 Canada 573 >20,000 Mexico 545 <20 Australia 437 ~40 S. Africa 390 0 Russia 285

15. Slide 15: Shale Has Created Similar Expansion in Oil Supply

    And Now Shale Has Created Similar Expansion in Oil Supply 7 Global +6.32Mbpd U.S. +4.76Mbpd 85 90 95 100 105 110 2010 2020 2025 2030 2035 M ill io n bp d Oil Supply Growth Forecasts WEO 2011 WEO 2014 0 5 10 15 Saudi Arabia Russia US Ex-Texas Texas China Canada UAE Iraq Brazil Iran Global Production

16. Slide 16: Supply Growth Affecting Global Markets by Displacing Imports

    Supply Growth Affecting Global Markets by Displacing Imports  Reached world markets first by displacing imports  Crude follows natural gas, propane narrative • Imports decline • Domestic inventories swell • Necessitates new markets • Exports triggered by robust supply 8 Source: EIA 0 100 200 300 4

17. Slide 17: Price Elastic U.S. Drives Cyclical Volatility

    Price Elastic U.S. Drives Cyclical Volatility 9  U.S. drillers slashed capex by $56B from 2014 • Canadians -$19B year-over-year  More than 50 companies announced initial cuts, then restated deeper cuts in early 2015  Reductions intensified in early 2015  Weighted average reduction of 31% from 20

18. Slide 18: Swing Producer U.S. Reacts, Rest of the World Does Not

    Swing Producer U.S. Reacts, Rest of the World Does Not 10 $0 $25 $50 $75 $100 $125 $150 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 1997 2000 2003 2006 2009 2012 2015 Rig Activity Vs. Brent Price Brent U.S. Rigs International Rigs 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 US Crude Production Wedge Growi

19. Slide 19: Global Fundamentals Support Continued Growth of Exports

    Global Fundamentals Support Continued Growth of Exports  Stable global demand growth for energy expected to continue  The U.S./Texas is the low cost incremental producer  Displacement of imports has largely played out  We believe continued growth in U.S. exports is required to efficiently rebala

20. Slide 20: What Do These Three Have In Common?

    What Do These Three Have In Common?  § 754 of the Bureau of Industry and Security’s Export Administration Regulations  Exports of crude significantly restricted since mid-1970s  Few exclusions apply—Alaskan Cook Inlet crude, some California heavies, SPR  Exports to Canada for consumption there i

21. Slide 21: Optimally Positioned to Address Constraints Across the Hydrocarbon Chain

    Cheniere Optimally Positioned to Address Constraints Across the Hydrocarbon Chain 13 Downstream logistics and market development Regasification Power Plants Liquids Logistics Upstream logistics and hydrocarbon capture Texas Supply Midstream Pipelines Storage Sabine Pass Liquefaction Corpus Christi L

22. Slide 22: LNG Platform Update

    Keith Teague – Executive Vice President, Asset Group LNG Platform Update

23. Slide 23: Cheniere LNG Platform

    Cheniere LNG Platform Sabine Pass Liquefaction TX LA Creole Trail PL Sabine Pass Liquefaction • 6 train development – 27 mtpa ~3.8 Bcf/d in export capacity • Trains 1-4 are under construction; First LNG in late 2015 • Trains 5-6 under development; FID expected 2015 Corpus Christi Liquefaction • 3 tr

24. Slide 24: Sabine Pass Liquefaction Brownfield LNG Export Project

    Sabine Pass Liquefaction –– Brownfield LNG Export Project Utilizes Existing Assets, Trains 1-4 Fully Contracted, Under Construction 3 Significant infrastructure in place including storage, marine and pipeline interconnection facilities; pipeline quality natural gas to be sourced from U.S. pipeline n

25. Slide 25: LSTK EPC Contracts with Bechtel Minimize Construction Costs and Risks

    LSTK EPC Contracts with Bechtel Minimize Construction Costs and Risks Hoover Dam Hong Kong Int’l Airport San Francisco Rapid Transit Source: Bechtel. Bechtel was the EPC contractor for the regasification project at the Sabine Pass LNG terminal, which was constructed on time and on budget Proven cons

26. Slide 26: Aerial View of SPLNG – Spring 2012

    Aerial View of SPLNG – Spring 2012

27. Slide 27: Aerial View of SPL Construction – March 2015

    Aerial View of SPL Construction – March 2015 6

28. Slide 28: Project Execution – Spring 2014

    Project Execution – Spring 2014

29. Slide 29: Project Execution – Spring 2015

    Project Execution – Spring 2015

30. Slide 30: Project Execution – Spring 2015

    Project Execution – Spring 2015 Train 1 Train 2 Train 3 Train 4 Air Coolers Compressor Area Propane Condenser Area T1 Ethylene Cold Box T1 Methane Cold Box T2 Ethylene Cold Box T2 Methane Cold Box

31. Slide 31: SPL Construction Completion Schedules

    SPL Construction Completion Schedules Trains 1 – 4 Stage 1 (Trains 1&2) overall project progress as of Feb 2015 is 85.4% complete vs. Target Plan of 85.8%: • Engineering, Procurement, Subcontracts and Construction are 100%, 100%, 61.8% and 69.2% complete against Target Plan of 99.5%, 97.8%, 64.8% an

32. Slide 32: SPL – Construction Manpower

    SPL – Construction Manpower 11 Over 31 million construction man hours; $1.7 billion in construction wages Train 1 – 4 Workforce peaking on site now at ~4,400

