Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

AL KHUWAIR

IMO: 9360908
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Bahamas
Port of registry: Nassau
Technical efficiency: EEXI 6.26 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel (estimated): Oil blended with biofuel or another alternative fuel

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

Report year

2021 at a glance

From the 2021 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

357

LNG carrier median 257 kg/nm (+39%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

9.97

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.5 (−5%)

Average speed

14.9 kn

LNG carrier median 14.6 kn (+2%)

Fuel per day at sea

127.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

15,721 t

CO₂ emitted

49,104 t

Distance sailed

44,036 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,952 h

123 days, 34% 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 311 kg/nm · median 190 (+63%)

152Ranks 340 of 386, lowest first319

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

11.2Faster than 63% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 9.00 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+26%)

5.06Ranks 264 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2021

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 EU41%
Into the EU58%
At berth in the EU1%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

516 t

1.1% 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 KHUWAIR
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

AL KHUWAIR
LNG carrier median

13.014.015.016.017.0

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

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

AL KHUWAIR
LNG carrier median

5.07.510.012.515.017.5

’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	−0.4 kn	+1%	−2%	+97%	+1%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+1.2 kn	−9%	−1%	+32%	−9%	1.2 kn faster, fuel per mile down 9%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−2.1 kn	+4%	−10%	−58%	−42%	2.1 kn slower, fuel per mile up 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	+1.3 kn	−9%	−1%	+3%	+69%	1.3 kn faster, fuel per mile down 9%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−1.4 kn	−5%	−13%	−12%	−9%	1.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 5%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+3.1 kn	+0%	+24%	−40%	−6%	3.1 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−1.5 kn	+8%	−3%	+461%	+15%	1.5 kn slower, fuel per mile up 8%; 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
2025Bio blend	Seapeak Maritime Limited	15,339	47,323	49,353	3,310	14.9	311	–	–
2024Bio blend	Seapeak Maritime Limited	7,711	23,810	25,009	1,639	15.3	308	–	–
2023	not published	6,374	19,833	18,883	1,343	14.1	338	–	–
2022	not published	14,691	45,842	45,366	2,795	16.2	324	–	–
2021	not published	15,721	49,104	44,036	2,952	14.9	357	–	–
2020	not published	18,744	58,510	49,961	3,063	16.3	375	–	–
2019	not published	31,127	96,825	83,011	6,308	13.2	375	–	–
2018	not published	5,130	16,063	14,805	1,005	14.7	347	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025Bio blend	Seapeak Maritime Limited	9.00	7.12	+26%	264 of 386	DNV	A+C
2024Bio blend	Seapeak Maritime Limited	8.93	7.39	+21%	196 of 312	DNV	A+C
2023	not published	9.76	9.10	+7%	194 of 355	DNV	A+C
2022	not published	16.8	10.4	+62%	316 of 379	DNV	A+C
2021	not published	9.97	10.5	−5%	135 of 289	DNV	A+C
2020	not published	11.0	10.7	+3%	144 of 267	DNV	A+C
2019	not published	11.7	10.9	+8%	143 of 248	DNV	A+C
2018	not published	10.2	10.9	−7%	76 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.