LNG chain: Technology advances

Floating plants, floating terminals and electric-drive liquefaction

What this tab covers The newest technologies in service or close to adoption, what each improves, and how the main options compare.

Recent progress has cut boil-off, shrunk ship fuel use, moved liquefaction offshore, and started replacing gas turbines with electric motors.

Latest advances

Low boil-off membrane tanks in service · approval 2020 onwards

Thicker, better insulation such as GTT NO₉₆ Super+⁷

Improves: Guaranteed boil-off fell from 0.15% per day in 2010 to as low as 0.07%

Dual-fuel two-stroke engines in service · 2024 order book

X-DF, ME-GA and ME-GI engines burning boil-off gas efficiently²

Improves: Lower fuel use and higher charter value than old steam turbine ships (about 209 X-DF, 83 ME-GA and 21 ME-GI on order)

Electric-drive liquefaction (e-LNG) being deployed · 2026 orders in Canada, Qatar and Australia

Electric motors drive refrigeration compressors; Hammerfest in Norway has run all-electric since 2007²³²⁴

Improves: Removes on-site combustion; drive systems up to 95% efficient versus about 35% for gas turbines (vendor figures; overall gain depends on the power source)

Floating liquefaction (FLNG) in service · 2025

Liquefaction plants on hulls moored offshore; largest operating units about 3.5 Mtpa, designs up to 5.4 to 6 Mtpa²⁵

Improves: Unlocks offshore fields without onshore plants

Floating import terminals (FSRUs) in service · 2025

Ships that store and regasify LNG at the quay²⁶

Improves: Fast, lower-capital import capacity; more than 50 active in 2025, about 65 expected by 2030

Comparing the options

Option	Efficiency	Cost	Capacity or distance	Maturity
Onshore liquefaction plus carriers⁸¹⁰	About 9 to 15% of energy used to liquefy (calculated)	About 0.76 to 1.05 billion USD per Mtpa on the US Gulf Coast	Trains of a few Mtpa; plants up to tens of Mtpa	mature
Floating liquefaction²⁵	Similar process energy	Reported as increasingly cost competitive with greenfield onshore plants	0.7 to about 3.5 Mtpa per unit today	early commercial
Electric-drive liquefaction²³	Higher drive efficiency; emissions depend on grid power	Not published in sources used	Trains of about 2 to 3 Mtpa ordered	being deployed
Onshore import terminal versus FSRU²²⁶	Similar	FSRU capital is much lower, but charter costs can make it dearer over time	Floating terminals held 207.3 Mtpa of capacity at end 2024	mature

For a large, long-lived export project with cheap gas on land, onshore trains remain the norm. FLNG suits offshore fields and smaller volumes. FSRUs have become the default for countries that need imports quickly, as Germany did after 2022, at the cost of higher running charges.

Sources

2025 World LNG Report International Gas Union, 2025
NO96 Super+ GTT, 2024
Analysis of the greenhouse gas intensities of LNG imports to Germany (Munter and Liebich), final report ifeu for Wissenschaftsplattform Klimaschutz, 2023
Alaska LNG could cost more than double Gulf Coast rivals, raising questions over economics (Reuters) gCaptain, 2026
Innomotics accelerates LNG electrification with major eLNG drive orders worldwide (press release) Innomotics GmbH via news aktuell, 2026
The future of LNG: electrification, innovation and efficiency ABB, 2025
Trends in FLNG (Perspective, September 2025) Gas Strategies, 2025
Floating LNG and FSRUs Bracewell, 2026