33. Slide 33: SPL – Craft Labor Incentive

    SPL – Craft Labor Incentive 12

34. Slide 34: Sabine Pass Liquefaction Project Execution Keys to Success

    Sabine Pass Liquefaction Project Execution Keys to Success  World class terminal site • Deep channel in close proximity to the coast • Sufficient acreage to satisfy siting challenges, both regulatory and physical  World class contractor • Bechtel has constructed one third of the world’s liquefacti

35. Slide 35: Corpus Christi Liquefaction Project

    Corpus Christi Liquefaction Project 14 Proposed 3 Train Facility  >1,000 acres owned and/or controlled  2 berths, 3 LNG storage tanks (~10.1 Bcfe of storage) Key Project Attributes  45 ft. ship channel 13.7 miles from coast  Protected berth  Premier Site Conditions • Established industrial zone

36. Slide 36: Key Differences Between CCL and SPL

    Key Differences Between CCL and SPL  Grassroots construction at CCL; SPL utilizes existing assets at the regasification terminal  Full containment LNG storage tanks at CCL instead of single containment  Dry low emissions (DLE) combustors on refrigeration gas turbines rather than water injection (

37. Slide 37: Corpus Christi Liquefaction – Artist's Rendition

    Corpus Christi Liquefaction – Artist’s Rendition Lump Sum Turnkey contracts signed with Bechtel:  Stage 1: ~$7.1B includes 2 Trains, 2 tanks, 1 berth  Stage 2: ~$2.4B includes 1 Train, 1 tank, 1 berth 16

38. Slide 38: CCL – EPC Contract Summary

    CCL – EPC Contract Summary Stage 1 Stage 2 Contract Price  $7.1 billion  $2.4 billion Scope  Two LNG trains  Two storage tanks  One marine berth  Most offsites, utilities, and supporting infrastructure for three LNG Trains  One LNG train  One storage tank  One marine berth Payment  15% of

39. Slide 39: Projected CCL Construction Completion Schedules Trains 1-3

    2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 Projected CCL Construction Completion Schedules Trains 1-3 18 Note: See “Forward Looking St

40. Slide 40: CCL Early Works – Access Road Widening & Pipeline Relocation

    CCL Early Works – Access Road Widening & Pipeline Relocation 19 1

41. Slide 41: CCL Liquefaction Area – Artist's Rendition

    CCL Liquefaction Area – Artist’s Rendition 20

42. Slide 42: CCL Storage Area & Train – Artist's Rendition

    CCL Storage Area & Train 1 – Artist’s Rendition 21

43. Slide 43: CCL Marine Area – Artist's Rendition

    CCL Marine Area – Artist’s Rendition 22 22

44. Slide 44: Cheniere LNG Platform – Timeline & Milestones

    Cheniere LNG Platform – Timeline & Milestones Target Date SPL Corpus SPL Milestone T1-2 T3-4 Christi T5-6  Initiate permitting process (FERC & DOE)      Commercial agreements   T1-T2  T3: 2015 T5  T6: 2015  EPC contract    2015  Financing commitments    2015  Regulatory approvals

45. Slide 45: Gas Procurement

    Corey Grindal – Vice President, Supply Gas Procurement

46. Slide 46: Agenda

    Agenda  Review of 2014 Stated Gas Supply Guiding Principals  2015 Status of Sabine Pass Supply  2015 Status of Corpus Christi Supply  Balance of Calendar 2015 and Forward Supply Strategy 2

47. Slide 47: Gas Supply Group Principals

    Gas Supply Group Principals 3  Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal level – Redundant delivery capacity • Capacity contracted upstream of terminal – S

48. Slide 48: 2015 Status of Sabine Pass Supply

    2015 Status of Sabine Pass Supply 4 Artist rendition

49. Slide 49: Establish Market Liquidity

    Establish Market Liquidity NAESB Contracting 5 Completed NAESB Contracts Completed Under Negotiation Production by Counterparties with Completed NAESBs Bcf / Day Percentage of Current Production (72.5 Bcf / Day) Top 5 Producers 5 0 12.73 18% Top 10 Producers 10 0 19.64 27% Top 25 Producers 22 2 28.2

50. Slide 50: Sabine Pass Supply – Counterparty Liquidity

    Sabine Pass Supply – Counterparty Liquidity 6 Sabine Pass   Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal level – Redundant delivery capacity • Capacity contr

51. Slide 51: Sabine Pass Terminal Transportation Pipeline Capacity by Train

    - 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 Nov-15 Nov-16 Nov-17 Nov-18 Nov-19 Nov-20 FT Contracted Total Load NGPL Capacity SPL Contracted Terminal Transportation 7 Pipeline Capacity by Train Train 1 Train 2 Train 3 Train 4 Train 5 Train 6 D th /d (1)Anticipated total load per train estimat

52. Slide 52: Sabine Pass Supply – Terminal Capacity

    Sabine Pass Supply – Terminal Capacity 8 Sabine Pass    Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal level – Redundant delivery capacity • Capacity contract

53. Slide 53: Upstream Pipeline Expansions – Texas Gas

    Sabine Pass Liquefaction Upstream Pipeline Expansions – Texas Gas  Texas Gas • Almost 1 Bcf/d Contracted • Starts late 2016/ early 2017 • Contracted by Utica producers • SPL owns 300,000 Dth/d 9 Source: Lippman Consulting, Baker Hughes and Bentek, as of January 2014 Haynesville Fayetteville Lebanon

