Navalyze · Container · Ship

ANDREA

IMO: 9333357
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 5,678 t
Port of registry: Madeira
Technical efficiency: EEXI 25.29 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: IA

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Myklebusthaug Management AS

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 5,678 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

86.3 kg/nm

Container median 177.0 kg/nm (−51%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

47.73

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 16.30 (+193%)

Average speed

11.2 kn

Container median 13.3 kn (−16%)

Fuel per day at sea

23.1 t/day

Fuel consumed

3,801 t

CO₂ emitted

11,937 t

12,123 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

44,048 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,950 h

165 days, 45% 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 86.3 kg/nm · median 177.0 (−51%)

78.8Ranks 349 of 2,208, lowest first302.4

Average speedThis ship 11.2 kn · median 13.3 (−16%)

9.1Faster than 23% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 47.73 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.30 (+193%)

7.22Ranks 1,998 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 ports90%
From the EU3%
Into the EU2%
At berth in the EU5%

98% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (11,650 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

5.2%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.2 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

ANDREA
Container median

50.0100.0150.0200.0

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

Average speed, kn

ANDREA
Container median

6.08.010.012.014.016.0

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

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

ANDREA
Container median

10.020.030.040.050.060.0

’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	+0.9 kn	+6%	+14%	−12%	+1%	0.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 6%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−1.3 kn	+16%	+3%	−9%	−16%	1.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 16%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−0.9 kn	−10%	−17%	+14%	+37%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile down 10%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	−1.2 kn	+5%	−4%	−10%	+1%	1.2 kn slower, fuel per mile up 5%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+2.9 kn	−11%	+13%	+8%	−9%	2.9 kn faster, fuel per mile down 11%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+2.0 kn	+10%	+34%	−9%	−11%	2.0 kn faster, fuel per mile up 10%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	+1.3 kn	−19%	−5%	+40%	−7%	1.3 kn faster, fuel per mile down 19%; 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	Myklebusthaug Management AS	3,801	11,937	44,048	3,950	11.2	86.3	47.73	–
2024	Myklebusthaug Management AS	4,099	12,801	50,243	4,872	10.3	81.6	47.35	–
2023	not published	3,916	12,300	55,493	4,797	11.6	70.6	56.23	–
2022	not published	3,829	12,126	48,814	3,906	12.5	78.4	41.08	–
2021	not published	4,047	12,864	54,431	3,964	13.7	74.4	40.50	–
2020	not published	4,204	13,138	50,441	4,674	10.8	83.3	44.51	–
2019	not published	4,188	13,158	55,234	6,243	8.8	75.8	49.94	–
2018	not published	3,716	11,774	39,555	5,287	7.5	94.0	53.77	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Myklebusthaug Management AS	47.73	16.30	+193%	1,998 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	Myklebusthaug Management AS	47.35	17.52	+170%	1,723 of 1,974	DNV	A
2023	not published	56.23	19.40	+190%	1,751 of 1,899	DNV	A
2022	not published	41.08	19.13	+115%	1,497 of 1,825	DNV	A
2021	not published	40.50	17.90	+126%	1,491 of 1,781	DNV	A
2020	not published	44.51	17.58	+153%	1,538 of 1,797	DNV	A
2019	not published	49.94	18.88	+165%	1,547 of 1,788	DNV	A
2018	not published	53.77	20.22	+166%	1,531 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.