Comparison tool

Compare LNG vessels and containment systems

Pick up to 4 entries, or start from a preset. Entries are compared on described characteristics only — no scores or rankings are applied.

Educational data

Preset comparisons

Select entries (1/4)

Small-scale

Regional distribution into shallow, coastal, and island markets.

Operational role
Small-Scale LNG Carrier
Containment system
Type C Pressure Tanks · Cylindrical Type C Tanks · Bi-Lobe Type C Tanks
Capacity class
Small-scale (indicative: below approximately 30,000 m³)
Indicative capacity
1K–30K m³
Tank geometry
Cylindrical or bi-lobe self-supporting pressure vessels
Typical application
Regional distribution to island, coastal and industrial customers
Hull-space efficiency
Lower than membrane — cylindrical pressure vessels use hull volume differently
Infrastructure requirements
Small jetties and shallow berths; modest shore storage and loading rates
Propulsion options
DFDE / TFDE
BOG management
BOG as fuel · Reliquefaction
Advantages
Shallow draft opens terminals large carriers cannot reach — Type C tanks tolerate pressure build-up during idle periods without venting — No secondary barrier required, simplifying construction in smaller hulls — Cargo parcels sized to regional demand and storage
Limitations
Pressure vessels use hull volume less efficiently than membrane systems — Higher cost per cubic metre delivered than ocean-going carriers — Design pressure, capacity and boil-off behaviour vary significantly between vessels
Typical routes
Northwest Europe coastal feeder · Caribbean island supply · Southeast Asia archipelago runs

Technical information

Status
Educational overview
Last reviewed
15 September 2026
Source status
Sources pending editorial review.

Technical parameters are indicative and may vary by vessel design, generation, shipyard, operator and intended service.