Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

MALANJE

IMO: 9490959
Type: LNG carrier
Port of registry: Nassau
Technical efficiency: EEXI 6.76 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel: Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd. · part of NYK

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel per mile

255.6 kg/nm

LNG carrier median 190.4 kg/nm (+34%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

9.95

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 7.12 (+40%)

Average speed

13.0 kn

LNG carrier median 14.4 kn (−10%)

Fuel per day at sea

79.7 t/day

Fuel consumed

13,722 t

CO₂ emitted

37,129 t

46,217 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

53,682 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,131 h

172 days, 47% 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 255.6 kg/nm · median 190.4 (+34%)

152.1Ranks 293 of 386, lowest first319.4

Average speedThis ship 13.0 kn · median 14.4 (−10%)

11.2Faster than 23% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 9.95 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+40%)

5.06Ranks 289 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 ports0%
From the EU50%
Into the EU48%
At berth in the EU2%

51% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (18,956 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

2.1%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

310.3 t

LNG engines slip unburnt methane

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.245

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

MALANJE
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

MALANJE
LNG carrier median

8.010.012.014.016.018.0

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

CO₂ per transport work (volume), g CO₂/m³·nm

MALANJE
LNG carrier median

7.08.09.010.011.0

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

Year on year

Year	Speed	Fuel per mile	Fuel per day	Distance	CO₂ per TW	Reading
2024→2025	−2.0 kn	−6%	−18%	+167%	–	2.0 kn slower, fuel per mile down 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+2.4 kn	+16%	+39%	−70%	–	2.4 kn faster, fuel per mile up 16%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+0.0 kn	+7%	+7%	+30%	−7%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 7%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	−2.5 kn	−14%	−28%	+103%	+23%	2.5 kn slower, fuel per mile down 14%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+1.1 kn	−16%	−10%	+14%	−10%	1.1 kn faster, fuel per mile down 16%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−2.6 kn	+17%	−1%	−22%	−2%	2.6 kn slower, fuel per mile up 17%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+7.1 kn	−1%	+74%	+178%	−8%	7.1 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine 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	NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd.	13,722	37,129	53,682	4,131	13.0	255.6	–	–
2024LNG	NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd.	5,435	14,527	20,075	1,340	15.0	270.7	–	–
2023LNG	not published	15,637	43,601	67,192	5,343	12.6	232.7	–	–
2022LNG	not published	11,264	31,889	51,846	4,117	12.6	217.2	–	–
2021LNG	not published	6,460	17,820	25,584	1,690	15.1	252.5	–	–
2020LNG	not published	6,779	18,702	22,475	1,603	14.0	301.6	–	–
2019LNG	not published	7,410	20,485	28,739	1,730	16.6	257.8	–	–
2018LNG	not published	2,676	7,671	10,325	1,085	9.5	259.1	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd.	9.95	7.12	+40%	289 of 386	ClassNK	B+C
2024LNG	NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd.	–	–	–	–	ClassNK	B+C
2023LNG	not published	9.19	9.10	+1%	180 of 355	ClassNK	B+C
2022LNG	not published	9.85	10.38	−5%	177 of 379	ClassNK	B+C
2021LNG	not published	8.04	10.46	−23%	97 of 289	ClassNK	B+C
2020LNG	not published	8.96	10.71	−16%	77 of 267	ClassNK	B+C
2019LNG	not published	9.14	10.87	−16%	68 of 248	ClassNK	B+C
2018LNG	not published	9.89	10.92	−9%	65 of 197	ClassNK	–

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.