1

Investor Presentation

April 2014

2

Cautionary Statements FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This presentation and the oral statements made in connection therewith may contain “forward looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, regarding Rice Energy’s strategy, future operations, financial position, estimated revenues and income/losses, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives of management are forward-looking statements. These statements often include the words “could,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project” and similar expressions intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. These forward-looking statements are based on Rice Energy’s current expectations and assumptions about future events and are based on currently available information as to the outcome and timing of future events. Rice Energy assumes no obligation to and does not intend to update any forward looking statements included herein. Rice Energy cautions you that these forward-looking statements are subject to all of the risks and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond their control, incident to the exploration for and development, production, gathering and sale of natural gas, natural gas liquids and oil. These risks include, but are not limited to, commodity price volatility, inflation, lack of availability of drilling and production equipment and services, environmental risks, drilling and other operating risks, regulatory changes, the uncertainty inherent in estimating natural gas reserves and in projecting future rates of production, cash flow and access to capital, the timing of development expenditures, and the other risks described under “Risk Factors” in Rice Energy’s Form 10-K filed on March 21, 2014 and other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties occur, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, Rice Energy’s actual results and plans could differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements.

This presentation has been prepared by Rice Energy and includes market data and other statistical information from sources believed by Rice Energy to be reliable, including independent industry publications, government publications or other published independent sources. Some data are also based on Rice Energy’s good faith estimates, which are derived from its review of internal sources as well as the independent sources described above. Although Rice Energy believes these sources are reliable, it has not independently verified the information and cannot guarantee its accuracy and completeness.

NON-PROVEN OIL AND GAS RESERVES

The SEC permits oil and gas companies, in their filings with the SEC, to disclose proved reserves, which are reserve estimates that geological and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions and certain probable and possible reserves that meet the SEC’s definition for such terms. We may use certain broader terms such as "EUR" (estimated ultimate recovery of resources), and we may use other descriptions of volumes of potentially recoverable hydrocarbon resources throughout this presentation that the SEC does not permit to be included in SEC filings. These broader classifications do not constitute "reserves" as defined by the SEC, and we do not attempt to distinguish these classifications from probable or possible reserves as defined by SEC guidelines.

Our estimates of EURs have been prepared by our independent reserve engineers. These estimates are by their nature more speculative than estimates of proved, probable and possible reserves and accordingly are subject to substantially greater risk of being actually realized, particularly in areas or zones where there has been limited or no drilling history. We include these estimates to demonstrate what we believe to be the potential for future drilling and production by the company. Actual locations drilled and quantities that may be ultimately recovered from our properties will differ substantially. In addition, we have made no commitment to drill all of the drilling locations which have been attributed to these quantities. Ultimate recoveries will be dependent upon numerous factors including actual encountered geological conditions, the impact of future oil and gas pricing, exploration and development costs, and our future drilling decisions and budgets based upon our future evaluation of risk, returns and the availability of capital and, in many areas, the outcome of negotiation of drilling arrangements with holders of adjacent or fractional interest leases. Estimates of resource potential and other figures may change significantly as development of our properties provide additional data and therefore actual quantities that may ultimately be recovered will likely differ from these estimates.

Our forecast and expectations for future periods are dependent upon many assumptions, including estimates of production decline rates from existing wells, the undertaking and outcome of future drilling activity and activity that may be affected by significant commodity price declines or drilling cost increases.

3

Rice Energy – Concentrated Core Position

Fayette

Preston

Monongahela

Greene

Washington

Allegheny

Washington

Butler

Marshall

Wetzel

Marion

Harrison Taylor

Doddridge

Tyler Washington

Wood

Pleasants

Ritchie Barbour Tucker

Somerset Belmont

Monroe

Harrison

Jefferson

Carroll

Columbiana

Tuscarawas

Guernsey

Noble

Morgan

Muskingum

Coshocton

Holmes

Stark Wayne

Westmoreland

Blair

Athens

Allegany

Ohio

Brooke

HQ

Marcellus/Upper Devonian Net acres at 12/31/13(1): ~43,000

1Q14 est. net production (MMcf/d): 205-210 Net Risked Locations(2): 536 (325 Marcellus, 211 Upper Devonian)

Current Rigs: 4 (2 top hole + 2 horizontal)

Pennsylvania

Ohio

Utica Net acres at 12/31/13: ~47,000

Net Risked Locations(2): 233

Current Rigs: 2 (1 top hole + 1 horizontal)

Rice Energy Net acres at 12/31/13: ~90,000

1Q14 est. net production (MMcf/d): 205-210 Net Risked Locations(2): 769

Current Rigs: 6 (3 top hole + 3 horizontal)

West Virginia __________________________ 1. Approximately 39,020 gross (36,932 net) acres in the Marcellus Shale is also prospective for the Upper Devonian Shale. The Upper Devonian and the Marcellus Shale are stacked formations within the same geographic footprint. 2. See slide entitled “Additional Disclosures” on detail regarding Rice’s methodology for the calculation of net unrisked and risked locations

4

RRC EQT

CHK

CHK

CHK

AEP

AEP/XTO

GPOR

ANTERO

CVX NBL/CNX

CVX

ECLIPSE

AEP

CVX GPOR

EQT Marshall

Wetzel

Monroe

Harrison Jefferson

Guernsey

Noble

Ohio

Brooke

Westmoreland

Allegheny

PDC

CNX

Carroll

Washington

Belmont

Greene Fayette

Positioned Within the Core and Surrounded by Development

__________________________ Note: Pennsylvania acreage excludes 548 net acres in Fayette and Tioga counties. Non-Rice wells depicted are drilled and/or permitted.

