This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Energy High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by Mlpearc, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 22 May 2010.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors Climate change Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Hello,

The lead section for this article following the kind additions of FRANCISBONNICI is now much too long and also entirely uncited.

@FrancisBonnici - would you be able to please cite the extra paragraphs you added to the lead section and also move them down into the appropriate section of the article? For example to History or to Production? If they remain uncited they will need to be removed. TheSLEEVEmonkey (talk) 14:41, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why are greenhouse gas emissions give with units of density (kg/m³)? Surely it's more relevant to compare kg of CO2/megajoule, or otherwise mass/energy? IAmNitpicking (talk) 15:54, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The main picture should actually help visualize what Liquefied natural gas is Jsubard (talk) 15:17, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then what should it be of? LNG is otherwise hard to picture visually.

I would agree that the picture of an LNG ship should probably be a better one, such as this, and should more clealy show the distinctive features of LNG ships. But otherwise the ship is a good masthead photo for LNG: Ship transport is a primary reason for LNG (otherwise just pipe it unliquefied), the ships are visually distinctive and their visually distinctive features are relevant to their purpose as LNG carriers. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]