Navalyze · Container · Ship

MAERSK NEWBURY

IMO: 9231470
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 12,708 t
Flag (estimated): Singapore
Port of registry: Singapore
Technical efficiency: EEXI 17.00 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Maersk A/S · part of Maersk

Report year

2019 at a glance

From the 2019 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 9,746 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

123

Container median 174 kg/nm (−29%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

39.7

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 18.9 (+110%)

Average speed

15.5 kn

Container median 13.7 kn (+13%)

Fuel per day at sea

45.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

11,098 t

CO₂ emitted

34,928 t

Distance sailed

90,202 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

5,811 h

242 days, 66% 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 118 kg/nm · median 177 (−33%)

78.8Ranks 691 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 12.2 kn · median 13.3 (−8%)

9.1Faster than 33% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 29.1 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (+78%)

7.22Ranks 1,667 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 ports10%
From the EU42%
Into the EU46%
At berth in the EU1%

Fuel burned laden

11,098 t

100% of all fuel; 0% in ballast or unladen

CO₂ at berth

520 t

1.5% 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 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

MAERSK NEWBURY
Container median

100.0120.0140.0160.0180.0200.0

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

Average speed, kn

MAERSK NEWBURY
Container median

8.010.012.014.016.0

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

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

MAERSK NEWBURY
Container median

10.020.030.040.0

’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	−2.7 kn	−14%	−29%	−12%	+5%	2.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 14%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.2 kn	+12%	+14%	−8%	+5%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 12%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+0.1 kn	+6%	+7%	−7%	+9%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 6%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	+6.1 kn	−12%	+50%	+24%	−18%	6.1 kn faster, fuel per mile down 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−4.4 kn	+16%	−24%	−24%	+1%	4.4 kn slower, fuel per mile up 16%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	−2.6 kn	−8%	−23%	−37%	−27%	2.6 kn slower, fuel per mile down 8%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	−0.4 kn	−3%	−5%	+0%	+69%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 3%; in line with the speed change.

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	Maersk A/S	4,724	14,794	40,061	3,271	12.2	118	29.1	96%
2024	Maersk A/S	6,233	19,548	45,543	3,051	14.9	137	27.6	97%
2023	not published	6,081	19,051	49,657	3,386	14.7	123	26.4	98%
2022	not published	6,157	19,294	53,295	3,660	14.6	116	24.2	98%
2021	not published	5,684	17,793	43,128	5,070	8.5	132	29.5	–
2020	not published	6,470	20,243	56,952	4,411	12.9	114	29.2	100%
2019	not published	11,098	34,928	90,202	5,811	15.5	123	39.7	100%
2018	not published	11,378	35,686	89,969	5,645	15.9	127	23.5	100%

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Maersk A/S	29.1	16.3	+78%	1,667 of 2,208	ABS	C
2024	Maersk A/S	27.6	17.5	+58%	1,398 of 1,974	ABS	C
2023	not published	26.4	19.4	+36%	1,240 of 1,899	ABS	C
2022	not published	24.2	19.1	+27%	1,121 of 1,825	ABS	C
2021	not published	29.5	17.9	+65%	1,289 of 1,781	ABS	C
2020	not published	29.2	17.6	+66%	1,324 of 1,797	ABS	C
2019	not published	39.7	18.9	+110%	1,416 of 1,788	ABS	C
2018	not published	23.5	20.2	+16%	989 of 1,705	ABS	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.