Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

LNG BENUE

IMO: 9267015
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Bermuda
Port of registry: Hamilton
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.34 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG

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

Report year

2023 at a glance

From the 2023 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

272

LNG carrier median 231 kg/nm (+18%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

10.3

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 9.10 (+13%)

Average speed

12.3 kn

LNG carrier median 14.2 kn (−13%)

Fuel per day at sea

80.2 t/day

Fuel consumed

11,710 t

CO₂ emitted

32,567 t

Distance sailed

43,098 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,505 h

146 days, 40% 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 342 kg/nm · median 190 (+79%)

152Ranks 363 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 7.0 kn · median 14.4 (−51%)

11.2Faster than 1% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 13.1 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+83%)

5.06Ranks 333 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2023

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 ports1%
From the EU44%
Into the EU53%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

664 t

2.0% 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 BENUE
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

LNG BENUE
LNG carrier median

5.07.510.012.515.017.5

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

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

LNG BENUE
LNG carrier median

5.07.510.012.515.017.5

’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	−2.0 kn	+21%	−6%	−60%	−15%	2.0 kn slower, fuel per mile up 21%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	−3.3 kn	+4%	−24%	−37%	+51%	3.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+0.7 kn	−8%	−2%	−30%	−22%	0.7 kn faster, fuel per mile down 8%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−1.8 kn	−5%	−18%	+47%	−6%	1.8 kn slower, fuel per mile down 5%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+1.2 kn	−7%	+2%	−10%	+2%	1.2 kn faster, fuel per mile down 7%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−1.2 kn	+9%	−1%	+126%	+13%	1.2 kn slower, fuel per mile up 9%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	−1.7 kn	+5%	−7%	−39%	−4%	1.7 kn slower, fuel per mile up 5%; 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	BW Fleet Management AS	3,684	10,159	10,780	1,547	7.0	342	–	–
2024LNG	BW Fleet Management A/S	7,674	21,160	27,150	3,015	9.0	283	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	11,710	32,567	43,098	3,505	12.3	272	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	18,175	50,126	61,871	5,343	11.6	294	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	13,024	35,955	42,204	3,157	13.4	309	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	15,526	42,813	46,660	3,838	12.2	333	–	–
2019LNG / alt.	not published	6,328	18,009	20,659	1,546	13.4	306	–	–
2018LNG / alt.	not published	9,898	27,941	33,775	2,243	15.1	293	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	BW Fleet Management AS	13.1	7.12	+83%	333 of 386	DNV	B+C
2024LNG	BW Fleet Management A/S	15.4	7.39	+109%	274 of 312	DNV	C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	10.3	9.10	+13%	209 of 355	DNV	C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	13.1	10.4	+26%	263 of 379	DNV	C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	14.0	10.5	+33%	217 of 289	DNV	C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	13.7	10.7	+28%	200 of 267	DNV	C
2019LNG / alt.	not published	12.1	10.9	+11%	154 of 248	DNV	C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	12.5	10.9	+15%	134 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.