Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

LNG ALLIANCE

IMO: 9320075
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Marshall Islands
Port of registry: Majuro
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.20 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG
Former names: GASELYS

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2024: Wilhelmsen Ship Management Sdn. Bhd. · part of Wilhelmsen Ship Management

Report year

2019 at a glance

From the 2019 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

348

LNG carrier median 308 kg/nm (+13%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

42.2

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.9 (+289%)

Average speed

11.8 kn

LNG carrier median 13.5 kn (−13%)

Fuel per day at sea

98.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

11,202 t

CO₂ emitted

32,542 t

Distance sailed

32,173 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,721 h

113 days, 31% of the year

Within the LNG carrier fleet, 2024

Set against all 312 LNG carrier ships with a full-year 2024 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 289 kg/nm · median 205 (+41%)

148Ranks 245 of 312, lowest first328

Average speedThis ship 12.3 kn · median 14.6 (−16%)

11.0Faster than 18% of LNG carrier ships16.1

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 10.3 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.39 (+40%)

4.54Ranks 227 of 312, lowest first17.3

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier 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 ports0%
From the EU40%
Into the EU57%
At berth in the EU3%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

934 t

2.9% 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 ALLIANCE
LNG carrier median

100.0200.0300.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

LNG ALLIANCE
LNG carrier median

0.05.010.015.020.025.0

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

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

LNG ALLIANCE
LNG carrier median

0.010.020.030.040.050.0

’182018’192019’202020’212021’232023’242024

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2023→2024	+0.6 kn	−6%	−1%	−64%	−20%	0.6 kn faster, fuel per mile down 6%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+9.3 kn	+5%	+406%	+524%	–	9.3 kn faster, fuel per mile up 5%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−18.7 kn	+146%	−72%	−67%	–	18.7 kn slower, fuel per mile up 146%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+9.2 kn	−58%	−26%	−60%	−59%	9.2 kn faster, fuel per mile down 58%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+0.1 kn	−17%	−17%	+29%	−78%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 17%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−0.5 kn	+18%	+14%	−5%	+341%	0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile up 18%; 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
2024LNG	Wilhelmsen Ship Management Sdn. Bhd.	3,631	10,263	12,555	1,021	12.3	289	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	10,754	31,172	34,784	2,983	11.7	309	–	–
2022	not published	1,645	5,242	5,570	2,309	2.4	295	–	–
2021	not published	1,996	6,028	16,643	788	21.1	120	–	48%
2020LNG / alt.	not published	11,942	33,299	41,559	3,478	11.9	287	–	63%
2019LNG / alt.	not published	11,202	32,542	32,173	2,721	11.8	348	–	–
2018LNG / alt.	not published	10,000	28,052	33,986	2,760	12.3	294	–	63%

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2024LNG	Wilhelmsen Ship Management Sdn. Bhd.	10.3	7.39	+40%	227 of 312	DNV	B+C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	12.9	9.10	+42%	281 of 355	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	–	–	–	–	Verifavia	B+C
2021	not published	3.82	10.5	−63%	5 of 289	Verifavia	B+C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	9.43	10.7	−12%	97 of 267	Verifavia	B+C
2019LNG / alt.	not published	42.2	10.9	+289%	240 of 248	Verifavia	B+C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	9.58	10.9	−12%	59 of 197	Verifavia	B+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.