Navalyze · Market view · Compare
Compare operators, 2025
Pick a company or group, then the competitors to hold it against, or compare verifiers. Every figure comes from the public THETIS-MRV reports for EU and EEA voyages.
- MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.your view
Side by side
All 2025 reports of each operator, across every ship type. Change is against 2024 where the operator reported then.
| MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. | |
|---|---|
| Ships | 33 |
| CO₂ emitted | 709 kt+59.6% |
| Fuel per mile | 197 kg/nm |
| Average speed | 13.3 kn |
| CO₂ at berth | 2.2% |
| Ships burning LNG | 17 |
| Main segment | LNG carrier |
Fuel per mile and speed depend on ship size and type; compare them within a segment below.
Segment by segment
Efficiency only compares within a ship type. Each row gives the CO₂ per transport work of an operator's typical (median) ship, and the bar sets it against the typical ship of the whole segment: to the left of the line it emits less CO₂ for the same transport work, to the right more.
LNG carrier
CO₂ per transport work (volume) in g CO₂/m³·nm · segment median 7.1
- MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.8.0 (+13% vs median)
- ← bettersegment medianworse →
| Ships | Per work | vs median | Fuel kg/nm | Speed kn | Hours at sea | At berth | LNG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. | 20 | 8.0 | +13% | 244 | 13.8 | 3,636 | 1.9% | 15 |
| Segment median | 7.1 | 0% |
Vehicle carrier
CO₂ per transport work (cargo) in g CO₂/t·nm · segment median 55.4
- MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.54.0 (−3% vs median)
- ← bettersegment medianworse →
| Ships | Per work | vs median | Fuel kg/nm | Speed kn | Hours at sea | At berth | LNG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. | 6 | 54.0 | −3% | 85 | 15.5 | 1,766 | 2.5% | – |
| Segment median | 55.4 | 0% |
Chemical tanker
CO₂ per transport work (cargo) in g CO₂/t·nm · segment median 15.0
- MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.11.2 (−25% vs median)
- ← bettersegment medianworse →
| Ships | Per work | vs median | Fuel kg/nm | Speed kn | Hours at sea | At berth | LNG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. | 5 | 11.2 | −25% | 72 | 10.3 | 3,401 | 5.7% | 2 |
| Segment median | 15.0 | 0% |
Gas carrier (LPG)
CO₂ per transport work (cargo) in g CO₂/t·nm · segment median 35.6
- MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.15.8 (−56% vs median)
- ← bettersegment medianworse →
| Ships | Per work | vs median | Fuel kg/nm | Speed kn | Hours at sea | At berth | LNG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. | 2 | 15.8 | −56% | 118 | 13.8 | 1,063 | 2.5% | – |
| Segment median | 35.6 | 0% |
Verification and monitoring
Who verifies each operator's reports, and which MRV methods its ships use to measure fuel (share of reports).
| Verifiers (ships) | A · delivery notes | B · tank monitoring | C · flow meters | D · direct | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. | ClassNK (33) | 39% | 58% | 100% | 0% |
MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.: ships furthest from their peers
Each ship's CO₂ per transport work against the median ship of its type and size band. +100% means the ship emits twice as much CO₂ for the same transport work as a typical ship of its size. Ro-pax ships show passenger figures, with freight underneath.
