Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

LNG: An eco-friendly cryogenic fuel for sustainable development

Satish Kumar a, Hyouk-Tae Kwon b, Kwang-Ho Choi b, Wonsub Lim a, Jae Hyun Cho a, Kyungjae Tak a,
Il Moon a,⇑
a
Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Yonsei University 262-Seongsanno, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-749, Republic of Korea
b
GS Engineering & Construction, GS Yeokjeon Tower, 537 Namdaemun-ro 5-ga, Joong-gu, Seoul 100-722, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: As the demand of natural gas has sharply increased in the last two decades at the global level, the trans-
Received 9 July 2010 portation of natural gas from different parts (gas producing to the consuming areas) of the world has
Received in revised form 7 June 2011 become more significant. Liquefaction of natural gas provides a safer and economical alternative for
Accepted 21 June 2011
transportation and also increases its storage capabilities. The liquefaction process requires the natural
Available online 20 July 2011
gas to be cooled using various methods of cryogenic processes and also be depressurized to atmospheric
conditions for easier and safer storage. LNG transported in cryogenic vessels offers several advantages
Keywords:
over pipeline transport of natural gas especially when the gas consuming areas are far away from the
Compressed natural gas
Liquefied natural gas
gas producing areas. Moreover, LNG as an automobile fuel has a definite edge over other fuels.
Cryogenic fuel This article presents an overview on the characteristics of LNG, present state of affairs of LNG, its import
Green house gases from overseas, CNG vs. LNG as an automobile fuel, eco-friendliness of natural gas fuel, etc. It also dis-
Pollution prevention cusses the potential of natural gas production from different sources.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4265
2. Important features of LNG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4265
2.1. LNG vs. CNG and LPG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4265
3. Worldwide use of LNG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4266
3.1. Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4266
3.2. Electricity production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4267
4. Storage and transport of LNG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4268
5. Worldwide LNG technology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4268
6. Worldwide potential of natural gas vis-a-vis LNG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4269
6.1. Fossil natural gas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4269
6.2. Town gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4270
6.3. Biogas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4270
6.4. Hydrates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4270
7. Lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of LNG vs. oil & coal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4270
8. Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4271
9. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4272
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4272
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4272

Abbreviations: L-NGV, liquefied natural gas vehicle; LNG, liquefied natural gas; CNG, compressed natural gas; LPG, liquefied petroleum gas; LFG, landfill gas; MT, million
tone; MMTA, million metric tone per annum; MJ/m3, megajoule per cubic meter; GGE, gasoline per gallonequivalent; DGE, diesel per gallonequivalent; NGV, natural gas
vehicles; LDV, light duty vehicles; GVR, gas vehicle report; PPG, pound per gallon; PPB, parts per billion; bpd, barrels per day; CO2, carbon dioxide; CO, carbon monoxide; NOx,
nitrogen oxides; SOx, sulfur oxides; GHG, green house gas.
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 2 2123 2761; fax: +82 2 312 6401.
E-mail addresses: vatssatish@yahoo.co.in (S. Kumar), ilmoon@yonsei.ac.kr (I. Moon).

0306-2619/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.06.035
 S. Kumar et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273 4265

1. Introduction 2. Important features of LNG

The worldwide energy demand is increasing continuously and
is projected to grow by an average of 1.2% per year [1]. Owing to
the abundance and the availability of fossil fuels resources, it can
be estimated that they will continue to play a significant role in
the world’s energy economy. Fossil fuels currently provide about
85% of the world’s commercial energy needs.
It has been anticipated that China [2], which today meets al-
most 90% of its power needs with coal, will see its energy demand
for power generation more than double by the next century, sur-
passing US demand by more than one-third [2,3]. Currently, auto-
mobile is responsible for more than half of total oil demand and
this demand is expected to grow substantially. Demand in devel-
oped countries is expected to be essentially flat in contrast to
developing countries as economic growth and rising prosperity
leads to a dramatic increase in personal vehicles.
At the same time, global CO2 emissions are projected to rise by
close to 30% between 2005 and 2030, even with improved energy
efficiency and growth in nuclear and renewable energies [1].
Therefore, in order to fulfill the increasing energy demand and
to reduce the environment CO2% a drive to find alternative fuels
[4] to replace hydrocarbons such as diesel and petrol has resulted
in a plethora of different fuels—few of which are commercially
available in significant quantities. Natural gas is one of them which
is widely available and renewable (through the production of bio-
gas or bio-methane), offers greenhouse gas reductions and pro-
duces fewer emissions compared to other traditional and
alternative fuels. Natural gas can be used either as compressed nat-
ural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG) or even blended with
hydrogen. The use of natural gas vehicles (NGVs) also facilitates
energy security and energy diversity.
Thus, natural gas has emerged as the most preferred fuel due to
its inherently environmental benignity, greater efficiency and cost
effectiveness. For long distance transportation of natural gas, natu-
ral gas liquefaction has many advantages over pipeline transporta-
tion. A comparison of world’s natural gas supplies via pipeline vs.
LNG is represented in Fig. 1.
Like all natural gases, LNG is cleaner than coal and oil, and offers
an opportunity to diversify energy supplies. Hence, within the gas
market the use of LNG has gained much recognition globally and it
is the right moment to review the status of LNG development with
regard to various resources of natural gas, storage, transportation,
utilization of LNG in different sectors and to trace the desirability
of LNG technology.
400
Production
350
Pipeline trade
LNG trade
Index ( 2001= 100 )
Natural gas is a mixture of paraffinic hydrocarbons such as
methane, ethane, propane and butane, etc. Small amounts of high-
er hydrocarbons such as ethylene may be present apart from car-
bon dioxide, a trace amount of hydrogen sulfide and nitrogen.
Since, LNG is the cleanest form of natural gas and contains more
than 98% methane therefore, it becomes synonyms to methane.
Natural gas is a low density (0.789 basis air) and low sulfur content
fuel as compared to gasoline, and is practically free from carbon
monoxide emission.
Natural gas is converted to LNG by cooling it down to 162 °C
[5], at which it becomes a liquid and this process reduces its vol-
ume [6] by a factor of more than 600. The ability to convert natural
gas to LNG, which can be shipped on specially built ocean-going
ships, provides consumers with access to vast natural gas resources
worldwide.
LNG is a clear, odorless, non-toxic, non-corrosive, cryogenic li-
quid at atmospheric pressure. The density of LNG is approximately
0.4–0.5 kg/L, depending on temperature, pressure and composi-
tion, compared to water at 1.0 kg/L. Thus LNG, if spilled on water,
floats on top and vaporizes rapidly. In the absence of an ignition
source, LNG evaporates quickly and disperses, leaving no residue.
Hence, no environmental cleanup needed for LNG spills on water
or land. LNG, when vaporized in gaseous form, will only burn in
concentrations of between 5% and 15% mixed [7] in the air. The re-
moval of acid gases (gas sweetening) such as CO2 and H2S, from
natural gas before liquefaction is an important process for produc-
ing pure methane. The comparison of various important properties
of LNG with other liquid fuels is given in Table 1 [8].
