LNG Comparisons

"Is LNG better than coal?" "What's the difference between LNG and pipeline gas?" "Why not just use CNG?" These are among the most common questions in energy debate, and the answers are rarely a simple yes or no — they depend on what you measure, where, and over what timescale. This section collects careful, like-for-like comparisons that spell out the assumptions behind each conclusion.

Available comparisons

Quick reference: the same gas in different forms

Before comparing LNG to other fuels, it helps to understand how natural gas itself changes depending on how it is stored and moved:

Property LNG (Liquefied) Pipeline Gas CNG (Compressed)
State Liquid, -162°C Gas, ambient Gas, ambient temp
Pressure ~1 bar (atmospheric) 50-100 bar 200-250 bar
Volume reduction 600:1 1:1 ~200:1
Energy density ~22.2 MJ/L ~0.034 MJ/L (STP) ~9 MJ/L
Best use case Intercontinental shipping Regional distribution Vehicle fuel, off-grid

Key point: LNG, pipeline gas, and CNG are the same product — predominantly methane. What differs is the physics of storage and transport, and therefore the economics of moving the energy from where it is produced to where it is burned.

How we approach comparisons

  • State the boundary. Combustion-only, well-to-power, or full lifecycle? The headline number changes dramatically depending on where you draw the line.
  • Name the timescale. Methane's warming effect looks very different over 20 years versus 100 years, which matters whenever gas is compared to other fuels on climate grounds.
  • Be explicit about assumptions. Methane leakage rate, plant efficiency, and regional fuel prices are the variables that most often flip a conclusion.
  • Separate global from local. A fuel can be better for global CO₂ yet worse — or better — for the air quality of people living next to the plant.

Last reviewed on May 29, 2026. Comparisons summarise publicly available data from the linked primary sources; verify current figures before citing.