So What Do You Do When There Is No Pipeline?

Claus Emmer, Chart USA

Vaclav Chrz, Chart Ferox

1 What is LNG
LNG is the acronym for “Liquefied Natural Gas”.
Unit Energy Content
It is produced by cooling natural gas to a temperature
Fuel
at which it becomes a liquid. This temperature varies BTU/US
with pressure. LNG is typically used at pressure be- Gal
Mj/Liter
tween 0 MPa ( -161.2 °C) and 1.03 MPa (-121 °C). No 2 Diesel 128,000 35.68
LNG has good energy density making it a very useful
Biodiesel (B20) 117,000 32.61
way of transporting fuel energy, as shown in Table 1.
Gasoline 109,000 30.38
Typically, LNG has a higher purity than pipeline natural
gas, since many impurities are removed by the lique- LPG 84,000 23.41
faction process. Ethanol (E85) 80,000 22.30
LNG 73,500 20.49
LNG is a colorless, odorless liquid that is kept in insu-
Methanol (M85) 56,000 15.61
lated containers to prevent it from evaporating. As it
only exist at very low temperatures operator training is CNG (Compressed) 33,000 9.20
required. In liquid state, LNG is not flammable. It can- Hydrogen ( Liquid) 30,500 8.50
not remain liquid at ambient temperatures. When evaporated it presents all the attractive prop-
erties of natural gas – narrow flammability range, hard to ignite, no soil contamination, and ten-
dency to rise in the air The energy density of 20.49 Mj/Liter make it significantly more attractive
than CNG for mobile or remote applications.
From the above table, it is evident that LNG is a very effective energy carrier if limitations such
as container volume or road transportation laws are in force. It is self evident that existing pipe-
lines are the most effective way to transport of fluids or gases in large volumes. But what if the
pipelines do not exist at the required location or the required volume is relatively small? Ask the
questions:
“How many gasoline or diesel stations have gasoline piped to them?”
“How many industries have a private liquid fuel pipelines?
“Why don’t they have pipelines going to them?”
The answer - economics -- are equally applicable to liquefied natural gas. LNG can be trans-
ported in tanker trucks or rail cars like any other fuel.

2 Everybody feels a ship for LNG is normal – why not a truck?

LNG shipments between countries and continents are a regular part of the LNG infrastructure.
LNG tankers have been in operation for several decades with a remarkable safety record. A pic-
torial description of the process:

Production - LNG Tanker - Marine Terminal

Similar methods are used to transport LNG over land.

1 of 8
LNG is produced either from gas, or is received in liquid form at a terminal. A truck loading sta-
tion is then used to load the LNG onto road tankers – very similar to gasoline tankers, and then
distributed to the use points as required.
These road tankers are very efficiently insulated and can go for very long distances without
losses. In the United States, all tankers must be rated with a “One Way Travel Time” (OWTT)
that is the number of hours that a tanker can circulate without pressure in the tanker reaching
relief valve settings. Many US LNG tankers have an OWTT in excess of 1000 hours – giving them
the ability to transport LNG without losses to any point on the continent.
It is self evident that the costs of transporting a fluid or gas through an existing pipeline that is
below capacity are lower than any other form of transportation. If however a pipeline does not
exist – or cannot carry more product – then relative capital costs suggest that using road tankers
or other mobile equipment is a lower cost solution than building a new pipeline to the destination
for low volumes. Low volumes would be on the order of 50,000 to 100,000 tons of gas per year.
As the following table suggests, LNG is an effective ways to transport energy – the essence of a
fuel. LPG and LNG are relatively close in payload capacity – in both cases the trailers require
special configuration. In the case of LPG it is extra weight of the container since LPG is stored
under pressure, and in the case of LNG it is extra insulation since the LNG is stored at low tem-
perature.

