Navalyze

Navalyze · Ro-pax · Ship

FJARDVAGEN

IMO
8401444
Type
Ro-pax ship
Flag (estimated)
Finland
Port of registry
EckerÖ
Technical efficiency
EEXI 25.47 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class
IA Super
Former names
SAILOR

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: HT Shipmanagement OU

?
?

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm
127
Ro-pax median 157 kg/nm (−19%)
CO₂ per transport work (pax)
5,347
g CO₂/pax·nm · Ro-pax median 751 (+612%)
CO₂ per transport work (freight)
17.5
g CO₂/t·nm · Ro-pax median 217 (−92%)
Average speed
24.2 kn
Ro-pax median 15.8 kn (+53%)
Fuel per day at sea
73.7 t/day
Fuel consumed
6,092 t
CO₂ emitted
19,263 t
Distance sailed
47,945 nm
CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile
Time at sea
1,984 h
83 days, 23% of the year

Within the ro-pax fleet, 2025

Set against all 408 ro-pax ships with a full-year 2025 report. Bigger ships burn more per mile but less per tonne of cargo, so read fuel per mile with the ship's size in mind.

Fuel kg/nmThis ship 650 kg/nm · median 150 (+333%)
69.3Ranks 408 of 408, lowest first232
Average speedThis ship 10.7 kn · median 15.8 (−32%)
12.0Faster than 5% of ro-pax ships22.3
CO₂ per transport work (pax)This ship 1,085 g CO₂/pax·nm · median 567 (+92%)
66.8Ranks 318 of 408, lowest first1,569
CO₂ per transport work (freight)This ship 175 g CO₂/t·nm · median 253 (−31%)
48.6Ranks 160 of 408, lowest first1,247
Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Ro-pax medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2020

THETIS splits each ship's CO₂ by voyage type. The split sets how much falls under the EU ETS: all of it within the EU and at berth, half of it on voyages into or out of the EU.

  • Between EU ports84%
  • From the EU0%
  • Into the EU0%
  • At berth in the EU16%
Fuel burned laden
–
Not reported
CO₂ at berth
3,150 t
16.4% of the ship's CO₂, alongside in EU ports
Methane (CH₄)
–
Mainly from LNG; small for oil, biofuel and methanol
CO₂eq uplift
–
CO₂eq on top of CO₂ alone, from CH₄ and N₂O

Over the years

Full-year reports only. The Ro-pax median is the middle ship of all ro-pax ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

  • FJARDVAGEN
  • Ro-pax median

Average speed, kn

  • FJARDVAGEN
  • Ro-pax median

CO₂ per transport work (freight), g CO₂/t·nm

  • FJARDVAGEN
  • Ro-pax median

CO₂ per transport work (pax), g CO₂/pax·nm

  • FJARDVAGEN
  • Ro-pax median

Year on year

YearAverage speedFuel kg/nmFuel per day at seaDistanceCO₂ per transport workReading
2024→2025−2.8 kn+482%+361%−97%−0%2.8 kn slower, fuel per mile up 482%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024−0.1 kn+2%+1%−7%+8%Same speed, fuel per mile flat.
2022→2023−0.9 kn−2%−8%−15%+0%0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile down 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022−0.4 kn−7%−9%+16%+3%0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 7%; in line with the speed change.
2020→2021−9.3 kn−6%−42%+1%−82%9.3 kn slower, fuel per mile down 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020+10.4 kn+4%+83%−8%−30%10.4 kn faster, fuel per mile up 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019+0.8 kn+4%+10%−3%+97,646%0.8 kn faster, fuel per mile up 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).

Part-year reports are left out of these comparisons. Fuel per mile rises roughly with the square of speed for a given ship, so a change in speed explains much of a change in fuel per mile.

Every reporting year

One row per THETIS-MRV report. A ship that changed operator during a year has a part-year report for each.

Operation

YearISM companyFuel tCO₂ tDistance nmHours at seahAverage speedknots at seaFuel kg/nmthis shipCO₂ per transport work (cargo)g/t·nm, this shipLaden fuel
2025part-yearHT Shipmanagement OU7292,3111,23711211.0589––
2025Rederi Ab Eckero9543,0311,46813710.7650––
2024HT Shipmanagement OU5,00015,82244,7563,32213.5112––
2023not published5,25716,62947,9513,53413.6110––
2022not published6,29219,89856,1463,87314.5112––
2021not published5,80018,36548,3323,25114.9120––
2020not published6,09219,26347,9451,98424.2127––
2019not published6,35820,10452,2493,79113.8122––
2018not published6,30919,76554,0204,14613.0117––

Benchmark and verification

YearISM companyCO₂ per TW, g CO₂/pax·nmRo-pax medianvs Ro-paxRankFreight, g CO₂/t·nmRo-pax median vs Ro-pax VerifierMethods
2025part-yearHT Shipmanagement OU–––––––VerifaviaC
2025Rederi Ab Eckero1,085567+92%318 of 408175253−31%VerifaviaC
2024HT Shipmanagement OU1,086547+99%308 of 404171233−27%VerifaviaC
2023not published1,002680+47%269 of 386150234−36%VerifaviaC
2022not published1,001626+60%267 of 394148253−41%VerifaviaC
2021not published968815+19%213 of 377145226−36%VerifaviaC
2020not published5,347751+612%375 of 38717.5217−92%VerifaviaC
2019not published7,624569+1,240%388 of 394276223+24%RINAC
2018not published7.80729−99%34 of 3610.27184−100%RINAA

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Ro-pax ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (pax) (TW), in g CO₂/pax·nm, and also per tonne of freight (g CO₂/t·nm freight). CO₂eq adds methane and nitrous oxide and is in the public files from 2024. Rank counts from the lowest figure among that year's ro-pax ships. Methods: A delivery notes, B tank monitoring, C flow meters, D direct measurement. FuelEU GHG intensity is not shown: it needs fuel types, which the public file does not carry. Operators are named only from 2024, the first year the public files carry them; earlier years belong to the ship, not to any company.