Navalyze · Container · Ship

MSC TOKYO

IMO: 9318046
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 60,070 t
Port of registry: Monrovia
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.75 g CO₂/t·nm
Former names: E.R. TOKYO, 0094 E.R. TOKYO

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

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 60,070 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

291.9 kg/nm

Container median 177.0 kg/nm (+65%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

15.16

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 16.30 (−7%)

Average speed

14.0 kn

Container median 13.3 kn (+5%)

Fuel per day at sea

98.1 t/day

Fuel consumed

10,525 t

CO₂ emitted

32,831 t

33,348 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

36,052 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,575 h

107 days, 29% 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 per mileThis ship 291.9 kg/nm · median 177.0 (+65%)

78.8Ranks 1,930 of 2,208, lowest first302.4

Average speedThis ship 14.0 kn · median 13.3 (+5%)

9.1Faster than 60% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 15.16 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.30 (−7%)

7.22Ranks 1,027 of 2,208, lowest first46.89

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2025

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 ports88%
From the EU4%
Into the EU2%
At berth in the EU6%

28% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (9,178 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

5.6%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.5 t

Mainly from LNG; small for oil

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.016

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

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 per mile, kg/nm

MSC TOKYO
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0

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

Average speed, kn

MSC TOKYO
Container median

10.012.014.016.0

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

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

MSC TOKYO
Container median

5.010.015.020.025.0

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

Year on year

Year	Speed	Fuel per mile	Fuel per day	Distance	CO₂ per TW	Reading
2024→2025	+1.6 kn	+29%	+46%	+169%	+10%	1.6 kn faster, fuel per mile up 29%; in line with the speed change.
2023→2024	−2.0 kn	+2%	−13%	−58%	+39%	2.0 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+0.7 kn	−18%	−14%	+67%	−19%	0.7 kn faster, fuel per mile down 18%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−1.6 kn	−5%	−15%	−67%	−12%	1.6 kn slower, fuel per mile down 5%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−0.1 kn	+4%	+3%	+2%	+0%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+0.2 kn	+0%	+2%	−12%	+5%	Same speed, fuel per mile flat.
2018→2019	+5.1 kn	−1%	+48%	+129%	−6%	5.1 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025	MSC SHIPMANAGEMENT LIMITED	10,525	32,831	36,052	2,575	14.0	291.9	15.16	–
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	3,021	9,416	13,396	1,080	12.4	225.5	13.84	–
2023	not published	7,033	21,904	31,687	2,196	14.4	221.9	9.95	–
2022	not published	5,142	16,224	19,006	1,386	13.7	270.6	12.22	–
2021	not published	16,489	51,974	58,032	3,790	15.3	284.1	13.88	–
2020	not published	15,469	48,230	56,739	3,677	15.4	272.6	13.85	–
2019	not published	17,594	54,825	64,682	4,250	15.2	272.0	13.17	–
2018	not published	7,771	24,243	28,195	2,786	10.1	275.6	14.06	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	MSC SHIPMANAGEMENT LIMITED	15.16	16.30	−7%	1,027 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	13.84	17.52	−21%	748 of 1,974	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	9.95	19.40	−49%	382 of 1,899	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	12.22	19.13	−36%	498 of 1,825	DNV	C
2021	not published	13.88	17.90	−22%	620 of 1,781	DNV	C
2020	not published	13.85	17.58	−21%	651 of 1,797	Verifavia	B
2019	not published	13.17	18.88	−30%	515 of 1,788	Verifavia	B
2018	not published	14.06	20.22	−30%	496 of 1,705	Verifavia	B

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.