Payload
Unit Energy Content
Fuel Vol. Weight Energy
BTU/US Gal BTU/l Mj/l Liter Lbs Kg BTU Mj
No 2 Diesel 128,000 33,814 35.68 27,991 52,500 23,814 946,480,000 998,600
Gasoline 109,000 28,795 30.38 32,302 52,500 23,814 930,120,000 981,300
Biodiesel (B20) 117,000 30,908 32.61 26,460 52,500 23,814 817,820,000 862,800
LPG 84,000 22,190 23.41 36,691 41,000 18,597 814,180,000 859,000
LNG 73,500 19,417 20.49 41,179 39,162 17,764 799,560,000 843,600
Ethanol (E85) 80,000 21,134 22.30 1,625 52,500 23,814 668,350,000 705,100
Methanol (M85) 56,000 14,794 15.61 30,259 52,500 23,814 447,640,000 472,300
CNG (Compressed) 33,000 8,718 9.20 29,700 8,395 3,808 258,920,000 273,200
Hydrogen ( Liquid) 30,500 8,057 8.50 31,097 4,799 2,177 250,560,000 264,400
Note:Hydrogen capacity is volume liminted.CNG transport in composite cylinders.
Using USA road regulations and a GVW of 80,000 Lbs.

2 of 8
3 Basics of an LNG transportation value chain
LNG is produced by cooling the purified methane to a point where it liquefies. LNG, like any other
cryogen, liquefies at higher temperatures under higher pressures. Selection of the liquefaction
parameters then depends on the downstream operation of the system. Liquefaction systems for
LNG destined for gasification systems for example, are often tailored to produce LNG saturated
at 5 bar pressure. The end application can tolerate higher pressures. It should be noted however
that LNG saturated at higher pressures has less density, thus storage capacities are lower than
at low pressures. The trailers to carry LNG are also pressure vessels. The pressure rating of an
LNG transport unit is tailored to the original pressure of the LNG plus the pressure gain from heat
influx through the insulation. In the US, most trailers are rated at 5 bar, with LNG being filled in
at 2 bar pressure. The 3 bar difference – accommodates the possible pressure rise due to the
heat gain during longer transportation times.
The key to effective transport of LNG over road or rail is temperature control. As LNG is main-
tained as a liquid by temperature, rather than pressure, the entire delivery sequence – from pro-
duction to final use - must be tailored to minimize heat gain by the product. Excessive heat gain
will evaporate LNG and thus create losses.
Heat management is particularly important in fueling applications, where a maximum amount of
fuel on board a vehicle is desirable. The colder (lower pressure) the LNG is, the more heat it can
tolerate between manufacture and ultimate destination. The coldest LNG is available from marine
terminals, where LNG is stored at nearly atmospheric pressure.
The first area of heat gain is during storage at the production site. This head gain however can
easily be offset by circulating the vented gases back into the production stream to re-liquefy it.
Once the LNG has been transferred into the transport equipment however, only the effectiveness
of the insulation maintains it liquid.

Insulation Efficiency Maintenance Cost Safety There are several types of road insula-
Multi-layer Very High ~ 12 years High High tion used – multi-layer, composite,
Composite Acceptable ~ 12 years Acceptable High perlite, and foam. Multi-layer insula-
tion has the benefit of being the most
Perlite Low ~ 7 years Medium High
effective and compact – however it
Foam Very low ~ 5 years Very Low Low requires significant manufacturing
technology to apply it. Foam is the lowest cost, but does present significant dangers in normal
use. Multi-layer, composite and perlite insulated tanks are double walled steel vessels, with a
high grade vacuum in the annular space. Maintenance consists of relatively easy vacuum renew-
al. Foam insulated trailers have the insulation covered with thin sheets of plastic or aluminum;
its is difficult to maintain seal against atmospheric humidity. This results in rapid deterioration of
its insulating ability and loss of mechanical consistency within few years. Repairs require the ex-
change of the entire insulation. There are indications that foam insulated tankers may be prohi-
bited for LNG service, since the only BLEVE (Boiling Liquid Evaporated Vapor Explosion) known to
have occurred in an LNG vessel was with a foam insulated road tanker.
In the US, transport units are tested and rated for a One Way Travel Time (OWTT), which is the
time the transport can travel before pressure build up from heat gain in the unit reaches relief
valve settings. A typical perlite road tanker can go more than 1000 hours before reaching relief
valve settings.

