LNG & Gas Processing Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Leadership is concentrated but not locked up. the top 5 assignees hold 32.0% of the 996 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 47.4% — well short of a closed field.
- Filings have pulled back sharply from their peak. after peaking at 89 in 2022, filings fell from 76 in 2021 to 22 in 2024, a 71% drop over that span.
- The technology mix is dominated by one class. E21B drilling and well-related art appears on 43.9% of records, more than three times the next-largest class, C09K materials at 12.0%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (76 records) with 2024 (22) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 996 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 996 published records at the intersection of LNG and natural gas processing with well and pipeline operations — records that combine LNG or gas-processing language with terms like well pressure, formation fluid, pipeline flow, corrosion rate, formation evaluation or production tubing. That combination pulls in patents on using LNG itself as a process fluid (fracturing, cooling, injection) as well as patents on monitoring and protecting the wells and pipelines that move gas once it is processed. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the last one to two years in any trend chart will always look thinner than the underlying filing activity actually was.
Coverage runs from 2015 through the 2026-08-31 cut-off, spanning both upstream well-servicing filings and downstream processing and materials claims. The record count is a useful census of activity, but patent families are the fairer unit for comparing companies, since they neutralise continuation practice and multi-jurisdiction refiling of the same invention.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 996-record set: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which technical classes carry the claim density.
A retreat from the 2022 peak
Filings rose to a peak of 89 in 2022 before falling back; the 2021-to-2024 span shows a 71% decline, from 76 to 22. Treat 2025 and 2026 as still filling in rather than as evidence the field is cooling further — publication lag means recent years understate true filing activity.
One class carries most of the weight
E21B (earth and rock drilling for wells) appears on 43.9% of the 996 records, making it by far the densest class. C09K materials (12.0%), C22C alloys (8.6%) and B01D separation processes (7.9%) form a second tier; classes can overlap on a single record, so these shares add to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 996 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on LNG & Gas Processing Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about lng & gas processing patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
Method and apparatus for stimulating a subterranean formation using liquefied natural gas
Liquefied natural gas is used as a fracturing fluid to stimulate production of hydrocarbons from and/or injectability of fluids into subterranean formations. Proppants may be blended with the LNG prior to pumping it into the well. Optionally, the LNG is heated after it is pumped and before it is introduced into the subterranean formation.US20060065400A1, filed by an individual inventor rather than a major operator, dated 2006-03-30.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20080128134A1 | Producing drive fluid in situ in tar sands formations | 261 |
| 2 | US20080174115A1 | Power systems utilizing the heat of produced formation fluid | 258 |
| 3 | US7635023B2 | Time sequenced heating of multiple layers in a hydrocarbon containing formation | 231 |
| 4 | US7549470B2 | Solution mining and heating by oxidation for treating hydrocarbon containing formations | 230 |
| 5 | US7562707B2 | Heating hydrocarbon containing formations in a line drive staged process | 224 |
| 6 | US6138760A | Pre-treatment methods for polymer-containing fluids | 221 |
| 7 | US7533719B2 | Wellhead with non-ferromagnetic materials | 219 |
| 8 | US20090014180A1 | Moving hydrocarbons through portions of tar sands formations with a fluid | 213 |
| 9 | US6145591A | Method and compositions for use in cementing | 213 |
| 10 | US20090014181A1 | Creating and maintaining a gas cap in tar sands formations | 212 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are a signal of prior-art weight, not of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the data means for filing strategy
Three read-throughs from the concentration, trend and class figures above.
A leading tier, not a monopoly
The top 5 assignees combined hold 32.0% of the 996 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 47.4%. That leaves more than half the field spread across the remaining ranked companies and a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants — room for a new entrant to build a defensible position without displacing an incumbent outright.
Activity has pulled back from its peak
Filings peaked at 89 in 2022, then fell from 76 in 2021 to 22 in 2024 — a 71% decline over that three-year span. Recent-year assignee momentum shows several leading filers at zero or flat activity in the latest year, consistent with a field that has cooled from its recent high rather than one still accelerating.
