Navalyze · Vehicle carrier · Ship

GRAND SAPPHIRE

IMO: 9325233
Type: Vehicle carrier
Average cargo carried: 3,250 t
Port of registry: Panama
Technical efficiency: EEXI 15.20 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Cido Shipping Korea Co., Ltd.

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 3,250 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

97.8 kg/nm

Vehicle carrier median 99.9 kg/nm (−2%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

95.09

g CO₂/t·nm · Vehicle carrier median 55.36 (+72%)

Average speed

12.2 kn

Vehicle carrier median 14.4 kn (−15%)

Fuel per day at sea

28.7 t/day

Fuel consumed

451 t

CO₂ emitted

1,424 t

1,446 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

4,607 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

376 h

16 days, 4% of the year

Within the vehicle carrier fleet, 2025

Set against all 506 vehicle 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 per mileThis ship 97.8 kg/nm · median 99.9 (−2%)

79.6Ranks 225 of 506, lowest first119.0

Average speedThis ship 12.2 kn · median 14.4 (−15%)

12.0Faster than 12% of vehicle carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 95.09 g CO₂/t·nm · median 55.36 (+72%)

34.70Ranks 405 of 506, lowest first158.48

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Vehicle carrier 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 ports12%
From the EU5%
Into the EU79%
At berth in the EU4%

58% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (824 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

4.1%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.0 t

Mainly from LNG; small for oil

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.015

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

Over the years

Full-year reports only. The Vehicle carrier median is the middle ship of all vehicle carrier ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel per mile, kg/nm

GRAND SAPPHIRE
Vehicle carrier median

95.0100.0105.0110.0115.0120.0

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

Average speed, kn

GRAND SAPPHIRE
Vehicle carrier median

12.013.014.015.016.017.0

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

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

GRAND SAPPHIRE
Vehicle carrier median

40.060.080.0100120

’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	−2.8 kn	−12%	−28%	−58%	+16%	2.8 kn slower, fuel per mile down 12%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+1.4 kn	+4%	+16%	−10%	−17%	1.4 kn faster, fuel per mile up 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−2.5 kn	+0%	−16%	−41%	+54%	2.5 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	+0.0 kn	−6%	−6%	−8%	+12%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 6%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	+0.3 kn	+10%	+12%	+10%	−3%	0.3 kn faster, fuel per mile up 10%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+1.8 kn	−12%	−1%	−19%	−16%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	+0.5 kn	+15%	+20%	+288%	−39%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile up 15%; 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025	Cido Shipping Korea Co., Ltd.	451	1,424	4,607	376	12.2	97.8	95.09	–
2024	Cido Shipping Korea Co., Ltd.	1,203	3,782	10,856	722	15.0	110.8	81.79	–
2023	not published	1,280	4,061	12,055	887	13.6	106.2	98.78	–
2022	not published	2,182	6,908	20,541	1,278	16.1	106.2	64.17	–
2021	not published	2,521	7,970	22,310	1,388	16.1	113.0	57.43	–
2020	not published	2,079	6,586	20,274	1,281	15.8	102.5	58.92	–
2019	not published	2,935	9,162	25,119	1,791	14.0	116.8	70.37	–
2018	not published	657	2,068	6,479	481	13.5	101.4	116.06	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Vehicle carrier median	vs Vehicle carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Cido Shipping Korea Co., Ltd.	95.09	55.36	+72%	405 of 506	Korean Register	B
2024	Cido Shipping Korea Co., Ltd.	81.79	55.31	+48%	257 of 335	Korean Register	B
2023	not published	98.78	56.64	+74%	365 of 417	Korean Register	B
2022	not published	64.17	57.66	+11%	276 of 463	Korean Register	B
2021	not published	57.43	59.57	−4%	213 of 459	Korean Register	B
2020	not published	58.92	57.26	+3%	238 of 449	Korean Register	B
2019	not published	70.37	58.95	+19%	292 of 426	Korean Register	B
2018	not published	116.06	62.35	+86%	367 of 434	Korean Register	B

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Vehicle carrier 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 vehicle 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.