Significant industry activity drives data analysis, learning curve and best practices Marcellus – More than 1,000 producing Marcellus wells in Washington County and Greene County, PA Utica – Belmont County, OH boasts highest active rig count in the play (9 rigs as of December 2013)

Belmont 43,996 Guernsey 1,727 Harrison 765 Total 46,488

Washington 27,474 Greene 15,680 Allegheny 197 Total 43,351

OH NET ACRES PA NET ACRES Rice Acreage Rice Producing Laterals Rice Development Laterals

PA OH

WV

5

325

180 53

125

54

16

450

235

69

0

100

200

300

400

500

Marcellus Utica Dry Utica WetRisked Locations Unrisked Locations

Rice Energy Net Drilling Inventory (2)

104%

70%

119%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Marcellus Utica Dry Utica Wet

__________________________ 1. Assumes $40.00 per Bbl NGL. 2. See slide entitled “Additional Disclosures” on detail regarding Rice’s methodology for the calculation of net unrisked and risked locations 3. Three wells currently shut-in as of 3/31/13. 4. Defined as total drilling and completion capital expenditures for the period divided by PDP and PDNP volumes after adding back production for the period. Rice pro forma for ASR buy-in.

IRR

Rice Energy Well Economics @ $4.00 / MMBtu NYMEX (1)

Net Drilling Locations

Extensive drilling inventory of low risk, high return projects Rice believes the most critical component of creating

shareholder value is repeatedly delivering high single well returns

Driven by production and costs

Sustained, prolific production

Our Marcellus wells have an average 180-day IP of ~9.0 MMcf/d, ~1.6 Bcf cumulative, with an average lateral length of 5,275’

Our Marcellus wells have an average 360-day IP of ~7.4 MMcf/d, ~2.7 Bcf cumulative, with an average lateral length of 4,876’

Low cost structure

Historically achieved $1.09/Mcf proved developed F&D(4) and $1,640 per lateral foot D&C cost

Our D&C costs have continued to trend down as a result of pad drilling and longer laterals and our 3 Hulk wells (9,000’ laterals) averaged $1,165 per lateral foot

Rice – A Returns Focused Company

PV-10 ($mm, 100% WI) Undiscounted Payback

$8.5mm 1.0 yrs

$19.6mm 1.0 yrs

$13.4mm 1.2 yrs

NRI HZ Ft Inventory 2.2mm ft. 0.5mm ft. 1.8mm ft. Lateral Length Assumed 6,000’ 9,700’ 9,700’

6

2,444

3,305

5,678 6,257

24.4

13.0 7.6

5.8

0

10

20

30

40

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

2010 2011 2012 2013

Dril

ling

Day

s

Late

ral L

engt

h (fe

et)

2 28 44 47 70

89

131 128 154

13 22 28 35 55 58

84 110

173 177

208

0

50

100

150

200

250

Q42010

Q12011

Q22011

Q32011

Q42011

Q12012

Q22012

Q32012

Q42012

Q12013

Q22013

Q32013

Q42013

Net Daily Production Gross Daily Production

30 45 65 80 114

150 174

224

1 3 5 5 7 8 11

15 17

23

29 33

40

0

10

20

30

40

50

0

50

100

150

200

250

Q42010

Q12011

Q22011

Q32011

Q42011

Q12012

Q22012

Q32012

Q42012

Q12013

Q22013

Q32013

Q42013

Gross Producing Horizontal Feet Gross Producing Horizontal Wells

Established Track Record of Drilling Proficiency

Producing Horizontal Feet and Wells (Gross) Average Daily Production

MMcf/d Feet (‘000)

# Rigs: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 4 4

Wells

Average Lateral Length (2) Average Drilling & Completion Cost Per Lateral Foot

Proven track record of growing production, reducing costs and improving drilling efficiency

Lateral Length, Ft Drilling Days (Kickoff to TD)

1,078 893 831 974 826 842 567 622 651 638 703 536

1,437 1,423 1,437 1,193

994 999

763 927 845 875 789

815

2,515 2,315 2,268 2,168

1,820 1,841

1,331 1,550 1,496 1,513 1,492

1,351

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

Q42010

Q12011

Q22011

Q32011

Q42011

Q12012

Q22012

Q32012

Q42012

Q12013

Q22013

Q32013

Q42013

NA

(1)

Drilling Cost per Foot Completion Cost per Foot _______________________ 1. No wells brought online in Q3 2011. 2. Well data based on IP date.

7

Why Invest in Rice?

