THE NORTH AMERICAN LNG OPPORTUNITY APEGGA, Calgary, Alberta

1. THE NORTH AMERICAN LNG OPPORTUNITY APEGGA, Calgary, Alberta Andrew Stephens Vice President, Planning and Corporate Communications October 13, 2005

2. Disclaimer LEGAL NOTICE - FORWARD LOOKING INFORMATION/RESERVES ESTIMATES This presentation contains forward-looking statements. Such statements are generally identifiable by the terminology used, such as “plan,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “expect,” “estimate,” “budget” or other similar wording. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, references to future capital and other expenditures, drilling plans, construction activities, the submission of development plans, seismic activity, refining margins, oil and gas production levels and the sources of growth thereof, results of exploration activities and dates by which certain areas may be developed or may come on-stream, retail throughputs, pre-production and operating costs, reserves estimates, reserves life, natural gas export capacity and environmental matters. These forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks and uncertainties and other factors which may cause actual results, levels of activity and achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such statements. Such factors include, but are not limited to: general economic, market and business conditions; industry capacity; competitive action by other companies; fluctuations in oil and gas prices; refining and marketing margins; the ability to produce and transport crude oil and natural gas to markets; the effects of weather conditions; the results of exploration and development drilling and related activities; fluctuation in interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates; the ability of suppliers to meet commitments; actions by governmental authorities including increases in taxes; decisions or approvals of administrative tribunals; changes in environmental and other regulations; risks attendant with oil and gas operations; expected rates of return; and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of Petro-Canada. These factors are discussed in greater detail in filings made by Petro-Canada with the Canadian provincial securities commissions and the United States (U.S.) Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Readers are cautioned that the foregoing list of important factors affecting forward-looking statements is not exhaustive. Furthermore, the forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are made as of the date of this presentation, and Petro-Canada does not undertake any obligation to update publicly or to revise any of the included forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. The forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement. Petro-Canada’s staff of qualified reserves evaluators generates the reserves estimates used by the Company. Our reserves staff and management are not considered independent of the Company for purposes of the Canadian provincial securities commissions. Petro-Canada has obtained an exemption from certain Canadian reserves disclosure requirements to permit it to make disclosure in accordance with SEC standards in order to provide comparability with U.S. and other international issuers. Therefore, Petro-Canada’s reserves data and other oil and gas formal disclosure is made in accordance with U.S. disclosure requirements and practices and may differ from Canadian domestic standards and practices. Where the term barrel of oil equivalent (boe) is used in this release it may be misleading, particularly if used in isolation. A boe conversion ratio of six thousand cubic feet (Mcf): one barrel (bbl) is based on an energy equivalency conversion method primarily applicable at the burner tip and does not represent a value equivalency at the wellhead. The SEC permits oil and gas companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose only proved reserves that a company has demonstrated by actual production or conclusive formation tests to be economically and legally producible under existing economic and operating conditions. The use of terms such as “probable, “possible,” “recoverable” or "potential” reserves and resources in this presentation does not meet the guidelines of the SEC for inclusion in documents filed with the SEC.

3. Agenda • Who is Petro-Canada • Natural gas supply/demand outlook • LNG value chain components and economics • Cacouna Energy project • Conclusion and questions

4. Five Core Businesses East Coast Oil Oil Sands North American Natural Gas International Downstream

5. Natural Gas Supply/Demand Outlook

6. U.S. Gas Demand > Domestic Supply Tcf/year 30 25 Consumption Net imports Net imports 20 Production Natural Gas Net Imports, 2003 and 2025 (Tcf) 15 Natural Gas Net Imports, 2003 and 2025 (Tcf) 10 5 Pipeline LNG LNG Pipeline 0 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2025 Source: EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook 2005

7. What’s Driving U.S. Gas Demand? U.S. Electricity Generation by Fuel, 2003 and 2025 (billion kilowatthours) U.S. Electricity Generation By Fuel, 2003 and 2025 billion kilowatt hours Share of Gas-Fired Generation increases 50% Share of Gas-Fired Generation Increases 50% Source: EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook 2005