Well-related art dominates the claim space
E21B (drilling and wells) sits on 43.9% of records, more than three times the next class. That density signals occupied claim space around well mechanics, not that the underlying technology is settled — materials (C09K, C22C) and separation (B01D) classes sit at a fraction of that density and carry more room to differentiate.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to lng & gas processing patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee landscape
The ranking covers 100 companies by record count. It is a comparative view of who is active, not evidence that the field is closed to new entrants.
A clear single leader
The top-ranked assignee holds 93 records, well ahead of the fifth-placed company at 50 and the tenth at 24 — a steep drop-off rather than a flat distribution across the leading group.
A meaningful second tier
Positions two through five hold a combined share that, together with the leader, brings the top 5 to 32.0% of all 996 records. This is a leading cluster to watch for freedom-to-operate checks, not a single gatekeeper.
Co-filing is limited and concentrated
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest of them recur around a small number of organisations — evidence of occasional joint development rather than a networked ecosystem of alliances.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| CNX RESOURCES CORP | 1 | 0% |
| Shell Oil Company | 0 | — |
| HORISONT ENERGI AS | 0 | — |
| Shell Internationale Research Maatschappij B.V. | 0 | -100% |
| Pohang Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (POSCO) | 0 | — |
| Baker Hughes Holdings LLC | 0 | — |
| ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company | 0 | — |
| Genscape Intangible Holding, Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The figures here describe the field as a whole. Decisions about a specific filing, freedom-to-operate question or R&D direction need the underlying claims, not just the aggregate counts.
Check freedom to operate before filing
Run the specific claim language you plan to file against the leading assignees' portfolios in the dense E21B and C09K classes, where claim space is most occupied.
Explore this landscape in Patsnap Eureka →Track the under-claimed branches
The under-claimed sub-areas flagged here are candidates for a first-mover claim; verify current status before committing R&D spend.
Search white space in Patsnap Eureka →Watch assignee momentum, not just totals
Several leading filers show flat or zero activity in the latest year; pair that with 2025–2026 publication lag before concluding a competitor has exited an area.
Monitor assignee activity in Patsnap Eureka →Common questions about LNG and gas processing patents
The dataset ranks 100 companies by record count, with the leading assignee holding 93 records against 996 total in scope. The top 5 assignees combined hold 32.0% of all records and the top 10 hold 47.4%, so leadership is concentrated in a recognisable group but far from closed to new entrants. Anyone assessing competitive position should look at both the raw ranking and the underlying claim scope, since record count alone does not show claim strength.
Filings peaked at 89 in 2022 and have since fallen, with the 2021-to-2024 span showing a 71% decline from 76 to 22. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any chart will understate real filing activity and should not be read as confirmation of a further slowdown. The safest read is that the field cooled from its 2022 high through 2024, with the most recent years still an open question.
E21B, covering earth and rock drilling for wells, appears on 43.9% of the 996 records in scope, making it by far the most heavily claimed class. Materials science (C09K, 12.0%), alloys (C22C, 8.6%) and separation processes (B01D, 7.9%) form a distinct second tier well below that density. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add to more than 100% and should not be summed or compared to a whole-field total.
The classes furthest from E21B's dominant claim density — water and wastewater treatment tied to gas streams, marine LNG vessel handling, and cryogenic-service alloy selection — carry comparatively thin filing coverage in this dataset. These are not proven-empty areas, but they sit well below the density of the leading classes, which makes them worth a focused prior-art search before committing to a specific claim scope. Co-filing between organisations is also limited, with only 10 co-assignee pairs identified, suggesting few established joint-development relationships to navigate around in these areas.
Ownership sits on a spectrum rather than at either extreme: the leading assignee alone holds 93 of 996 records, but the top 5 combined only reach 32.0% and the top 10 reach 47.4%. That leaves more than half the dataset spread across the remaining ranked companies and a long tail of smaller filers. It is a field with a visible leading tier rather than a single dominant gatekeeper, which generally means more room for a well-scoped new filing to coexist alongside incumbents.
Research LNG & Gas Processing Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole lng & gas processing patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.