Floating Facilities in Ice Anchorage, May 27, 2015 Rolf Eide | Senior Director | Hull and Marine Engineering

Preferred partner

■ Brief introduction of Aker Solutions.

■ Arctic environmental design impact on floating facilities

■ Technology & knowledge to enable Arctic floater operations

■ Aker Solutions References

■ Aker Solutions is a global provider of products, systems and services to the oil and gas industry ■ ■ Built on more than 170 years of industrial experience

■ Employs approximately 17,000 people in 18 countries ■ ■ Built on more than

■

Public © 2015 Aker Solutions Slide 3 June 5, 2015 Preferred partner Public © 2015 Aker Solutions Slide 4 June 5, 2015 Preferred partner Arctic and near Arctic projects Beaufort Sea Barents Sea Shallow water FD study H6 (Semi) Deep water concepts for Snøhvit (subsea-to-shore) drilling & prod studies Goliat subsea Sea of Okhotsk Sakhalin I (GBS) West Greenland Sakhalin II (GBS) Feasibility study (FD) Sakhalin II LUN-A (GBS)

Kara Sea Drillship development

Northern Caspian Sea Kashagan field development Kashagan topsides (exp. phase)

Norwegian Sea Grand Banks Skarv (FPSO) Hibernia (GBS) Norne (FPSO) White Rose (FPSO, M&O) Haltenbanken (Semi) Terra Nova (FPSO) Hebron (GBS-ongoing)

Public © 2015 Aker Solutions Slide 5 Preferred partner Project track record - covering most of the value chain Shtokman (pre-FEED) White Rose FPSO Onshore: Offloading: Sakhalin I & II Onshore plant design & operation Bow loading H-6 Sub-zero processing equipment Loading towers Heavy oil treatment Operations

Snøhvit - Melkøya Prirazlomnaya Varandey

Haltenbanken Winterized topside designs: Design methodology Heat tracing Enclosing critical areas Dropped ice protection Operations

E.g., Kai Kos Dehseh Floaters (FPSO): Deep water Subsea-to-shore: Gravity Based Sub- Storage capability Subsea compression structures (GBS) Drift ice management Operations Shallow water Quick disconnect Storage capability Operations Resistant to sea-ice Resistant to ice-bergs White Rose Operations Ormen Lange Sakhalin I, II, and LUN-A Hebron (FEED)

NOTE: Terra Nova Includes projects performed by Aker Solutions and Kvaerner. Hibernia Kashagan

Public © 2015 Aker Solutions Slide 6 Preferred partner The Arctic Circle The arctic circle is an imaginary line located at 66°, 30’N latitude, and as a guide defines the southernmost part of the arctic.

Arctic Arctic Alaska Russian Beafourt Sea Barents Sea Chucki Sea Kara Sea

Arctic Greenland

Sub-Arctic Norwegian Sub- Arctic Barents Sea New Foundland

■ Remote distance from existing infrastructure (compared to other areas like the North Sea and Gulf of Mexico)

■ Low air temperature

■ Presence of Sea ice

■ Presence of icebergs

■ Combination of above items are very area dependent

■ Kara Sea ■ Beafourt Sea ■ Multi-year ice ■ Multi-year ice ■ Risk of icebergs ■ Risk of ice Islands ■ Long ice season ■ Long ice season ■ Low temperatures ■ Low temperatures

■ Norwegian Barents Sea ■ Low risk of sea ice / iceberg interaction ■ Low temperatures (not as low as Kara Sea/Beafourt Sea) ■ Grand Banks ■ Risk of iceberg interaction ■ Very light ice conditions ■ Temperatures as for Norwegian Barents Sea Public © 2015 Aker Solutions Slide 9 June 5, 2015 Preferred partner

Floating Platforms – Building Blocks

■ Topside: ■ Production/Drilling/Both

■ Hull: ■ Carry topside weight/mooring/riser ■ Motions

■ Turret (shipshaped units) ■ Carry riser/mooring

■ Mooring ■ Stationkeeping of floater

■ Riser ■ Transport hydrocarbons from seabed to topside - Import ■ Transport processed well-stream to pipeline at seabed - Export ■ Drilling riser

■ Long distance to existing infrastructure ■ Increased topside weight (more functions needed) ■ Increased oil storage in hull → Larger hull (for FPSO)

■ Low temperatures ■ Icing from sea spray on topside→ Larger topside weight ■ Enclosement → Larger topside weight

Icy deck structure Harsh environment HSE challenges

Heat tracing HSE challenges

■ High local hull loads from ice ■ Clogging of hull water intakes

■ High mooring loads ■ Freezing of ballast water

■ Riser interaction with sea ice ■ Ice thruster interaction

■ All installed platforms in waters with ice are bottom-founded (Gravity Based Structures-GBS) ■ No floaters (drilling/production) operates in areas with sea ice (the closest is the Sea Rose FPSO)

■ Industry experience with bottom founded structures and artificial Islands goes back to the 80`s ■ For lighthouse design even further

■ Global and local Ice pressure on GBSs and artificial Islands measured and documented (ISO 19906)

■ Today; Ice load concern wrt GBSs mostly related to vibrations of GBS

■ Several Arctic licenses located in water depths requiring floaters for exploration and production ■ With sea ice often present on an annual basis

■ Industry experience with moored floaters in ice limited to the Kulluk and Canmar drillship operations in the Beafourt Sea (80`s and partly 90`s)

■ Kulluk and Canmar drillships ■ Operated in Beafourt Sea in the 80`s ■ Supported by up to 4 ice breakers ■ Operated in severe ice conditions ■ Disconnection capability