100% of Leasehold in Core of Marcellus and Utica

Owned and Operated Gathering and Water Midstream Infrastructure Supports Our Upstream Operations

Differentiated Technical Approach Has Led to Industry Leading Well Results

Conservative Financial and Hedging Approach to Protect Downside and Lock-In Attractive Returns

Nimble and Incentivized Management and Technical Teams

Top-Tier Growth With Attractive Risk-Adjusted Return Profile

Firm Transportation Contracts De-risk Production Growth, Ensure Takeaway and Limit Appalachian Basis Exposure

8

Pennsylvania Assets

9

43,351 net acres in the southwestern core • 48% held by production with an

additional 36% not expiring until 2017 or later

• Expect to hold substantially all of our core acreage under our current development plan

• The Upper Devonian and Marcellus are stacked formations within the same geographic footprint, substantially all of our acreage is also prospective for the Upper Devonian

Drilled and completed 44 horizontal wells as of March 31, 2013

• Average Marcellus initial 120-day production rates of 9.9 MMcf/d

519 total net risked identified drilling locations, 325 in the Marcellus and 194 in the Upper Devonian

Average working interest of 95% (100% operated)

March 2014 average net production of ~230 MMcf/d

Marcellus Overview

_________________________ Note: Wells shown are all Marcellus wells turned to sales in 2013 and 2014 YTD.

Marcellus Well Results Summary

Sustained prolific production rates over a 6-month period

Allegheny

Washington

Greene

PA OH

WV

Rice Energy Acreage

X-Man Pad – 2 Wells Avg 180 Day IP: 12.8 MMcf/d Avg Lateral Ft: 7,410’

Thunder 2 Pad – 2 Wells Avg 180 Day IP: 12.0 MMcf/d Avg Lateral Ft: 9,006’

Lusk Pad – 2 Wells Avg 180 Day IP: 10.2 MMcf/d Avg Lateral Ft: 5,780’

AU2 Pad – 2 Wells Avg 180 Day IP: 8.8 MMcf/d Avg Lateral Ft: 5,921’

Brova 1H Avg 180 Day IP: 9.5 MMcf/d Lateral Ft: 3,552’

Amigos Pad – 3 Wells Avg 120 Day IP: 11.7 MMcf/d Avg Lateral Ft: 6,317’

Big Daddy Pad – 2 Wells Avg 180 Day IP: 6.7 MMcf/d Avg Lateral Ft: 3,150’

Hulk Pad – 3 Wells Avg 120 Day IP: 15.7 MMcf/d Avg Lateral Ft: 9,000’

Mono 4H Avg 482 Day IP: 11.2 MMcf/d 5.4 Bcf produced in 16 months Lateral Ft: 6,233’

Whipkey 1H Avg 180 Day IP:10.5 MMcf/d Avg Lateral Ft: 6,655’

2012 2013 2014

Gotham Pad – 4 Wells Avg 60 Day IP:12.6 MMcf/d Avg Lateral Ft: 6,691’

10

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800

Peer-Leading Results with Strong Production Profiles

__________________________ 1. Rice Energy days online based on producing days, peer data based on Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection production reports as of December 31, 2013.

Producing wells have exhibited strong production profiles compared to those of Marcellus peers D&C strategies have resulted in consistently higher cumulative production and cash flows on a per well basis

Rice Marcellus

Rice Upper Devonian

Peer Wells

Washington & Greene Counties Cumulative Production vs. Time (1)

Cumulative Production (Bcfe)

Days Online

11

Rapidly Growing Production in a Capital Efficient Manner

Rice reached 300 MMcf/d of gross operated production with fewer wells than any company over the last 30 years

Nearly linear production growth an outcome of committed takeaway capacity and repeatable well results

Rice is focused on being the most capital efficient operator in the Marcellus, not the biggest

Rice 308 MMcf/d 41 Wells (1)

Rice is drilling the biggest wells and growing production faster than its peers while maintaining a healthy balance sheet

__________________________ Note: Based on management analysis of Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection production reports. 1. Rice’s gross operated production surpassed 300 MMcf/d in February 2014. At that time, Rice had brought 44 gross wells online and had 3 wells shut-in.

Gro

ss D

aily

Pro

duct

ion

(Mcf

/d)

12

Offset Operator 2 wells, 6,000’ lateral avg Missed richest zone Inconsistent rock stage to stage Screened out on 20% of stages

Rice Energy 2 wells, 6,000’ lateral avg In 3’ window for entire lateral Most brittle + gas rich zone Completion pumped as designed

Avg Production per Well

Peak IP: 6.0 MMcf/d 6 Month Avg: 2.8 MMcf/d

Avg Production per Well

Peak IP: 20.0 MMcf/d 6 Month Avg: 10.2 MMcf/d

Pads Drilled 2 Miles Apart

Rice Energy Two 6,000’ Laterals

Offset Operator Two 6,000’ Laterals

Within a localized geologic area, performance variability is mostly attributable to operator execution; not rock quality Our lateral placement accuracy has yielded higher productivity and greater consistency in productivity versus our peers’ efforts

Differentiator #1: Proficiency with Lateral Placement

In Target zone

Washington County, PA

Rice is able to achieve consistent and predictable results by using the same methodical approach

13

2,019 1,885 1,685 1,613 1,554 1,516 1,380 1,373 1,336 1,316 1,284 1,249 1,246 1,198 1,196 1,170 1,157 1,156 1,138 1,042 1,021 1,015 1,002 883

0 lb

1,000 lb

2,000 lb

3,000 lbPounds per Lateral Foot

Differentiator #2: Early Adopter of New Services & Techniques

__________________________ Note: Marcellus wells in Pennsylvania completed since 2010, PA DEP data, company analysis.

205 255 256 256 258 266 272 285 287 294 294 295 295 307 313 316 317 323 332 357 366 368

