Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

MALANJE

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

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

Report year

2023 at a glance

From the 2023 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

233

LNG carrier median 231 kg/nm (+1%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

9.19

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 9.10 (+1%)

Average speed

12.6 kn

LNG carrier median 14.2 kn (−11%)

Fuel per day at sea

70.2 t/day

Fuel consumed

15,637 t

CO₂ emitted

43,601 t

Distance sailed

67,192 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

5,343 h

223 days, 61% 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 kg/nmThis ship 256 kg/nm · median 190 (+34%)

152Ranks 293 of 386, lowest first319

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 first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier 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 ports7%
From the EU39%
Into the EU47%
At berth in the EU8%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

3,431 t

7.9% 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 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 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	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	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	Hours at seah	Average speedknots at sea	Fuel kg/nmthis ship	CO₂ per transport work (cargo)g/t·nm, this ship	Laden fuel
2025LNG	NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd.	13,722	37,129	53,682	4,131	13.0	256	–	–
2024LNG	NYK LNG Shipmanagement (UK) Ltd.	5,435	14,527	20,075	1,340	15.0	271	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	15,637	43,601	67,192	5,343	12.6	233	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	11,264	31,889	51,846	4,117	12.6	217	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	6,460	17,820	25,584	1,690	15.1	253	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	6,779	18,702	22,475	1,603	14.0	302	–	–
2019LNG / alt.	not published	7,410	20,485	28,739	1,730	16.6	258	–	–
2018LNG / alt.	not published	2,676	7,671	10,325	1,085	9.5	259	–	–

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 / alt.	not published	9.19	9.10	+1%	180 of 355	ClassNK	B+C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	9.85	10.4	−5%	177 of 379	ClassNK	B+C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	8.04	10.5	−23%	97 of 289	ClassNK	B+C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	8.96	10.7	−16%	77 of 267	ClassNK	B+C
2019LNG / alt.	not published	9.14	10.9	−16%	68 of 248	ClassNK	B+C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	9.89	10.9	−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.