Navalyze · Container · Ship

CONESTE

IMO: 9252802
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 3,977 t
Port of registry: Madeira
Technical efficiency: EEXI 25.46 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Myklebusthaug Management AS

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 3,977 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

75.4 kg/nm

Container median 177.0 kg/nm (−57%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

59.26

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 16.30 (+264%)

Average speed

14.4 kn

Container median 13.3 kn (+8%)

Fuel per day at sea

26.0 t/day

Fuel consumed

4,459 t

CO₂ emitted

13,945 t

14,164 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

59,164 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,116 h

172 days, 47% 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 per mileThis ship 75.4 kg/nm · median 177.0 (−57%)

78.8Ranks 172 of 2,208, lowest first302.4

Average speedThis ship 14.4 kn · median 13.3 (+8%)

9.1Faster than 67% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 59.26 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.30 (+264%)

7.22Ranks 2,111 of 2,208, lowest first46.89

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2025

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 ports88%
From the EU0%
Into the EU0%
At berth in the EU12%

99% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (13,787 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

11.6%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.2 t

Mainly from LNG; small for oil

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.016

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

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 per mile, kg/nm

CONESTE
Container median

50.0100.0150.0200.0

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

Average speed, kn

CONESTE
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

CONESTE
Container median

0.020.040.060.080.0

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

Year on year

Year	Speed	Fuel per mile	Fuel per day	Distance	CO₂ per TW	Reading
2024→2025	+0.1 kn	+1%	+2%	+6%	−13%	Same speed, fuel per mile flat.
2023→2024	+1.7 kn	+12%	+26%	+105%	+79%	1.7 kn faster, fuel per mile up 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+2.7 kn	−13%	+10%	−19%	−21%	2.7 kn faster, fuel per mile down 13%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−2.7 kn	+4%	−18%	−43%	+11%	2.7 kn slower, fuel per mile up 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−2.1 kn	−3%	−16%	−23%	−20%	2.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 3%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+1.4 kn	+0%	+10%	+19%	−10%	1.4 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−0.6 kn	−1%	−5%	+17%	−12%	0.6 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; 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
2025	Myklebusthaug Management AS	4,459	13,945	59,164	4,116	14.4	75.4	59.26	–
2024	Myklebusthaug Management AS	4,191	13,241	56,020	3,927	14.3	74.8	68.33	–
2023	not published	1,830	5,722	27,344	2,168	12.6	66.9	38.19	–
2022	not published	2,610	8,151	33,787	3,405	9.9	77.2	48.37	–
2021	not published	4,374	13,784	59,005	4,673	12.6	74.1	43.45	–
2020	not published	5,832	18,532	76,764	5,233	14.7	76.0	54.05	–
2019	not published	4,884	15,517	64,243	4,837	13.3	76.0	59.78	–
2018	not published	4,215	13,434	54,979	3,950	13.9	76.7	68.29	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Myklebusthaug Management AS	59.26	16.30	+264%	2,111 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	Myklebusthaug Management AS	68.33	17.52	+290%	1,901 of 1,974	DNV	A
2023	not published	38.19	19.40	+97%	1,512 of 1,899	DNV	A
2022	not published	48.37	19.13	+153%	1,584 of 1,825	DNV	A
2021	not published	43.45	17.90	+143%	1,521 of 1,781	DNV	A
2020	not published	54.05	17.58	+207%	1,630 of 1,797	DNV	A
2019	not published	59.78	18.88	+217%	1,652 of 1,788	DNV	A
2018	not published	68.29	20.22	+238%	1,620 of 1,705	DNV	A

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.