452 474 502

0'

200'

400'

600'Feet per Stage

Average Frac Stage Length

150-250’ stages since first HZ well in 2010… long before this technique became an industry buzzword

Strong correlation between sand concentration and production

Rice executes the same methodical approach since its first horizontal well in 2010 and was early to identify the benefits of new oilfield services and techniques

Other Marcellus Operators

Rice Marcellus / Utica Peers

Other Marcellus Operators

Rice Marcellus / Utica Peers

Average Sand Concentration

14

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 1 yrs 2 yrs 3 yrsActual Production - Historical Average NSAI - 6,000' Lateral

Type Well Economics (2)

1.94 Bcf / 1,000’ Type Curve (1)

IRR Sensitivity (3)

30% 61%

104%

162%

236%

52% 77% 135%

169%

$3.00 $3.50 $4.00 $4.50 $5.000%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

NYMEX ($ / MMBtu)

Rice’s Marcellus Shale Type Curve

___________________________ 1. Represents gross type curve. Actual production is normalized to 6,000’ laterals. Normalized production excludes six wells; five due to suboptimal spacing to offset producing wells and one well excluded because majority of lateral was

drilling in suboptimal zone (second Marcellus well in Company’s history). Data has been adjusted to reflect only producing days. 2. Based on $4.00/MMBtu and 100% WI. Net horizontal feet calculation based on net revenue interest assuming a 18.5% average royalty interest in the Marcellus. 3. IRR is net to Rice’s ownership interest. Hedged IRR assumes 50% of production hedged at $4.00/MMBtu in the first year and 25% of production hedged at $4.00/MMBtu in the second year.

All new wells are produced on restricted choke program

Hedged IRR Unhedged IRR

Net Unrisked Locations 450NRI HZ Ft. Inventory 2.2mm ft.PV-10 ($mm) $8.5IRR 104%Undiscounted Payback 1.0 yrs

D&C ($mm) $8.0

Type Curve Assumptions120-Day IP (MMcf/d) Pre-Processed 13.4 Bcf / 1,000' 1.94 Average Lateral Length 6,000 NGL Yield (Bbls / MMcf) - Gas Mmbtu (Pre-Processed) 1,050 Gas Shrink 0%Gross EUR (Bcfe, Post-Processing) 11.6% Gas 100%

MMcf/d

15

172,744

394,555

47,796 442,351

–

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

2013 2014Marcellus Utica

Highly Visible Production Growth in 2014 ~270,000 NRI horizontal feet scheduled for first sales in 2014, of which ~85% or ~230,000 horizontal feet were in progress as of March 2014 Similarly, 2014 development fuels 2015 production growth

__________________________ Note: Feet in progress denotes horizontal feet from wells spud but not yet producing.

NRI Horizontal Feet Bridge (12/31/13 – 12/31/14)

184,491 42%

85,116 19%

Producing In Progress 2014

2014 Scheduled Development

NRI Producing Horizontal Feet, by Area

Utica - 2 Rigs Marcellus - 4 Rigs

Greene County, PA Washington County, PA

Producing

Drilling/Completing On Schedule

Greene

Washington

Belmont

GPOR Non-Op

172,744 39%

16

Ohio Assets

17

Utica: Quickly Becoming Another Premier North American Play

__________________________ 1. Data per RigData as of March 14, 2014.

Growth and Development

Horizontal rig count has dramatically increased due to recent results and activity continues to shift towards the Utica core

Rice has partnered with one of the most active and proven operators in the play, Gulfport Energy (NYSE: GPOR)

• Gulfport and Rice’s acreage positions are very complementary, leading to substantial drilling cost savings

• Rice is able to leverage off of Gulfport’s learning curve

Utica Rigs Over Time (1)

Rig count continues to grow and rig activity is shifting towards the core area in Belmont and Monroe counties

Infrastructure Build-out

Active build-out of midstream infrastructure to support production in the Utica

Take-away capacity out of the Appalachian Basin will continue to improve • The proposed reversal of the Rockies

Express pipeline could add significant take-away capacity

Rice’s production is expected to be substantially all dry gas and enables multiple take-away options

November 2012 March 2014

Utica Fairway

Utica Core

Competitor Horizontal Rigs Rice Acreage Position Dry Gas Line

Rice Horizontal Rig

Marcellus Fairway

Marcellus Core

Utica Fairway

Utica Core

Marcellus Fairway

Marcellus Core

18

Industry Results Confirm our Position in the Utica Core

Very consistent well results from offset operators clearly define Point Pleasant Core in the southern portion of the play

Offset operators’ results, from the likes of Gulfport and Antero, tie extremely well with internal geologic model

Rice Energy has captured 46,488 net acres in what is potentially the highest volume shale play in the country

Development is underway on initial pads (stars)

Initial test results for Bigfoot 9H in second quarter 2014

Utica Core

IP Results Sized and Color-Coded >30 MMcfe/d

20-30 MMcfe/d

10-20 MMcfe/d

5-10 MMcfe/d 0-5 MMcfe/d

__________________________ Note: Initial production rates are based on operator announcements and public filings.

Gulfport: 1 well IP: 30 MMcfe/d (in sales)

