Navalyze · Container · Ship

CMA CGM COLUMBA

IMO: 9410789
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 100,911 t
Flag (estimated): Malta
Port of registry: Valletta
Technical efficiency: EEXI 8.97 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: CMA SHIPS SAS · part of CMA CGM

Report year

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 116,293 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

326

Container median 172 kg/nm (+89%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

8.85

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 17.6 (−50%)

Average speed

15.5 kn

Container median 14.0 kn (+11%)

Fuel per day at sea

121.2 t/day

Fuel consumed

14,175 t

CO₂ emitted

44,735 t

Distance sailed

43,466 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,806 h

117 days, 32% 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 kg/nmThis ship 262 kg/nm · median 177 (+48%)

78.8Ranks 1,755 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 12.0 kn · median 13.3 (−10%)

9.1Faster than 31% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 8.13 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−50%)

7.22Ranks 351 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container 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 ports20%
From the EU9%
Into the EU68%
At berth in the EU4%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,700 t

3.8% 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 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 kg/nm

CMA CGM COLUMBA
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

CMA CGM COLUMBA
Container median

10.012.014.016.018.0

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

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

CMA CGM COLUMBA
Container median

5.010.015.020.025.0

’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	−3.2 kn	−10%	−29%	−48%	−8%	3.2 kn slower, fuel per mile down 10%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.6 kn	+9%	+13%	+95%	−21%	0.6 kn faster, fuel per mile up 9%; in line with the speed change.
2022→2023	+3.8 kn	−5%	+29%	+756%	+2%	3.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 5%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−4.3 kn	−15%	−39%	−86%	+9%	4.3 kn slower, fuel per mile down 15%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−0.4 kn	+2%	−1%	−27%	+13%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+0.5 kn	+1%	+5%	+84%	−7%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−1.4 kn	+8%	−2%	−46%	+7%	1.4 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
2025	CMA SHIPS SAS	10,009	31,290	38,140	3,172	12.0	262	8.13	96%
2024	CMA SHIPS SAS	21,210	66,169	72,915	4,792	15.2	291	8.88	97%
2023	not published	10,021	31,581	37,483	2,559	14.6	267	11.2	93%
2022	not published	1,230	3,919	4,380	406	10.8	281	10.9	90%
2021	not published	10,530	33,232	31,747	2,106	15.1	332	9.98	94%
2020	not published	14,175	44,735	43,466	2,806	15.5	326	8.85	–
2019	not published	7,618	23,762	23,671	1,583	15.0	322	9.51	94%
2018	not published	13,028	40,605	43,777	2,663	16.4	298	8.92	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	CMA SHIPS SAS	8.13	16.3	−50%	351 of 2,208	ABS	C
2024	CMA SHIPS SAS	8.88	17.5	−49%	369 of 1,974	ABS	C
2023	not published	11.2	19.4	−42%	465 of 1,899	ABS	C
2022	not published	10.9	19.1	−43%	391 of 1,825	ABS	A
2021	not published	9.98	17.9	−44%	319 of 1,781	ABS	C
2020	not published	8.85	17.6	−50%	295 of 1,797	ABS	C
2019	not published	9.51	18.9	−50%	288 of 1,788	ABS	C
2018	not published	8.92	20.2	−56%	191 of 1,705	ABS	C

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.