# LNG Tanker Spills and environmental damage? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 17, 2026, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lng-tanker-spills-and-environmental-damage/1028527 "2026-03-17T16:32:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/marvin_the_martian/32/2898_2.png) [@Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marvin_the_Martian)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2026, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lng-tanker-spills-and-environmental-damage/1028527/21 "2026-03-19T22:49:19Z")
But atmospheric oxidation of methane still results in the same amount of CO2 and water as burning it. Just for a decade or so you have a far more potent greenhouse gas. Burning still seems a net positive. ---
**Author:** ![Ancient\_Nerd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed655f/32.png) [@Ancient\_Nerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ancient_Nerd)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2026, 8:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lng-tanker-spills-and-environmental-damage/1028527/22 "2026-03-20T08:31:08Z")
> [@Marvin\_the\_Martian](#): > > But atmospheric oxidation of methane still results in the same amount of CO2 and water as burning it. Methane, CH4 has a molecular weight of 16 while the molecular nitrogen, N2, making up most of the atmosphere has a heavier weight of 28. The lighter methane would float to the top. I wonder how much would escape into space before it could react. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2026, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lng-tanker-spills-and-environmental-damage/1028527/23 "2026-03-20T18:53:32Z")
Essentially none. First off, lighter gases don’t rise like balloons; they mostly just mix with the other gases. They won’t fall off in density with height as quickly as heavier gases, but they’ll still end up at all heights in the atmosphere. Second, even if some does end up higher than most of the other gases, just being exposed to the vacuum of space won’t cause gases to escape. They’d still need to get out of the Earth’s gravity well. Some fraction of the gas molecules will be going faster than escape speed, but then, that’s also true of the nitrogen and oxygen. It’ll still be a very small fraction. For comparison, methane is only a little lighter than water (18), and we don’t have to worry about that escaping, either. ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2026, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lng-tanker-spills-and-environmental-damage/1028527/24 "2026-03-20T21:55:38Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > For comparison, methane is only a little lighter than water (18), and we don’t have to worry about that escaping, either. Basically true, but water will photodissociate at high altitudes and the hydrogen will escape. However, little water gets to those high altitudes because it condenses or freezes out at mid altitudes. Methane has a much lower boiling point, so it won’t condense or freeze out. ---
**Author:** ![TruCelt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/trucelt/32/523_2.png) [@TruCelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TruCelt)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2026, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lng-tanker-spills-and-environmental-damage/1028527/25 "2026-03-24T12:07:28Z")
[Update on the particular tanker that started the question.](https://youtu.be/ZF8_mKTwo08?list=TLPQMjQwMzIwMjYr7DhBLl5k7Q&t=480) It does seem to me at this point the best choice is to torpedo the remaining tanks at sea, with incendiary devices. The longer it drifts, the more likely the worst case scenario - that it runs aground and THEN explodes. ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2026, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lng-tanker-spills-and-environmental-damage/1028527/26 "2026-03-27T03:33:16Z")
That seems less credible than the original article, because he’s claiming that “the cooling is turned off”. But the cooling is _always_ turned off. The LNG is insulated, and kept cool in transit by evaporation I can see that the ship represents an environmental threat, because it is fully fueled, and that draining the fuel might be an unusually risky procedure, because the LNG tanks are freely venting, and that you don’t want the ship to run ashore for that reason. The dark fleet is made up of low-value EOL ships, and this one has a hole blown in the side. It may have negative salvage value. Sinking it would be acceptable if they can get the fuel oil off. Releasing the LNG somehow would be acceptable if that helps get the oil off somehow. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lng-tanker-spills-and-environmental-damage/1028527.md?page=1)