2.1. LNG vs. CNG and LPG
CNG and LPG are often confused with LNG while CNG and LPG
have quite different properties than LNG at similar conditions of
temperature and pressure.
CNG is a mixture of hydrocarbons consisting of approximately
80–90% methane in gaseous form, and it is colorless, non-carcino-
genic, non-toxic, inflammable and lighter than air. Because of its
low energy density, it is compressed to pressure of 200–250 kg/
cm2 (to enhance the vehicle on-board storage in a cylinder). Supe-
rior to petroleum, it operates at one-third the cost of conventional
fuel and is hence, increasingly becoming popular with automobile
owners.
As far as LPG is concerned, it is a clean, high octane, abundant
and eco-friendly fuel. It is obtained from natural gas through frac-
tionation and from crude oil through refining. It is a mixture of
petroleum gases like propane and butane. LPG is a gas at atmo-
spheric pressure and normal temperatures, but it can be liquefied
when moderate pressure is applied or when the temperature is
sufficiently reduced (42 °C). This property makes the fuel an ideal
Table 1

300 Comparison of physical and chemical properties of LNG with diesel, gasoline and LPG.

Properties LNG Diesel Gasoline LPG

250 Auto ignition 540 316 257 454–450
point (°C)
Flash point (°C) 187 60 45 104
200
Boiling point 160 204 32 42
(°C)
Flammable 5–15 N/A 1.3–6 2.1–9.5
150
range (%)
Stored pressure Atmospheric Atmospheric Atmospheric Pressurized
100 Toxic No Yes Yes No
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Carcinogenic No Yes Yes No
Health hazards None None Eye irritant None
Fig. 1. Comparison of natural gas supply in the form of LNG vs. pipeline.
4266 S. Kumar et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273
energy source for a wide range of applications, as it can be easily
condensed, packaged, stored and utilized. When the pressure is re-
leased, the liquid makes up about 250 times its volume as gas, so
large amounts of energy can be stored and transported compactly.
In liquefied form, the volume of LNG is 600 times less than the
same amount of natural gas at room temperatures while the vol-
ume of CNG is 1% less of its original volume. LNG shipping is there-
fore an economic way of transporting large quantities of natural
gas over long distances as compared to other natural gases such
as CNG and LPG [9,10]. LNG is transported and stored at normal
atmospheric pressure and LNG carriers are purpose-built tank ves-
sels for transporting LNG at sea.
The energy density of LNG is 435 Kg/m3 as compared to 175 kg/
3
m for compressed natural gas (CNG) at 200 bar. This means that
for a given capacity fuel tank, an LNG powered vehicle can travel
up to 2.4 times the distance of the CNG counterpart, or in another
way, for a given vehicle range, an LNG powered vehicle needs up to
2.4 times smaller fuel tank capacity than its CNG counterpart.
Again, an LNG powered vehicle costs less than a CNG powered
vehicle for manufacturing. The capital and maintenance costs of
LNG refueling stations are a fraction of their CNG counterparts
and they do not require any electricity.
Hence, LNG offers special advantages over CNG and LPG in
terms of easier transportation, storage and better density than gas-
eous methane. LNG also offers additional flexibility as liquefied to
compressed natural gas (L-CNG). Additionally, LNG has a role of
contributing to the development of biogas-to-biomethane as a
vehicle fuel, both for gas purification and transport.
3. Worldwide use of LNG
3.1. Transportation
The use of LNG in transport sector is increasing rapidly in many
parts of the world [11]. It is the most commonly used as a clean
burning alternative vehicle fuel in thousands of heavy duty trucks,
buses and waste collection trucks as compared to passenger cars
because on average passenger cars stand idle more often, which
would give rise to high evaporative losses. The use of LNG requires
storage facilities for the cold (-162 °C) liquid natural gas at the
roadside refueling stations and special fuelling equipment which
can handle cryogenic temperatures [12]. In addition, the trucks
must be equipped with special dual fuel engines to use LNG. More-
over, the fuel tank on board of the truck needs to be adapted for
LNG usage. These requirements make the use of LNG relatively
expensive.
LNG is superior to gasoline and oil in terms of calorific value,
which is evident from Table 2 [13,14]. It makes available 41 KJ/kg
for refrigeration as compared to 21.2 kJ/kg for liquid nitrogen. This
characteristic of being able to obtain high refrigeration enables
LNG to be used towards cooling in water jackets or improving
the inter-cooling between compressor stages. In a high output tur-
bo-charged piston engine, the refrigeration effect lowers the over-
all intake charge temperature. This improves power output and
reduces the tendency towards knock and pre-ignition.
It could be efficiently used as aircraft engine and ships engine
fuel owing to its high octane number and easier maintenance. A re-
Table 2
Comparison of energy contents of LNG vs. CNG, diesel, gasoline and LPG.
Fuel CNG
Energy content (gross heating value) 37–40 MJ/m3
46–49 MJ/kg
cent study has revealed that LNG would be the preferred feedstock
for power, chemical, fertilizer [15] and petrochemical plants in fu-
ture. Big power companies are moving away from coal towards
LNG and, in future, it is likely to replace naphtha as the main fuel
for the plants.
Its consumption is expected to grow from, presently, 12.5 mil-
lion tons to 50 million tons by 2016–2017 [16]. Moreover, LNG
has good antiknock characteristics therefore it can be used with
higher compression than gasoline inside the motor without prema-
ture ignition of the fuel/air mixture [17]. Natural gas (LNG) offers a
higher thermal efficiency and lower specific energy consumption
than gasoline and oil, hence, it is expected as a promising fuel for
the future. In addition because of more stringent standards against
environmental emissions and its regulations as well as economic
reason, natural gas is considered as a clean-burning, alternative
fuel for the transportation sector.
A brief review on the use of LNG as a transport fuel is reported
below.
Natural gas has been used as fuel for transportation for decades
and currently, about 11.4 million NGVs of different types are run-
ning either on CNG or LNG worldwide, which correspond to a share
of 1% of the total vehicles population [11,17]. The leading users of
NGVs are Pakistan (2.7 million), Iran (1.95 million), Argentina (1.9
million), Brazil (1.6 million), and India (1.0 million) [17] as repre-
sented in Fig. 2, with the Asia–Pacific region leading with a global
market share with 5.7 million NGVs, followed by Latin America
with almost 4 million vehicles. In Latin America and Asia, the in-
crease of natural gas vehicles has been particularly strong in recent
years when oil prices escalated [18]. These countries together have
more than half of the worldwide existing stock of natural gas vehi-
cles. In Iran and India, the stock of natural gas vehicles amounted
to more than 800,000, followed by Italy (5, 80,000).
However, LNG as a road fuel has already been introduced in the
UK [16]. There are about 3000 LNG vehicles in US that run on LNG
and most LNG vehicles are government owned; there are 40 gov-
ernments – owned 40 LNG fuelling stations at the same time. To-
day, approximately 50 LNG vehicle fueling stations are available
worldwide [19].
The 10 countries following the front runners – among them are
China, Russia and the US–have obviously lower stock figures. How-
ever, they are well above the German stock figure (64,454 NGVs).