Gulfport: 2 Wells IP: 29 - 45 MMcfe/d

Eclipse: 1 well IP: 20 MMcfe/d

TUSCARAWAS

Rex: 3 Wells IP: 18 - 19 MMcfe/d

Rice Acreage

Rice: 1 well Bigfoot 9H

Reached TD Mid-March

Rice: 2 wells Blue Thunder 10H, 12H

Drilling Ahead

Hess: 1 well IP: 25 MMcfe/d

Gulfport: 1 well IP: 21 MMcf/d

Avg 14 MMcfe/d in Q3 ‘13

Antero: 5 wells IP: 37 – 53 MMcfe/d (peak)

Antero: 2 wells IP: 20 – 22 MMcfe/d

Rice’s acreage is offset by some of the largest producing wells in the Utica

Magnum Hunter: 1 Well IP: 32 MMcfe/d

19

High Volume Wells Predicted by Geologic Model

Consistent offset operators’ strong well results and high quality reservoir and geologic characteristics should equate to low risk and highly productive well results • Offset operator production results mirror Rice’s internal geologic model • Core Features: Strong Point Pleasant porosity, impermeable Utica cap, highly overpressured

Increased capital spending by the industry confirms Rice’s belief that the Utica is one of the premier and highest quality shale plays in North America

Initial data from pilot hole in Belmont County very encouraging: • Porosity > 14% in our target interval translates into strong results • Severely overpressured: Pressure Gradient > 0.8 psi/ft • Flowed substantial gas unstimulated while drilling pilot hole through the Point Pleasant

North South

6 MMcfe 2 MMcfe 8 MMcfe 12 MMcfe 30 MMcfe

0%

6%

Rice Belmont Leasehold

Porosity 12%

__________________________ Note: Initial production rates are based on operator announcements and public filings.

20 MMcfe 1 MMcfe Pending Results

Utica

Point Pleasant Core

Rice Energy controls ~46,488 net acres in the heart of the high porosity Point Pleasant core in Belmont County

Point Pleasant Core Belmont + Monroe Counties

30+ MMcfe/d

20-30 MMcfe/d

10-20 MMcfe/d

5-10 MMcfe/d 0-5 MMcfe/d

CRAWFORD MERCER ERIE BEAVER COLUMBIANA CARROLL JEFFERSON BELMONT MONROE WASHINGTON ATHENS MERCER WASHINGTON

20

Rice-Gulfport Belmont County Development Agreement

Rice and Gulfport Energy entered into a Development Agreement covering an Area of Mutual Interest in the core of the Utica • Contiguous acreage immediately creates a more drillable position to

provide development and unit visibility • Mutually beneficial, coordinated effort allows for shared learning in

development, leasing and infrastructure Management teams are dedicated to the science and execution of low

risk, repeatable results • Gulfport has three of the highest producing wells in Belmont

County, the Shugert 1-12H, Irons 1-4H and Shugert 1-1H

AMI ~50,000 net acres

Marshall

Ohio

Belmont

Monroe Noble

Jefferson

Harrison

Tuscarawas

Guernsey

Brooke Rice Operated

~69% Rice Participating Interest

Gulfport Operated ~57% GPOR

Participating Interest

Rice’s AMI partnership provides the opportunity to leverage Gulfport’s Utica experience and realize substantial cost synergies

Areas: The agreement is divided up into two areas and each party’s participating interest is based on the amount of acreage they own • Rice Operated Northern Contract Area (~27,000 net acres)

o Townships: Goshen & Smith o Net Acres & Participating Interest: Rice ~18,400 & ~69% /

Gulfport ~8,400 & 31% • Gulfport Operated Southern Contract Area (~23,000 net acres)

o Townships: Washington & Wayne o Net Acres & Participating Interest: Rice ~9,700 & ~43% /

Gulfport ~13,100 & 57% Term: The agreement has a term of ten years and is terminable upon 90

days notice by either party

Terms of the Agreement

Acreage Map Overview

21

Utica Dry – Type Well Economics (1) Utica Dry – IRR Sensitivity (2)

Rice’s Utica Well Economics

___________________________ 1. Based on $4.00/MMBtu and 100% WI. Net horizontal feet calculation based on net revenue interest assuming a 20% average royalty interest in the Utica. 2. IRR is net to Rice’s ownership interest. Hedged IRR assumes 50% of production hedged at $4.00/MMBtu in the first year and 25% of production hedged at $4.00/MMBtu in the second year.

21% 41%

70%

108%

155%

33% 51% 91%

115%

$3.00 $3.50 $4.00 $4.50 $5.000%

50%

100%

150%

200%

NYMEX ($ / MMBtu) Hedged IRR Unhedged IRR

Net Unrisked Locations 235NRI HZ Ft. Inventory 1.8mm ft.PV-10 ($mm) $13.4IRR 70%Undiscounted Payback 1.2 yrs

D&C ($mm) $14.0

Type Curve Assumptions120-Day IP (MMcf/d) Pre-Processed 17.1 Bcf / 1,000' 2.25 Average Lateral Length 9,700 NGL Yield (Bbls / MMcf) - Gas Mmbtu (Pre-Processed) 1,080 Gas Shrink 0%Gross EUR (Bcfe, Post-Processing) 21.8% Gas 100%

Utica Wet – Type Well Economics (1) Utica Wet – IRR Sensitivity (2)

