Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship
AL KHARSAAH
- IMO
- 9360881
- Type
- LNG carrier
- Port of registry
- Nassau
- Technical efficiency
- EEXI 6.27 g CO₂/t·nm
ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Seapeak Maritime Limited · part of Seapeak
2025 at a glance
From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report.
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.
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 EU44%
- Into the EU55%
- At berth in the EU1%
50% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (22,887 t).
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 KHARSAAH
- LNG carrier median
Average speed, kn
- AL KHARSAAH
- LNG carrier median
CO₂ per transport work (volume), g CO₂/m³·nm
- AL KHARSAAH
- LNG carrier median
Year on year
| Year | Speed | Fuel per mile | Fuel per day | Distance | CO₂ per TW | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024→2025 | −0.2 kn | +1% | +0% | +19% | −17% | Same speed, fuel per mile flat. |
| 2023→2024 | +1.0 kn | −13% | −7% | −3% | +7% | 1.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 13%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade). |
| 2022→2023 | −0.8 kn | −5% | −10% | +78% | −18% | 0.8 kn slower, fuel per mile down 5%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade). |
| 2021→2022 | −0.9 kn | +6% | +0% | +61% | +21% | 0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile up 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade). |
| 2020→2021 | −0.5 kn | −5% | −8% | −22% | −37% | 0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile down 5%; in line with the speed change. |
| 2019→2020 | +1.4 kn | −1% | +8% | −55% | +64% | 1.4 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine 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 | At sea h | Speed kn | Fuel kg/nm | CO₂ g/t·nm | Laden fuel |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Seapeak Maritime Limited | 14,705 | 45,390 | 49,139 | 3,295 | 14.9 | 299.2 | – | – |
| 2024 | Seapeak Maritime Limited | 12,175 | 37,620 | 41,247 | 2,728 | 15.1 | 295.2 | – | – |
| 2023 | not published | 14,508 | 44,991 | 42,634 | 3,032 | 14.1 | 340.3 | – | – |
| 2022 | not published | 8,556 | 26,606 | 23,954 | 1,612 | 14.9 | 357.2 | – | – |
| 2021 | not published | 4,994 | 15,638 | 14,868 | 943 | 15.8 | 335.9 | – | – |
| 2020 | not published | 6,754 | 21,048 | 19,107 | 1,172 | 16.3 | 353.5 | – | – |
| 2019 | not published | 15,258 | 47,468 | 42,608 | 2,865 | 14.9 | 358.1 | – | – |
Benchmark and verification
| Year | ISM company | CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm | LNG carrier median | vs LNG carrier | Rank | Verifier | Methods |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Seapeak Maritime Limited | 8.67 | 7.12 | +22% | 252 of 386 | DNV | A+C |
| 2024 | Seapeak Maritime Limited | 10.44 | 7.39 | +41% | 231 of 312 | DNV | A+C |
| 2023 | not published | 9.80 | 9.10 | +8% | 199 of 355 | DNV | A+C |
| 2022 | not published | 11.96 | 10.38 | +15% | 235 of 379 | DNV | A+C |
| 2021 | not published | 9.92 | 10.46 | −5% | 134 of 289 | DNV | A+C |
| 2020 | not published | 15.87 | 10.71 | +48% | 229 of 267 | DNV | A+C |
| 2019 | not published | 9.67 | 10.87 | −11% | 86 of 248 | DNV | A+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.