With regard to the total car population of a given country, Bangla-
desh has more than 20%, Armenia 13%, Pakistan14%, Argentina and
Brazil have 10% natural gas fueled cars. In contrast, the share of
natural gas fueled cars in Europe is very low.
Even in Italy, where CNG was already used as fuel for cars in
the1930s; natural gas vehicles have a share of only 1.1% of the total
car population. In Germany, the corresponding share is only 0.1%.
In addition to cars, buses and trucks the two-and three-wheel vehi-
cles are also driving with natural gas. However, cars dominate the
natural gas vehicles fleet in those countries where natural gas is
widely used as a vehicle fuel. One exemption is India, where natu-
ral gas cars have a share of 38% natural gas vehicles stock and two
and three-wheeler natural gas vehicles play an important role.
Another exception is the Ukraine with a share of natural gas
cars amounting only to 6%. In Ukraine, buses as well as truck shave
a share of 25%, while, other vehicles even reach a share of about
LNG Diesel Gasoline LPG
25 MJ/L 38.3 MJ/L 34.5 MJ/L 25.4 MJ/L
 S. Kumar et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273
Korea, South
Sweden
Japan
Venezuela
Malaysia
Uzbekistan
Bulgaria
Germany
Russia
Armenia
Peru
United States
Egypt
Bolivia
Bangladesh
Ukraine
Thailand
Colombia
China
Italy
India
Brazil
Argentina
Iran
Pakistan
0 500000
Fig. 2. World’s leading NGVs users. Source: GVR Gas vehicle report 2009.
44%. To compare this with European countries, Germany’s natural
gas cars have a share of 79% of the total natural gas vehicles pop-
ulation, while the share of trucks amounts to 18%, and the share
of buses is very low (2%).
LNG is included as a substitute of crude oil in automotive fuel
chains in a number of studies [20–23]. Williams et al. [20] and Go-
ver et al. [21] studied only a small number of natural gas based
chains. The focus of Gover et al. [21] was specifically on future fuel
chain options for the UK.
The use of LNG as a transportation fuel in the heavy trucking
industry has been reported by William et al. and Litzake et al.
[24–26]. According to their report LNG can directly substitute the
diesel fuel and for heavy-duty vehicle applications, such as haul
trucks, LNG is the most viable option for long range use. The
amount of fuel that can be stored in a liquefied state with cryo-
genic tanks greatly exceeds a CNG system.
Further, the usefulness of LNG as a motor fuel and refrigerant
has been reported by Kirillov [27]. As per their report, LNG is effec-
tive not merely as a cheap and ecologically clean fuel. It may, at the
same time, be a source of refrigeration as well.
In addition to the use of LNG as motor fuel, it is also projected to
be a potential fuel for shipping industry [28,29].
Recently, China and Norway has developed LNG marine engine
[30] and it is expected that this step will be promising in extending
the LNG technology. According to this news, even though a LNG
fueled engine is more expensive than a conventional engine but
it will be viable investment as LNG is less expensive than diesel.
Hence, LNG is providing an economic alternative to diesel in the
heavy duty trucking industry, in port facility vehicles, and increas-
ingly in marine and rail applications.
Although the use of LNG as vehicle fuel is capturing wider
attention worldwide, yet LNG faces some significant challenges
to achieving its full potential share of the global NGV market.
The challenges are listed as follows:
I. There are very few global regulations for L-NGV applications
and there are many remaining gaps in the existing interna-
tional standards. The lack of harmonized standards and reg-
ulations impede opportunities to reduce the cost of
manufacturing and purchasing different LNG equipment.
II. A number of countries have their own national interest and
policies regarding the utilization of energy for transportation
which prohibits the development of various types of L-NGVs
in the areas where there could be a strong LNG market.
4267
1000000 1500000 2000000 2500000
Natural Gas Vehicles
III. Many manufacturers of heavy-duty engines and vehicles –
even those producing NGVs – have not yet adapted their
products for LNG. There are too few products, in particular,
for the very heavy truck-haulage industry or for larger off-
road vehicle applications where LNG could provide eco-
nomic and environmental benefits.
IV. Retrofit systems being installed on various heavy duty
trucks operate at slightly different working pressures,
requiring the LNG to be delivered at different pressures. This
complicates the opportunity to develop a network of harmo-
nized LNG fuelling stations.
V. Consistency of fuel quality, particularly in the cryogenic pro-
cessing of biogas and in LNG fuelling stations faces special
challenges that need to be addressed.
Hence, in order to accept LNG as a vehicle fuel it is recom-
mended to add more global regulations for L-NGV and to develop
infrastructures (LNG fuelling stations and LNG kits for heavy to
light duty vehicles) along with more advanced technologies.
3.2. Electricity production
The use of LNG is not only limited up to transport sector but it is
also useful in the production of electricity. The utilization of the
cryogenic exergy of LNG for the production of electricity has been
reported by many research groups [31–35]. In [35] the authors
propose the introduction of a combined Rankine–Brayton cycle
with CO2 as a working fluid. An additional source of heat is neces-
sary, which is obtained by means of combustion of some amount of
CH4 in oxygen, producing combustion gases with a large content of
CO2 (95%). The transmission of heat to the evaporating LNG would
be very irreversible.
Deng et al. [36] proposed a combined plant producing electric-
ity and refrigeration. The process would utilize the cryogenic exer-
gy of LNG, but also the chemical exergy of some amount of CH4
burnt in oxygen. This solution would not comply with the principle
of combined cogeneration processes, because the cold cycle can be
combined with the refrigeration cycle without any additional heat
source. The working fluid would be CO2 having very inconvenient
thermal properties. Hence, in the proposed installation large exer-
gy losses would appear.
Use of natural gas for power generation has been reported by
Oliveira et al. [37] and Oshima et al. [38]. According to Okamura
et al. [39] LNG is a major source of energy for transport and power
4268 S. Kumar et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273
generation sector, in Japan. They analyzed that the use of LNG con-
tribute greatly to improving the atmospheric environment and
reducing CO2 emissions.
The possibilities of the utilization of cryogenic exergy of LNG for
electricity production without any additional combustion of any its
portion, have been analyzed by Szargut et al. [40] and Dispenza
et al. [41]. According to their study LNG delivered by sea-ships con-
tains considerable cryogenic exergy which can be utilized for elec-
tricity production before its evaporation and introduction into the
system of pipelines. The liquefaction of natural gas consumes a
considerable amount of exergy [42] and some part of that con-
sumption may be recovered by means of a cold power plant utiliz-
ing the cryogenic exergy of LNG. The simplest method of that
utilization might be based on the principle of a cold Rankine cycle
absorbing the evaporation heat from the environment and reject-
ing the heat of condensation to preheat and evaporate LNG. Querol
et al. [43] have reported the method of power generation from
LNG. They carried out the thermoeconomics of different power
generation methods and found that the use of LNG for power gen-
eration is effective.
In addition to transportation and generation of power, LNG is
also used in fertilizer industry [15] and it is also gaining foothold
for cooking, heating homes instead of LPG.