57% 85%

119%

160%

210%

78% 98% 142%

166%

$3.00 $3.50 $4.00 $4.50 $5.000%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

NYMEX ($ / MMBtu) Hedged IRR Unhedged IRR

Net Unrisked Locations 69NRI HZ Ft. Inventory 0.5mm ft.PV-10 ($mm) $19.6IRR 119%Undiscounted Payback 1.0 yrs

D&C ($mm) $14.0

Type Curve Assumptions120-Day IP (MMcf/d) Pre-Processed 15.2 Bcf / 1,000' 2.00 Average Lateral Length 9,700 NGL Yield (Bbls / MMcf) 40 Gas Mmbtu (Pre-Processed) 1,200 Gas Shrink 15%Gross EUR (Bcfe, Post-Processing) 21.1% Gas 78%

22

Midstream Assets

23

NFG

Ohio River

Monongahela River

TCO – Columbia Gas

Basis to NYMEX May ‘14 -$0.09

TETCO-M2 Basis to NYMEX

May ‘14 -$0.35

DTI – Dom. South Basis to NYMEX

May ‘14 -$0.59

Rice Acreage

Belmont

Jefferson

Harrison

Monroe

Brooke

Hancock

Ohio

Marshall

Greene

Monongalia Wetzel

Washington

Allegheny

Fayette

Pipeline and Basis Overview

Basis Strip Prices as of 3/31/14

Access to multiple long-haul pipelines and substantial firm transportation contracts support production growth and provides basis/pricing diversification

Firm Transportation/Sales & Associated Basis (1)

~65% of FT outside of Appalachia by 2016 Pennsylvania long-haul access – Columbia, DTI, TETCO Ohio long-haul access – DEO, REX, TETCO

__________________________ 1. These amounts include approximately 115,000 MMBtu/d of firm sales contracted with a third party through October 2017, subject to annual renewal. 2. As of 3/31/2014.

($0.04)

MMBtu/d

Basis Strip Prices (Discount to NYMEX) (2)

330

654

761

-

200

400

600

800

2014 2015 2016TCO M2 Dom S M3 Michcon ELA HHUB

$(1.50)

$(1.00)

$(0.50)

$-

$0.50

$1.00

$1.50

$2.00

TCO M2 Dom SM3 Michcon ELA

24

Midstream Infrastructure Overview

Highlights

As of December 31, 2013, our owned and operated system comprised of the following: • Gas gathering pipeline system with 1.5 Bcf/d throughput capacity • 27 miles of high-pressure gathering pipelines • 33 miles of high-density polyethylene pipelines for transporting water

Provides the ability to efficiently bring wells online, mitigates the risk of unplanned shut-ins and creates pricing and transportation optionality • Connected to multiple large pipelines: Columbia, DEO, DTI, REX,

TETCO • Continue to expand our Pennsylvania gathering system congruent

with our future development plans • Recently announced an acquisition of 28 miles of high pressure

gathering pipelines in Washington and Greene counties

Committed to owning and operating midstream assets to ensure off-take capacity from the wellhead Rice Gathering and Water System

We will replicate the strategy deployed in Pennsylvania of owning and operating our own midstream system in Ohio • Expect to have our gathering system in Belmont County substantially

complete by Q2 2015 • Plan to invest $375 million in midstream infrastructure, including our

~$110 million Momentum acquisition, in 2014 Focused on securing long haul firm transport (FT) and firm sales (FS)

takeaway capacity to provide certainty of sales • Heavy investment from 3rd party off-takers will provide additional

flexibility for long haul transportation & storage • We continue to identify and acquire additional takeaway capacity to

facilitate production growth

Development Plans

Washington

Greene

Belmont

Momentum Acquisition

25

Financial Policy

26

Focus on financial flexibility provides downside protection, especially in commodity price down-cycle Operate vast majority of our properties to control timing, execution and cost of our drilling program Maintain a minimum of $200 million of liquidity, consisting of cash on hand and borrowing base availability Pro forma for the Senior Unsecured Notes, we will have $1,099 million of liquidity (as of 12/31/13) Expect borrowing base to increase meaningfully as a result of successful drilling program

Focus on Financial Flexibility

Acreage strategy driven by quality over quantity Built leasehold position through carefully selected and privately negotiated acreage acquisitions and low risk bolt-on

opportunities; leasehold budget is highly discretionary and will be deployed opportunistically Targeting the core of the Marcellus and Utica with single well IRRs of 70% - 119% and break even pricing between

$1.84 - $2.82 per Mcfe

Maintain Conservative

Business Model

Committed to building and owning midstream infrastructure to meet our production growth Allows us to commercialize our production more quickly and provides us with a competitive advantage in acquiring bolt-

on acreage Will continue to enter firm transport and firm sales agreements to assure access to market and diversify basis exposure Over 80% of 2014E gross production contracted through firm transport or firm sales agreements

Midstream Infrastructure

Emphasis

Goal of protecting near-term financial commitments from sudden changes in commodity prices Typically hedge 50% of forecasted production for up to two years out 71.3 Bcf of natural gas production hedged for 2014 at a weighted average index floor price of $4.06 per MMBtu (1)

59.1 Bcf of natural gas production hedged for 2015 at a weighted average index floor price of $4.05 per MMBtu

Active Commodity

Hedging Program

Financial Policy

__________________________ 1. Hedges as of 3/31/14.

27

Commodity Hedging Philosophy We employ financial instruments (primarily swaps and costless collars) to mitigate commodity price risk

Assures a base level of cash flow to reinvest in growth

Typically target hedging of 50% of forecasted production for up to two years out

Add incremental hedges opportunistically beyond two years

Utilize our bank group as counterparties to avoid cash collateral and margin calls

Detailed Hedge Position (1)

__________________________ 1. Hedges as of 3/31/14. 2. The index prices for the natural gas price swaps, collars and puts are based on the NYMEX – Henry Hub last trading day futures price.

