Navalyze · General cargo · Ship

SIDER LUCK

IMO: 9495595
Type: General cargo ship
Port of registry: Madeira
Technical efficiency: EIV 7.58 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Technical Core Management Srl

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel per mile

69.4 kg/nm

General cargo median 35.3 kg/nm (+97%)

CO₂ per transport work (dwt)

12.54

g CO₂/dwt·nm · General cargo median 25.45 (−51%)

Average speed

10.0 kn

General cargo median 9.3 kn (+8%)

Fuel per day at sea

16.7 t/day

Fuel consumed

1,762 t

CO₂ emitted

5,586 t

5,673 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

25,396 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,532 h

106 days, 29% of the year

Within the general cargo fleet, 2025

Set against all 2,706 general cargo 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 69.4 kg/nm · median 35.3 (+97%)

17.4Ranks 2,243 of 2,706, lowest first78.8

Average speedThis ship 10.0 kn · median 9.3 (+8%)

7.0Faster than 65% of general cargo ships12.1

CO₂ per transport work (dwt)This ship 12.54 g CO₂/dwt·nm · median 25.45 (−51%)

10.14Ranks 368 of 2,706, lowest first52.37

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%General cargo 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 ports43%
From the EU28%
Into the EU18%
At berth in the EU11%

74% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (4,109 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

10.6%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.1 t

Mainly from LNG; small for oil

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.016

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

Over the years

Full-year reports only. The General cargo median is the middle ship of all general cargo ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel per mile, kg/nm

SIDER LUCK
General cargo median

30.040.050.060.070.080.0

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

Average speed, kn

SIDER LUCK
General cargo median

7.08.09.010.011.0

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

CO₂ per transport work (dwt), g CO₂/dwt·nm

SIDER LUCK
General cargo median

5.010.015.020.025.030.0

’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	−0.9 kn	−2%	−10%	−7%	−10%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile down 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.0 kn	+13%	+12%	−17%	+25%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 13%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+0.5 kn	+5%	+10%	−12%	+98%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile up 5%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−0.3 kn	−8%	−11%	−18%	−50%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 8%; in line with the speed change.
2020→2021	+1.1 kn	−7%	+4%	+19%	−27%	1.1 kn faster, fuel per mile down 7%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+1.9 kn	+15%	+43%	+6%	+23%	1.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 15%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−0.1 kn	+8%	+6%	−6%	+31%	Same speed, 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025	Technical Core Management Srl	1,762	5,586	25,396	2,532	10.0	69.4	–	–
2024	Technical Core Management Srl	1,945	6,115	27,358	2,521	10.9	71.1	13.90	–
2023	not published	2,069	6,491	32,767	3,005	10.9	63.1	11.83	–
2022	not published	2,237	7,073	37,191	3,586	10.4	60.2	5.66	–
2021	not published	2,976	9,426	45,564	4,257	10.7	65.3	10.73	–
2020	not published	2,683	8,500	38,129	3,974	9.6	70.4	13.94	–
2019	not published	2,208	6,915	36,045	4,695	7.7	61.3	14.54	–
2018	not published	2,182	6,809	38,294	4,907	7.8	57.0	15.01	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/dwt·nm	General cargo median	vs General cargo	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Technical Core Management Srl	12.54	25.45	−51%	368 of 2,706	RINA	B
2024	Technical Core Management Srl	13.90	19.25	−28%	360 of 1,111	RINA	B
2023	not published	11.14	20.67	−46%	223 of 1,045	RINA	B
2022	not published	5.64	21.57	−74%	23 of 1,034	RINA	B
2021	not published	11.23	22.70	−51%	129 of 1,142	RINA	B
2020	not published	15.34	24.50	−37%	196 of 1,167	RINA	B
2019	not published	12.43	24.96	−50%	135 of 1,154	RINA	B
2018	not published	9.49	24.89	−62%	82 of 1,044	RINA	B

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. General cargo ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (dwt) (TW), in g CO₂/dwt·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 general cargo 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.