4. Storage and transport of LNG
Types of storage facilities for LNG depend on whether the liquid
is to be used to meet winter shortages of gas (Peak shaving facili-
ties to meet the seasonal fluctuating gas demand) or to supply base
load gas by long distance shipment. In the later case, complete
ships cargos should be loaded into and unloaded from LNG tankers.
Apart from the necessary insulation for minimizing evaporation
losses, it is essential to keep the LNG cargo away from contact with
the ship structure as mild steel becomes brittle below 223 K, and
could lead a disastrous situation. Evaporation losses may be as
low as 0.1% per day for the tank contents, provided insulation is
sufficient. For ocean going vessel reliquefaction facilities, facilities
usually cater for about a 0.3% boil-off.
LNG on shore can be contained in double walled metal tanks not
dissimilar to those used in ships, i.e. aluminum or nickel steel inner
vessels or membranes, surrounded by insulation and external
weather-proofing. In addition, pre stressed concrete tanks can also
be erected above ground, or can be cast below the surface. Finally,
Libya
US
Norway
Eq.Guinea
UAE
Brunai
Oman
Egypt
Trinidad
Australia
Nigeria
Algeria
Indonesia
Malaysia
Quatar
0 5 10
MMTY
Fig. 3. World’s major LNG exporting countries. Source: Global LNG Info.
existing underground spaces specially prepared for LNG storage
can be used. The main advantage of in-ground tanks, both concrete
and natural, is that they do not require containment dykes to col-
lect products from leaking or burst containers. The attraction of
above-ground tanks, on the other hand, is improved control of heat
leakage and also the possibility of repairs.
5. Worldwide LNG technology
The introduction of LNG dates back in 19th century when the
first practical compressor and refrigeration machine was engi-
neered in Munich, Germany, in 1873 [44] and after that LNG gains
foothold in the energy market. Currently, there are 26 liquefaction
and 60 re-gasification terminals in different countries. In addition
to these existing terminals, there are many liquefaction and re-gas-
ification terminal projects that have been either proposed or are
under construction all around the world [45].
Today, Qatar has achieved a major production milestone of 77
million tonnes per annum of LNG, confirming the country’s posi-
tion as the world’s leading producer and supplier of liquefied nat-
ural gas (LNG). Qatar’s natural gas liquefaction facilities and related
industries are located in Ras Laffan industrial city, site of the
world’s largest LNG exports of more than 31 million metric tons
per year. Qatar’s heavy industrial base, located in Messaged, in-
cludes a refinery with 140,000 barrels per day (bpd) capacity, a fer-
tilizer plant for urea and ammonia, a steel plant, and a
petrochemical plant, and several new petrochemical plants are
planned to build in the coming years. All these established and
planned industries are natural gas based. Most are joint ventures
between US, European, and Japanese firms and the state-owned
Qatar Petroleum (QP). The US is the major equipment supplier
for Qatar’s oil and gas industry, and US companies are playing a
major role in the development of the oil and gas sector and petro-
chemicals [46].
PETRONAS is also playing a major role in proliferation of LNG
production, distribution and utilization. The PETRONAS LNG com-
plex in Bintulu, Malaysia, is the world’s second largest integrated
LNG facility at a single location with a combined production capac-
ity of about 23 MMT per annum and LNG is being supplied from
this installation to South Korea [16]. By the end of 2008 Qatar
(30 MMT), Malaysia (23 MMT) and Indonesia (20 MMT) were ma-
jor LNG exporters and the three biggest LNG importers were Japan
15 20 25 30
 S. Kumar et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273 4269

Argentina
Domenic Rep.
Puerto Rico
Greece
UK
Itlay
Mexico
Belgium
Portugal
China
Turkey
India
Taiwan
France
USA
Spain
S.Korea
Japan
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
MMTY

Fig. 4. World’s major LNG importing countries. Source: Global LNG Info.

(70 MMT), South Korea (30 MMT) and Spain (24 MMT) as shown in
Figs. 3 and 4 [47].
The world’s natural gas consumption is increasing and the his-
tory of natural gas indicates that the consumption of natural gas
was 2.5% more in 2008 as compared to 2007 and the contribution
of LNG to this consumption was 7%. Further, the contribution of
LNG to natural gas consumption is projected to increase by 6.7%
per year from 2005 to 2020 [48]. At the same time, the production
of natural gas is also increasing continuously to meet this growing
global energy demand and the production of LNG was found 3.8%
more in year 2008 in comparison to 2007 [18].
Further, natural gas production is expected to grow more than
50% by 2030 [49] when it will overtake coal as the second-biggest
global fuel source. Most of the natural gas demand is expected
from the power generation [40], transportation [11], industrial
and commercial sectors, attracted by the fact that gas is not only
an efficient fuel source but also produces lower emissions than
oil or coal. LNG is projected to be a significant component of the
overall natural supply portfolio. Global natural gas demand in
terms of LNG is reported in Fig. 5. The above facts reflect that
LNG technology is expanding and it will be helpful in diversifying
the natural gas.
6. Worldwide potential of natural gas vis-a-vis LNG
The natural gas industries have a great potential to supply nat-
ural gas because of the availability of worldwide natural gas re-
sources and the successful conversion of natural gas into an
easily transportable LNG. The major sources of natural gas are fos-
sil natural gas, town gas, biogas and hydrates.
6.1. Fossil natural gas
Natural gas is commercially produced from oil and natural gas
fields. Gas produced from oil wells is called associated gas. The nat-
ural gas industry is producing gas from increasingly more challeng-

Fig. 5. Schematic representation of growing global LNG demand. Source: Cedigaz, BP, Shell.
4270 S. Kumar et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273
ing resource types: sour gas [50], tight gas, shale gas [51] and coal
bed methane gas [52]. The world’s total natural gas reserves are
6254.364 Tcf located in different regions/countries as reported in
Table 3[53]. Russia has the world’s largest natural reserves hence;
it is the largest producer of natural gas, through the Gazprom Com-
pany. The world’s second largest gas field is Qatar’s offshore North
Field, estimated to have 891 Tcf [46] of gas in place—enough to last
more than 200 years at optimum production levels. The next larg-
est natural gas field is the South Pars Gas Field in Iranian waters in
the Persian Gulf connected to Qatar’s North Field [54]. Because nat-
ural gas is not a pure product, when non-associated gas is ex-
tracted from a field under supercritical (pressure/temperature)
conditions, it may partially condense upon isothermal depressuriz-
ing—an effect called retrograde condensation. The liquids thus
formed may get trapped by depositing in the pores of the gas res-
ervoir. One method to deal with this problem is to re-inject dried
gas free of condensate to maintain the underground pressure and
to allow re-evaporation and extraction of condensates.
