Petroleum Equipment Supply Association Annual Meeting 2013

“Stability in Our Energy Future –

The Role of MLP’s and Private Equity”

Mark A. Houser President and CEO Executive VP and COO EV Energy Partners, LP EnerVest, Ltd.

Overview of EnerVest, Ltd.

20 Years in Business ◊ Private equity business

Over 30% realized IRR to limited partners in institutional funds

EV Energy Partners, LP ◊ Publicly traded MLP

◊ 26% annualized rate of return since IPO 6.5 years ago

2

EnerVest Institutional Properties

EVEP Properties

Houston Headquarters

21,000 Operated Wells in 14 states 4.6 TCFE 2P Reserves (68% gas) 554 MMCFED 5.5 Million Acres

2013 ◊ Over $3 billion in capital

available for acquisitions

Since 1992 ◊ Over $6.8 billion of

acquisitions

◊ Over $2 billion of divestitures

◊ Over 1,000 wells drilled

Producer Basin Ranking

EnerVest Basin Status

and Producer Rankings

Barnett Shale -#6 producer

Austin Chalk -#1 producer

Ohio -#1 conventional producer

Michigan - #5 producer

Appalachia – Top 10 producer;

#3 conventional

San Juan - #10 producer

US – Top 25 producer

3

10%

7%

61%

8%

14%

Reserves 4.6 Tcfe

Appalachia

Austin Chalk

Barnett Shale

Greater Mid-

Con

Permian/San

Juan

37%

18%

15%

5%

10%

5%

6% 4%

LaborCompressionSWDDownhole repairSurface RepairFuel

4

Capital Expenditures - $541 million

Barnett Shale $209

Austin Chalk $115

Permian $112

Utica/Bakken $57

Greater MidCon $26

Appalachia $22

TOTAL $541

Lease Operating Expenses

- $218 million

2013 Activity

EnerVest Barnett Position

Joint purchases between EVEP/EnerVest Institutional Partnerships totaling > $2.2 billion since December 2010

> 115,000 gross acres ◊ Located primarily in core & combo

areas

◊ Focus shifted to liquids-oriented areas

Reserves ◊ 1,687 Bcfe Proved Reserves

◊ 69% Proved Developed

◊ Net production: ~ 234 MMcfe/d

2013 Plans ◊ $209 million capital budget

◊ 70 gross wells

5

EVEP/EnerVest Acreage

EnerVest Ohio Position

Producing assets acquired in 5 separate transactions since 2003

Over 8,000 gross wells

85 MMcfe/d gross production

Largest Operator in Ohio ◊ 16% of wells

◊ 20% of oil production

◊ 19% of gas production

1.2 mm gross acres

~711,000 net Utica acres ◊ ~386,000 Operated

◊ ~325,000 with CHK

6

Overall Utica Activity

585 total permits issued

273 spud wells

◊ EnerVest has interest in ~100 wells

◊ 77 producing wells

EnerVest Institutional GP

Large institutions seeking

growth-oriented equity returns

Semi-mature property focus

Buy, fix up and sell mentality

EnerVest Operating Manages all upstream activities for EnerVest Companies

EnerVest Ltd.

EVEP

EnerVest Operating

EIGP

EV Energy Partners

Retail and institutional investors seeking yield oriented returns

Mature Property focus

The EnerVest Family

7

EnerVest Private Equity Fund Growth

8

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

$ M

illi

on

s

Various

1994 - 1999

1

Fund IX

2001

11

Fund X

2005

40

Fund VIII

1998

6

GE

Non GE

Fund XI

2006/2007

75

Fund

Year(s)

# of Investors

Fund XII

2010

113

Fund XIII

2012/2013

141

EVEP – Upstream MLP Overview

Created in September 2006

GP Ownership ◊ EnerVest & Management (76.25%)

◊ EnCap (23.75%)

42.6 million outstanding units ◊ $3.1 billion enterprise value

Current yield of 5.7%

Solid returns since IPO ◊ Total return 256%

◊ Compound annual rate of return 26%

9

Note: Current yield based on $0.767/unit 4Q12 distribution paid on Feb. 14, 2013. Unit price as of Mar. 22, 2013 and AMZX as of Mar. 15, 2013.

US Gas Production (lower 48 states)

10

Pro

du

cti

on

(tr

illi

on

cu

bic

feet

per y

ear)

Shale gas represents 34% of US gas production versus 14% 3 years ago & 1% 15 years ago

Source: Raymond James Equity Research 11

Major Oil Growth From New Areas

12

Rapid Growth of NGL Production

Source: Barclays

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

2,200

2,400

2,600

NG

Ls E

xtr

act

ed F

rom

Gas

Pro

cess

ing (

MBbl/d)

70% Growth in 4 years

NG

L’s

Extr

acte

d f

rom

Gas P

rocessin

g (

MBbl/

d)

Shale Plays Have Changed the Oil & Gas Landscape

13

Source: BMO Capital Markets, UT Bureau of Economic Geology

Selected Play

Remaining Locations

Wells/ Year

Implied Years of Drilling

Marcellus 175,000 1,650 100

Eagle Ford 100,000 2,500 40

Barnett 10,000 550 20

Haynesville 50,000 1,000 50

Utica vs. Barnett – A Long Way to Go

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

Wells Drilled To Be Drilled CumulativeProduction (Bcfe)

Resource Potential(Bcfe)

Barnett

Utica

?

