Navalyze · Reefer · Ship

BALTIC LADY

IMO: 9160736
Type: Refrigerated cargo carrier
Average cargo carried: 4,654 t
Flag (estimated): Bahamas
Port of registry: Nassau
Technical efficiency: EIV 25.61 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: OWH Shipmanagement GmbH

Report year

2018 at a glance

From the 2018 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 4,007 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

85.0

Reefer median 86.2 kg/nm (−1%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

66.3

g CO₂/t·nm · Reefer median 72.8 (−9%)

Average speed

12.6 kn

Reefer median 15.3 kn (−18%)

Fuel per day at sea

25.7 t/day

Fuel consumed

1,813 t

CO₂ emitted

5,664 t

Distance sailed

21,323 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

1,696 h

71 days, 19% of the year

Within the reefer fleet, 2025

Set against all 109 reefer 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 93.8 kg/nm · median 82.9 (+13%)

55.8Ranks 81 of 109, lowest first118

Average speedThis ship 15.9 kn · median 14.6 (+9%)

8.2Faster than 76% of reefer ships16.7

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 63.5 g CO₂/t·nm · median 56.8 (+12%)

36.7Ranks 68 of 109, lowest first140

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Reefer medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2018

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 ports2%
From the EU60%
Into the EU36%
At berth in the EU3%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

142 t

2.5% 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 Reefer median is the middle ship of all reefer ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

BALTIC LADY
Reefer median

80.085.090.095.0100.0105.0

’182018’192019’202020’212021’222022’232023’242024’252025

Average speed, kn

BALTIC LADY
Reefer median

12.014.016.018.0

’182018’192019’202020’212021’222022’232023’242024’252025

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

BALTIC LADY
Reefer median

20.040.060.080.0100

’182018’192019’202020’212021’222022’232023’242024’252025

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	−1.0 kn	−5%	−11%	+61%	+4%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile down 5%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.1 kn	+12%	+12%	+52%	−29%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 12%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+1.2 kn	−12%	−5%	+24%	+147%	1.2 kn faster, fuel per mile down 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−0.9 kn	+6%	+0%	−79%	−5%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile up 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+3.5 kn	−4%	+22%	−33%	−40%	3.5 kn faster, fuel per mile down 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−2.7 kn	+2%	−16%	+78%	−11%	2.7 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+3.1 kn	+14%	+42%	+36%	+5%	3.1 kn faster, fuel per mile up 14%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).

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	Hours at seah	Average speedknots at sea	Fuel kg/nmthis ship	CO₂ per transport work (cargo)g/t·nm, this ship	Laden fuel
2025	OWH Shipmanagement GmbH	2,060	6,485	21,955	1,382	15.9	93.8	63.5	–
2024	OWH Shipmanagement GmbH	1,356	4,233	13,670	810	16.9	99.2	61.3	–
2023	not published	800	2,499	9,014	536	16.8	88.7	86.4	–
2022	not published	730	2,280	7,255	466	15.6	101	35.0	–
2021	not published	3,327	10,472	34,991	2,125	16.5	95.1	37.0	–
2020	not published	5,124	16,166	51,876	3,996	13.0	98.8	61.6	–
2019	not published	2,831	8,843	29,100	1,858	15.7	97.3	69.5	–
2018	not published	1,813	5,664	21,323	1,696	12.6	85.0	66.3	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Reefer median	vs Reefer	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	OWH Shipmanagement GmbH	63.5	56.8	+12%	68 of 109	Verifavia	A+C
2024	OWH Shipmanagement GmbH	61.3	58.7	+4%	59 of 108	Verifavia	B+C
2023	not published	86.4	55.6	+55%	113 of 135	Verifavia	C
2022	not published	35.0	55.3	−37%	14 of 143	Verifavia	C
2021	not published	37.0	55.0	−33%	18 of 158	Verifavia	C
2020	not published	61.6	59.1	+4%	78 of 149	Verifavia	B+C
2019	not published	69.5	62.6	+11%	90 of 147	Verifavia	B+C
2018	not published	66.3	72.8	−9%	59 of 136	Verifavia	C

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Reefer 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 reefer 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.