6.2. Town gas
Town gas is a mixture of methane and other gases, [55] mainly
the highly toxic CO2, which can be used in a similar way to natural
gas and can be produced by treating coal chemically. This is a his-
toric technology, still used as best solution in some local circum-
stances, although coal gasification is not usually economical at
current gas prices. However, depending upon infrastructure con-
siderations, it remains a future possibility. Most town gashouses
located in the eastern United States in the late 19th and early
20th century, were simple by-product coke ovens which heated
bituminous coal in air-tight chambers. The gas driven off from
the coal was collected and distributed through town-wide net-
works of pipes to residences and other buildings where it was used
for cooking and lighting purposes. The coal tar that collected in the
bottoms of the gashouse ovens was often used for roofing and
other water-proofing purposes, and also, when mixed with sand
and gravel, was used for creating bitumen for the surfacing of local
streets.
6.3. Biogas
Biogas typically refers to a gas produced by the anaerobic diges-
tion or fermentation of biodegradable materials (biomass). Biogas
is manly composed of 60–70% methane, 30–40% CO2 and low
amount of other gases. Sources of biogas include swamps, marshes,
and landfills as well as sewage sludge and manure by way of anaer-
obic digester, in addition to enteric fermentation particularly in
cattle. Methanogenic archea are responsible for all biological
sources of methane, some in symbiotic relationships with other life
forms, including termites, ruminants, and cultivated crops.
The future sources of methane, the principal component of nat-
ural gas are landfill gas (LFG) [56–58], biogas [59], and methane
Table 3
World’s proven gas reserves by region.
Country/region Amount of natural gas [at end 2009] (Trillion cubic
feet)
North America 308.794
Central & South 266.541
America
Europe 169.086
Middle East 2591.653
Africa 494.078
Asia Pacific 430.412
hydrate. Biogas and LFG are already used in some areas but their
use could be greatly expanded.
LFG is a type of biogas which is produced from the decomposi-
tion of waste in landfills. If the gas is not removed, the pressure
may get so high that it works its way to the surface, causing dam-
age to the landfill structure, unpleasant odor, vegetation die-off
and an explosion hazard. Once water vapors are removed, about
half of landfill gas is methane and rest of the gas is carbon dioxide.
In addition to CO2 and methane the small amounts of nitrogen,
oxygen, hydrogen and H2S also exists in LFG, but their concentra-
tion varies widely. Landfill gas cannot be distributed through nat-
ural gas pipelines unless it is cleaned up to the same quality. It is
usually more economical to combust the gas on site or within a
short distance of the landfill using a dedicated pipeline. Water va-
por is often removed, even if the gas is combusted on site. Biogas
[59] is usually produced using agricultural waste materials, such
as unusable parts of plants and manure.
Biogas can also be produced from domestic waste that other-
wise goes to landfills. In general, the waste materials do not gener-
ate any income, even they require money to get rid of it. However,
the utilization of the waste materials can contribute to the econ-
omy and sustainable energy balances.
Anaerobic lagoons produce biogas from manure, while biogas
reactors can be used for manure or plant parts. Once biogas is up-
graded to the required level of purity, it can be used as an alterna-
tive vehicle fuel in the same form as conventionally derived natural
gas (CNG & LNG).
6.4. Hydrates
Huge quantities of natural gas (primarily methane) exist in the
form of hydrates under sediment on offshore continental shelves
and on land in arctic regions that experience permafrost such as
those in Siberia (hydrates require a combination of high pressure
and low temperature to form). However, as of 2010 no technology
has been developed to produce natural gas economically from
hydrates.
All these natural gas resources can open up avenues for aug-
mentation of natural gas/LNG production over the world.
Therefore, it may be concluded that the existing non-exhaustive
natural gas resources and the worldwide LNG technology (as well
as forthcoming) can meet the future energy demands. Further, the
worldwide shale gas developments, especially in US and Canada,
are adding to the energy security.
7. Lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of LNG vs. oil & coal
Production, transport and exploitation of the energy, all have a
great impact on the environment and ecosystems [60]. The major-
ity of the world’s energy is still gained from ecologically unaccept-
able energy sources, especially fossil fuels which are still dominant
energy sources [61]. Since fossil fuels have coal as their base, nor-
mal combustion of these fuels results in carbon dioxide (CO2) emis-
sion which is a greenhouse gas [62]. This carbon dioxide mostly
ends up in the atmosphere, and with its greenhouse effect, causes
Table 4
Comparison of fossil fuel emissions (in PPB Btu of Energy Input).
Pollutant LNG Oil Coal
Carbon dioxide 117,000 164,000 208,000
Carbon monoxide 40 33 208
Nitrogen oxides 92 448 457
Sulfur dioxide 1 1112 2591
Particulate 7 84 2774
Mercury 0.000 0.007 0.016
 S. Kumar et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273
global warming. Carbon monoxide (CO) which is produced during
incomplete combustion of fuel (combustion without the needed
amount of oxygen) is more dangerous as compared to CO2. CO is
an extremely poisonous gas without color, taste or scent, and its
concentration of just 0.6% can cause death after only 15 min of
the inhalation [63,64].
Apart from CO2 and CO the combusted coal and oil releases NOx
and SOx particles while combustion of LNG provides an excellent
means to reduce particle emissions (PM) to near 99%, sulfur oxides
(SOx) emissions to near 100%, nitrogen oxides (NOx) to 80%, and
70% fewer GHG emissions [64,65] as reported in Table 4. Due to
the clean-burning nature of natural gas, LNG powered heavy-duty
vehicles can achieve low emission rates without excessive and
expensive emission control equipment as is required for diesel
engines.
When burned for power generation, the results are even more
dramatic [65], SO2emissions are virtually eliminated and CO2 emis-
sions are reduced significantly. Therefore, the increased use of LNG
in place of other fossil fuels, like coal and oil, can significantly re-
duce the emission of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere [66].
Moreover, LNG vessel operations are generally more environmen-
tally friendly than other ships because they use natural gas rather
than oil as their primary fuel source for propulsion. LNG is cur-
rently being used to fuel public transit vehicles in clean air pro-
grams and is accounted for 7% of the world natural gas demand
[67].
The role of LNG in GHG reduction in comparison to coal and oil
has been reported by many investigators [26–28,68–70]. Arteconi
et al. have studied the comparison of diesel and LNG fuel for use
in heavy-duty vehicles in term of GHG emissions throughout their
life-cycle, in the setting of the European market and they found
that LNG afforded a 10% reduction in GHG emission in comparison
to diesel fuel [71]. Further, on the basis of life cycle analysis of GHG
emission from different fuels Stefano et al. [72] have reported LNG
as a green energy for future.
Graham et al. [73] have compared the GHG emissions from a
variety of heavy-duty vehicles and engines operating on a range
of different fuels including diesel, biodiesel, compressed natural
gas (CNG), hythane (20% hydrogen, 80% CNG), and liquefied natural
gas (LNG), and with different advanced after treatment technolo-
gies were studied by chassis dynamometer testing, engine dyna-
mometer testing or on-road testing. The results of this study
represent that different choices in fuels may have different effects
on GHG emissions. The use of natural gas (either as compressed,
liquefied, or blended with hydrogen) can reduce GHG emissions
at the tailpipe by 10–20% on a CO2-equivalent basis compared to
diesel fuel.
