ZHEN HUA 7
- IMO
- 9166560
- Type
- Other ship types
- Port of registry
- Monrovia
- Technical efficiency
- EIV 10.01 g CO₂/t·nm
2023 at a glance
From the 2023 THETIS-MRV report.
Within the other fleet, 2019
Set against all 96 other ships with a full-year 2019 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, 2023
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.
The voyage split is not in this year's report.
Over the years
Full-year reports only. The Other median is the middle ship of all other ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.
Fuel per mile, kg/nm
- ZHEN HUA 7
- Other median
Average speed, kn
- ZHEN HUA 7
- Other median
CO₂ per transport work (cargo), g CO₂/t·nm
- ZHEN HUA 7
- Other median
Year on year
| Year | Speed | Fuel per mile | Fuel per day | Distance | CO₂ per TW | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022→2023 | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 2020→2022 | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 2019→2020 | – | – | – | – | – | |
| 2018→2019 | −2.4 kn | +50% | +22% | +239% | +65% | 2.4 kn slower, fuel per mile up 50%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading 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 | At sea h | Speed kn | Fuel kg/nm | CO₂ g/t·nm | Laden fuel |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | not published | 0 | 0 | – | 0 | – | – | – | – |
| 2022 | not published | 0 | 0 | – | 0 | – | – | – | – |
| 2020 | not published | 0 | 0 | – | 0 | – | – | – | – |
| 2019 | not published | 5,322 | 16,631 | 28,985 | 2,772 | 10.5 | 183.6 | 55.22 | – |
| 2018 | not published | 1,048 | 3,267 | 8,539 | 663 | 12.9 | 122.7 | 33.46 | – |
Benchmark and verification
| Year | ISM company | CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm | Other median | vs Other | Rank | Verifier | Methods |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | not published | – | – | – | – | China Classification Society | A |
| 2022 | not published | – | – | – | – | China Classification Society | A |
| 2020 | not published | – | – | – | – | China Classification Society | A |
| 2019 | not published | 55.22 | 90.12 | −39% | 36 of 96 | China Classification Society | A |
| 2018 | not published | 33.46 | 72.88 | −54% | 28 of 87 | China Classification Society | A |
Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Other 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 other 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.