Navalyze · Container · Ship

MSC ORNELLA

IMO: 9281267
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 32,985 t
Flag (estimated): Panama
Port of registry: Panama
Technical efficiency: EEXI 11.03 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MSC Shipmanagement Ltd · part of MSC Group

Report year

2019 at a glance

From the 2019 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 29,764 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

180

Container median 174 kg/nm (+3%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

18.9

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 18.9 (+0%)

Average speed

14.5 kn

Container median 13.7 kn (+6%)

Fuel per day at sea

62.3 t/day

Fuel consumed

15,765 t

CO₂ emitted

49,412 t

Distance sailed

87,792 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

6,071 h

253 days, 69% 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 204 kg/nm · median 177 (+15%)

78.8Ranks 1,303 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 14.5 kn · median 13.3 (+9%)

9.1Faster than 69% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 19.3 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (+19%)

7.22Ranks 1,309 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2019

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 ports29%
From the EU32%
Into the EU36%
At berth in the EU3%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,354 t

2.7% 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

MSC ORNELLA
Container median

140.0160.0180.0200.0220.0

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

Average speed, kn

MSC ORNELLA
Container median

12.013.014.015.016.0

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

CO₂ per transport work (cargo), g CO₂/t·nm

MSC ORNELLA
Container median

15.020.025.030.035.0

’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	−0.9 kn	+7%	+1%	+35%	+17%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile up 7%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+1.2 kn	+36%	+48%	+79%	−51%	1.2 kn faster, fuel per mile up 36%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+2.1 kn	−20%	−7%	+94%	+62%	2.1 kn faster, fuel per mile down 20%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−2.4 kn	−6%	−21%	+92%	+37%	2.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+0.9 kn	+8%	+16%	−90%	−12%	0.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 8%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−0.9 kn	−4%	−9%	−9%	−9%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile down 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	−0.7 kn	−10%	−15%	+86%	−14%	0.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 10%; in line with the speed change.

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	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	15,365	47,946	75,159	5,176	14.5	204	19.3	–
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	10,646	33,279	55,667	3,609	15.4	191	16.5	–
2023	not published	4,383	13,756	31,161	2,200	14.2	141	33.5	–
2022	not published	2,834	9,005	16,046	1,326	12.1	177	20.8	–
2021	not published	1,568	4,957	8,351	578	14.5	188	15.2	–
2020	not published	13,893	43,914	80,238	5,908	13.6	173	17.2	–
2019	not published	15,765	49,412	87,792	6,071	14.5	180	18.9	–
2018	not published	9,406	29,551	47,114	3,094	15.2	200	22.0	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	19.3	16.3	+19%	1,309 of 2,208	DNV	C
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	16.5	17.5	−6%	926 of 1,974	DNV	C
2023	not published	33.5	19.4	+73%	1,422 of 1,899	DNV	C
2022	not published	20.8	19.1	+8%	975 of 1,825	DNV	C
2021	not published	15.2	17.9	−15%	728 of 1,781	DNV	C
2020	not published	17.2	17.6	−2%	868 of 1,797	DNV	C
2019	not published	18.9	18.9	+0%	898 of 1,788	DNV	C
2018	not published	22.0	20.2	+9%	941 of 1,705	DNV	C

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.