A study on life cycle assessment of GHG emissions from LNG
and coal fired generation was conducted by CLNG (Center for Liq-
uefied Natural Gas) [74]. According to this study coal produces
161% grater emissions on a life cycle basis than that of LNG. More-
over, this analysis indicates that the cleanest coal scenario releases
73% more emissions from a life cycle perspective than LNG.
According to Andress et al. [75] CNG and LNG provide modest
benefits in reducing GHG emissions when used directly as a motor
vehicle fuel. GHG reductions benefits are much greater when nat-
ural gas is used to produce hydrogen. Nitrogen oxide (NOx) emis-
sions reduction of over 75% compared to diesel fuel vehicle has
been reported by Frailey [76].
Chen et al. [77] have studied the comparison of two types of air
fuelled engines for zero emission road transportation. Their inves-
tigation represents that the shaft work output and the coolth of
both the fuels increase with increasing working pressure or tem-
perature. Given the working pressure and temperature, liquid air
powered engines have a slightly lower specific work outputs than
compressed air powered engines. The volumetric energy density of
4271
liquid air, however, is much higher than that of compressed air,
and liquid air has much higher coolth than compressed air.
The available evidences show that LNG produces the lower GHG
emissions as compared to traditional fossil fuels hence; it is an eco-
friendly fuel.
8. Discussion
The gas industry has entered an exciting phase of rapid growth
from all supply chain and technology perspectives. LNG is clearly
destined to play a key role in future global energy development
by providing the sustainable energy supplies and services needed
for social and economic development. For such developments to
progress, the construction of large-scale inter-regional natural
gas supply networks (pipeline and LNG) is required across the
globe. Natural gas is composed essentially of methane, which can
be obtained also through anaerobic fermentation of different or-
ganic products yielding biogas (60% methane). The role of methane
as a fuel has shown increasing importance due to the growth in di-
gester construction all over the world, and especially in developing
countries. Further, burning of one molecule of methane (CH4) in
presence of oxygen releases one molecule CO2 and two molecules
of H2O and 890 kJ/mol [78] heat is liberated out as represented
below:
CH4 ðgÞ þ 2O2 ðgÞ ! CO2 ðgÞ þ 2H2 OðlÞ þ 890 kJ=mol
Therefore, methane’s relative abundance and clean burning pro-
cess makes it a very attractive fuel. However, it is a gas and not li-
quid or solid, methane is difficult to transport from the areas that
produce it to the areas that consume it. Converting methane to
forms that are more easily transported, such as LNG and methanol,
is an active area of research. Hence, demand for LNG as a clean fuel
is increasing and LNG is often considered the best form of energy
that will be the bridging fuel to a sustainable energy system, some-
time after 2050 [79].
According to Marcogaz [80] the natural gas industry is in a good
position regarding sustainability compared with other fossil fuels,
as it has a good track record of health & safety, labor standards,
waste minimization, GHG reductions and affordable prices.
Moreover, [81] the combination of higher natural gas prices, ris-
ing demand for natural gas and lower LNG production costs (repre-
sented in Fig. 6) are setting the stage for a dramatic increase in LNG
trade. While LNG already enjoys very favorable economics over
petroleum and other transportation fuels—with fuel cost savings
typically reported in the 30% range – the continued high price of
petroleum and growing supply/low price of natural gas is expected
to further decouple these traditionally linked energy markets and
provide cost savings to fuel hungry end users.
$ per tonne of annual capacity
700
600 Regasification
Shipping
Liquefaction
500
400
300
200
100
0
mid 1990s 2002 2010 2030
Fig. 6. Schematic representation of reducing unit cost of LNG project. Source: IEA.
4272 S. Kumar et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273
Where there exists an LNG production plant, peak shaving or
gas processing facility, loading facility or receiving terminal, or
even a natural gas pipeline, LNG vehicle fuel will offer the lowest
cost fuel option for heavy-duty transportation in the immediate re-
gion. For example, where there is an LNG receiving terminal in an
industrial port complex, LNG vehicle fuel can also be made avail-
able for use in local port delivery trucks, off-road yard tractors,
locomotives, ferries and commercial harbor craft, and for cold-
ironing large ocean going vessels [82].
Thus, LNG cost reduction and increasing supplies of LNG,
accompanied by increased flexibility in LNG trade are adding to
the security of gas supply [83]. The software program, developed
by Miana et al. [84] for the analysis of the LNG ageing process dur-
ing ship transportation can help the terminal operators to manage
re-gasification plants in a safer and more efficient manner.
The current level of global trade in LNG is anticipated to nearly
double by 2020 and, potentially, triple by 2030 and beyond, so the
market for liquefied natural gas vehicles (L-NGVs) should strength-
en concurrently as more countries incorporate LNG into their en-
ergy strategies [85,86]. Moreover, LNG has a safe history of
transportation by LNG trains. Even if it escapes it will evaporate
and not pollute waterways and oceans like oil can [87]. Using
LNG will produce less greenhouse gases than using coal for elec-
tricity generation. Therefore, a switch from oil based to natural
gas (LNG) based fuel chains may be a good way to reduce both
the carbon emissions of current fuel chain and to keep a high de-
gree of flexibility regarding future developments. Further, growth
of the LNG is required because of the energy shortage in certain
areas, and the problem of environmental pollution. Improving
technology leading to even greater safety and lower relative costs
could enable this need to be satisfied.
The use of LNG is however, quite a different area of technology,
as briefly discussed above. Generally, it will use a combination of
known, existing technology, and new technology. The greatest
challenges for the use of LNG are to secure the ready acceptance
by the public and the production of safe systems to generate, store,
distribute and consume. So to use LNG as an alternate source of en-
ergy requires modification in existing technology [88], develop-
ment of more infrastructure and public awareness about this
fuel. Hence, emphasis should also be laid on infrastructure devel-
opment and the use of LNG in heavy vehicles. The use of LNG
should be subsidized taking into consideration the environmental
advantages of LNG over oil and coal.
The growing estimates on LNG suggest that accessible supplies
of this least carbon-intensive fossil fuel may be far more abundant
than previously assumed. This unexpected development creates
opportunities for deploying LNG in a variety of sectors-including
power generation, industry and transportation – to help displace
oil and coal, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
improving air quality. Beyond providing a cleaner, market ready
alternative to oil and coal, LNG can facilitate the systematic
changes that will underpin the development of a more energy-effi-
cient and renewable energy based economy.
9. Conclusions
Like all natural gases, LNG is cleaner than coal or oil and offers
an opportunity to diversify energy supplies. LNG will be the most
viable option for automobile for long range use in comparison to
CNG as LNG offers special advantages over CNG, that it can be
transported and stored easily and with better density than gaseous
methane. LNG also offers additional flexibility as liquefied-to-com-
pressed natural gas (L-CNG) Therefore, it has been considered as a
safe and clean fuel for future. Main factors that contribute to the
global growth of LNG include climate change, escalating oil price,
the decreasing LNG costs, increasing overall energy needs, fuel
switching, the availability of natural gas from various offshore/on-
shore sites, the scope of utilization of low grade coal for LNG pro-
duction, recovery of coal bed methane and the availability of
natural gas from biogas resources. The existing cryogenic gas
industries can suitably diversify in the LNG field because of their
historical depth of knowledge and width of expertise in handling
and storage of cryogenic liquids. Moreover the implementation of
new safety measurements, increasing demand of LNG and expend-
ing LNG technology will drive LNG to become a globally promising
fuel alternative.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by a grant from the GAS Plant R&D
Center funded by the Ministry of Land, Transportation and Mari-
time Affairs (MLTM) of the Korean government and also respect-
fully supported by BK 21 Program funded by the Ministry of
Education (MOE) of Korea.
