Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

AL THUMAMA

IMO: 9360843
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Marshall Islands (from the 2023 report)
Technical efficiency: EIV 5.99 g CO₂/t·nm

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

Report year

2018 at a glance

From the 2018 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

380

LNG carrier median 323 kg/nm (+18%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

11.7

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.9 (+7%)

Average speed

15.9 kn

LNG carrier median 13.7 kn (+16%)

Fuel per day at sea

145.3 t/day

Fuel consumed

10,594 t

CO₂ emitted

33,032 t

Distance sailed

27,856 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

1,749 h

73 days, 20% 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 336 kg/nm · median 190 (+77%)

152Ranks 361 of 386, lowest first319

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 first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier 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 ports0%
From the EU35%
Into the EU64%
At berth in the EU1%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

426 t

1.3% 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 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 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	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	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	Hours at seah	Average speedknots at sea	Fuel kg/nmthis ship	CO₂ per transport work (cargo)g/t·nm, this ship	Laden fuel
2025	NYK LNG Shipmanagement Ltd	22,626	69,696	67,317	4,440	15.2	336	–	–
2024part-year	NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd.	24,614	75,730	71,130	4,972	14.3	346	–	–
2024Bio blend	NYK LNG Shipmanagement Ltd	32,489	100,261	97,561	6,792	14.4	333	–	–
2023	not published	1,329	4,156	2,896	407	7.1	459	–	–
2022	not published	5,548	17,488	18,085	1,240	14.6	307	–	–
2021	not published	4,545	14,347	12,651	796	15.9	359	–	–
2020	not published	10,339	32,532	24,838	1,448	17.2	416	–	–
2019	not published	7,354	22,761	18,950	1,109	17.1	388	–	–
2018	not published	10,594	33,032	27,856	1,749	15.9	380	–	–

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
2024Bio blend	NYK LNG Shipmanagement Ltd	9.51	7.39	+29%	208 of 312	ClassNK	–
2023	not published	12.5	9.10	+38%	271 of 355	ClassNK	B+C
2022	not published	13.9	10.4	+34%	279 of 379	ClassNK	B+C
2021	not published	15.8	10.5	+51%	243 of 289	ClassNK	B+C
2020	not published	12.2	10.7	+14%	174 of 267	ClassNK	B+C
2019	not published	25.9	10.9	+138%	231 of 248	ClassNK	B+C
2018	not published	11.7	10.9	+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.