Bio-LNG: A comeback or a transitional technology?
Can bio-LNG provide long-term support for the transport transition in the heavy-duty sector – or are we seeing a repeat of a scenario that has already cost many fleet operators dearly?
The answer is not so straightforward. After all, bio-LNG does have some compelling qualities: it can be refuelled quickly, enables long ranges and, when biomethane derived from slurry, bio-waste or other residual materials is used, can drastically improve a lorry’s greenhouse gas footprint. The German Energy Agency (dena) even refers to transport as being virtually CO₂-neutral when using suitable biomethane.
But this is precisely where the problem lies: not all bio-LNG is the same – and a good environmental footprint is by no means a guarantee of an economically viable business model.
Technically impressive, ecologically limited
For long-distance transport, bio-LNG has a decisive advantage over battery-electric lorries: the vehicles can offer similar ranges and short refuelling times to diesel lorries. The existing LNG infrastructure can, in principle, continue to be used. This can be attractive for companies with long, predictable long-distance routes.
Furthermore, biomethane produced from residual and waste materials has considerable climate protection potential. The Federal Environment Agency points out that biomethane in the German transport sector now predominantly comes from waste and residual materials.
However, this resource is limited. Sustainably produced biomethane cannot be supplied in unlimited quantities. This is precisely why the Federal Environment Agency does not regard bio-LNG as an equivalent substitute for comprehensive electrification, but rather as a possible transitional solution or option for specific applications.
Batteries outperform internal combustion engines in terms of efficiency
The key advantage of battery-electric lorries lies in their energy efficiency. Renewable electricity is converted directly into electrical propulsion energy. The Federal Environment Agency therefore regards battery-electric lorries, in principle, as the most efficient use of renewable energy in road freight transport.
The drawbacks are obvious: high purchase costs, a charging infrastructure that is still patchy, a lack of grid connections and, in some cases, longer downtime. However, a great deal is currently happening in this area. From 2026, the federal government will be providing one billion euros over four years for charging infrastructure for heavy goods vehicles.
Hydrogen, on the other hand, promises rapid refuelling and long ranges. However, fuel cell lorries require green hydrogen, the production and supply of which demand considerably more renewable energy than a direct battery-electric drive. The UBA therefore rates BEVs as significantly more favourable in terms of energy requirements and long-term climate impacts.
The bitter experience with LNG
For fleet operators, however, another point is at least as important: investments require planning certainty. Many companies have purchased LNG lorries in recent years because policymakers and the market were sending the right signals. Toll benefits, subsidy schemes and the prospect of cheap LNG fuel made the vehicles economically attractive.
Then the framework conditions changed. The LNG toll exemption expired at the end of 2023, whilst at the same time fuel prices and the availability of LNG shifted. What was supposed to be a future-proof investment could thus turn into an economic disaster within a few years. This experience serves as a warning: anyone buying bio-LNG lorries today must expect that political subsidies, toll rules or quotas may change.
The chaos surrounding state subsidies is by no means merely a historical problem. Programmes for other alternative propulsion systems have also been altered or discontinued. The former KsNI programme (Guideline on the Promotion of Light and Heavy Commercial Vehicles with Alternative, Climate-Friendly Powertrains and Associated Refuelling and Charging Infrastructure) run by the Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport (BMDV) was terminated prematurely following the Federal Constitutional Court’s ruling on the Climate and Transformation Fund of 15 November 2023.
No funds were available for a new call for proposals.
Bio-LNG: sensible, but not a panacea
Bio-LNG can be a sensible option where long ranges, short refuelling times and existing vehicle designs are crucial, and where certified biomethane from sustainable waste materials is available in the long term. For such niche applications, the fuel can serve as a bridge.
The strategic question for fleet operators is therefore not “Bio-LNG or battery?”, but rather: Which technology is best suited to the route, operational profile, energy supply and regulatory framework over the vehicle’s entire lifespan?
Anyone who bases this calculation today solely on current fuel prices or government subsidies risks repeating the history of the first LNG wave.