8. TCF/Y Growth in Alaskan production 30 Growth in LNG imports 25 Growth in non- associated unconventional - 20 Base production (all sources) 15 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 LNG Helps Fill U.S. Supply Gap Source: Source: EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook 2005

9. 79 72 57 50 76 73 30 18 261 10 44 36 27 23 31 97 55 13 11 14 7 Global Gas Supply And Consumption Russia & FSU Europe N. America Middle East Asia Pacific C & S America Africa Consumption (BCF/D) Production (BCF/D) R/P Ratio (Years) Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy

10. The Importance Of LNG “Access to world natural gas supplies will require a major extension of LNG terminal import capacity…. Without the flexibility that such facilities impart, imbalances in supply and demand will engender price volatility.” Alan Greenspan Testimony to U.S. House Energy Committee June 10, 2003

11. LNG Value Chain Components And Economics

12. LNG Value Chain Upstream LNG Typical Investment(500 MMcfd / 3.5 Mt/yr) Capex $ MM Marketing Regas Transport Liquefaction Upstream

13. LNG Block Flow Diagram Acid Gas Treatment Dehydration Gas Acid Gas Mercury Wells Removal Removal Reception Liquefaction LNG Condensate Natural Gas Stabilisation Fractionation Condensate LPG Storage and Loading Utilities

14. The Liquefaction Process

15. Heat Exchanger

16. LNG Carriers Photos courtesy of CH-IV International

17. Shipping - A Critical Cost Factor DISTANCES (in nautical miles from Dataloy AS) QuebecGulf of Mexico Baltic 3,784 6,076 Nigeria 4,924 5,936 Qatar 8,113 9,753 Trinidad 2,684 2,232 Trinidad • Shipping costs for Quebec LNG regasification terminals will be $0.15 to $0.25 lower than the Gulf of Mexico

18. Re-gasification Process

19. Existing And Proposed LNG TerminalsIn North America A B C D E Source: FERC

20. Potential LNG Terminals In North America Source: FERC

21. At What Market Price Is LNG Economical For North America? Source: EIA’s 2005 Annual Energy Outlook

22. The Cacouna Energy Project

23. Project Overview • Average send out capacity of about 500 MMcf/d • TransCanada and Petro-Canada share construction costs of about $660 million • TransCanada: facility operator with transportation expertise • Petro-Canada: LNG supplier with marketing experience and international upstream supply business

24. Gros-Cacouna Terminal And Ship • Siting based on water depth and berthing capabilities, • storage capacity and take-away pipeline capacity. Artist’s Rendition

25. Stakeholder Relations • Direct employment of 500 to 1,000 people during construction • 30 to 50 long-term positions to operate facility • Regulatory approval process to take two years • Environmental impact statement filed in spring 2005 • Public hearings in 2006 • Community referendum supports project in September

26. Market Advantage Impact of 10 Bcm/yr LNG into Each Market Bcm/yr 160 Gros-Cacouna LNG easily absorbed: limited price ramification 140 7% 120 100 Other Canadian LNG has major impact: prices spiral down 80 60 40 20 40% 0 Ontario, Quebec, New England and Mid-Atlantic Market Demand New EnglandMarket Demand Northeastern Canada and United States Absorption Advantage

27. Progress On Russian LNG Project • Gas grid to feed LNG export • Progress • MOU – Oct. 2004 • Feasibility report – May 2005 • Commercial proposal – June 2005 • Discussing Interim Development Agreement • Risk mitigation • Project financing • Gazprom partnership • Reciprocal investment Vyborg Primorsk

28. Project Schedule • Sept 2004 – June 2005 Prepare and file regulatory applications • July 2005 – Q4 2006 Application review and approval process • 2007 – 2009 Design and construction • Q4 2009 Facility start-up

29. Petro-Canada’s Capabilities • Solid operator of large projects • Track record of successful stakeholder relations • Relationships with suppliers around the world • Marketing expertise through upstream and downstream business • Strong partners with TransCanada Pipelines and potential suppliers like Gazprom

30. Conclusions • LNG will be a critical supply source to meet growing North American demand • Siting of re-gasification facilities is based on economics and community acceptance • A Quebec LNG facility has better access to markets and lower shipping costs • Petro-Canada has the experience, capability and partners to bring LNG to North America