Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

AL SHAMAL

IMO: 9360893
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Bahamas
Port of registry: Nassau
Technical efficiency: EEXI 6.26 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Seapeak Maritime Limited · part of Seapeak

Report year

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

367

LNG carrier median 297 kg/nm (+24%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

10.6

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.7 (−1%)

Average speed

15.4 kn

LNG carrier median 14.7 kn (+5%)

Fuel per day at sea

136.1 t/day

Fuel consumed

15,704 t

CO₂ emitted

48,911 t

Distance sailed

42,757 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,770 h

115 days, 32% 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 343 kg/nm · median 190 (+80%)

152Ranks 365 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 14.9 kn · median 14.4 (+3%)

11.2Faster than 65% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 8.51 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+20%)

5.06Ranks 243 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2020

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 ports3%
From the EU47%
Into the EU48%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

968 t

2.0% 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 SHAMAL
LNG carrier median

100.0200.0300.0400.0500.0

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

Average speed, kn

AL SHAMAL
LNG carrier median

11.012.013.014.015.016.0

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

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

AL SHAMAL
LNG carrier median

5.010.015.020.0

’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	−0.5 kn	+14%	+10%	+32%	−3%	0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile up 14%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+2.2 kn	−11%	+4%	+104%	−11%	2.2 kn faster, fuel per mile down 11%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−2.1 kn	−13%	−25%	−50%	−19%	2.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 13%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	+0.1 kn	−5%	−4%	+118%	−34%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 5%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−0.2 kn	+12%	+10%	−48%	+74%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 12%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+3.9 kn	−7%	+25%	−18%	−8%	3.9 kn faster, fuel per mile down 7%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−2.0 kn	+22%	+4%	+88%	+1%	2.0 kn slower, fuel per mile up 22%; 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	Seapeak Maritime Limited	22,089	67,802	64,338	4,305	14.9	343	–	–
2024	Seapeak Maritime Limited	14,766	45,454	48,870	3,167	15.4	302	–	–
2023	not published	8,128	25,169	23,991	1,814	13.2	339	–	–
2022	not published	18,774	58,227	48,120	3,140	15.3	390	–	–
2021	not published	9,058	28,214	22,085	1,450	15.2	410	–	–
2020	not published	15,704	48,911	42,757	2,770	15.4	367	–	–
2019	not published	20,657	63,964	52,429	4,562	11.5	394	–	–
2018	not published	9,030	28,224	27,956	2,065	13.5	323	–	–

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	8.51	7.12	+20%	243 of 386	DNV	A+C
2024	Seapeak Maritime Limited	8.74	7.39	+18%	192 of 312	DNV	A+C
2023	not published	9.79	9.10	+8%	197 of 355	DNV	A+C
2022	not published	12.1	10.4	+17%	241 of 379	DNV	A+C
2021	not published	18.4	10.5	+76%	252 of 289	DNV	A+C
2020	not published	10.6	10.7	−1%	130 of 267	DNV	A+C
2019	not published	11.5	10.9	+6%	138 of 248	DNV	A+C
2018	not published	11.4	10.9	+4%	112 of 197	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.