54. Slide 54: Upstream Pipeline Expansions – Columbia Gulf

    Sabine Pass Liquefaction Upstream Pipeline Expansions – Columbia Gulf  Columbia Gulf Transmission • 1.2 Bcf/d Contracted from Columbia Gas Transmission • Starts 2017 • Contracted by Marcellus/ Utica producers • SPL has contracted term purchases off of expansion capacity 10 Haynesville Fayetteville

55. Slide 55: Upstream Pipeline Expansions – ANR

    Sabine Pass Liquefaction Upstream Pipeline Expansions – ANR  ANR Pipeline • 1.2 Bcf/d Contracted • Starts 2015/ 2016 • Contracted by Marcellus/ Utica producers • SPL has contracted term purchases off of expansion capacity 11 Transco Tetco ANR Trunkline NGPL Tennessee Gas Columbia Gulf Rockies Expre

56. Slide 56: Upstream Pipeline Expansions – Texas Eastern

    Sabine Pass Liquefaction Upstream Pipeline Expansions – Texas Eastern  Texas Eastern Transmission • 3 Expansion Projects contracted • Total expansion capacity to South Louisiana is 1.7 Bcf/d • 1st Capacity started Nov 2014 • Contracted by Marcellus producers • SPL has contracted for term purchases

57. Slide 57: Upstream Pipeline Expansions – Trunkline

    Sabine Pass Liquefaction Upstream Pipeline Expansions – Trunkline  Trunkline Gas/ ETP Rover • SPL anchored first reversal • ETP Rover 3.25 Bcf/d expansion; 0.75 Bcf/d to Louisiana • Rover capacity starts 2017 • Contracted by Marcellus/ Utica producers • SPL in discussions for term supply off of Rov

58. Slide 58: Sabine Pass Supply – Upstream Capacity

    Sabine Pass Supply – Upstream Capacity 14 Sabine Pass     Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal level – Redundant delivery capacity • Capacity contr

59. Slide 59: Sabine Pass Liquefaction Term Gas Purchase Locations

    Sabine Pass Liquefaction Term Gas Purchase Locations 15 Permian Basin Barnett Granite Wash Eagle Ford Haynesville Woodford Fayetteville Marcellus / Utica Transco Tetco ANR Trunkline NGPL Tennessee Gas Columbia Gulf Rockies Express Texas Gas Shale Plays Basins Henry Hub Transco Zone 3 CTPL Gillis Tru

60. Slide 60: Term Gas Supply Deal Summary

    - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 Nov-15 May-16 Nov-16 May-17 Nov-17 May-18 Supply Contracted Total Load 65% Filled 75% Filled 65% Filled 50% Filled Sabine Pass Liquefaction Term Gas Supply Deal Summary 16 Train 1 Train 2 Train 3 Train 4 (1)Anticipated total load per train estimated at 0.65 Bcf/d

61. Slide 61: Sabine Pass Supply – Term Gas Purchases

    Sabine Pass Supply – Term Gas Purchases 17 Sabine Pass      Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal level – Redundant delivery capacity • Capacity co

62. Slide 62: Sabine Pass Supply – Gas Supply Personnel

    Sabine Pass Supply – Gas Supply Personnel  Have hired the full front office team to manage supply and logistics  Over 19 years each of average of energy experience • Trading • Infrastructure Development and Analysis • Fundamental Analysis • Meteorologist • Scheduling and Logistics  Mid and Back O

63. Slide 63: Sabine Pass Supply – Personnel

    Sabine Pass Supply – Personnel 19 Sabine Pass       Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal level – Redundant delivery capacity • Capacity contracte

64. Slide 64: 2015 Status of Corpus Christi Supply

    2015 Status of Corpus Christi Supply 20 Artist rendition

65. Slide 65: Corpus Christi Counterparty Contracting

    Corpus Christi Counterparty Contracting  Current Actions • Have contracted some “Texas-only” producers that can’t get to SPL • Replicating supply strategy executed in SPL for CCL volumes  Plan for 2015 • After achieving FID, will start similar process for obtaining NAESBs as SPL • Plan to have ach

66. Slide 66: Corpus Christi Supply - Contracting

    Corpus Christi Supply - Contracting 22 Sabine Pass Corpus Christi        Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal level – Redundant delivery capacit

67. Slide 67: Corpus Christi Pipeline (CCPL)

    Corpus Christi Pipeline (CCPL) Proposed 23 Miles of 48” Pipe, 2.25 bcf/d Deliverability, 4.5 bcf/d Interconnect Capacity 23 Corpus Christi Liquefaction Interconnect Capacity Bcf/d Tennessee 1.00 Enterprise 0.50 Transco 0.50 NGPL 0.50 KM Tejas 1.00 Channel/HPL 0.50 Southcross 0.40 Total 4.40 Sinton C

68. Slide 68: Corpus Christi Gas Supply Network

    Corpus Christi Gas Supply Network 24 Shale Plays Basins NGPL Tennessee Gas HPL KM Tejas Oasis Enterprise Permian Basin Barnett Granite Wash Eagle Ford Haynesville Marcellus / Utica Corpus Christi Woodford Source: Lippman Consulting, Baker Hughes and Bentek, as of January 2014

69. Slide 69: CCL Transportation Capacity – Upstream

    CCL Transportation Capacity – Upstream  Transportation at CCL is different than SPL • Reversals of existing infrastructure more extensive in South Texas than in South Louisiana • Goal for most capacity will be to reach out of the state • Targeting different basins and different receipt locations th

