Navalyze · Container · Ship

WEC DE HOOGH

IMO: 9315018
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 8,107 t
Flag (estimated): Cyprus
Port of registry: Limassol
Technical efficiency: EEXI 21.85 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: IA
Former names: ELITE

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MSC SHIPMANAGEMENT LIMITED · part of MSC Group

Report year

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 7,063 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

86.5

Container median 172 kg/nm (−50%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

38.7

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 17.6 (+120%)

Average speed

12.6 kn

Container median 14.0 kn (−10%)

Fuel per day at sea

26.2 t/day

Fuel consumed

5,022 t

CO₂ emitted

15,872 t

Distance sailed

58,085 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,592 h

191 days, 52% 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 83.3 kg/nm · median 177 (−53%)

78.8Ranks 296 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 12.7 kn · median 13.3 (−5%)

9.1Faster than 40% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 32.1 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (+97%)

7.22Ranks 1,727 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2020

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 ports90%
From the EU0%
Into the EU0%
At berth in the EU10%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,651 t

10.4% 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

WEC DE HOOGH
Container median

50.0100.0150.0200.0

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

Average speed, kn

WEC DE HOOGH
Container median

11.012.013.014.015.0

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

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

WEC DE HOOGH
Container median

10.020.030.040.050.0

’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	+0.4 kn	+6%	+8%	−4%	−3%	0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile up 6%; in line with the speed change.
2023→2024	+0.1 kn	−7%	−5%	+39%	−18%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 7%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+0.0 kn	+2%	+2%	−20%	+12%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 2%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	−1.1 kn	+1%	−7%	−4%	+2%	1.1 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+0.7 kn	−5%	−0%	+3%	−8%	0.7 kn faster, fuel per mile down 5%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−0.5 kn	−3%	−7%	−9%	−1%	0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile down 3%; in line with the speed change.
2018→2019	+1.3 kn	−5%	+5%	+18%	−1%	1.3 kn faster, fuel per mile down 5%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine 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	MSC SHIPMANAGEMENT LIMITED	5,141	16,070	61,751	4,878	12.7	83.3	32.1	–
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	5,087	15,893	64,458	5,226	12.3	78.9	33.0	–
2023	not published	3,905	11,785	46,266	3,796	12.2	84.4	40.3	–
2022	not published	4,745	15,069	57,505	4,700	12.2	82.5	36.1	–
2021	not published	4,903	15,510	59,839	4,502	13.3	81.9	35.5	–
2020	not published	5,022	15,872	58,085	4,592	12.6	86.5	38.7	–
2019	not published	5,670	17,892	63,709	4,847	13.1	89.0	39.2	–
2018	not published	5,093	16,077	54,182	4,582	11.8	94.0	39.5	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	MSC SHIPMANAGEMENT LIMITED	32.1	16.3	+97%	1,727 of 2,208	DNV	C
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	33.0	17.5	+89%	1,516 of 1,974	DNV	C
2023	not published	40.3	19.4	+108%	1,542 of 1,899	DNV	C
2022	not published	36.1	19.1	+89%	1,418 of 1,825	DNV	C
2021	not published	35.5	17.9	+98%	1,418 of 1,781	DNV	C
2020	not published	38.7	17.6	+120%	1,463 of 1,797	DNV	A
2019	not published	39.2	18.9	+107%	1,407 of 1,788	DNV	A
2018	not published	39.5	20.2	+96%	1,340 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.