Navalyze · Container · Ship

MSC ARUSHI R.

IMO: 9244881
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 24,105 t
Flag (estimated): Liberia
Port of registry: Monrovia
Technical efficiency: EEXI 13.57 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MSC SHIPMANAGEMENT LIMITED · part of MSC Group

Report year

2018 at a glance

From the 2018 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 23,920 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

233

Container median 182 kg/nm (+28%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

30.5

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 20.2 (+51%)

Average speed

15.1 kn

Container median 13.8 kn (+9%)

Fuel per day at sea

84.4 t/day

Fuel consumed

17,254 t

CO₂ emitted

53,901 t

Distance sailed

74,004 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,909 h

205 days, 56% 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 201 kg/nm · median 177 (+13%)

78.8Ranks 1,278 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 14.5 kn · median 13.3 (+9%)

9.1Faster than 69% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 26.0 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (+59%)

7.22Ranks 1,588 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container 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 ports7%
From the EU38%
Into the EU53%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,137 t

2.1% 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 ARUSHI R.
Container median

150.0175.0200.0225.0250.0275.0

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

Average speed, kn

MSC ARUSHI R.
Container median

13.014.015.016.017.018.0

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

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

MSC ARUSHI R.
Container median

15.020.025.030.035.0

’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	−0.8 kn	+3%	−2%	+41%	+17%	0.8 kn slower, fuel per mile up 3%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+1.2 kn	+4%	+12%	−4%	−7%	1.2 kn faster, fuel per mile up 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−1.9 kn	−15%	−26%	−38%	−14%	1.9 kn slower, fuel per mile down 15%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	−1.2 kn	−13%	−19%	+22%	+19%	1.2 kn slower, fuel per mile down 13%; in line with the speed change.
2020→2021	+0.7 kn	+8%	+12%	−7%	−6%	0.7 kn faster, fuel per mile up 8%; in line with the speed change.
2019→2020	−0.4 kn	−6%	−8%	+23%	−11%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 6%; in line with the speed change.
2018→2019	+1.8 kn	+7%	+20%	−26%	−9%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile up 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 LIMITED	12,946	40,410	64,527	4,454	14.5	201	26.0	–
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	8,865	27,623	45,622	2,983	15.3	194	22.1	–
2023	not published	8,880	27,833	47,331	3,364	14.1	188	23.8	–
2022	not published	17,074	53,814	76,954	4,803	16.0	222	27.7	–
2021	not published	16,046	50,561	63,007	3,668	17.2	255	23.2	–
2020	not published	15,892	50,076	67,507	4,081	16.5	235	24.6	–
2019	not published	13,706	42,801	54,763	3,236	16.9	250	27.7	–
2018	not published	17,254	53,901	74,004	4,909	15.1	233	30.5	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	MSC SHIPMANAGEMENT LIMITED	26.0	16.3	+59%	1,588 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	22.1	17.5	+26%	1,230 of 1,974	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	23.8	19.4	+23%	1,141 of 1,899	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	27.7	19.1	+45%	1,232 of 1,825	DNV	C
2021	not published	23.2	17.9	+30%	1,122 of 1,781	DNV	C
2020	not published	24.6	17.6	+40%	1,211 of 1,797	DNV	C
2019	not published	27.7	18.9	+47%	1,200 of 1,788	DNV	C
2018	not published	30.5	20.2	+51%	1,180 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.