Based on the summary above it seems reasonable to conclude that a Class 8 truck running an assumed 100,000 miles in a year saves $10,000 - $20,000 by running on CNG instead of LNG. In addition carriers that have tested both CNG and LNG trucks report that drivers prefer CNG's simplicity and increased safety. When also taking into account that CNG stations are being rolled out at a much greater pace than LNG stations, it becomes hard to agree with CLNE and WPRT that LNG is going to be the dominant fuel for high-mileage heavy duty natural gas vehicles going forward.That helps. I can never keep track of the pros and cons of LNG vs CNG. This article compares and contrasts the two. For me, it is splitting hairs. Both are natural gas variants.
But after reading the article twice, I'm not sure the writer has made his case. I'm more sold on LNG than CNG after reading his pros and cons. Maybe I'm in a cynical mood this morning. I usually am.
Oh, that statement that CNG stations are being rolled out at a much greater pace than LNG stations? The writer admits that most CNG stations cannot handle the big rigs. But it wouldn't be the first time Boone bet on the wrong horse.