4 How is it handled
At destination, LNG must be pump transferred to maintain thermal control of the system. Trans-
ferring by pressure only is wasteful both in time as well as product. Tests done at Chart Inc. sev-
eral years ago indicate that losses in excess of 10% due to flash loss will occur when pressure
transferring common cryogenic fluids. Pumping however also adds some heat to the fluid being
pumped, giving good reasons to start with liquid as cold as possible.

3 of 8
It is important that the system into which the LNG is being filled is also thermally efficient, to
prevent excessive pressure rise and potential venting. This need is met excellently with vacuum
insulated tanks.

5 Where can it be used

LNG can be used in satellite stations, where it is stored in cryogenic tanks and vaporized to feed
a local distribution pipeline. A classic case of this application is in the USA, where the city of
Jackson’s Hole is supplied by LNG by truck, and a local in-town pipeline network distributes it to
the various homes. During the coldest part of the year as much as 600,000 US Gallons per
month are transported to the town1. Similar applications – particularly in the northeastern part
of the USA, has LNG tanks used at sites where the pipeline system is overburdened, to inject va-
porized gas into the pipelines during peak demand. LNG satellite stations are being used success-
fully in many countries, particularly in Spain, Norway, Poland, Turkey, China, Australia, USA,
Brazil, and others4,5.
For purposes of this discussion vehicle fueling with LNG will be the primary focus.

6 Easy Pickings – vehicles

In vehicles, the amount of fuel (energy) that they can carry
determines their range, autonomy, and their operating costs.
The large amount of energy that each volume of diesel fuel,
as well as the efficiencies of the diesel cycle engine, have
made this fuel as the preferred fuel for heavy duty transports
that use fuel at a significant rate. Diesel fuel is thus the opti-
mum solution, however it has the drawback of being a known
carcinogen, steadily increasing costs due to scarcity, and rela-
tively high emissions with negative environmental impact.
LNG’s relative abundance, coupled with high energy density
makes it a compact and effective fuel for onboard use, and
has extremely low emissions. Any number of fuel tanks may be put on a vehicle. Guidelines in
the US are given by NFPA-57 and SAE J-2343.
LNG as a fuel has several other advantages.
 It can be located where the traffic is,
not where the pipeline is.
 It is reasonably energy-dense, so
transportation to sites is efficient.
 It can be stored on site in any volume
desired
 It is simple to pump – both directly as
a liquid into a fuel tank, or by positive

4 of 8
 displacement pumps to a high pressure liquid that can the directly be vaporized to a high
pressure gas.
 Fueling is fast and effective
A common objection to LNG from the general public is that it is a
cryogenic liquid, and therefore inherently dangerous and impossible to
handle. Cryogenic fluids have been used and transported on all conti-
nents since the 1940’s. Cryogenic nitrogen is used in pubs in England
to make beer gas mixtures, cryogenic oxygen is used for patient care
in the US – some patients even carry small cryogenic containers the
size of a handbag with an 8 hours supply of supplemental oxygen with
them. Cryogenic argon is used for welding in the field. The technolo-
gy for handling cryogenic fluids is well known and has been developed
over the years to be a robust and safe technology. LNG is just anoth-
er cryogenic fluid which, if used with the appropriate equipment, LOX Tank
presents no more hazards than any other hydrocarbon fuels.
On vehicles in particular, LNG is a useful total replacement, or partial substitute for diesel or gas-
oline. The tanks, though double walled, are relatively light weight and the storage density (see
previous table) allows the vehicle to have a good range between refills.
It is particularly interesting in these times to look for alternative fuels for vehicles, since we are
coming to the realization that fossil fuel reserves – particularly oil – will continue to decrease,
and the market value of fuels of will climb in response to supply and demand. Large, relatively
untapped reserves of natural gas still exist; gas fields, coal beds, methane hydrates, etc.
LNG allows the construction of a fueling site anywhere – not just along a pipeline. Regulations in
California2 imply that a alternative fueling station must be within 5 miles of the vehicles home
base. Generally, a pipeline suitable for CNG systems is not located within 5 miles of a road,
much less at locations where the most traffic occurs.