References
[1] The outlook for energy: a view to 2030. <www.exxonmobil.com>.
[2] Lin W, Zhang Na, Gu A. LNG (liquefied natural gas): a necessary part of China’s
future energy infrastructure. Energy 2010;35:4383–91.
[3] Parik J, Dutta BCR, Singh C, Singh V. Natural gas requirement by fertilizer sector
in India. Energy 2009;34(8):954–61.
[4] Astbury GR. A review of the properties and hazardous of some alternative
fuels. Proc Safety Environ Protect 2008;86:397–414.
[5] Chamberlain GA. Management of large LNG hazardous, 23rd World gas
conference, Amsterdam; 2006.
[6] Shukri T. LNG technology selection. Hydro Eng 2004. <http://www.fwc.com/
publications/tech_papers/files/TariqLNG.pdf>.
[7] Vaenem E, Antao P, Ostvik I, Francisco DC. Analyzing the risk of LNG
operations. Reliab Eng Syst Safety 2008;93:1328–44.
[8] Foss MM, LNG safety and security, centre for energy economics. Sugar land,
Texas. <www.beg.utexas.edu/energycon/lng>.
[9] Litzke WL, Wegrzyn J. Natural gas as a future fuel for heavy duty vehicles. SAE
technical paper series, Brookhaven laboratory, Warrendale PA, USA. SAE paper
No-2001-01-2067.
[10] Failey M. Using LNG as a fuel in heavy –duty tractors. NREL paper No-NREL/SR-
540-24146. Golden, Colorado, USA.
[11] Carvalho Jr AV. Natural gas and other alternative fuels for transportation
purposes. Energy 1985;10(2):187–215.
[12] International association for natural gas vehicles. <www.iangv.org>.
[13] Sarkar SC, Bose PK. Study of gas liquefaction cycles with reference to LNG
plant. Indian J Cryog 1992;17(3):22–31.
[14] Sarkar SC, Bose PK. Development of mini methane liquefaction plant based on
cryogenerator for fuel application. Indian J Power 1999;44(9):60–1.
[15] The fertilizer industry as the largest domestic consumer of LNG, Indonesian
Commercial News Lett; October 14, 1991.
[16] Technical bulletin, PETRONAS, LNG Limited; 2004. <www.petronas.com>.
[17] GVR gas vehicle report. Worldwide NGV statistics; 2009.
[18] BP 2008 Statistical review. <http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview>.
[19] Liquefied natural gas: LNG. Information and activities (national energy
education development Project; 2011). <www.NEED.org>.
[20] Williams RH, Larson ED, Katofsky RE, Chen J. Methanol and hydrogen from
biomass for transportation, with comparison to methanol and hydrogen from
natural gas and coal; PU/CEES Report 292.The center for energy and
environmental studies, Princeton University; 1995.
[21] Gover MP, Collings SA, Hitchcock GS. Alternative road transport fuels—a
preliminary life-cycle study for the UK, vol. 2. London: ETSU; 1996.
[22] Stodolsky F, Gaines L, Marshall CL, Eberhardt, JJ. Total fuel cycle impacts of
advanced vehicles; SAE technical paper series 1999-01-0322; SAE
international. Argonne National Laboratory, US DOE, Detroit; 1999.
[23] Wang MQ. Greenhouse gases, regulated emissions, and energy use in
transportation, GREET model 1.5. Centre for transportation research,
Argonne National Laboratory, Illinois, August 1999.
[24] William HS. Liquid natural gas a transport fuel in heavy trucking industry,
technical report, sponsored by US department of energy, Contract DE-
FG2294BC14971, 5/10/94-12/30/95.
[25] Litzake WL, Wegrzyn J. Natural gas as a future fuel for heavy-duty vehicles.
SAE technical paper series 2001-01-2067.
[26] Humphries S. LNG as alternative transport fuel. Natural gas solution for heavy
vehicles seminar, Melbourne, 20 May 2009.
[27] Kirillov KG. Liquefied natural gas as a motor fuel and a refrigerant:
methodology of evaluation of ecological sustainability of truck-mounted
refrigerating systems. Chem Petro Eng 2002;38:5–6.
 S. Kumar et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 4264–4273
[28] Seatrans LHK. The LNG future seen from a ship owner. Magalog conference 16
January 2007.
[29] Singh T. LNG the shipping fuel of the future. <http://www.cisoilgas.com/
article/could-lng-be-the-shipping-fuel-of-the-future>.
[30] NGV global news. News for the natural gas vehicle industry, 22 April 2011.
<http://www.ngvglobal.com/china-and-norway-develop-lng-marine-engine-
0422>.
[31] Angelino G. The use of liquid natural gas as a heat sink for power cycles. ASME
J Eng Power 1978;100:160–77.
[32] Karashima N, Akutsu T. Development of LNG cryogenic power generation
plant. In: Proc of 17th conference IECEC; 1982. p. 399–404.
[33] Kim CW, Chang SD, Ro ST. Analysis of the power cycle utilizing the cold energy
of LNG. Int J Energy Res 1995;19:741–9.
[34] Aspelund A, Gundersen T. A. Liquefied energy chain for transport and
utilization of natural gas for power production with CO2 capture and
storage–part 1. Appl Energy 2009;86(6):781–92.
[35] Zhang N, Noam L. A novel near-zero CO2 emission thermal cycle with LNG
cryogenic exergy utilization. In: Proc of ECOS, Copenhagen; 2003. p. 1467–77.
[36] Deng S, Jin H, Cai R, Lin R. Novel cogeneration power system with liquefied
natural gas (LNG) cryogenic exergy utilization. J Intl Energy 2004;29:497–512.
[37] de Oliveira R, de Marreco JM. Natural gas power generation in Brazil: new
window of opportunity. Energy Policy 2006;34:2361–72.
[38] Oshima K, Ishizaki Y, Kamiyama S, Akiyama M, Okuda M. The utilization of LH2
and LNG cold for generation of electric power by a cryogenic type stirling
engine. Cryogenics 1978:617–20.
[39] Okamura T, Furukawa M, Ishitani H. Future forecast for life-cycle greenhouse
gas emissions of LNG and city gas 13A. Appl Energy 2007;84:1136–49.
[40] Szargut J, Szczygiel I. Utilization of the cryogenic exergy of liquid natural gas
(LNG) for the production of electricity. Energy 2009;34:827–37.
[41] Dispenza C, Dispenza G, Rocca V, Panno G. Exergy recovery during LNG
regasification: electric energy production. Appl Therm Eng 2009;29:380–7.
