Navalyze · Ro-pax · Ship

ROMANTIKA

IMO: 9237589
Type: Ro-pax ship
Flag (estimated): Latvia
Port of registry: Riga
Technical efficiency: EEXI 21.20 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: IA Super

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: HT Shipmanagement SIA

Report year

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

218

Ro-pax median 157 kg/nm (+39%)

CO₂ per transport work (pax)

575

g CO₂/pax·nm · Ro-pax median 751 (−23%)

CO₂ per transport work (freight)

76.4

g CO₂/t·nm · Ro-pax median 217 (−65%)

Average speed

15.5 kn

Ro-pax median 15.8 kn (−2%)

Fuel per day at sea

80.9 t/day

Fuel consumed

6,621 t

CO₂ emitted

20,864 t

Distance sailed

30,439 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

1,963 h

82 days, 22% of the year

Within the ro-pax fleet, 2025

Set against all 408 ro-pax 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 228 kg/nm · median 150 (+52%)

69.3Ranks 360 of 408, lowest first232

Average speedThis ship 4.1 kn · median 15.8 (−74%)

12.0Faster than 0% of ro-pax ships22.3

CO₂ per transport work (pax)This ship 13,806 g CO₂/pax·nm · median 567 (+2,337%)

66.8Ranks 406 of 408, lowest first1,569

CO₂ per transport work (freight)This ship 664 g CO₂/t·nm · median 253 (+162%)

48.6Ranks 301 of 408, lowest first1,247

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Ro-pax medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2020

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 ports67%
From the EU0%
Into the EU0%
At berth in the EU33%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

6,787 t

32.5% 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 Ro-pax median is the middle ship of all ro-pax ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

ROMANTIKA
Ro-pax median

0.0100,000200,000300,000

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

Average speed, kn

ROMANTIKA
Ro-pax median

0.05.010.015.020.0

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

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

ROMANTIKA
Ro-pax median

0.0200400600800

’182018’192019’202020’252025

CO₂ per transport work (pax), g CO₂/pax·nm

ROMANTIKA
Ro-pax median

0.05,00010,00015,000

’182018’192019’202020’212021’252025

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	+3.7 kn	−100%	−99%	+283,513%	–	3.7 kn faster, fuel per mile down 100%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−16.7 kn	+121,281%	+2,525%	−100%	–	16.7 kn slower, fuel per mile up 121,281%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+0.3 kn	+6%	+8%	−20%	–	0.3 kn faster, fuel per mile up 6%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	−0.9 kn	−39%	−42%	+202%	–	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile down 39%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	+2.2 kn	+37%	+57%	−24%	+142%	2.2 kn faster, fuel per mile up 37%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+0.1 kn	+44%	+45%	−69%	+83%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 44%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+0.0 kn	−2%	−2%	−0%	−16%	Same speed, fuel per mile flat.

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	HT Shipmanagement SIA	5,167	16,565	22,689	5,590	4.1	228	–	–
2024	HT Shipmanagement SIA	1,972	6,322	8	23	0.4	233,902	–	–
2023	not published	10,863	34,826	56,375	3,305	17.1	193	–	–
2022	not published	12,717	40,740	70,124	4,163	16.8	181	–	–
2021	not published	6,948	22,154	23,257	1,311	17.7	299	–	–
2020	not published	6,621	20,864	30,439	1,963	15.5	218	–	–
2019	not published	14,837	46,751	98,353	6,389	15.4	151	–	–
2018	not published	15,075	47,502	98,414	6,391	15.4	153	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/pax·nm	Ro-pax median	vs Ro-pax	Rank	Freight, g CO₂/t·nm	Ro-pax median	vs Ro-pax	Verifier	Methods
2025	HT Shipmanagement SIA	13,806	567	+2,337%	406 of 408	664	253	+162%	Verifavia	C
2024	HT Shipmanagement SIA	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	Verifavia	C
2023	not published	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	Verifavia	C
2022	not published	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	Bureau Veritas	A
2021	not published	1,391	815	+71%	296 of 377	–	–	–	Verifavia	C
2020	not published	575	751	−23%	166 of 387	76.4	217	−65%	Verifavia	C
2019	not published	315	569	−45%	129 of 394	122	223	−45%	Verifavia	C
2018	not published	376	729	−48%	129 of 361	52.4	184	−72%	Verifavia	C

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Ro-pax ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (pax) (TW), in g CO₂/pax·nm, and also per tonne of freight (g CO₂/t·nm freight). CO₂eq adds methane and nitrous oxide and is in the public files from 2024. Rank counts from the lowest figure among that year's ro-pax 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.