Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

LNG AKWA IBOM

IMO: 9262209
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Bermuda
Port of registry: Hamilton
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.46 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: NLNG Ship Management Ltd

Report year

2018 at a glance

From the 2018 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

331

LNG carrier median 323 kg/nm (+3%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

3.36

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.9 (−69%)

Average speed

13.1 kn

LNG carrier median 13.7 kn (−4%)

Fuel per day at sea

104.5 t/day

Fuel consumed

8,074 t

CO₂ emitted

23,563 t

Distance sailed

24,384 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

1,855 h

77 days, 21% of the year

Within the LNG carrier fleet, 2025

Set against all 386 LNG carrier 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 325 kg/nm · median 190 (+71%)

152Ranks 352 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 10.6 kn · median 14.4 (−26%)

11.2Faster than 8% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 17.0 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+139%)

5.06Ranks 352 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier 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 ports0%
From the EU62%
Into the EU37%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

372 t

1.6% 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 LNG carrier median is the middle ship of all LNG carrier ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

LNG AKWA IBOM
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

LNG AKWA IBOM
LNG carrier median

6.08.010.012.014.016.0

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

CO₂ per transport work (volume), g CO₂/m³·nm

LNG AKWA IBOM
LNG carrier median

0.05.010.015.020.0

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

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	−1.5 kn	+2%	−11%	−7%	−1%	1.5 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	−1.3 kn	+13%	+3%	+46%	+30%	1.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 13%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+1.6 kn	−24%	−14%	−20%	−31%	1.6 kn faster, fuel per mile down 24%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−0.4 kn	+8%	+5%	−25%	−0%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile up 8%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+4.4 kn	−11%	+40%	+15%	+44%	4.4 kn faster, fuel per mile down 11%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2020	−5.3 kn	+16%	−31%	+113%	+296%	5.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 16%; 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
2025LNG	NLNG Ship Management Ltd	15,911	43,230	48,934	4,609	10.6	325	–	41%
2024LNG	NLNG Ship Management Ltd	16,779	47,761	52,512	4,332	12.1	320	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	10,140	28,047	35,993	2,693	13.4	282	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	16,694	46,606	45,035	3,809	11.8	371	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	20,465	56,961	59,755	4,881	12.2	343	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	20,055	57,595	51,996	6,687	7.8	386	–	–
2018LNG / alt.	not published	8,074	23,563	24,384	1,855	13.1	331	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	NLNG Ship Management Ltd	17.0	7.12	+139%	352 of 386	Lloyd's Register	C
2024LNG	NLNG Ship Management Ltd	17.1	7.39	+132%	280 of 312	Lloyd's Register	C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	13.2	9.10	+45%	286 of 355	Lloyd's Register	C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	19.2	10.4	+84%	324 of 379	Lloyd's Register	C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	19.2	10.5	+84%	256 of 289	Lloyd's Register	C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	13.3	10.7	+24%	192 of 267	Lloyd's Register	C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	3.36	10.9	−69%	11 of 197	Lloyd's Register	C

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. LNG carrier ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (volume) (TW), in g CO₂/m³·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 LNG carrier 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.