Navalyze · Container · Ship

IPIOS

IMO: 9359117
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 6,156 t
Flag (estimated): Malta (from the 2024 report)
Technical efficiency: EEXI 21.90 g CO₂/t·nm
Former names: ASIAN MOON

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Zircon Shipping SA

Report year

2018 at a glance

From the 2018 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 5,994 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

110

Container median 182 kg/nm (−39%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

57.4

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 20.2 (+184%)

Average speed

12.5 kn

Container median 13.8 kn (−9%)

Fuel per day at sea

33.0 t/day

Fuel consumed

5,998 t

CO₂ emitted

18,746 t

Distance sailed

54,484 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,363 h

182 days, 50% 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 kg/nmThis ship 101 kg/nm · median 177 (−43%)

78.8Ranks 543 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 8.1 kn · median 13.3 (−39%)

9.1Faster than 6% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 51.3 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (+215%)

7.22Ranks 2,038 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2018

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 ports8%
From the EU51%
Into the EU27%
At berth in the EU14%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

2,677 t

14.3% 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

IPIOS
Container median

50.0100.0150.0200.0

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

Average speed, kn

IPIOS
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

IPIOS
Container median

0.020.040.060.080.0100

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

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	+0.3 kn	+7%	+11%	+10%	−38%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 7%; in line with the speed change.
2023→2024	−2.8 kn	+21%	−11%	−41%	+60%	2.8 kn slower, fuel per mile up 21%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−1.2 kn	−24%	−32%	+301%	+31%	1.2 kn slower, fuel per mile down 24%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	+4.9 kn	+10%	+88%	−53%	−28%	4.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 10%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−5.9 kn	+8%	−42%	+101%	+2%	5.9 kn slower, fuel per mile up 8%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	−0.2 kn	−5%	−7%	−81%	+18%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 5%; in line with the speed change.
2018→2019	+0.5 kn	−17%	−14%	+16%	−22%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile down 17%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine 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
2025	Zircon Shipping SA	2,996	9,383	29,718	3,657	8.1	101	51.3	–
2024part-year	Marlow Navigation Co Ltd-CYP	2,228	6,966	23,529	2,756	8.5	94.7	88.5	98%
2024	Zircon Shipping SA	2,535	7,926	26,941	3,433	7.8	94.1	82.4	86%
2023	not published	3,567	11,175	46,031	4,326	10.6	77.5	51.6	83%
2022	not published	1,175	3,672	11,483	969	11.8	102	39.2	91%
2021	not published	2,287	7,154	24,584	3,546	6.9	93.0	54.3	75%
2020	not published	1,059	3,316	12,257	959	12.8	86.4	53.1	–
2019	not published	5,727	17,900	62,969	4,829	13.0	90.9	44.9	–
2018	not published	5,998	18,746	54,484	4,363	12.5	110	57.4	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Zircon Shipping SA	51.3	16.3	+215%	2,038 of 2,208	Verifavia	A
2024part-year	Marlow Navigation Co Ltd-CYP	–	–	–	–	ABS	B
2024	Zircon Shipping SA	82.4	17.5	+370%	1,938 of 1,974	Verifavia	A
2023	not published	51.6	19.4	+166%	1,702 of 1,899	ABS	B
2022	not published	39.2	19.1	+105%	1,476 of 1,825	ABS	B
2021	not published	54.3	17.9	+204%	1,640 of 1,781	ABS	B
2020	not published	53.1	17.6	+202%	1,619 of 1,797	ABS	B
2019	not published	44.9	18.9	+138%	1,486 of 1,788	ABS	B
2018	not published	57.4	20.2	+184%	1,555 of 1,705	ABS	B

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.