| Ship | IMO | Segment | CO₂ per transport work | Size-band median | vs median | Speed kn | CO₂ | Allowances |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VLADIMIR RUSANOVLNG | 9750701 | LNG carrier | 11.3 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +59% | 14.5 | 46,328 t | €1.2m |
| LNG PHECDALNG | 9834313 | LNG carrier | 11.0 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +54% | 6.1 | 13,015 t | €346k |
| NIKOLAY URVANTSEVLNG | 9750660 | LNG carrier | 10.8 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +52% | 14.0 | 57,087 t | €1.5m |
| VLADIMIR VIZELNG | 9750658 | LNG carrier | 10.6 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +49% | 14.9 | 60,505 t | €1.6m |
| POINT FORTINLNG | 9375721 | LNG carrier | 10.5 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +47% | 15.5 | 18,667 t | €383k |
| EMERALD ACE | 9539236 | Vehicle carrier | 217 g CO₂/t·nm | 158 | +37% | 16.3 | 5,342 t | €42k |
| AL AAMRIYA | 9338266 | LNG carrier | 8.9 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +25% | 13.6 | 89,765 t | €1.4m |
| FRAIHA | 9360817 | LNG carrier | 8.6 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +21% | 14.9 | 65,743 t | €849k |
| MURWAB | 9360805 | LNG carrier | 8.6 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +21% | 12.7 | 21,912 t | €558k |
| AQUAMARINE ACE | 9397987 | Vehicle carrier | 52.6 g CO₂/t·nm | 43.7 | +21% | 15.3 | 9,876 t | €257k |
| AQUAMARINE PROGRESS | 9415650 | Gas carrier (LPG) | 17.3 g CO₂/t·nm | 14.4 | +20% | 13.1 | 7,301 t | €4k |
| LNG ROSENROTLNG | 9877133 | LNG carrier | 8.3 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +16% | 13.1 | 44,929 t | €1.2m |
| GAIL BHUWANLNG | 9877145 | LNG carrier | 7.8 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +9% | 14.4 | 10,910 t | €294k |
| LNG JUNOLNG | 9774628 | LNG carrier | 7.5 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +6% | 15.2 | 41,466 t | €0 |
| MARVEL SWALLOWLNG | 9963449 | LNG carrier | 7.5 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | +5% | 13.8 | 22,632 t | €607k |
| CYPRESS SUNLNG | 9911551 | Chemical tanker | 8.2 g CO₂/t·nm | 8.2 | 0% | 11.1 | 1,341 t | €0 |
| LNG DUBHELNG | 9834296 | LNG carrier | 7.1 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | 0% | 12.4 | 13,733 t | €372k |
| VALIANT ACE | 9610420 | Vehicle carrier | 55.3 g CO₂/t·nm | 55.4 | 0% | 15.2 | 342 t | €0 |
| AQUAMARINE PROGRESS II | 9947495 | Gas carrier (LPG) | 14.2 g CO₂/t·nm | 14.4 | −1% | 15.2 | 3,596 t | €0 |
| MANCHAC SUNLNG | 9724013 | Chemical tanker | 11.2 g CO₂/t·nm | 11.5 | −3% | 10.2 | 7,390 t | €0 |
| GRANDE RIVIERE | 9733686 | Chemical tanker | 13.9 g CO₂/t·nm | 15.2 | −9% | 10.1 | 12,362 t | €53k |
| ETERNAL ACE | 9606479 | Vehicle carrier | 66.9 g CO₂/t·nm | 76.1 | −12% | 12.9 | 2,904 t | €30k |
| MERIDIAN ACE | 9209518 | Vehicle carrier | 46.8 g CO₂/t·nm | 55.4 | −16% | 16.7 | 8,938 t | €0 |
| LNG SCHNEEWEISSCHENLNG | 9771913 | LNG carrier | 5.9 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | −17% | 14.2 | 46,961 t | €702k |
| LNG MERAKLNG | 9834301 | LNG carrier | 5.9 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | −17% | 15.8 | 8,891 t | €243k |
| UMM GHUWAILINALNG | 9953250 | LNG carrier | 5.9 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | −17% | 13.6 | 35,680 t | €960k |
| REX TILLERSONLNG | 9953248 | LNG carrier | 5.7 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | −21% | 12.8 | 13,245 t | €358k |
| MEDALTA ADVENTURER | 9761451 | Chemical tanker | 15.2 g CO₂/t·nm | 21.4 | −29% | 10.5 | 12,222 t | €34k |
| MAYARO | 9733703 | Chemical tanker | 10.7 g CO₂/t·nm | 15.2 | −30% | 10.0 | 4,742 t | €0 |
| GREENERGY PEARLLNG | 9961489 | LNG carrier | 4.4 g CO₂/m³·nm | 7.1 | −38% | 14.9 | 3,924 t | €105k |
30 of 33 reports shown. A high ratio can mean an older or faster-sailing ship, short trades with much time manoeuvring, or part-loaded voyages; it marks where to look first.
Notes
- Companies are ISM companies (Document of Compliance holders) as named in THETIS, usually the ship manager.
- Groups combine ISM companies matched on name and known ownership. If a company is in the wrong group, tell us at info@navalyze.com.
- Efficiency figures use full-year reports with fuel; totals include part-year reports.
- Euro figures use the EUA price set at the top of the page.
- Verifier names vary by entity and year (for example DNV AS and DNV Hellas); they are rolled up into one brand. A verifier's figures cover the ships whose 2025 report it verified.