Navalyze · Container · Ship

POTOMAC EXPRESS

IMO: 9349526
Type: Container ship
Flag (estimated): United States
Port of registry: Norfolk, Va
Technical efficiency: EEXI 10.46 g CO₂/t·nm
Former names: MAYSSAN

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Marine Transport Management

Report year

2022 at a glance

From the 2022 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 48,818 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

240

Container median 178 kg/nm (+35%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

15.5

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 19.1 (−19%)

Average speed

17.1 kn

Container median 13.6 kn (+26%)

Fuel per day at sea

98.7 t/day

Fuel consumed

10,958 t

CO₂ emitted

34,472 t

Distance sailed

45,586 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,664 h

111 days, 30% of the year

Within the container fleet, 2024

Set against all 1,974 container 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 169 kg/nm · median 167 (+1%)

78.9Ranks 1,005 of 1,974, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 14.8 kn · median 13.5 (+10%)

9.6Faster than 71% of container ships16.1

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 12.3 g CO₂/t·nm · median 17.5 (−30%)

7.33Ranks 630 of 1,974, lowest first51.6

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2022

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 ports10%
From the EU9%
Into the EU76%
At berth in the EU4%

Fuel burned laden

10,487 t

96% of all fuel; 4% in ballast or unladen

CO₂ at berth

1,510 t

4.4% 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 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 kg/nm

POTOMAC EXPRESS
Container median

150.0175.0200.0225.0250.0275.0

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

Average speed, kn

POTOMAC EXPRESS
Container median

12.014.016.018.0

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

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

POTOMAC EXPRESS
Container median

12.014.016.018.020.022.0

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

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	−0.5 kn	+9%	+5%	−78%	–	0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile up 9%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	−0.5 kn	−20%	−23%	+35%	−38%	0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile down 20%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−1.8 kn	−12%	−21%	−21%	+28%	1.8 kn slower, fuel per mile down 12%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	+3.2 kn	+6%	+31%	+39%	+10%	3.2 kn faster, fuel per mile up 6%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	+0.5 kn	+2%	+6%	+8%	+4%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile up 2%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+1.3 kn	−13%	−3%	+4%	−11%	1.3 kn faster, fuel per mile down 13%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−0.8 kn	−2%	−8%	+36%	−0%	0.8 kn slower, fuel per mile down 2%; 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
2025	Marine Transport Management	1,994	6,255	10,872	761	14.3	183	–	97%
2024	Marine Transport Management	8,211	25,715	48,592	3,287	14.8	169	12.3	96%
2023	not published	7,632	23,932	36,068	2,358	15.3	212	19.8	96%
2022	not published	10,958	34,472	45,586	2,664	17.1	240	15.5	96%
2021	not published	7,418	23,284	32,795	2,360	13.9	226	14.0	94%
2020	not published	6,755	21,315	30,503	2,276	13.4	221	13.5	–
2019	not published	7,446	23,253	29,332	2,433	12.1	254	15.1	–
2018	not published	5,589	17,428	21,547	1,675	12.9	259	15.2	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Marine Transport Management	–	–	–	–	ABS	A
2024	Marine Transport Management	12.3	17.5	−30%	630 of 1,974	ABS	–
2023	not published	19.8	19.4	+2%	974 of 1,899	ABS	–
2022	not published	15.5	19.1	−19%	739 of 1,825	ABS	–
2021	not published	14.0	17.9	−22%	632 of 1,781	ABS	–
2020	not published	13.5	17.6	−23%	618 of 1,797	DNV	A
2019	not published	15.1	18.9	−20%	660 of 1,788	DNV	A
2018	not published	15.2	20.2	−25%	554 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.