Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

LNG RIVER ORASHI

IMO: 9266982
Type: LNG carrier
Port of registry: Hamilton
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.34 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel: Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: BW Fleet Management AS · part of BW Group

Report year

2024 at a glance

From the 2024 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel per mile

253.6 kg/nm

LNG carrier median 204.5 kg/nm (+24%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

11.74

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 7.39 (+59%)

Average speed

11.2 kn

LNG carrier median 14.6 kn (−23%)

Fuel per day at sea

68.2 t/day

Fuel consumed

4,999 t

CO₂ emitted

13,779 t

13,927 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

19,711 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

1,758 h

73 days, 20% of the year

Within the LNG carrier fleet, 2024

Set against all 312 LNG carrier ships with a full-year 2024 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 253.6 kg/nm · median 204.5 (+24%)

147.8Ranks 217 of 312, lowest first328.0

Average speedThis ship 11.2 kn · median 14.6 (−23%)

11.0Faster than 11% of LNG carrier ships16.1

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 11.74 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.39 (+59%)

4.54Ranks 252 of 312, lowest first17.34

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2024

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 EU55%
Into the EU43%
At berth in the EU2%

51% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (7,042 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

2.2%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.0 t

LNG engines slip unburnt methane

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.011

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

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 per mile, kg/nm

LNG RIVER ORASHI
LNG carrier median

200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

LNG RIVER ORASHI
LNG carrier median

8.010.012.014.016.0

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

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

LNG RIVER ORASHI
LNG carrier median

5.07.510.012.515.017.5

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

Year on year

Year	Speed	Fuel per mile	Fuel per day	Distance	CO₂ per TW	Reading
2023→2024	+1.3 kn	+12%	+26%	−19%	+4%	1.3 kn faster, fuel per mile up 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−1.0 kn	−16%	−24%	−49%	+5%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile down 16%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	+1.6 kn	−8%	+7%	+17%	−19%	1.6 kn faster, fuel per mile down 8%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−0.6 kn	−4%	−9%	−32%	+4%	0.6 kn slower, fuel per mile down 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	−0.7 kn	−12%	−18%	+190%	−27%	0.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 12%; in line with the speed change.
2018→2019	−5.0 kn	+1%	−32%	−24%	+38%	5.0 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).

Part-year reports are left out of these comparisons. 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
2025part-yearLNG	BW Fleet Management AS	1,098	3,035	4,564	310	14.7	240.6	–	–
2024LNG	BW Fleet Management A/S	4,999	13,779	19,711	1,758	11.2	253.6	–	–
2023LNG	not published	5,484	15,135	24,218	2,440	9.9	226.5	–	–
2022LNG	not published	12,764	35,262	47,134	4,328	10.9	270.8	–	–
2021LNG	not published	11,943	32,943	40,385	4,326	9.3	295.7	–	–
2020LNG	not published	18,302	50,682	59,669	6,057	9.9	306.7	–	–
2019LNG	not published	7,204	20,705	20,584	1,950	10.6	350.0	–	–
2018LNG	not published	9,414	27,136	27,132	1,742	15.6	347.0	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025part-yearLNG	BW Fleet Management AS	–	–	–	–	DNV	B+C
2024LNG	BW Fleet Management A/S	11.74	7.39	+59%	252 of 312	DNV	C
2023LNG	not published	11.33	9.10	+25%	250 of 355	DNV	C
2022LNG	not published	10.77	10.38	+4%	210 of 379	DNV	C
2021LNG	not published	13.22	10.46	+26%	205 of 289	DNV	C
2020LNG	not published	12.66	10.71	+18%	184 of 267	DNV	C
2019LNG	not published	17.35	10.87	+60%	214 of 248	DNV	C
2018LNG	not published	12.61	10.92	+15%	136 of 197	DNV	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.