Navalyze · Container · Ship

OOCL ST. LAWRENCE

IMO: 9290414
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 18,216 t
Flag (estimated): Marshall Islands
Port of registry: Majuro
Technical efficiency: EEXI 13.05 g CO₂/t·nm
Former names: SHANGHAI TRADER

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION · part of Conbulk

Report year

2022 at a glance

From the 2022 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 23,782 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

203

Container median 178 kg/nm (+14%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

27.1

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 19.1 (+42%)

Average speed

12.7 kn

Container median 13.6 kn (−7%)

Fuel per day at sea

61.6 t/day

Fuel consumed

13,242 t

CO₂ emitted

42,099 t

Distance sailed

65,370 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

5,163 h

215 days, 59% 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 161 kg/nm · median 177 (−9%)

78.8Ranks 998 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 12.6 kn · median 13.3 (−5%)

9.1Faster than 39% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 27.9 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (+71%)

7.22Ranks 1,632 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2022

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 ports42%
From the EU7%
Into the EU50%
At berth in the EU1%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

619 t

1.5% 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

OOCL ST. LAWRENCE
Container median

140.0160.0180.0200.0220.0

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

Average speed, kn

OOCL ST. LAWRENCE
Container median

10.012.014.016.018.0

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

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

OOCL ST. LAWRENCE
Container median

10.015.020.025.030.0

’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	+1.1 kn	−1%	+9%	−15%	+34%	1.1 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−0.5 kn	+4%	−0%	+3%	−10%	0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile up 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−0.7 kn	−23%	−27%	−29%	−15%	0.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 23%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−1.9 kn	+16%	+1%	+26%	+24%	1.9 kn slower, fuel per mile up 16%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+0.0 kn	−8%	−8%	+44%	−16%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 8%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+1.4 kn	+14%	+25%	+102%	+117%	1.4 kn faster, fuel per mile up 14%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−3.1 kn	−16%	−32%	−83%	−42%	3.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 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
2025	CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION	6,492	20,568	40,455	3,212	12.6	161	27.9	83%
2024	CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION	7,736	24,533	47,857	4,152	11.5	162	20.8	–
2023	not published	7,199	22,829	46,267	3,845	12.0	156	22.9	–
2022	not published	13,242	42,099	65,370	5,163	12.7	203	27.1	–
2021	not published	9,037	28,759	51,749	3,542	14.6	175	21.8	–
2020	not published	6,874	21,807	36,062	2,478	14.6	191	26.0	–
2019	not published	2,995	9,382	17,845	1,354	13.2	168	12.0	–
2018	not published	21,010	66,029	105,599	6,487	16.3	199	20.8	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION	27.9	16.3	+71%	1,632 of 2,208	ABS	A
2024	CONBULK SHIPMANAGEMENT CORPORATION	20.8	17.5	+18%	1,169 of 1,974	ABS	A
2023	not published	22.9	19.4	+18%	1,117 of 1,899	ABS	A
2022	not published	27.1	19.1	+42%	1,215 of 1,825	DNV	A
2021	not published	21.8	17.9	+22%	1,078 of 1,781	DNV	A
2020	not published	26.0	17.6	+48%	1,251 of 1,797	DNV	A
2019	not published	12.0	18.9	−36%	447 of 1,788	DNV	A
2018	not published	20.8	20.2	+3%	887 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.