Navalyze · Chemical tanker · Ship

QD SUMMER

IMO: 9363845
Type: Chemical tanker
Average cargo carried: 13,381 t
Flag (estimated): Liberia
Port of registry: Monrovia
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.77 g CO₂/t·nm
Former names: STANLEY PARK

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Zodiac Maritime Ltd

Report year

2021 at a glance

From the 2021 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 12,678 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

74.5

Chemical tanker median 83.0 kg/nm (−10%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

18.5

g CO₂/t·nm · Chemical tanker median 16.7 (+11%)

Average speed

11.5 kn

Chemical tanker median 11.2 kn (+3%)

Fuel per day at sea

20.6 t/day

Fuel consumed

2,843 t

CO₂ emitted

8,929 t

Distance sailed

38,152 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,305 h

138 days, 38% of the year

Within the chemical tanker fleet, 2025

Set against all 1,460 chemical tanker 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 76.7 kg/nm · median 79.7 (−4%)

52.8Ranks 642 of 1,460, lowest first111

Average speedThis ship 11.6 kn · median 11.1 (+5%)

8.8Faster than 68% of chemical tanker ships12.4

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 18.0 g CO₂/t·nm · median 15.0 (+19%)

7.93Ranks 873 of 1,460, lowest first40.2

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Chemical tanker 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 ports15%
From the EU26%
Into the EU53%
At berth in the EU7%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

607 t

6.8% 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 Chemical tanker median is the middle ship of all chemical tanker ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

QD SUMMER
Chemical tanker median

50.060.070.080.090.0100.0

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

Average speed, kn

QD SUMMER
Chemical tanker median

4.06.08.010.012.014.0

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

CO₂ per transport work (cargo), g CO₂/t·nm

QD SUMMER
Chemical tanker median

0.020.040.060.0

’182018’192019’212021’222022’242024’252025

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	+0.1 kn	+5%	+6%	+348%	−43%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 5%; in line with the speed change.
2023→2024	−0.3 kn	+26%	+23%	−59%	–	0.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 26%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−1.2 kn	−30%	−36%	+306%	–	1.2 kn slower, fuel per mile down 30%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	+1.5 kn	+11%	+25%	−85%	+217%	1.5 kn faster, fuel per mile up 11%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−0.7 kn	−2%	−8%	−22%	–	0.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	−0.7 kn	−13%	−18%	+61%	–	0.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 13%; in line with the speed change.
2018→2019	+7.7 kn	−3%	+139%	+112%	−38%	7.7 kn faster, fuel per mile down 3%; 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
2025part-year	Zodiac Maritime Ltd	1,455	4,571	19,634	1,630	12.0	74.1	17.5	77%
2025	Nexmar Shipping Ltd	3,206	10,055	41,818	3,592	11.6	76.7	18.0	35%
2024	Zodiac Maritime Ltd	682	2,174	9,335	810	11.5	73.1	31.8	43%
2023	not published	1,313	4,114	22,657	1,919	11.8	57.9	–	86%
2022	not published	461	1,442	5,582	430	13.0	82.6	58.5	–
2021	not published	2,843	8,929	38,152	3,305	11.5	74.5	18.5	–
2020	not published	3,720	11,619	48,685	3,978	12.2	76.4	1.29	–
2019	not published	2,660	8,313	30,288	2,339	12.9	87.8	2.23	–
2018	not published	1,291	4,054	14,293	2,725	5.2	90.4	3.61	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Chemical tanker median	vs Chemical tanker	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025part-year	Zodiac Maritime Ltd	–	–	–	–	ABS	C
2025	Nexmar Shipping Ltd	18.0	15.0	+19%	873 of 1,460	Lloyd's Register	C
2024	Zodiac Maritime Ltd	31.8	16.7	+90%	1,018 of 1,274	ABS	C
2023	not published	–	–	–	–	ABS	C
2022	not published	58.5	16.1	+264%	1,372 of 1,409	DNV	C
2021	not published	18.5	16.7	+11%	780 of 1,343	DNV	C
2020	not published	–	–	–	–	Lloyd's Register	C
2019	not published	2.23	17.3	−87%	1 of 1,321	Lloyd's Register	C
2018	not published	3.61	17.1	−79%	4 of 1,294	Lloyd's Register	C

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Chemical tanker ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (cargo) (TW), in g CO₂/t·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 chemical tanker 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.