Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

CORAL METHANE

IMO: 9404584
Type: LNG carrier
Port of registry: Rotterdam
Technical efficiency: EEXI 25.60 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: IB
Fuel: Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Anthony Veder Rederijzaken B.V.

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel per mile

73.5 kg/nm

LNG carrier median 190.4 kg/nm (−61%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

48.68

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 7.12 (+584%)

Average speed

9.2 kn

LNG carrier median 14.4 kn (−36%)

Fuel per day at sea

16.1 t/day

Fuel consumed

3,749 t

CO₂ emitted

10,123 t

12,848 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

51,027 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

5,576 h

232 days, 64% 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 per mileThis ship 73.5 kg/nm · median 190.4 (−61%)

152.1Ranks 8 of 386, lowest first319.4

Average speedThis ship 9.2 kn · median 14.4 (−36%)

11.2Faster than 5% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 48.68 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+584%)

5.06Ranks 375 of 386, lowest first16.14

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier 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 ports58%
From the EU18%
Into the EU20%
At berth in the EU4%

70% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (7,134 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

4.0%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

93.4 t

LNG engines slip unburnt methane

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.269

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

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

CORAL METHANE
LNG carrier median

0.0100.0200.0300.0

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

Average speed, kn

CORAL METHANE
LNG carrier median

5.07.510.012.515.0

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

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

CORAL METHANE
LNG carrier median

0.050.0100150200250

’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	−0.2 kn	+0%	−3%	+27%	−8%	Same speed, fuel per mile flat.
2023→2024	+1.3 kn	−13%	+1%	+53%	−2%	1.3 kn faster, fuel per mile down 13%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+2.8 kn	−27%	+11%	+0%	−27%	2.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 27%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−2.4 kn	+38%	−5%	−29%	−8%	2.4 kn slower, fuel per mile up 38%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+0.4 kn	−10%	−4%	−2%	−55%	0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile down 10%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+1.9 kn	+33%	+79%	−3%	−12%	1.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 33%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−3.6 kn	+34%	−19%	+32%	+74%	3.6 kn slower, fuel per mile up 34%; 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025LNG	Anthony Veder Rederijzaken B.V.	3,749	10,123	51,027	5,576	9.2	73.5	–	–
2024LNG	Anthony Veder Rederijzaken B.V.	2,955	7,975	40,250	4,284	9.4	73.4	–	–
2023LNG	not published	2,230	6,209	26,338	3,251	8.1	84.7	–	–
2022LNG	not published	3,048	8,548	26,234	4,934	5.3	116.2	–	–
2021LNG	not published	3,082	8,589	36,738	4,742	7.7	83.9	–	–
2020LNG	not published	3,526	9,806	37,632	5,184	7.3	93.7	176.99	–
2019LNG	not published	2,737	7,547	38,871	7,212	5.4	70.4	202.05	–
2018	not published	1,541	4,860	29,379	3,268	9.0	52.5	115.98	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	Anthony Veder Rederijzaken B.V.	48.68	7.12	+584%	375 of 386	DNV	B+C
2024LNG	Anthony Veder Rederijzaken B.V.	52.82	7.39	+615%	305 of 312	DNV	B+C
2023LNG	not published	53.66	9.10	+490%	345 of 355	DNV	B+C
2022LNG	not published	73.72	10.38	+610%	367 of 379	DNV	B+C
2021LNG	not published	79.90	10.46	+664%	284 of 289	DNV	B+C
2020LNG	not published	176.99	42.29	+319%	329 of 339	DNV	B
2019LNG	not published	202.05	45.85	+341%	323 of 331	Bureau Veritas	B
2018	not published	115.98	53.11	+118%	243 of 297	Bureau Veritas	B

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.