Navalyze · Container · Ship

CONESTE

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

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

Report year

2021 at a glance

From the 2021 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 5,377 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

74.1

Container median 186 kg/nm (−60%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

43.5

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 17.9 (+143%)

Average speed

12.6 kn

Container median 14.1 kn (−11%)

Fuel per day at sea

22.5 t/day

Fuel consumed

4,374 t

CO₂ emitted

13,784 t

Distance sailed

59,005 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,673 h

195 days, 53% 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 75.4 kg/nm · median 177 (−57%)

78.8Ranks 172 of 2,208, lowest first302

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 59.3 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (+264%)

7.22Ranks 2,111 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2021

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 ports65%
From the EU16%
Into the EU14%
At berth in the EU5%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

707 t

5.1% 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

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	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	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	Hours at seah	Average speedknots at sea	Fuel kg/nmthis ship	CO₂ per transport work (cargo)g/t·nm, this ship	Laden fuel
2025	Myklebusthaug Management AS	4,459	13,945	59,164	4,116	14.4	75.4	59.3	–
2024	Myklebusthaug Management AS	4,191	13,241	56,020	3,927	14.3	74.8	68.3	–
2023	not published	1,830	5,722	27,344	2,168	12.6	66.9	38.2	–
2022	not published	2,610	8,151	33,787	3,405	9.9	77.2	48.4	–
2021	not published	4,374	13,784	59,005	4,673	12.6	74.1	43.5	–
2020	not published	5,832	18,532	76,764	5,233	14.7	76.0	54.1	–
2019	not published	4,884	15,517	64,243	4,837	13.3	76.0	59.8	–
2018	not published	4,215	13,434	54,979	3,950	13.9	76.7	68.3	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Myklebusthaug Management AS	59.3	16.3	+264%	2,111 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	Myklebusthaug Management AS	68.3	17.5	+290%	1,901 of 1,974	DNV	A
2023	not published	38.2	19.4	+97%	1,512 of 1,899	DNV	A
2022	not published	48.4	19.1	+153%	1,584 of 1,825	DNV	A
2021	not published	43.5	17.9	+143%	1,521 of 1,781	DNV	A
2020	not published	54.1	17.6	+207%	1,630 of 1,797	DNV	A
2019	not published	59.8	18.9	+217%	1,652 of 1,788	DNV	A
2018	not published	68.3	20.2	+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.