LNG/LPG (or is it just LPG, and LNG won't work?) has been in use as a transportation fuel for decades in Europe (don't know about other regions). The market share is certainly smaller that gasoline/diesel, but the technology is available and the infrastructure is in place, and right now it's just a cost-benefit question of having one's car adapted. When oil runs low and gas is plentiful, the balance will quickly tilt towards gas. If it's just LPG, what technical reasons are there that LNG couldn't be used as well?
Yes, it’s actually the best, if your a greenie you like it for it’s clean lean burn, if you a corponazi you like it for it’s reliability in the vehicle (no carbon buildup engines last for 10 forevers).
LNG and LPG are not the same.
LPG, liquefied Petroleum Gas, is primarily propane and butane.
LNG, liquefied Natural Gas, is methane and must be kept at -260 degrees F.
re: moltke: LNG as transportation fuel
I think you are correct but LNG is not like propane, which can be kept in liquid form at room temperature. LNG has to be kept at a very low temperature, and since the ‘thermos bottles’ aren’t perfect insulators, it will slowly evaporate.
Also, LNG has a lower energy content per pound and per cubic foot of liquid, so you need not only an insulated and carefully vented tank, but a larger one to attain the range of a gas or diesel powered car.
Maybe LNG could be converted to propane but as you say it’s a matter of relative costs. LNG is a good, clean fuel, but produces carbon dioxide (greenhouse gas) just like the rest of the fossil fuels. I don’t think greenhouse gases or global warming pose a problems for the animal kingdom.