Navalyze · Container · Ship

NETA A.

IMO: 9412531
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 7,468 t
Flag (estimated): Liberia
Port of registry: Monrovia
Technical efficiency: EEXI 19.96 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: IA
Fuel (estimated): Oil blended with biofuel or another alternative fuel
Former names: PRIAMOS, ELBSKY

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MS Elbsky Gmbh

Report year

2023 at a glance

From the 2023 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 6,583 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

91.0

Container median 165 kg/nm (−45%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

43.8

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 19.4 (+126%)

Average speed

12.5 kn

Container median 13.2 kn (−5%)

Fuel per day at sea

27.2 t/day

Fuel consumed

5,154 t

CO₂ emitted

16,314 t

Distance sailed

56,645 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,550 h

190 days, 52% 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 86.2 kg/nm · median 177 (−51%)

78.8Ranks 349 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 11.5 kn · median 13.3 (−14%)

9.1Faster than 26% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 35.8 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (+119%)

7.22Ranks 1,802 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2023

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 ports84%
From the EU4%
Into the EU1%
At berth in the EU11%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,804 t

11.1% 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 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

NETA A.
Container median

50.0100.0150.0200.0

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

Average speed, kn

NETA A.
Container median

11.012.013.014.015.0

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

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

NETA A.
Container median

10.020.030.040.050.0

’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	+0.3 kn	−4%	−2%	+15%	−4%	0.3 kn faster, fuel per mile down 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−1.3 kn	−1%	−11%	−15%	−15%	1.3 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−1.1 kn	+7%	−2%	−3%	+21%	1.1 kn slower, fuel per mile up 7%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	+0.5 kn	−7%	−3%	−2%	−6%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile down 7%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	+1.7 kn	+1%	+16%	+35%	−11%	1.7 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−0.2 kn	+6%	+4%	−25%	+21%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	−1.0 kn	+1%	−7%	+24%	−5%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; 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	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	MS Elbsky Gmbh	3,845	11,923	45,389	3,918	11.6	84.7	34.3	–
2025Bio blend	Doehle Shipmanagement Pte. Ltd.	4,780	14,809	55,455	4,828	11.5	86.2	35.8	–
2024	MS Elbsky Gmbh	4,333	13,762	48,106	4,303	11.2	90.1	37.2	–
2023	not published	5,154	16,314	56,645	4,550	12.5	91.0	43.8	–
2022	not published	4,980	15,731	58,399	4,302	13.6	85.3	36.2	–
2021	not published	5,491	17,278	59,771	4,569	13.1	91.9	38.5	–
2020	not published	4,017	12,720	44,285	3,888	11.4	90.7	43.4	–
2019	not published	5,036	15,874	58,666	5,071	11.6	85.8	35.7	–
2018	not published	3,994	12,588	47,187	3,747	12.6	84.7	37.5	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025part-year	MS Elbsky Gmbh	–	–	–	–	EnvService	B
2025Bio blend	Doehle Shipmanagement Pte. Ltd.	35.8	16.3	+119%	1,802 of 2,208	DNV	A
2024	MS Elbsky Gmbh	37.2	17.5	+112%	1,579 of 1,974	DNV	A
2023	not published	43.8	19.4	+126%	1,595 of 1,899	DNV	A
2022	not published	36.2	19.1	+89%	1,422 of 1,825	DNV	A
2021	not published	38.5	17.9	+115%	1,462 of 1,781	DNV	A
2020	not published	43.4	17.6	+147%	1,518 of 1,797	DNV	A
2019	not published	35.7	18.9	+89%	1,355 of 1,788	DNV	A
2018	not published	37.5	20.2	+85%	1,299 of 1,705	DNV	A

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.