Navalyze · Container · Ship

MARTI WIND

IMO: 9386976
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 6,871 t
Port of registry: Monrovia
Technical efficiency: EEXI 19.65 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: IA
Former names: WYBELSUM

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Briese Schiffahrts GmbH & Co. KG MS "Wybelsum" · part of Briese

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 6,871 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

109.4 kg/nm

Container median 177.0 kg/nm (−38%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

50.10

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 16.30 (+207%)

Average speed

8.0 kn

Container median 13.3 kn (−40%)

Fuel per day at sea

21.1 t/day

Fuel consumed

1,324 t

CO₂ emitted

4,165 t

4,230 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

12,101 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

1,507 h

63 days, 17% of the year

Within the container fleet, 2025

Set against all 2,208 container 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 per mileThis ship 109.4 kg/nm · median 177.0 (−38%)

78.8Ranks 618 of 2,208, lowest first302.4

Average speedThis ship 8.0 kn · median 13.3 (−40%)

9.1Faster than 5% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 50.10 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.30 (+207%)

7.22Ranks 2,027 of 2,208, lowest first46.89

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

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 ports19%
From the EU45%
Into the EU30%
At berth in the EU5%

6% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (237 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

5.5%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.1 t

Mainly from LNG; small for oil

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.016

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

Over the years

Full-year reports only. The Container median is the middle ship of all container ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel per mile, kg/nm

MARTI WIND
Container median

50.0100.0150.0200.0

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

Average speed, kn

MARTI WIND
Container median

8.010.012.014.016.0

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

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

MARTI WIND
Container median

10.020.030.040.050.060.0

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

Year on year

Year	Speed	Fuel per mile	Fuel per day	Distance	CO₂ per TW	Reading
2024→2025	−0.6 kn	+33%	+24%	−69%	+60%	0.6 kn slower, fuel per mile up 33%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	−1.0 kn	+4%	−7%	−27%	+5%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile up 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−1.0 kn	−7%	−16%	+22%	+2%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile down 7%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	−0.1 kn	+6%	+5%	−6%	−4%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−0.1 kn	−6%	−6%	+3%	−12%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 6%; in line with the speed change.
2019→2020	−0.1 kn	+4%	+3%	−23%	+32%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	−0.1 kn	+7%	+5%	−3%	−13%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 7%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025part-year	Briese Schiffahrts GmbH & Co. KG MS "Wybelsum"	1,176	3,702	10,345	1,332	7.8	113.7	52.44	–
2025	Doehle Shipmanagement Pte. Ltd.	1,324	4,165	12,101	1,507	8.0	109.4	50.10	–
2024	Briese Schiffahrts GmbH & Co. KG MS "Wybelsum"	3,224	10,071	39,317	4,546	8.6	82.0	31.23	–
2023	not published	4,238	13,233	53,625	5,583	9.6	79.0	29.81	–
2022	not published	3,730	11,651	44,015	4,147	10.6	84.7	29.24	–
2021	not published	3,723	11,676	46,708	4,347	10.7	79.7	30.61	–
2020	not published	3,840	12,163	45,202	4,182	10.8	85.0	34.82	–
2019	not published	4,786	15,078	58,662	5,401	10.9	81.6	26.47	–
2018	not published	4,620	14,750	60,343	5,478	11.0	76.6	30.26	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025part-year	Briese Schiffahrts GmbH & Co. KG MS "Wybelsum"	–	–	–	–	DNV	B
2025	Doehle Shipmanagement Pte. Ltd.	50.10	16.30	+207%	2,027 of 2,208	DNV	A
2024	Briese Schiffahrts GmbH & Co. KG MS "Wybelsum"	31.23	17.52	+78%	1,481 of 1,974	DNV	B
2023	not published	29.81	19.40	+54%	1,344 of 1,899	DNV	B
2022	not published	29.24	19.13	+53%	1,281 of 1,825	DNV	B
2021	not published	30.61	17.90	+71%	1,320 of 1,781	DNV	B
2020	not published	34.82	17.58	+98%	1,405 of 1,797	DNV	B
2019	not published	26.47	18.88	+40%	1,160 of 1,788	DNV	B
2018	not published	30.26	20.22	+50%	1,176 of 1,705	Korean Register	B

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Container 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 container 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.