70. Slide 70: CCL Transportation Portfolio

    - 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 Nov-18 Feb-19 May-19 Aug-19 Nov-19 Feb-20 May-20 Aug-20 Done Under Negotiation Total Load CCL Transportation Portfolio 26 Pipeline Capacity by Train (1)Anticipated total load per train estimated at 0.65 Bcf/d annually Tr

71. Slide 71: CCL Transportation Capacity Connections to CCL Pipeline

    CCL Transportation Capacity Connections to CCL Pipeline  Transportation at CCL is different than SPL • Reversals of existing infrastructure more extensive in South Texas than in South Louisiana • Goal for most capacity will be to reach out of the state • Targeting different basins and different rec

72. Slide 72: Corpus Christi Supply - Capacity

    Corpus Christi Supply - Capacity  Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal level – Redundant delivery capacity • Capacity contracted upstream of terminal

73. Slide 73: CCL Term Gas Purchases

    CCL Term Gas Purchases  In discussions with producers that have gas into relevant contracted capacities  Working some capacity discussions along with term purchase discussions  With first gas expected in 2018, goal is to have some gas contracts negotiated or in place by 2016  Negotiating similar

74. Slide 74: Corpus Christi Supply – Term Supply

    Corpus Christi Supply – Term Supply 30 Sabine Pass Corpus Christi      In Process  In Process   Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal level – Re

75. Slide 75: Corpus Christi Supply – Personnel

    Corpus Christi Supply – Personnel 31 Sabine Pass Corpus Christi      In Process  In Process  In Process  Gas procurement • Cheniere to secure gas at the terminal for liquefaction  How gas procurement is achieved • Establish counterparty / market liquidity • Capacity contracted at terminal l

76. Slide 76: Cheniere Continuing Supply Strategy

    Cheniere Continuing Supply Strategy  Sabine Pass • Currently testing Creole Trail compressor station/ reversal • First test gas to terminal expected Summer 2015 • Have acquired storage to balance loads/ upsets • Plan to acquire short term upstream pipeline capacity and additional term supply opport

77. Slide 77: Cheniere Marketing

    Meg Gentle – Executive Vice President, Marketing Cheniere Marketing

78. Slide 78: 2014 Year in Review

    2014 Year in Review  Net addition to installed liquefaction capacity = 15.6 mtpa • 3 new liquefaction plants came on-line (Australia, Algeria, Papua New Guinea) • 1 liquefaction plant went off-line (Indonesia - Arun conversion)  5 new regasification plants came on-line including 3 floating  36 ve

79. Slide 79: Projected Future Changes in the LNG Market

    Projected Future Changes in the LNG Market  Steady demand growth  Three large supply centers  Shorter term contracting  Flexibility  Physical liquidity  LNG market pricing  Trading 3

80. Slide 80: Asia Pacific Gas Demand

    Asia Pacific Gas Demand LNG Terminals (Bcf/d) Existing Under Construction Planned Sources: IHS Energy (2014), Facts Global, (2014), Wood Mackenzie 2014 data is based on preliminary estimates 170 Incremental LNG Need 2025E = +18 Bcf/d Consumption 2014 = 66 Bcf/d 2025E = 102 Bcf/d LNG Import Capacity

81. Slide 81: Europe Gas Demand

    Europe Gas Demand LNG Terminals (Bcf/d) Existing Construction Proposed Sources: IEA (2014) Wood Mackenzie (2015), PFC Energy (2015), PIRA (2015) 2014 data is based on preliminary estimates 5.03 Europe-Med 2 (18) W. Europe 1 (6) U.K. 1 (7) LNG Import Capacity 2014 = 20 Bcf/d 2025E= 29 Bcf/d Consumpti

82. Slide 82: Mexico, Central, and South America Gas Demand

    Mexico, Central, and South America Gas Demand Source: BP Statistical Review 2014, IEA (2014), IHS (2015), Wood Mackenzie (2015), SENER (2015) Gas Demand (Bcf/d) Pipeline 35 30 25 15 0 2013 2025E Pipeline LNG 94% 88% 2 Bcf/d LNG Import Capacity 2013 = ~5 Bcf/d 2025E = ~8 Bcf/d Consumption 2013 = 24 B

83. Slide 83: Middle East and Africa Gas Demand

    Middle East and Africa Gas Demand LNG Terminals (Bcf/d) Existing Under Construction Planned Gas Demand (Bcf/d) Pipeline 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2013 2025E Pipeline LNG 97% 99% 2 Bcf/d 0.4 Bcf/d LNG Import Capacity 2013 = 1 Bcf/d 2025 = 5 Bcf/d Consumption 2013 = 53 Bcf/d 2025 = 69 Bcf/d Production 20

84. Slide 84: Projected Global LNG Demand

    Projected Global LNG Demand 438 mtpa by 2025 8 22 17 19 2015 2020 2025 2015 2020 2025 5 10 16 2015 2020 2025 2015 2020 2025 Americas Asia Middle East/N. Africa 186 270 314 30 63 89 Europe Source: Wood Mackenzie Q1 2015 LNG Tool (1) Assumes 85% utilization of nameplate capacity Demand forecasted to i

85. Slide 85: Projected Firm Liquefaction Capacity Additions

    Projected Firm Liquefaction Capacity Additions (mtpa) 9 Source: Cheniere Research Nameplate Liquefaction Capacity ~ 304 mtpa as of YE 2014 ~ 427 mtpa by YE 2020 Asia Pacific Atlantic Basin SPL T1, Gorgon T1, Gladstone T1, Donggi LNG Gorgon T3, Wheatstone T1 APLNG T2, PFLNG 1, MLNG Tiga T9 Wheatstone

