## 4 Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Weather Component** & **Boundary Value** & **Value in the Baltic Sea** &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Compliance with** \\ **Regulations** \\ \end{tabular} & **Remarks** \\ \hline
**Barometric pressure** & Steady, no sudden changes & Steady, no sudden changes & Yes &
\begin{tabular}{c} Sudden changes may \\ affect LNG cryogenic \\ systems and LNG \\ handling operations. \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
**Icing** & No icing of equipment or infrastructure & No icing of equipment or infrastructure & Yes &
\begin{tabular}{c} Baltic ports require \\ anti-icing systems for \\ the LNG handling \\ equip- \\ especially in winter. \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
**Humidity** & Range: less than 90\% & Less than 90\% & Yes &
\begin{tabular}{c} High air humidity in a \\ cold climate may lead \\ to icing and hinder the \\ operation of valves and \\ cryogenic armature. \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
**Mist and fog** & Operations prohibited at restricted visibility & Operations prohibited at restricted visibility \(<\) 500 m & Yes &
\begin{tabular}{c} Standards for the Baltic \\ ports, considering \\ frequent fog. \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
**Sea currents** & Max. 1.5 kn & Max. 1.5 kn & Yes &
\begin{tabular}{c} Additionally: \\ guidelines of the Baltic \\ ports (strong currents \\ may affect the stability \\ of vessels during the \\ LNG bunkering \\ operation). \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
**Salinity** & - & \begin{tabular}{c} Mean 7 PSU, \\ in the Bothnian Bay \(<\) 3 \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Lower than in oceans; \\ the Baltic has a lower \\ salinity than oceans \\ (mean 35 PSU), which \\ affects water quality \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} Additionally: \\ guidelines of the Baltic \\ ports. \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline
**Sunshine duration** & - & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Summer 8–12 h daily, \\ winter \\ 0–3 h \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} Variable across seasons; \\ highly dependent on \\ the season—very short \\ in winter, long in \\ summer \\ \end{tabular} & Port guidelines. \\ \hline
**Waves** & - &
\begin{tabular}{c} Sometimes above \\ standard; values within \\ standard, but during \\ storms may be \\ significantly higher \\ than permitted \\ \end{tabular} & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 11: _Cont._continuity during subzero temperatures. Moreover, real-time meteorological monitoring, predictive weather analytics, and flexible scheduling procedures are essential to minimize weather-related disruptions. In practice, some Baltic ports, such as Helsinki and Klapeda, already enforce operational restrictions under conditions of low visibility or high sea state, reflecting the operational relevance of such thresholds. In contrast, Western European ports, like Rotterdam and Zeebrugge, benefit from milder climates and more stable hydrological conditions. LNG bunkering in these locations is less frequently affected by icing, strong winds, or reduced visibility, which translates into fewer unplanned delays and more consistent scheduling. On the other hand, Arctic and subarctic ports, such as Murmansk and Hammerfest, experience significantly harsher weather, including prolonged ice cover and polar storms. However, their LNG infrastructure is purpose-built for such extremes, featuring reinforced components, permanent deicing systems, and vessels designed to meet ice class specifications. This results in a high degree of resilience, albeit at the cost of increased capital and operational expenditure. Within this spectrum, the Baltic region represents an intermediate operational challenge. While it does not demand the full extent of polar infrastructure, it must nonetheless contend with marked seasonal variability and occasional extreme weather events. This reality highlights the importance of scalable and climate-resilient infrastructure investments that reflect the specific risk profile of the region.