6.1 How is it done now – Mother Daughter3

TRUCK DELIVERY (E.G., FROM COMPRESSED NAT- OPTIONAL COM- DISPENSER

COMPRESSION PLANT) URAL GAS TUBE PRESSOR & HP
TRAILER GAS STORAGE

Gas is compressed at a pipeline location, and transported in trailers to the station site. This will
require a minimum of two transport units to function – one being filled and transported, the oth-
er to act as a supply at the site. There are costs at each phase – to compress the gas into the
tube trailer, the cost to transport the trailer, and the cost to recompress part of the gas at site to
meet the fill pressures required. Due to the low energy density of CNG, the containers are very
expensive relative to the volume delivered and stored. The energy and cost to compress the gas
(two times) compares significantly to the cost of liquefaction.
Energy to Energy for Liquefac-
Energy to fill Total Energy % Energy to liquefy
Pipeline Pressure Recompress tion
tube trailer Compression vs. Compressing to
PSIA (bara) to fill (100 TPD plant,)
kWh/kg kWh/kg Tube trailers
kWh/kg kWh/kg

20 (1.38) 0.35 0.19 0.54 0.56 104%

40 (4.14) 0.27 0.19 0.46 0.53 115%

600 (41.38) 0.11 0.19 0.30 0.39 130%

5 of 8
This energy cost, combined with the more frequent trip cost for CNG as compared to LNG, as
well as the lower station operating costs make LNG an attractive alternative.

7 LCNG

LNG

TRUCK DELIVERY (E.G., FROM LIQUEFAC- LNG STORAGE, PUMPING, VAPORIZA- DISPENSER
TION PLANT OR TERMINAL) TION, HP GAS STORAGE

LCNG takes advantage of the much simpler direct displacement pump as compared to a multis-
tage compressor. A 34 Nm3/min LNG direct displacement pump requires a 44 kW motor to
compress LNG to 310 bar LCNG. Vaporizing is generally done with ambient vaporizers, so there
are no additional energy costs. Maintenance is simple – a major overhaul can be done in a few
hours.
Since LNG is a very pure form of natural gas, no pre-treatment such as dryers or filters is re-
quired. On the other hand, odorant must be added after compression. In the United States,
fleets have gotten permission to use un-odorized gas if the vehicle is quipped with a gas detec-
tor.

7.1 Economics of LCNG

Tube Trailer Route LCNG Route

CNG LCNG
Cost of Trailer US $ 200,000 Cost of Trailer ########
Average Driving Speed 55 mph Average Driving Speed 55 mph
Distance from Plant 100 miles Distance from Plant 100 miles
Time to Fill 4 hours Time to Fill 0.91
Hook and unhoock time 0.5 hours Hook and unhoock time 0.5 hours
Volume per Delivery 5,000 NM3 Volume per Delivery 23,600 NM3
Delivery cost 1.5 US$/mile Delivery cost 1.5 US$/mile
Power Costs 0.007 US$/kw Power Costs 0.007 US$/kw

No of Vehciles at Site 100 No of Vehciles at Site 100

Usage per vehcile (Gasoline Gallon Equivalents) 50 GGE Usage per vehcile (Gasoline Gallon Equivalents) 50 GGE
Shifts 3 Shifts 3
Total Usage 150 Total Usage 150
Equivalent NM3 590 Equivalent NM3 590
Total Daily Usage 59,000 NM3 Total Daily Usage 59,000 NM3
Total Tube Trailers used 11.8 Cryogenic Trailers used 2.50
Trailers per hour used 0.49 Trailers per hour used 0.10
Tube Trailers on site 3.00 Time to fill Tailers at 700 LPM) + 30 Minutes 0.91
Trailers filling ( 1 trailer every 4 hours ) 1.967 Time to unload Trailers at site at 700 LPM + 30 min 0.91
Trailers in Transit: (100 miles x 2 / 55 mph plus 0.5 hours handling 2.03 Trailers filling ( 1 trailer fills in about 0.91 hours ) 0.095
Total Trailers (on site, in transit & filling) 8.00 Transit tims: (100 miles x 2 / 55 mph plus 0.5 hours handling 4.14
Daily Delivery Costs (11.8 trips x 200 miles x 1.5 US$/mile $ 3,540 Total Trailers in-use time (on site, in transit & filling) 14.89
Cost per site per year - Mother Daughter $1,260,240 Percent trailer usage 62%
Trailers needed 1
Daily Delivery Costs (2.5 trips x 200 miles x 1.5 US$/mile $ 750.00
Cost per site per year - Cryogenic pump and Trailer $ 267,000

