Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

AL THUMAMA

IMO: 9360843
Type: LNG carrier
Technical efficiency: EIV 5.99 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: NYK LNG Shipmanagement Ltd · part of NYK

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel per mile

336.1 kg/nm

LNG carrier median 190.4 kg/nm (+77%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

9.53

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 7.12 (+34%)

Average speed

15.2 kn

LNG carrier median 14.4 kn (+6%)

Fuel per day at sea

122.3 t/day

Fuel consumed

22,626 t

CO₂ emitted

69,696 t

70,760 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

67,317 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,440 h

185 days, 51% 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 per mileThis ship 336.1 kg/nm · median 190.4 (+77%)

152.1Ranks 361 of 386, lowest first319.4

Average speedThis ship 15.2 kn · median 14.4 (+6%)

11.2Faster than 74% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 9.53 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+34%)

5.06Ranks 278 of 386, lowest first16.14

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG 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 ports0%
From the EU42%
Into the EU56%
At berth in the EU2%

51% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (35,642 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

2.3%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

1.0 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 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 per mile, kg/nm

AL THUMAMA
LNG carrier median

100.0200.0300.0400.0500.0

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

Average speed, kn

AL THUMAMA
LNG carrier median

5.010.015.020.0

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

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

AL THUMAMA
LNG carrier median

5.010.015.020.025.030.0

’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	+0.8 kn	+1%	+7%	−31%	+0%	0.8 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	+7.3 kn	−27%	+47%	+3,269%	−24%	7.3 kn faster, fuel per mile down 27%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−7.5 kn	+50%	−27%	−84%	−10%	7.5 kn slower, fuel per mile up 50%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	−1.3 kn	−15%	−22%	+43%	−12%	1.3 kn slower, fuel per mile down 15%; in line with the speed change.
2020→2021	−1.3 kn	−14%	−20%	−49%	+29%	1.3 kn slower, fuel per mile down 14%; in line with the speed change.
2019→2020	+0.1 kn	+7%	+8%	+31%	−53%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 7%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+1.2 kn	+2%	+9%	−32%	+122%	1.2 kn faster, fuel per mile up 2%; 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025	NYK LNG Shipmanagement Ltd	22,626	69,696	67,317	4,440	15.2	336.1	–	–
2024part-year	NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd.	24,614	75,730	71,130	4,972	14.3	346.0	–	–
2024	NYK LNG Shipmanagement Ltd	32,489	100,261	97,561	6,792	14.4	333.0	–	–
2023	not published	1,329	4,156	2,896	407	7.1	458.9	–	–
2022	not published	5,548	17,488	18,085	1,240	14.6	306.8	–	–
2021	not published	4,545	14,347	12,651	796	15.9	359.3	–	–
2020	not published	10,339	32,532	24,838	1,448	17.2	416.2	–	–
2019	not published	7,354	22,761	18,950	1,109	17.1	388.1	–	–
2018	not published	10,594	33,032	27,856	1,749	15.9	380.3	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	NYK LNG Shipmanagement Ltd	9.53	7.12	+34%	278 of 386	ClassNK	A+C
2024part-year	NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd.	–	–	–	–	ClassNK	A+C
2024	NYK LNG Shipmanagement Ltd	9.51	7.39	+29%	208 of 312	ClassNK	–
2023	not published	12.52	9.10	+38%	271 of 355	ClassNK	B+C
2022	not published	13.87	10.38	+34%	279 of 379	ClassNK	B+C
2021	not published	15.77	10.46	+51%	243 of 289	ClassNK	B+C
2020	not published	12.19	10.71	+14%	174 of 267	ClassNK	B+C
2019	not published	25.91	10.87	+138%	231 of 248	ClassNK	B+C
2018	not published	11.69	10.92	+7%	119 of 197	ClassNK	–

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.