2014 2015 2016 2017

NYMEXNatural Gas Swaps (2)

Volume (BBtu/d) 162 92 99 60Price ($/MMBtu) $4.12 $4.16 $4.20 $4.24

Natural Gas Collars (2)

Volume (BBtu/d) 10 70 - -Ceiling Price ($/MMBtu) $5.80 $4.68 N/A N/AFloor Price ($/MMBtu) $3.00 $3.91 N/A N/A

Natural Gas Puts (2)

Volume (BBtu/d) 23 - - -Strike Price ($/MMBtu) $4.55 - - -Put Premium ($/MMBtu) $0.45 - - -

BasisTCOVolume (BBtu/d) 40 35 8 -Swap Price ($/MMBtu) ($0.24) ($0.42) ($0.44) N/A

Dominion South Point / M3 Volume (BBtu/d) 4 25 21 -Swap Price ($/MMBtu) ($0.79) ($0.79) ($0.79) N/A

28

2014 Guidance

Capital Expenditure Budget by Type

Drilling & Completion Capital Expenditure Budget by Area

Net Wells Turned to Sales by Area (2)

Marcellus, 37, 84%

Utica, 7, 16%

Drilling, $580, 47%

Leasehold, $385, 31%

Midstream, $265, 22%

Marcellus, $430, 74%

Utica, $150, 26%

44 Wells $1,230mm (1) $580mm

___________________________ 1. Excludes acquisition capital expenditures of $300 million for ASR buy-in and ~$110 million for Momentum acquisition in 2014. 2. Represents net wells drilled that become revenue producing.

2014 GuidanceIncome Statement Guidance Low HighTotal Net Production (MMcfe/d) 260 310 % Dry Gas 100% 100%

Heat Content (Btu/Scf) 1,050 Lease Operating Expense ($/mcfe) (0.40)$ (0.35)$ Gathering & Transportation ($/mcfe) (0.55)$ (0.45)$ Production Taxes and Impact Fees ($/mcfe) (0.03)$ (0.02)$ Cash G&A ($mm) 40$ 35$

1,050

29

Q1 2014 Preliminary Financial and Operating Data

Low HighOperating statisticsAverage daily net production (MMcfe/d) 205 - 210 Natural gas as a percentage of production 100%Heat content (Btu/Scf) 1,050

Total revenues including the effect -of realized hedging gains and losses ($mm)

Operating expenses ($mm)Lease operating $7 - $6Gathering, compression and transportation $10 - $9Production taxes and impact fees $1 - $1

Realized Prices per mcfeAverage prices before effects of hedges $5.45 Average realized prices after effects of hedges $4.82

Average costs per mcfeLease operating $0.40 - $0.32 Gathering, compression and transportation $0.53 - $0.47 Production taxes and impact fees $0.04 - $0.04

1Q 2014 Preliminary

$89 $91

30

Sources & Uses and Pro Forma Capitalization

Pro Forma Capitalization Proposed Transaction

Sources & Uses

$750 million senior unsecured notes

Proceeds are intended to be used to:

• Repay and permanently retire the $300 million Second Lien Term Loan and pay associated breakage cost of ~$3 million

• Fund general corporate purposes including capital expenditures

• Pay related fees and expenses

___________________________ 1. Pro forma for Initial Public Offering and Alpha Shale Resources acquisition. Does not include ~$110 million cash consideration for Momentum acquisition. 2. As of April 9, 2014, there was cash on hand of ~$182.6 million. 3. As of April 10, 2014, there were no outstanding borrowings under the revolving credit facility. 4. Net of unamortized original issue discount of ~$3.9 million. As of April 10, 2014, there were $293.3 million in outstanding borrowings under the second lien term loan, net of unamortized original issue discount of ~$3.7 million. 5. Other debt includes (i) $7mm of convertible debentures outstanding as of 12/31/13, (ii) $8mm of NPI note and (iii) $3mm of other debt 6. As of April 10, 2014, there were $71.3 million of outstanding letters of credit.