14

By any industry measure, the Utica is a very new play, in the early stages of development

The Barnett, by comparison, has been commercially exploited for over 10 years

Source: UT Bureau of Economic Geology, Ohio Department of Natural Resources Note: Cumulative Barnett production from January 2004 through July 2012.

High

Low

Historical U.S. Acquisition Activity

$4 $4.5 $5.2 $5.1

$4.1 $3.9

$5.8

$7.7 $6.9 $6.8

$5.5 $4.4

$9.3 $9.9

$15.7

$23.6

$28.7

$44.5 $44.2

$15.3

$56.3

$54.3

$59

$7

$0.0

$5.0

$10.0

$15.0

$20.0

$25.0

$30.0

$35.0

$40.0

$45.0

$50.0

$55.0

$60.0

$65.0

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013YTD

A&

D A

sse

t T

ran

sa

cti

on

s (

$ B

illi

on

s)

15

Source: RBC Richardson Barr

Shale Plays – Changing the Acquisition World

$0.0

$5.0

$10.0

$15.0

$20.0

$25.0

$30.0

$35.0

$40.0

$45.0

$50.0

$55.0

$60.0

$65.0

16

Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2011

A&

D A

sset

Tran

sacti

on

s (

in b

illio

ns)

Source: RBC

US Dry Gas trillion cubic feet per year

Key Players in the Acquisition World

17

Source: RBC Richardson Barr

Private Equity

Private Equity

MLPs

Publics

Publics

Low High

Hig

h

Low

Risk Profile

Resource Play Maturity & Development

17

Mature Assets Increasingly Operated By MLPs

18

Source: BMO Capital Markets

MLP Asset Transactions (2007 – 2012)

19 Source: IHS Herold

2010 marks broad based MLP entry into “shale plays”

Expect increasing divestiture activity in shale plays as E&P corps monetize “tail” production streams to fund drilling programs

Substantial Private Equity Capital ($ in Millions)

Capital Provider/ Financing Funds Fund Size %

Riverstone $6,000

Natural Gas Partners $2,600

Quantum Energy Partners $2,500

EnCap $5,000

First Reserve $1,500

ArcLight Capital Partners $530

Denham Capital Management $750

Kayne Anderson $1,600

White Deer $750

Limerock Capital $1,400

SFC Energy Partners $596

Yorktown Partners $1,000

Energy Spectrum $450

Various other funds $1,000

$25,676 79%

Operating Companies

EnerVest Fund XIII $2,000

Urban Oil and Gas $200

Merit Energy $912

Quantum Resources $1,000

Sheridan Resources $1,800

Limerock Resources $850

$6,762 21%

Total $32,438 100%

20

Including Leverage, over $40 billion of spending power

Large Buyout Shops

(Blackstone, KKR, etc.) represent an additional

~$15 billion of spending power

(1) Estimate 25% of funds will be for the upstream sector

(1)

(1)

(1)

Publics, Majors Continue to be Active Record Activity From Private Equity, MLPs and Non-Traditionals

2012 Market Recap of Buyer’s Focus

21

$17.6

$17.0

$12.6

$7.2

$4.6

$0.8

Publics

Private Equity

Majors / Int'ls

MLPs / Trusts

Non-Traditional

Privates

Publics52%

Majors / Int'ls39%

Private Equity

7%Other2%

Private Equity61%

MLPs / Trusts27%

Non-Traditional

4%Privates3%

Other5%

Source: RBC Richardson Barr internal database. Note: Includes select U.S. onshore transactions of $20+ million since January 1, 2012. *Excludes the Nucor-Encana $3.6 B joint venture transaction.

Demand is ~90% Financial Buyers*

Capex Requires Big Balance Sheets

Resource Plays (oil / liquids)

Conventional (oil and gas)

Res. Plays / JVs

(oil / liquids)

Conventional (oil and gas)

Conventional (gas)

Majors 44%

Growth-Focused Buying Resource

PE and MLPs Buying Conventional

Expanding Service Capabilities in Maturing Plays

Water Handling

Compression

Artificial Lift

Refracs

Infill Drilling

Micro-seismic

Frac Enhancements

Pad Drilling Enhancement

Land Value

Reserves Value

Resource Play Maturity / Development

Gas Plays

Haynesville

Emerging Plays Commercial Development Blow down Assets

Liquids Plays

Barnett

Bakken / Three Forks

Eagle Ford (condensate)

Eagle Ford (oil)

Mississippian

Niobrara

Bone Spring / Avalon

Fayetteville

E. Utica

Hz Wolfcamp

Marcellus Vertical Wolfberry

Cline

Tuscaloosa Marine Shale

ETOF Cotton Valley

22

An Independent’s Perspective

Abundant Commodity Supply will likely limit commodity price growth

Economics will drive drilling more so than land requirements

Unconventional reserves will compete even more with conventional reserves

◊ Water production, compression, artificial lift will increase cost of maturing shale wells

◊ Scale will be increasingly important

◊ Technology advancement will be needed to guide “mature shale development”

◊ “Help us keep these low productivity wells profitable”!!

Urbanization of oil and gas development activities continues

The “food chain” of acquisitions will continue ◊ MLP’s and PE will continue to move into the conventionals and mature shales

23