After converting coke oven gas into natural gas, is it better to use methane to produce CNG or LNG?
Thread Content
After converting coke oven gas into natural gas, is it better to use methane to produce CNG or LNG?
LNG is easier to store and transport, which is of course a advantage.
This post was last edited by jensse on 2011-4-6 at 21:25. Let’s take a look at the amount of investment required; compare CNG investments with LNG investments. In terms of transportation and storage, CNG is transported using tank trucks – 8 pipes can carry around 4,000 cubic meters, at a pressure of 20 MPa. LNG, on the other hand, is transported in cryogenic tanks, with each tank capable of carrying 30–40 tons.
This is still worth discussing. In my opinion, when it comes to CNG, it’s generally used for city gas, and it can be delivered through pipelines to the gas distribution network. Liquefied natural gas, on the other hand, is mainly used for vehicles, as it has high energy consumption. I think it’s better to use CNG near the city.
Provide CNG for urban users and LNG for industrial users
If permitted, CNG and LNG should be used in proportions determined by market demand; however, if only one type can be used, I believe CNG is the better choice, as it is easier to transport and there is a higher demand for it.
This mainly depends on the actual situation of the owner; using CNG is indeed more economical, and the market prospects are good.
The investment required for LNG is much higher than that for CNG. If you can negotiate with the local authorities to connect CNG to the local gas pipelines, CNG should be given priority, as it involves lower costs. If such facilities are not available locally, then LNG should be considered; the cryogenic processing involved in CNG is extremely difficult, and its costs can account for up to 40% of the total investment.