Tube Trailer Route LCNG Route

Compression Needed at Plant (Assume 200 PSI source) 41 NM3/min Power needed - to fill - 30 hp pump (22.3710 Kw estimate) 51 kwh
Cryogenic Pump Power Required Power needed - to offload - 30 hp pump (22.3710 Kw estimate) 51 kwh
Assume 200 PSI inlet - 250 hp at 200 PSI inlet and 1200 SCFH Power needed to pump LCNG ( catalog Data: 46 NM3/min needs 100 Hp) 90 hp
(41 NM3/min x 35.31 ft3/mr / 1200 scf/min x 250 hp) 241.12 hp LCNG Pump Power: (90 horsepower per hour is 68 kwh X 24 hours) 1,611 kwh
Power/Day ( 1 hp-hour = 0.7457 kwh) 4,315 kwh Trailer Loading and Offloading per day at 0.007 $/kwh $ 0.71
Power Costs per day $ 30 LCNG Pump Costs per day at 0.007 kwh/day: $ 11.27
Same Power Costs at fueling site per day $ 30 Total Power costs per day $ 11.99
Yearly Power Costs $ 22,100
Total Costs to operate a site with tube trailers $1,282,340 Total Power costs per year $ 4,375

Tube Trailer Cost $1,600,000 Total Cryogenic LNG cost $ 271,400

LCNG Trailer Cost $ 300,000

The economics of transporting and using LNG are self evident. To supply a medium sized truck
or bus fleet via the “Mother-Daughter” will cost around 1.3 million dollars a year, versus 0.3 mil-
lion dollars a year with LNG. Naturally, transport and power costs must be tailored to the eco-
nomics of a specific country.

6 of 8
The economics also work for smaller systems. Using the same calculations,
Transport Costs Site Costs Total Cost
Yearly Costs to OIperate No CNG L NG CN G LNG CNG LNG
10 $ 126,024 $ 26,700 $ 128,324 $ 438 $ 254,348 $ 27,138
20 $ 252,048 $ 53,400 $ 256,548 $ 875 $ 508,596 $ 54,275
$1,400,000
30 $ 378,072 $ 80,100 $ 384,772 $ 1,313 $ 762,844 $ 81,413
40 $ 504,096 $ 106,800 $ 512,966 $ 1,750 $ 1,017,062 $ 108,550
$1,200,000
50 $ 630,120 $ 133,500 $ 641,220 $ 2,188 $ 1,271,340 $ 135,688

$1,000,000
Particularly on smaller systems, the cost of
$800,000 transport equipment is reduced, as one
Cost

CNG

$600,000
LNG port tanker can fill many stations.
$400,000

$200,000
8 Accessibility freedom
$-
through of LNG
10 20 30 40 50
The current dilemma is that generally roads
Vehicles being filled with 50 GGE
and pipelines – much less high pressure pipe-
lines, do not run side by side. Natural gas fueling stations are therefore not generally located in
high traffic areas where use – and revenue – would be greatest. To bring a pipeline to the high
traffic area would cost on the order of $600,000 to $3,000,000 per kilometer, and would cause
major traffic problems for a long time in cities where the greatest traffic lies. Alternatively, the
gas can be brought in high pressure containers to a site for transfilling. Some cost approxima-
tions for this have been shown in the previous table.