86. Slide 86: Additional Liquefaction FID – Which Ones?

    Need 100 mtpa of Additional Liquefaction FID – which ones? 10 Source: Cheniere Research, company disclosures Project Country mtpa Targeted FID date Corpus LNG T1-3 USA 13.5 2015 Sabine T5-6 USA 9.0 2015 Freeport T3 USA 4.4 2015 Jordan Cove USA 6.0 2015 Elba Island USA 2.5 2015 Kitimat LNG Canada 9.3

87. Slide 87: Prompt Month Brent Volatility Increased by 150%

    Prompt Month Brent Volatility Increased by 150% 11 Term structures of implied volatilities as of 25/03/2015 Source: Bloomberg 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1M 2M 3M 6M 9M 1Y 18M 2Y 3Y 4Y 5Y 7Y 10Y % Brent – Implied Volatility Today 6 months ago 1 year ago 2 years ago

88. Slide 88: Brent: Mean Reversion $75 - $95 / Bbl

    Brent: Mean Reversion $75 - $95 / Bbl 12 Source: Bloomberg $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100 $110 $120 $130 $140 O ct -0 9 A pr -1 0 O ct -1 0 A pr -1 1 O ct -1 1 A pr -1 2 O ct -1 2 M ar -1 3 Se p- 13 M ar -1 4 Se p- 14 M ar -1 5 Se p- 15 M ar -1 6 Se p- 16 M ar -1 7 Se p- 17 M ar -1 8 Se p- 18 Fe b- 19

89. Slide 89: Prompt Month HH Volatility Increased by 35%

    Prompt Month HH Volatility Increased by 35% 13 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 1M 2M 3M 6M 9M 1Y 18M 2Y 3Y 4Y 5Y 7Y 10Y % Henry Hub – Implied Volatility Today 6 months ago 1 year ago 2 years ago Term structures of implied volatilities as of 25/03/2015 Source: Bloomberg

90. Slide 90: HH: Falling Forward Curve Reflects Supply Expectations

    HH: Falling Forward Curve Reflects Supply Expectations 14 Source: Bloomberg $0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 $8 O ct -0 9 A pr -1 0 O ct -1 0 A pr -1 1 O ct -1 1 A pr -1 2 O ct -1 2 M ar -1 3 Se p- 13 M ar -1 4 Se p- 14 M ar -1 5 Se p- 15 M ar -1 6 Se p- 16 M ar -1 7 Se p- 17 M ar -1 8 Se p- 18 Fe b- 19 A ug

91. Slide 91: HH Index + Fixed Price is less volatile than Brent index

    HH Index + Fixed Price is less volatile than Brent index 15 Source: Bloomberg; Cheniere $6.88 $8.23 $9.57 $10.91 $12.26 $13.60 $14.94 $16.29 $17.63 $18.97 $/mmBtu Distribution of HH Indexed LNG and Brent Indexed LNG assuming equivalent means and current implied volatility 14.5%*Brent = Mean:11.6, St

92. Slide 92: Non Long-Term LNG Trade Increasing

    Non Long-Term LNG Trade Increasing 16 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 MTPA 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 0 % SHARE 1995 1999 2003 2007 2011 Non Long-Term LNG % of Total LNG Trade (right axis) Source: IGU LNG Report 2014

93. Slide 93: Contracted LNG to Expire 2018 – 2020

    37 mtpa of Contracted LNG to Expire 2018 – 2020 17 Source: Cheniere Research estimates based on public disclosures and some assumptions on contract start and end dates.

94. Slide 94: Shorter Term Contracting – Increasing Liquidity

    Shorter Term Contracting – Increasing Liquidity mtpa 2025 Demand Forecast 438 2013 Non Long-Term LNG Trade 77 Expiring LNG Contracts 127 U.S. Supply 100 Total 304 Total Flexible LNG as a % of Demand 69% 18 Sources: IGU, Woodmac, Cheniere Research Before 2025, over 2/3 of LNG trade expected to be bas

95. Slide 95: Global Natural Gas Market Hubs

    Global Natural Gas Market Hubs 19 ~95 traded hubs and transits in the U.S. & Canada NBP ? ? ? Europe rapidly transitioning to hub-based gas trading Asia ? Successful trading hubs - evolved from creating liquidity and diversification Henry Hub

96. Slide 96: HH v Brent v NBP: Financial Liquidity Comparison

    HH v Brent v NBP: Financial Liquidity Comparison 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 M A Y 15 JU L 15 SEP 15 N O V 15 JA N 16 M A R 16 M A Y 16 JU L 16 SEP 16 N O V 16 JA N 17 M A R 17 M A Y 17 JU L 17 SEP 17 N O V 17 JA N 18 M A R 18 M A Y 18 JU L 18 SEP 18 N O V 18 JA N 19 M A R 19 M A Y 19 JU L 19 S

97. Slide 97: Portfolio Summary

    Portfolio Summary (mtpa) 21 Planned Total Portfolio, 9 Trains 40.5 Financing Strategy (Long term FOB Sales) 31.8 Sold to date 28.2 Remaining 3.6 Marketing Strategy (Delivered to Market) 8.7 Long Term 2.9 Medium Term 2.9 Short Term & Spot 2.9

