Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

AL AAMRIYA

IMO: 9338266
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Marshall Islands
Port of registry: Majuro
Technical efficiency: EEXI 6.13 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MOL LNG Transport (Europe) Ltd · part of MOL

Report year

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

353

LNG carrier median 297 kg/nm (+19%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

11.8

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.7 (+10%)

Average speed

15.9 kn

LNG carrier median 14.7 kn (+8%)

Fuel per day at sea

134.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

22,272 t

CO₂ emitted

70,292 t

Distance sailed

63,180 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,966 h

165 days, 45% of the year

Within the LNG carrier fleet, 2025

Set against all 386 LNG 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 kg/nmThis ship 296 kg/nm · median 190 (+56%)

152Ranks 320 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 13.6 kn · median 14.4 (−6%)

11.2Faster than 30% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 8.87 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+25%)

5.06Ranks 259 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier 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 ports0%
From the EU45%
Into the EU53%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,230 t

1.8% 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

AL AAMRIYA
LNG carrier median

100.0200.0300.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

AL AAMRIYA
LNG carrier median

10.012.014.016.0

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

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

AL AAMRIYA
LNG carrier median

5.010.015.020.0

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

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	−1.8 kn	+2%	−10%	+97%	+2%	1.8 kn slower, fuel per mile up 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+1.8 kn	−18%	−7%	−11%	−18%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 18%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+1.1 kn	−11%	−3%	+229%	−44%	1.1 kn faster, fuel per mile down 11%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2022	−3.4 kn	+13%	−12%	−73%	+61%	3.4 kn slower, fuel per mile up 13%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+4.4 kn	−3%	+35%	+408%	−28%	4.4 kn faster, fuel per mile down 3%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−1.3 kn	+2%	−8%	+102%	+208%	1.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).

Part-year reports are left out of these comparisons. 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
2025part-year	MOL LNG Transport (Europe) Ltd	11,458	35,676	36,879	2,463	15.0	311	–	–
2025	MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.	28,776	89,765	97,087	7,163	13.6	296	–	–
2024	MOL LNG Transport (Europe) Ltd	14,280	44,398	49,253	3,202	15.4	290	–	–
2023	not published	19,681	61,237	55,633	4,105	13.6	354	–	–
2022	not published	6,708	21,158	16,898	1,351	12.5	397	–	–
2020	not published	22,272	70,292	63,180	3,966	15.9	353	–	–
2019	not published	4,500	14,041	12,443	1,080	11.5	362	–	–
2018	not published	2,175	6,788	6,166	481	12.8	353	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025part-year	MOL LNG Transport (Europe) Ltd	–	–	–	–	DNV	A+B+C
2025	MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.	8.87	7.12	+25%	259 of 386	ClassNK	A+B+C
2024	MOL LNG Transport (Europe) Ltd	8.73	7.39	+18%	191 of 312	DNV	A+B+C
2023	not published	10.6	9.10	+17%	228 of 355	DNV	A+B+C
2022	not published	19.0	10.4	+83%	322 of 379	DNV	A+B+C
2020	not published	11.8	10.7	+10%	164 of 267	DNV	A+B+C
2019	not published	16.4	10.9	+51%	206 of 248	DNV	A+B+C
2018	not published	5.33	10.9	−51%	18 of 197	DNV	A+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.