[42] Molenda J, Ziemny G, Surowiec PI. Natural gas, fuel and raw
material. Warszawa: WNT; 1993.
[43] Querol E, Regueral BG, Torrent JG, Ramos A. Available power generation cycles
to be coupled with the LNG vaporization process in a Spanish LNG terminal.
Appl Energy 2011;88:2382–90.
[44] History of LNG (liquefied natural gas). <www.dragonlng.co.uk>.
[45] Kumar S, Kwon HT, Choi KH, Cho JH, Lim W, Moon I. Current status and future
projections of LNG demand and supplies: a global prospective. Energy Policy
2011;39:4097–104.
[46] A background note: Qatar bureau of near eastern affairs, January 2010. <http://
www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5437.htm>.
[47] Global LNG info. Global LNG developments in 2008. <http://www
.globallnginfo.com/develop2008.htm>.
[48] The outlook for global trade in liquefied natural gas projections to the year
2020, Prepared for: California energy commission, August 2007.
[49] Jaramillo P, Griffin WM, Matthews HC. Comparative life cycle air emission of
coal, domestic natural gas, LNG and SNG for electricity generation. Environ Sci
Technol 2007;41:6290–6.
[50] Energy information administration, Office of oil and gas, January 2006.
[51] Krauss C. New way to gap gas may expand global supplies. New York Times, 9
October 2009.
[52] King EHW. Coal gasification. Fuel 1981;60(9):803–8.
[53] Penn Well Corporation. Oil Gas J, 2008; 106:48, December 22.
[54] Pars special economic energy zone; 2007. <http://www.pseez.ir/gas-en.html>.
[55] Buzek F, Onderka V, Vancura P, Wolf I. Carbon isotope study of methane
production in a town gas storage reservoir. Fuel 1994;73(5):747–52.
[56] Burdekin O. An investigation into the continuous monitoring of landfill gas and
the commercial viability of the intelysis landfill gas monitor, Ph.D Thesis,
Manchester University; 2003.
[57] Lee CE, Hwang CH. An experimental study on the flame stability of LFG and
LFG-mixed fuels. Fuel 2007;86:649–55.
[58] Lee CE, Hwang CH. A study on the interchange ability of LFG–LPG mixed fuels
with LFG quality in domestic combustion appliances. Fuel 2008;87:297–303.
[59] Porpatham E, Ramesh A, Nagalingam B. Investigation on the effect of
concentration of methane in biogas when used as a fuel for a spark ignition
engine. Fuel 2008;87:1651–9.
4273
[60] World gas intelligence; 2009;6:8.
[61] Energy and ecology November 2007. <www.our- nergy.com/energy_and_
ecology.html>.
[62] Weisser D. A guide to life cycle green house gas (GHG) emissions from electric
supply technologies. Energy 2007;32:1543–59.
[63] Anthea M, Hopkins J, Laughlin Mc CW, Johnson S, Warner MQ, La Hart D,
Wright JD. Human biology and Health Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, USA,
Prentice Hall, ISBN 013981176-1; 1993.
[64] Dominguez ED, Ruiz MT, Rubio J, Andres de S. Equality of in vivo and in vitro
oxygen binding capacity of hemoglobin in patients with serve respiration
diseases. Br J Anesth 1981;53:1325–8.
[65] Tamura I, Tanka T, Kagajo T, Kuwabara S, Yoshioka T, Nagata T, et al. Life cycle
CO2 analysis of LNG and city gas. Appl Energy 2001;68:301–19.
[66] Zhang N, Noam L. A Novel near zero CO2 emission thermal cycle with LNG
cryogenic exergy utilization. Energy 2006;31:1666–79.
[67] Oregon LNG <http://www.oregonlng.com/lng_enviro.php>.
[68] Hekkert MP, Hendriks FHJF, Faaij APC, Neelis ML. Natural gas as an alternative
to crude oil in automotive fuel chains well-to-wheel analysis and transition
strategy development. Energy Policy 2005;33:579–94.
[69] Hondo H. Life cycle GHG emissions analysis of power generation systems:
Japanese case. Energy 2005;30:2042–56.
[70] Kannan R, Leong KC, Osman R, Ho HK. Life cycle energy, emissions and cost
inventory of power generation technologies in Singapore. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2007;11:702–15.
[71] Arteconi A, Brandoni D, Evangelista D, Polonara F. Life cycle green house gas
analysis of LNG as a heavy vehicle fuel in Europe. Appl Energy
2010;87(6):2005–13.
[72] Stefano PD, Femia A, Luzzati T. Natural gas, cars and the environment. A
(relatively) clean and cheap fuel looking for users. Ecol Econ 2001;38:179–89.
[73] Graham LA, Rideout G, Rosenblatt D, Hendren J. Greenhouse gas emissions
from heavy-duty vehicles. Atmos Environ 2008;42:4665–81.
[74] Life cycle assessment of GHG emissions from LNG and coal fired generation
scenarios: assumptions and results. Fair Lakes Court, Fairfax, VA-22033348
USA, 3 February 2009.
[75] Andress D, Nguyen TD, Das S. Reducing GHG emissions in the United States
transportation. Energy Sustain Develop, in press. doi:10.1016/j.esd.2011.
03.002.
[76] Frailey M. Development of LNG-powered heavy duty trucks in commercial
hauling. NREL/SR-540-25154, December 1998.
[77] Chen H, Ding Y, Li Y, Zhang X, Tan C. Air fuelled zero emission road
transportation: a comparative study. Appl Energy 2011;88:337–42.
[78] Schaum’s outline series, Organ Chem.
[79] Correlje AF. Markets for natural gas. Encyclo Energy 2004;3:799.
[80] The natural gas industry in Europe: Key factors for a successful sustainable
energy future. <www.marcogaz.org>.
[81] Sandia national laboratories, Guidance on risk analysis and safety implications
of a large liquefied natural gas spill over water. Sandia report SAND 2004;
6258, 2004.
[82] LNG vehicle fuel consulting. <http://www.lngvehiclefuel.com/why.html>.
[83] Gahndolphe SC. LNG cost reduction and flexibility in LNG trade add to security
of gas supply. Energy prices & taxes 1st quarter 2005-xxix.
[84] Miana M, Hoya R, Rodrigalvarez V, Valdes JR, Liorens R. Calculation models for
prediction of liquefied natural gas (LNG) ageing during ship transportation.
Appl Energy 2010;87:1687–700.
[85] Johnson DW, Cornwell JB. Modeling the release, spreading and burning of LNG,
LPG and gasoline on water. J Hazard Mater 2005;140:535–40.
[86] Spaulding ML, Swanson JC, Jayko K, Whittier N. An LNG release, transport and
fate models system for marine spills. J Hazard Mater 2007;140:488–503.
[87] Lehr W, Beatty DS. Comparison of hypothetical LNG and fuel oil fires on water.
J Hazard Mater 2004;107:3–9.
[88] Lim W, Tak K, Moon I, Choi K, Lee S. Development of design technology for
liquefaction process in LNG plant. In: 2nd international symposium on
sustainable chemical product and process engineering, Hangzhou, China,
May 2010.