98. Slide 98: Financing Strategy - Long term FOB Sales

    Financing Strategy - Long term FOB Sales (28 mtpa sold) 22 383 1.5 2.25 0.76 0.85 0.77 0.77 BG GAIL Kogas Total Centrica Pertamina Endesa Iberdrola Woodside EDF EDP 5.5 3.5 3.5 2.0 1.75 Contracted with Sabine Pass (mtpa) Contracted with Corpus Christi (mtpa) Gas Nat 1.5 3.5 5.0 mtpa Sabine Pass Corp

99. Slide 99: Cheniere Marketing: Building a Portfolio

    Cheniere Marketing: Building a Portfolio Up to 9 mtpa to be delivered to market plus additional positions & assets 23 Call options at Henry Hub Index to begin in 2016 Put options at Isle of Grain until 2022 5 year time charters on 3 LNG vessels to begin in 2015 and 2016 Regas assets in Chile FID pen

100. Slide 100: Annual Gross Profit from Marketing Portfolio

     Annual Gross Profit from 2 mtpa 24 Assumptions  $5 Henry Hub Price  $15 LNG sales price, delivered at terminal  6% loss of gas on the vessel  Cheniere vessels: $84,000 per day average charter rate  Port / Canal costs: $900,000 per voyage  1 incremental vessel needed at $100,000 per day  Finan

101. Slide 101: Price Sensitivities

     Price Sensitivities 25 Observations  The intrinsic value of 104 million MMBtu of LNG from Sabine Pass is ~$700 million  Trading activity could add an additional 10-25% extrinsic value  A 10% change in the LNG sales price causes a 21% change in the gross margin  A 10% change in the Henry Hub Pric

102. Slide 102: Current Futures Prices Support $3.25 / MMBtu Intrinsic Margin

     Current Futures Prices Support $3.25 / MMBtu Intrinsic Margin  $6.00/MMBtu – gross margins realized from purchasing LNG at 115% of HH and selling at 15% of Brent  $ 3.25/MMBtu – intrinsic margins net of shipping, boil-off & fuel to Asia 26 $- $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $- $2 $4 $6 $8 $10

103. Slide 103: Conclusions

     Conclusions  Projected steady demand growth supports long term contracting • Estimated an average of 21 mtpa new LNG needed each year • ~$21 - $42 BN / year of capital @ $1,000 - $2,000 / ton • Long term contracts support infrastructure investment • Cheniere offering 3.6 mtpa for 20 year contractin

104. Slide 104: Finance Update

     Michael Wortley – Chief Financial Officer Finance Update

105. Slide 105: Global Economic Growth Key LNG Demand Driver

     0 50 100 150 200 250 $0.00 $20.00 $40.00 $60.00 $80.00 $100.00 $120.00 $140.00 G lo ba l L N G D em an d (m m tp a) Average Annual Brent Crude Price (2010$/bbl) 0 50 100 150 200 250 0 20 40 60 80 G lo ba l L N G D em an d (m m tp a) Global Real GDP (2010$ Tn) 1980-2014 Demand CAGRs LNG 10% Natural G

106. Slide 106: Low Cost and Flexible Incremental LNG Supply Source

     $9.5 $12.0 $14.0 $14.5 $13.0$11.5 $13.0 $16.0 $17.0 $18.5 $5 $10 $15 $20 Cheniere Gulf Coast West Africa Western Canada Northwest Australia East Africa Southeast Asia LN G p ri ce s ($ /M M B tu ) Cheniere Provides a Low Cost and Flexible Incremental LNG Supply Source  At $4.00/MMBtu Henry Hub, Che

107. Slide 107: Financing Strategy Update

     Financing Strategy Update  Trains 1-2: project ~85.4% complete (Feb 2015)  Trains 3-4: project ~59.8% complete (Feb 2015)  Spent ~$8.2 billion of ~$13 billion budgeted (Feb 2015) 4 SPL Project Trains 1-4 CCL Project Trains 1-2 SPL Train 5 2015 Financing Plan Long Term Financing Plan  FID imminen

108. Slide 108: Summary Organizational Structure

     Summary Organizational Structure Cheniere Energy, Inc. (NYSE MKT: LNG) Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. (NYSE MKT: CQP) Sabine Pass LNG, L.P. (SPLNG) Total TUA (1 Bcf/d) Chevron TUA (1 Bcf/d) SPL TUA (2 Bcf/d) Sr Secured Notes  $1,666 due 2016 (7.50%)  $420 due 2020 (6.50%) ($ in millions) Cheniere

109. Slide 109: CEI EBITDA Build Up – SPL Trains 1-4

     CEI EBITDA build up ($ in billions, unless otherwise noted) SPL Trains 1-4 CQH distributions (1) $0.4 CQP GP and IDR distributions 0.4 Management fees 0.1 CMI profit share (after SPA payment) 0.1 - 0.4 CEI revenues $1.0 - $1.3 Less: G&A (0.2) CEI EBITDA $0.8 - $1.1 CEI pre-tax cash flow(2) $0.7 - $1

110. Slide 110: Corpus Christi Liquefaction Trains 1-2

     Corpus Christi Liquefaction Trains 1-2 7 Corpus Christi Liquefaction Trains 1-2 Estimates Design production capacity is expected to be ~4.5 MTPA per train, using ConocoPhillips’ Optimized Cascade® Process. CEI CCH / CCL (Trains 1-2) LNG Customers Project Lenders ~$8.4 billion funded during construct

111. Slide 111: Sabine Pass Liquefaction Train 5

     Sabine Pass Liquefaction Train 5 8 Sabine Pass Liquefaction Train 5 Estimates Equity SPL Train 5 LNG customers Project Lenders ~$3.5 billion ~$1 billion Note: Final investment decision dependent on completion of various regulatory, financing and commercial milestones. (1) Includes expected EPC and o

