Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

LNG IMO

IMO: 9311581
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Bermuda
Port of registry: Hamilton
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.31 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

260

LNG carrier median 231 kg/nm (+13%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

11.6

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 9.10 (+28%)

Average speed

11.5 kn

LNG carrier median 14.2 kn (−19%)

Fuel per day at sea

72.1 t/day

Fuel consumed

8,334 t

CO₂ emitted

22,948 t

Distance sailed

32,011 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,776 h

116 days, 32% 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 272 kg/nm · median 190 (+43%)

152Ranks 301 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 11.2 kn · median 14.4 (−22%)

11.2Faster than 10% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 10.9 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+53%)

5.06Ranks 317 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 ports0%
From the EU50%
Into the EU50%
At berth in the EU1%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

200 t

0.9% 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 IMO
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

LNG IMO
LNG carrier median

10.012.014.016.0

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

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

LNG IMO
LNG carrier median

6.08.010.012.014.0

’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	+0.8 kn	+4%	+12%	−7%	+6%	0.8 kn faster, fuel per mile up 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−1.1 kn	+1%	−9%	+65%	−12%	1.1 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−0.1 kn	−9%	−10%	−58%	−10%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 9%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	+0.0 kn	−2%	−1%	+105%	−2%	Same speed, fuel per mile flat.
2020→2021	−1.2 kn	+4%	−5%	−47%	+20%	1.2 kn slower, fuel per mile up 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	−1.1 kn	−4%	−12%	+40%	−9%	1.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	−1.4 kn	+16%	+5%	+28%	−3%	1.4 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	BW Fleet Management AS	13,432	36,989	49,325	4,397	11.2	272	–	–
2024LNG	BW Fleet Management A/S	13,856	38,246	52,871	5,094	10.4	262	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	8,334	22,948	32,011	2,776	11.5	260	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	21,842	60,169	76,182	6,547	11.6	287	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	10,820	29,795	37,144	3,194	11.6	291	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	19,697	54,236	70,476	5,514	12.8	280	–	–
2019LNG / alt.	not published	14,772	41,749	50,492	3,633	13.9	293	–	–
2018LNG / alt.	not published	9,996	28,642	39,456	2,572	15.3	253	–	–

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	10.9	7.12	+53%	317 of 386	DNV	B+C
2024LNG	BW Fleet Management A/S	10.3	7.39	+39%	224 of 312	DNV	C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	11.6	9.10	+28%	258 of 355	DNV	C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	12.9	10.4	+25%	259 of 379	DNV	C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	13.3	10.5	+27%	207 of 289	DNV	C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	11.0	10.7	+3%	147 of 267	DNV	C
2019LNG / alt.	not published	12.1	10.9	+11%	157 of 248	DNV	C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	12.5	10.9	+14%	133 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.