Navalyze · Container · Ship

MSC KATYA R.

IMO: 9227302
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 25,625 t
Flag (estimated): Liberia
Port of registry: Monrovia
Technical efficiency: EEXI 13.23 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MSC Shipmanagement Ltd · part of MSC Group

Report year

2019 at a glance

From the 2019 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 28,943 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

245

Container median 174 kg/nm (+40%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

26.4

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 18.9 (+40%)

Average speed

17.0 kn

Container median 13.7 kn (+24%)

Fuel per day at sea

99.5 t/day

Fuel consumed

16,655 t

CO₂ emitted

52,009 t

Distance sailed

68,118 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,016 h

167 days, 46% of the year

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.

Fuel kg/nmThis ship 204 kg/nm · median 177 (+15%)

78.8Ranks 1,298 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 15.0 kn · median 13.3 (+13%)

9.1Faster than 77% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 25.0 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (+53%)

7.22Ranks 1,554 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2019

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 ports5%
From the EU32%
Into the EU62%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

889 t

1.7% 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 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 kg/nm

MSC KATYA R.
Container median

150.0175.0200.0225.0250.0275.0

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

Average speed, kn

MSC KATYA R.
Container median

12.014.016.018.0

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

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

MSC KATYA R.
Container median

15.020.025.030.0

’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	+0.0 kn	−9%	−9%	+73%	+4%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 9%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−0.3 kn	+27%	+25%	−16%	−5%	0.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 27%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−0.9 kn	−22%	−27%	−36%	−4%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile down 22%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−1.3 kn	−10%	−17%	+5%	+14%	1.3 kn slower, fuel per mile down 10%; in line with the speed change.
2020→2021	+0.6 kn	+6%	+9%	−6%	−11%	0.6 kn faster, fuel per mile up 6%; in line with the speed change.
2019→2020	−0.1 kn	−3%	−3%	−1%	−2%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 3%; in line with the speed change.
2018→2019	+0.9 kn	−7%	−2%	+75%	−5%	0.9 kn faster, fuel per mile down 7%; 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	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	12,570	39,451	61,706	4,105	15.0	204	25.0	–
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	8,003	25,114	35,733	2,381	15.0	224	24.0	–
2023	not published	7,500	23,518	42,591	2,792	15.3	176	25.2	–
2022	not published	14,997	47,281	66,292	4,100	16.2	226	26.3	–
2021	not published	15,853	49,954	63,006	3,607	17.5	252	23.0	–
2020	not published	15,962	50,296	67,098	3,972	16.9	238	26.0	–
2019	not published	16,655	52,009	68,118	4,016	17.0	245	26.4	–
2018	not published	10,287	32,134	38,961	2,420	16.1	264	27.8	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	25.0	16.3	+53%	1,554 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	24.0	17.5	+37%	1,287 of 1,974	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	25.2	19.4	+30%	1,193 of 1,899	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	26.3	19.1	+37%	1,186 of 1,825	DNV	C
2021	not published	23.0	17.9	+28%	1,117 of 1,781	DNV	C
2020	not published	26.0	17.6	+48%	1,251 of 1,797	DNV	C
2019	not published	26.4	18.9	+40%	1,159 of 1,788	DNV	C
2018	not published	27.8	20.2	+38%	1,122 of 1,705	DNV	C

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.