112. Slide 112: CEI EBITDA Build Up – SPL T5, CCL T1-2

     CEI EBITDA build up ($ in billions, except per unit amounts or unless otherwise noted) + SPL T5, CCL T1-2 SPL T1-5, CCL T1-2 CQH distributions(1) +$0.1 $0.5 CQP GP and IDR distributions +0.1 0.5 Management fees +0.0 0.1 CMI profit (after SPA payment) +0.1 - 0.4 0.2 - 0.9 CCL Trains 1-2 EBITDA +1.3 1

113. Slide 113: Estimated CEI EBITDA Build Up SPL Trains 1-5 and CCL Trains 1-2

     $1.7 $0.7 $0.6 $1.7 $0.7 $0.6 $2.4 - $3.0 $2.4 - $3.0 – $1.0 $2.0 $3.0 $4.0 $5.0 $6.0 $7.0 CE I E B IT D A ( $ in b ill io ns ) Estimated CEI EBITDA Build Up SPL Trains 1-5 and CCL Trains 1-2 10 Number of trains 7 trains Nameplate capacity 31.5 MTPA Long term SPA volumes 27.4 MTPA CMI portfolio volu

114. Slide 114: Corpus Christi Liquefaction Train 3

     Corpus Christi Liquefaction Train 3 11 Corpus Christi Liquefaction Train 3 Estimates Design production capacity is expected to be ~4.5 MTPA per train, using ConocoPhillips’ Optimized Cascade® Process. CCL Train 3 Target FID date H2 2015 Capex estimate(1) ~$4 billion Project equity (EIG equity contri

115. Slide 115: CEI EBITDA Build Up – CCL T3

     CEI EBITDA build up ($ in billions, except per unit amounts or unless otherwise noted) + CCL T3 SPL T1-5, CCL T1-3 CQH distributions(1) – $0.5 CQP GP and IDR distributions – 0.5 Management fees +0.0 0.1 CMI profit (after SPA payment) +0.1 - 0.3 0.3 - 1.2 CCL Trains 1-3 EBITDA +0.7 2.0 CEI revenues +

116. Slide 116: Estimated CEI EBITDA Build Up SPL Trains 1-5 and CCL Trains 1-3

     $1.7 $0.7 $0.6 $0.4 $0.4 $0.3 $2.1 $1.1 $0.9 $2.4 - $3.0 $0.8 - $1.0 $3.2 - $4.1 – $1.0 $2.0 $3.0 $4.0 $5.0 $6.0 $7.0 CE I E B IT D A ( $ in b ill io ns ) Estimated CEI EBITDA Build Up SPL Trains 1-5 and CCL Trains 1-3 13 Number of trains 7 trains 8 trains Nameplate capacity 31.5 MTPA 36.0 MTPA Long

117. Slide 117: Sabine Pass Liquefaction Train 6

     Sabine Pass Liquefaction Train 6 14 Sabine Pass Liquefaction Train 6 Estimates Design production capacity is expected to be ~4.5 MTPA, using ConocoPhillips’ Optimized Cascade® Process. SPL Train 6 Target FID date H2 2015 Capex estimate(1) ~$3 billion Project equity (operating cash flow or public cap

118. Slide 118: CEI EBITDA Build Up – SPL T6

     CEI EBITDA build up ($ in billions, except per unit amounts or unless otherwise noted) + SPL T6 SPL T1-6, CCL T1-3 CQH distributions(1) +$0.1 $0.6 CQP GP and IDR distributions +0.3 0.8 Management fees +0.0 0.1 CMI profit (after SPA payment) +0.2 - 0.6 0.5 - 1.8 CCL Trains 1-3 EBITDA – 2.0 CEI revenu

119. Slide 119: Estimated CEI EBITDA Build Up SPL Trains 1-6 and CCL Trains 1-3

     $1.7 $0.7 $0.6 $0.4 $0.4 $0.3 $0.1 $0.4 $0.5 $2.2 $1.5 $1.4 $2.4 - $3.0 $0.8 - $1.0 $0.5 - $1.0 $3.7 - $5.1 – $1.0 $2.0 $3.0 $4.0 $5.0 $6.0 $7.0 CE I E B IT D A ( $ in b ill io ns ) Estimated CEI EBITDA Build Up SPL Trains 1-6 and CCL Trains 1-3 16 Number of trains 7 trains 8 trains 9 trains Namepla

120. Slide 120: Estimated CQP Distributable Cash Flow Build Up

     $2.95 $3.30 $3.65 $3.15 $3.60 $4.05 – $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00 CQ P di st ri bu ta bl e ca sh fl ow p er u ni t ($ p er u ni t) Estimated CQP Distributable Cash Flow Build Up 17 Note: Distributable cash flow (“DCF”) is a non-GAAP measure. We have not made any forecast of net income, which would be th

121. Slide 121: Estimated CQH Distributable Cash Flow Build Up

     $2.35 $2.65 $2.90 $2.50 $2.90 $3.25 – $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00 CQ H d is tr ib ut ab le c as h fl ow p er s ha re ($ p er s ha re ) Estimated CQH Distributable Cash Flow Build Up 18 SPL T1-4 SPL T1-5 SPL T1-6 Note: Distributable cash flow (“DCF”) is a non-GAAP measure. We have not made any forecast o

