LNG Atlas

Comparison

FSRU vs onshore import terminals, by the numbers

Floating storage and regasification units against the rest of the import fleet, in count, capacity and age. For the cost, speed and flexibility trade-offs behind these numbers, see the FSRU vs onshore regasification explainer.

Why there is no "onshore" row

Global Energy Monitor's tracker flags an FSRU or a floating liquefaction facility reliably when one applies, but it does not carry an explicit onshore flag for any terminal in the current release. The rows below use not tagged as floating rather than onshore for that reason: it is almost certainly the right group in practice, since floating facilities are the ones GEM consistently tags, but it is an inference from an absent tag, not a count the source confirms. Treat that row's figures as a close proxy for onshore capacity, not a GEM-reported onshore statistic.

Import terminals by floating status

Export-only and import-export terminals are counted on their import side; export-only FLNG facilities are out of scope here.

FSRUOther floatingNot tagged floating
Terminals tracked17331354
Operating today408146
Operating capacity185 Mtpa37.7 Mtpa905 Mtpa
Average start year (operating)201920172007
Earliest still operating200920101969

See every largest import terminal and browse the full terminal directory, filterable by facility type.

Common questions

Each answer stands on its own.

Does the tracker record which import terminals are onshore?
Not as an explicit tag. Global Energy Monitor's floating field reliably flags an FSRU or floating liquefaction facility when one applies, but in the current release no terminal carries an explicit onshore flag. This page's onshore-style bucket is every import terminal not tagged as floating — almost all genuinely onshore, but inferred from the absence of a floating tag rather than confirmed by one.
Are FSRUs newer than onshore-style import terminals on average?
Yes, substantially: operating FSRUs average a start year of 2019, against 2007 for the not-tagged-floating group, whose oldest operating terminal dates to 1969. That gap matches the real-world pattern the explainer describes: FSRUs are the fast option, chartered and connected in a year or two, while most onshore capacity was built over decades.
Which holds more operating capacity today?
The not-tagged-floating group by a wide margin: 905 Mtpa across 146 operating terminals, against 185 Mtpa across 40 operating FSRUs. Most of the world's LNG import capacity was built before FSRUs were a mainstream option.
What is the "other floating" row?
Import terminals GEM tags as floating but not specifically as an FSRU — 31 terminals in the current release. Kept separate rather than folded into either the FSRU or the not-tagged-floating bucket, since neither label fits it.

For the cost, speed and flexibility reasoning behind these numbers, read FSRU versus onshore regasification.