Sources Amount % of TotalSenior Unsecured Notes $750 100.0%Total Sources $750 100.0%

Uses Amount % of TotalRepayment of Second Lien Term Loan $298 39.7%General Corporate Purposes 435 57.9%Fees & Expenses 15 2.0%Breakage Fees 3 0.4%Total Uses $750 100.0%

As of December 31, 2013As (1) Notes As Further

($ in millions) Adjusted Adj. Adjusted

Cash (2) $347 $435 $782

Borrowing Base Credit Facility (3) - - -Second Lien Term Loan (4) 294 (294) -Senior Unsecured Notes - 750 750Other Debt (5) 18 - 18Total Debt $312 $456 $768

Shareholders' Equity 1,134 (13) 1,121Total Capitalization $1,446 $443 $1,889

LiquidityBorrowing Base $350 $350Less: Borrowings - -Less: Letters of Credit (6) (33) (33)Plus: Cash (2) 347 782Available Liquidity $664 $1,099

On April 11, 2014, Rice announced the private placement offering of $750mm of senior notes due 2022

31

Appendix

32

Rice Energy History

__________________________ Note: Initial Production refers to 24 hour IP test rate.

April 2013 Closed new $500 million

Senior Secured Borrowing Base Credit Facility, $300 million Second Lien Term Loan and received $200 million follow-on equity investment from NGP

Feb 2007 Rice Energy founded

with $50 million equity investment by

the Rice Family

May 2009 Acquired initial

615 net acre foothold in the

Marcellus (Washington County, PA)

Jan 2014 Completed $1.1 billion Initial

Public Offering

Jan 2014 Acquired ANR’s 50% JV interest for $300 million,

funded with $100 million of cash and $200 million of Rice

Energy shares

Feb 2010 Formed 50% / 50% Joint Venture with

Alpha Natural Resources (NYSE: ANR) to develop

certain properties in the Marcellus

(Greene County, PA)

Nov 2012 Acquired initial ~33,500 net acre foothold in the Utica (Belmont County, OH)

Feb 2014 Entered agreement to

purchase certain gathering assets in

the Marcellus (Washington &

Greene Counties, PA) from

Momentum for ~$110 million

October 2010 Completed first

horizontal well in the Marcellus, X-Man

1H with 8.6 MMcf/d IP (2,444’ lateral)

October 2013 Signed Development & Area of Mutual Interest

Agreement with Gulfport in the Utica

(Belmont County, OH) on ~50,000 net acres

Jan 2012 Natural Gas Partners

(“NGP”) invested $100 million of equity in Rice

Energy

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

($ / MMBtu)

Rice’s formative years were during a $2.00-$4.00 gas price environment; being a nimble, low-cost producer is in our DNA

March 2014 Successfully drilled and cased Bigfoot

9H Utica well

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

$9.00

$10.00

$11.00

$12.00

$13.00

$14.00

Jan-07 Mar-08 Jun-09 Aug-10 Nov-11 Jan-13 Apr-14Henry Hub Spot Price

33

Determination of Identified Drilling Locations

Our gross (net) identified drilling locations are those drilling locations identified by management based on the following criteria:

Drillable Locations – These are mapped locations that our Vice President of Exploration & Geology has deemed to have a high likelihood as being drilled or are currently in development but have not yet commenced production. With respect to our Pennsylvania acreage, we had 224 gross (200 net) pro forma drillable Marcellus locations and 134 gross (117 net) pro forma drillable Upper Devonian locations as of December 1, 2013. With respect to our Ohio acreage, as of December 1, 2013, we had 637 gross (192 net) drillable Utica locations, all of which are located within the contract areas covered by our Development Agreement and AMI Agreement with Gulfport.

Estimated Locations – These remaining estimated locations are calculated by taking our total acreage, less acreage that is producing or included in drillable locations, and dividing such amount by our expected well spacing to arrive at our unrisked estimated locations which is then multiplied by a risking factor. We assume these Marcellus locations have 6,000 foot laterals and 600 foot spacing between Marcellus wells which yields approximately 80 acre spacing. We assume these Upper Devonian locations have 6,000 foot laterals and 1,000 foot spacing between Upper Devonian wells which yields approximately 140 acre spacing. We assume these Utica locations have 8,000 foot laterals and 600 foot spacing between Utica wells which yields approximately 110 acre spacing. With respect to our Pennsylvania acreage, we multiply our unrisked estimated Marcellus and Upper Devonian locations by a risking factor of 50% to arrive at total risked estimated locations. As a result, we had 125 gross (125 net) pro forma estimated risked Marcellus locations and 77 gross (77 net) pro forma estimated risked Upper Devonian locations as of December 1, 2013. With respect to our Ohio acreage, we multiply our unrisked estimated locations by a risking factor of approximately 37% to arrive at total risked estimated locations. We then apply our assumed working interest for such location, calculated by applying the impact of assumed unitization on the underlying working interest as well as, in the case of locations within the AMI with Gulfport, the applicable participating interest. As a result, as of December 1, 2013, we had 116 gross (41 net) estimated risked Utica locations. Estimated locations include ununitized locations that have been risked (50% in the Marcellus, 37% in the Utica) to take into account the risk of forming drilling units.

Net Risked Locations – Consist of Drillable Locations and Estimated Locations. We assume 325 net risked Marcellus locations (200 pro forma net drillable Marcellus locations and 125 pro forma net estimated risked Marcellus locations). We assume 233 net risked Utica locations (192 pro forma net drillable Utica locations and 41 net estimated risked Utica locations).

Unrisked Locations – Consist of Drillable Locations and Estimated Locations without applying our risking factor. We assume 450 net unrisked Marcellus locations (200 pro forma net drillable Marcellus locations and 250 pro forma net estimated unrisked Marcellus locations). We assume 304 net unrisked Utica locations (192 pro forma net drillable Utica locations and 112 net estimated unrisked Utica locations)

Additional Disclosures