122. Slide 122: Additional 2-Train Expansion

     Additional 2-Train Expansion 19 Additional 2-Train Expansion Estimates Target FID date H2 2017 Capex estimate(1) ~$10 billion Project equity (Cash flow or public capital market financings ) ~$2.5 billion Project debt ~$7.5 billion Target COD 2021/2022 Target commercial assumptions 20-year “take-or-p

123. Slide 123: CEI EBITDA Build Up – Additional 2-train expansion

     CEI EBITDA build up ($ in billions, except per unit amounts or unless otherwise noted) + Add. 2-train expansion SPL T1-6, CCL T1-3, Add. 2-train exp. CQH distributions(1) – $0.6 CQP GP and IDR distributions – 0.8 Management fees +0.0 0.1 CMI profit (after SPA payment) +0.1 - 0.4 0.6 - 2.2 CCL Trains

124. Slide 124: Estimated CEI EBITDA Build Up with Additional 2-train expansion

     $1.7 $0.7 $0.6 $0.4 $0.4 $0.3 $0.1 $0.4 $0.5 $1.0 $3.2 $0.5 $2.0 $0.3 $1.7 $2.4 - $3.0 $0.8 - $1.0 $0.5 - $1.0 $1.5 - $1.8 $5.2 - $6.9 – $1.0 $2.0 $3.0 $4.0 $5.0 $6.0 $7.0 CE I E B IT D A ( $ in b ill io ns ) Estimated CEI EBITDA Build Up SPL Trains 1-6, CCL Trains 1-3, Additional 2-train expansion

125. Slide 125: Potential Financial Profile of CEI

     Potential Financial Profile of CEI 22 Note: EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure. EBITDA is computed as total revenues less non-cash deferred revenues, operating expenses, assumed commissioning costs and state and local taxes. It does not include depreciation expenses and certain non-operating items. Becaus

126. Slide 126: Future Developments

     Katie Pipkin – Senior Vice President, Business Development & Communications Future Developments

127. Slide 127: Future Developments Horizontal / Vertical Integration

     Future Developments Horizontal / Vertical Integration Total focus on cash flow per share as guiding metric for future investments LNG expansion most likely the first development project beyond the current 9-Train program Significant Cash Flow expected starting in 2016 Cheniere core competencies, sca

128. Slide 128: Estimated Steady State Annualized Cash Flows at CEI

     Estimated Steady State Annualized Cash Flows at CEI Based on 9 Liquefaction Trains 3 Annualized Pre-Tax Cash Flows Maintenance Cap Ex Estimated income tax payments $2.9B - $4.3B ~$0.3B (included above) ~20% (post 2021) Note: See “Forward Looking Statements” Slide EBITDA per share is a non-GAAP measu

129. Slide 129: Criteria for LNG Export Projects

     Criteria for LNG Export Projects 4  Proposing 2 more liquefaction trains at one of our sites  We would possibly back other developers (small-scale LNG projects) Consideration: Cheniere: Land  Can assess in a few days Pipeline access  Gas supply team Regulatory requirements  Full staff Engineeri

130. Slide 130: Estimated CEI EBITDA per Share

     Estimated CEI EBITDA per Share 5 Projects evaluated with an emphasis on cash flows 9 Liquefaction Trains ~$15 11 Liquefaction Trains  Initiating process to develop additional trains ~$20 Targeting Future Growth (2020)  Other hydrocarbon exports  Infrastructure development/acquisitions  Internati

131. Slide 131: Future Growth – Beyond Liquefaction Trains

     Future Growth – Beyond 11 Liquefaction Trains Near Term Proposed Developments  Developing export facilities for other liquid hydrocarbons • Facilities could take the whole liquids stream (one stop shop)  Additional infrastructure developments • Pipeline takeaway capacity (from Permian for example)

132. Slide 132: Next Proposed Development – Other Hydrocarbon Exports

     Next Proposed Development – Other Hydrocarbon Exports Developing Project in Texas along Gulf Coast 7  Estimated investment opportunity up to $2B • Initial investment expected up to $1B, initial commercialization ~200kbpd  Export up to 1 MMbpd liquid hydrocarbons  Capture WTI-Brent spread  Initia

133. Slide 133: Next Proposed Development – Other Hydrocarbon Exports

     Next Proposed Development – Other Hydrocarbon Exports Developing Project in Texas along Gulf Coast 8 Corpus Christi LNG Facility Cheniere Liquids Terminal San Patricio Hub

134. Slide 134: Cheniere Liquids Terminal at Ingleside, TX

     9 Next Proposed Development – Other Hydrocarbon Exports Cheniere Liquids Terminal at Ingleside, TX  550 acres  Up to 1 MMBpd throughput  3 MM Bbls storage (initial)  5-bay truck rack  Up to 2 marine docks – barge and ship, Aframax capable Artist rendition

135. Slide 135: San Patricio Hub

     10  160 acres  1.5MM Bbls storage (initial)  5-bay truck rack  Splitter and stabilization Next Proposed Development – Other Hydrocarbon Exports San Patricio Hub Artist rendition

136. Slide 136: Other Hydrocarbon Exports Project Milestones

     Next Proposed Development – Other Hydrocarbon Exports Project Milestones  Project Design • Initial project throughput of 200kbd – 100kbpd of splitter capacity – 100kbpd of straight-run crude/condensate capacity • 60kbpd of stabilization capacity • Expandable to ~1,000kbd with additional dock, stora

137. Slide 137: Questions?

     12 Questions?

Cheniere Energy — Investor Day (April 2015) on 6ix