■ Sea Rose and Terra Nova FPSO ■ Operating at Grand Banks (New Foundland) ■ Iceberg and very light ice conditions ■ Disconnection capability

Public © 2015 Aker Solutions Slide 16 June 5, 2015 Preferred partner 9~12 6~9 3~6 0~3 500 Rub-depth(m): 400 300 Fym=17550 Fym=17550 kN 200 Fxm=-1180 Fxm=-1180 kN 100 Ice load on floaters Fm=17590 kNFm=17590 [m] E X

■ Correlation between ice action (pressure) on floater 0 and floater responses not fully known and understood

4 x 10 Mooring force 2.5 ■ Today mooring system design for ice-floater -100 Sim Exp interaction is based on 2

■ Ice model testing 1.5 Pitch=-0.1 deg

■ Numerical simulation 1 -200 Force Force [kN] 0.5

0 ■ There exists no full-scale correlation of ice actions on Roll=-1.5 deg Roll=-1.5 -0.5 -300 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 moored floating structures for comparison with ice Time (s) model testing or numerical simulations model -400 Yaw=96.0 Yaw=96.0 deg 0 50

-50

-100 -150

[m] Y

■ Ice pressure (fixed and moored) ■ Buoy responses ■ 2009 and in 2010 – Ice Model Test JIP – Two model tests ■ Client: Chevron, Statoil, Shell, ExxonMobil ■ Location: HSVA ■ Structure tested: SPAR and shallow draught buoys ■ Fixed to carriage ■ Moored to basin floor

■ Arctic Meso Scale Floater ■ Objective: Design floater with purpose of being installed in ice and monitoring of ice conditions, global hull pressure and mooring loads simultaneously

■ Feasibility Study 2010 ■ Clients: Statoil & Chevron ■ Scope: Design of meso-scale floater for monitoring of ice induced responses of moored structures in drift ice at Spitsbergen (Svalbard)

■ Pre-FEED 2012: ■ Clients/Partners: Statoil, Shell, DNV, NTNU and Research Council of Norway ■ Scope: Concept screening, metocean/ice design basis preparation, deployment of ice tracker at relevant location and sizing and engineering of floater concept

■ North Norway – Norwegian Barents Sea ■ Sea ice on field every 2400 year (0.6 m level ice - 4 m deep ridges (average) ■ Pre-Feed study 2012-2014 ■ Client: Statoil ■ Scope of work ■ Pre-Feed study on Semi-submersible unit and FPSO ■ Hull, mooring, turret design ■ Topside design ■ Ice model test of Semi ■ Aker Arctic and HSVA ■ Ice model test of FPSO ■ HSVA

■ Operating displacement: 89 000 tonnes (13 m draft) ■ Dimensions: ■ LOA: 232 m - LPP: 212 m ■ B: 42 m (reamer 48m) ■ Can operate in 1.5 meter thick ice ■ Mooring system ■ 12 /18 line system designed for 100 / 400 m water depth ■ Thrusters: ■ FWD: Two nozzle retractable thrusters: each 3.5 MW to be retracted in ice ■ AFT: Three open podded thrusters

■ Beafourt Sea shallow water 2013-2014 ■ Client: Major Oil Company ■ Scope of Work: Large field development study (building blocks) ■ Assessment on pre-drilling ■ Substructure and topside (production / drilling) design ■ Tanker loading ■ Marine operations and installation ■ Fabrication ■ Logistics/supply and infrastructure assessment

■ Beafourt Sea deep water 2013-2014 ■ Client: Major Oil Company ■ Scope of work: Field development study including pre-drilling assessment

■ Arctic areas are in general remote from existing infrastructure ■ Different arctic areas have different knowledge and require different technology ■ Almost all installed platforms in waters with ice are bottom-founded (Gravity Based Structures-GBS) ■ Industry experience with moored floaters in ice is limited and mostly based on model tests and numerical simulations.

Copyright Copyright of all published material including photographs, drawings and images in this document remains vested in Aker Solutions and third party contributors as appropriate. Accordingly, neither the whole nor any part of this document shall be reproduced in any form nor used in any manner without express prior permission and applicable acknowledgements. No trademark, copyright or other notice shall be altered or removed from any reproduction.

Disclaimer This Presentation includes and is based, inter alia, on forward-looking information and statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ. These statements and this Presentation are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about global economic conditions, the economic conditions of the regions and industries that are major markets for Aker Solutions ASA and Aker Solutions ASA’s (including subsidiaries and affiliates) lines of business. These expectations, estimates and projections are generally identifiable by statements containing words such as “expects”, “believes”, “estimates” or similar expressions. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expectations include, among others, economic and market conditions in the geographic areas and industries that are or will be major markets for Aker Solutions’ businesses, oil prices, market acceptance of new products and services, changes in governmental regulations, interest rates, fluctuations in currency exchange rates and such other factors as may be discussed from time to time in the Presentation. Although Aker Solutions ASA believes that its expectations and the Presentation are based upon reasonable assumptions, it can give no assurance that those expectations will be achieved or that the actual results will be as set out in the Presentation. Aker Solutions ASA is making no representation or warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the Presentation, and neither Aker Solutions ASA nor any of its directors, officers or employees will have any liability to you or any other persons resulting from your use.

Aker Solutions consists of many legally independent entities, constituting their own separate identities. Aker Solutions is used as the common brand or trade mark for most of these entities. In this presentation we may sometimes use “Aker Solutions”, “we” or “us” when we refer to Aker Solutions companies in general or where no useful purpose is served by identifying any particular Aker Solutions company.