8.1 Cost of inaccessibility

The following table demonstrates approximate direct costs of a detour. Additional costs would be
incurred from lost opportunity during the detour time, additional equipment required due to ca-
pacity lost during the detour, etc.
Costs of CNG off-motorway/highway fueling

Distance to the CNG refueling station off-direction one way. km 2 5 8 11 14

both the ways there and return km 4 10 16 22 28
truck gas specific consumption m3/100km 33 50 50 50 50
total gas consumption m3 1.32 5 8 11 14
unit price of gas $/m3 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
price of additional gas for detour $ 0.66 2.5 4 5.5 7

average truck speed during branching to the station km/h 40 40 40 40 40

time spent on detour hours 0.1 0.25 0.4 0.55 0.7
cost of labor (incl. overhead, taxing etc.) $/hour 20 20 20 20 20
cost of drivers additional time $ 2 5 8 11 14

vehicle price $ 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000

vehicle lifetime km 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
vehicle maintenance and other operation costs $/km 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
vehicle depreciation $/km 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
additional vehicle costs $ 1.2 3 4.8 6.6 8.4

additional costs - total $ 3.86 10.5 16.8 23.1 29.4

Vehicle CNG capacity m3 80 80 80 80 80

vehicle range on one CNG filling km 242 242 242 242 242
reduction in paying run % 1.7% 6.3% 10.0% 13.8% 17.5%
Costs to fill vehicle with CNG $ 40 40 40 40 40
increase of fuel gas price due to drive to the station % 10% 26% 42% 58% 74%

An LNG or LCNG station has the flexibility to be placed anywhere so as to minimize detour costs.

7 of 8
9 Increased range through LNG
The benefits of placing a fueling station at a location that minimizes detour costs are self evident.
LNG/LCNG stations have the added benefit that the natural gas stored at the stations can be dis-
pensed directly as a liquid as well as a high pressure gas. This has the benefit of allowing ve-
hicles with greater range, payload, and uptime using LNG rather than CNG to be used.
LNG can be used directly on board a vehicle. it is stored in superinsulated tanks and warmed up
with engine coolant. Due to the greater energy density, LNG vehicles have an autonomous range
or at least 3 times the range of a similar CNG vehicle. LNG fueling systems will fill at a rate of
150 or more liters a minute, so a truck can be filled for a 1,000+ km trip in 3 to 4 minutes. Fill-
ing as CNG, on the other hand, will take at least twice as long with a very high capacity dispens-
er.
Often, the configuration of the vehicles does not allow placement of sufficient CNG fuel tanks to
allow the vehicle to meet mission requirements. This is true in the example of waste hauling ve-
hicles, for example, where space is at a premium and fuel consumption is high because of fre-
quent stops for hydraulic compressing of the cargo. As refuse and also town cleaning vehicles
operate in the most populated streets, their conversion to LNG brings maximum economical and
environmental effect. Other LNG application branches are municipal busses and long distance
heavy trucks, both being successfully operated in USA and some other countries.

10 Conclusion
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) can be transported over land as easily as it is transported by sea. It
is a relatively dense form of storing and transporting energy, with transport payloads of 843,600
MJ per trip, higher than Ethanol, Methanol, CNG, or Liquid Hydrogen. As such, the distribution model
and distribution economics used for fuels such as gasoline or diesel can be applied also to LNG.
The energy cost to liquefy LNG compared to the energy cost to compress CNG, is only slightly
higher. If the small incremental energy cost to liquefy natural gas rather than compressing it is
combined with the very large savings in transportation and storage costs, LNG shows clear ad-
vantages as over transported CNG.
Further benefits of LNG is that a fueling station can be placed wherever required, and a supply of
fuel can easily be stored at the site. The detour costs from having to locate a CNG station near a
pipeline, rather than a traffic area, can be a significant part of the costs of operating a vehicle.
The longer the detour, the greater the cost in range as well as operating costs.
LNG can be used directly as a liquid on vehicles, with obvious benefits in vehicle autonomy, payl-
oad, and flexibility. The nature of cryogenics is well understood, and proper design and training
make LNG simple to use.

1
Data from ALT Fuels, Amarillo, TX.
2
AQMD Form FORM 1196-1186.1TICR
3
Transport scenario sketches courtesy of Charles Powars, St Croix research
4 Chrz V., Zaruba P., Zeman J. Emmer C., Technology for small scale LNG applications, Confe-
rence on Small LNG in Europe, Tekna agency, Oslo, Sept. 2005
5 Liquefied Natural Gas: a Promising Energy Vector, Informatory Note on Refrigeration Technolo-
gies, International Institute of Refrigeration, Paris, 2005

8 of 8