BELITAKI
- IMO
- 9152923
- Type
- Container ship
- Average cargo carried
- 9,316 t
- Port of registry
- Monrovia
- Technical efficiency
- EEXI 18.61 g CO₂/t·nm
- Former names
- VENTO DI LEVANTE
ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION · part of Conbulk
2025 at a glance
From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 9,316 t of cargo on average.
Within the container fleet, 2025
Set against all 2,208 container 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.
Where the emissions happen, 2025
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 ports39%
- From the EU14%
- Into the EU40%
- At berth in the EU7%
32% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (3,482 t).
Over the years
Full-year reports only. The Container median is the middle ship of all container ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.
Fuel per mile, kg/nm
- BELITAKI
- Container median
Average speed, kn
- BELITAKI
- Container median
CO₂ per transport work (cargo), g CO₂/t·nm
- BELITAKI
- Container median
Year on year
| Year | Speed | Fuel per mile | Fuel per day | Distance | CO₂ per TW | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024→2025 | +0.4 kn | +0% | +5% | +24% | +12% | 0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade). |
| 2023→2024 | −2.1 kn | −14% | −29% | +12% | −26% | 2.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 14%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade). |
| 2022→2023 | −6.5 kn | +3% | −34% | −30% | +56% | 6.5 kn slower, fuel per mile up 3%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade). |
| 2021→2022 | −2.7 kn | −1% | −14% | +7% | −2% | 2.7 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade). |
| 2020→2021 | +14.0 kn | −2% | +204% | +57% | −25% | 14.0 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade). |
| 2019→2020 | −2.8 kn | +17% | −18% | −44% | +9% | 2.8 kn slower, fuel per mile up 17%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade). |
| 2018→2019 | −3.3 kn | +30% | −3% | +14% | −26% | 3.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 30%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading 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
| Year | ISM company | Fuel t | CO₂ t | Distance nm | At sea h | Speed kn | Fuel kg/nm | CO₂ g/t·nm | Laden fuel |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025part-year | CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION | 1,855 | 5,830 | 20,124 | 1,806 | 11.1 | 92.2 | 27.51 | 92% |
| 2025 | CONBULK ASIA PTE.LTD. | 3,462 | 10,866 | 38,082 | 3,868 | 9.8 | 90.9 | 30.63 | 93% |
| 2024part-year | CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION | 148 | 467 | 1,737 | 196 | 8.9 | 85.0 | 27.68 | – |
| 2024part-year | CONBULK ASIA PTE.LTD. | 2,130 | 6,711 | 23,939 | 2,521 | 9.5 | 89.0 | 28.36 | – |
| 2024 | CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION | 2,786 | 8,781 | 30,741 | 3,262 | 9.4 | 90.6 | 27.24 | – |
| 2023 | not published | 2,878 | 9,079 | 27,431 | 2,383 | 11.5 | 104.9 | 36.80 | – |
| 2022 | not published | 3,969 | 12,523 | 39,006 | 2,170 | 18.0 | 101.8 | 23.57 | – |
| 2021 | not published | 3,760 | 11,812 | 36,426 | 1,760 | 20.7 | 103.2 | 24.01 | – |
| 2020 | not published | 2,436 | 7,660 | 23,190 | 3,464 | 6.7 | 105.0 | 32.19 | – |
| 2019 | not published | 3,702 | 11,583 | 41,351 | 4,344 | 9.5 | 89.5 | 29.63 | – |
| 2018 | not published | 2,485 | 7,764 | 36,138 | 2,818 | 12.8 | 68.8 | 40.27 | 85% |
Benchmark and verification
| Year | ISM company | CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm | Container median | vs Container | Rank | Verifier | Methods |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025part-year | CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION | – | – | – | – | ABS | A |
| 2025 | CONBULK ASIA PTE.LTD. | 30.63 | 16.30 | +88% | 1,698 of 2,208 | ABS | A |
| 2024part-year | CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION | – | – | – | – | ABS | A |
| 2024part-year | CONBULK ASIA PTE.LTD. | – | – | – | – | ABS | A |
| 2024 | CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION | 27.24 | 17.52 | +55% | 1,390 of 1,974 | ABS | A |
| 2023 | not published | 36.80 | 19.40 | +90% | 1,483 of 1,899 | Bureau Veritas | A |
| 2022 | not published | 23.57 | 19.13 | +23% | 1,100 of 1,825 | Bureau Veritas | A |
| 2021 | not published | 24.01 | 17.90 | +34% | 1,158 of 1,781 | Bureau Veritas | A |
| 2020 | not published | 32.19 | 17.58 | +83% | 1,369 of 1,797 | Bureau Veritas | A |
| 2019 | not published | 29.63 | 18.88 | +57% | 1,253 of 1,788 | Bureau Veritas | A |
| 2018 | not published | 40.27 | 20.22 | +99% | 1,354 of 1,705 | Bureau Veritas | A |
Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Container ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (cargo) (TW), in g CO₂/t·nm. CO₂eq adds methane and nitrous oxide and is in the public files from 2024. Rank counts from the lowest figure among that year's container 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.