Navalyze · Ro-pax · Ship

TANIT

IMO: 9598579
Type: Ro-pax ship
Flag (estimated): Tunisia
Port of registry: La Goulette
Technical efficiency: EIV 2.85 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: COTUNAV

Report year

2021 at a glance

From the 2021 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

368

Ro-pax median 155 kg/nm (+138%)

CO₂ per transport work (pax)

894

g CO₂/pax·nm · Ro-pax median 815 (+10%)

CO₂ per transport work (freight)

2,189

g CO₂/t·nm · Ro-pax median 226 (+868%)

Average speed

23.3 kn

Ro-pax median 16.2 kn (+44%)

Fuel per day at sea

205.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

19,298 t

CO₂ emitted

60,127 t

Distance sailed

52,395 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,250 h

94 days, 26% of the year

Within the ro-pax fleet, 2025

Set against all 408 ro-pax 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 302 kg/nm · median 150 (+101%)

69.3Ranks 406 of 408, lowest first232

Average speedThis ship 18.4 kn · median 15.8 (+16%)

12.0Faster than 73% of ro-pax ships22.3

CO₂ per transport work (pax)This ship 928 g CO₂/pax·nm · median 567 (+64%)

66.8Ranks 281 of 408, lowest first1,569

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Ro-pax medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2021

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 EU49%
Into the EU50%
At berth in the EU1%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

728 t

1.2% 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 Ro-pax median is the middle ship of all ro-pax ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

TANIT
Ro-pax median

100.0200.0300.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

TANIT
Ro-pax median

14.016.018.020.022.024.0

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

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

TANIT
Ro-pax median

0.01,0002,0003,000

’182018’192019’202020’212021’222022

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

TANIT
Ro-pax median

0.02,5005,0007,50010,000

’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	−3.1 kn	−1%	−15%	+28%	+11%	3.1 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	−0.3 kn	−22%	−23%	+22%	−18%	0.3 kn slower, fuel per mile down 22%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−1.2 kn	+9%	+3%	−9%	+8%	1.2 kn slower, fuel per mile up 9%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	−0.3 kn	−2%	−3%	+21%	+6%	0.3 kn slower, fuel per mile down 2%; in line with the speed change.
2020→2021	+1.0 kn	−1%	+4%	+22%	−45%	1.0 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−0.2 kn	−1%	−2%	−36%	+54%	Same speed, fuel per mile flat.
2018→2019	+0.2 kn	+8%	+9%	+6%	−89%	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	Hours at seah	Average speedknots at sea	Fuel kg/nmthis ship	CO₂ per transport work (cargo)g/t·nm, this ship	Laden fuel
2025	COTUNAV	27,223	85,197	90,135	4,891	18.4	302	–	–
2024	COTUNAV	21,472	66,929	70,144	3,268	21.5	306	–	–
2023	not published	22,658	70,625	57,706	2,644	21.8	393	–	–
2022	not published	22,781	70,967	63,171	2,744	23.0	361	–	–
2021	not published	19,298	60,127	52,395	2,250	23.3	368	–	–
2020	not published	15,955	49,738	43,100	1,936	22.3	370	–	–
2019	not published	25,248	78,711	67,375	2,990	22.5	375	–	–
2018	not published	22,098	68,860	63,792	2,865	22.3	346	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/pax·nm	Ro-pax median	vs Ro-pax	Rank	Freight, g CO₂/t·nm	Ro-pax median	vs Ro-pax	Verifier	Methods
2025	COTUNAV	928	567	+64%	281 of 408	–	–	–	Verifavia	C
2024	COTUNAV	838	547	+53%	265 of 404	–	–	–	Verifavia	C
2023	not published	1,022	680	+50%	274 of 386	–	–	–	Verifavia	C
2022	not published	948	626	+51%	258 of 394	1,083	253	+328%	Verifavia	C
2021	not published	894	815	+10%	197 of 377	2,189	226	+868%	Verifavia	C
2020	not published	1,632	751	+117%	302 of 387	370	217	+70%	Verifavia	C
2019	not published	1,059	569	+86%	300 of 394	463	223	+108%	Verifavia	B+C
2018	not published	9,747	729	+1,237%	356 of 361	1,173	184	+537%	Verifavia	B+C

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Ro-pax ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (pax) (TW), in g CO₂/pax·nm, and also per tonne of freight (g CO₂/t·nm freight). CO₂eq adds methane and nitrous oxide and is in the public files from 2024. Rank counts from the lowest figure among that year's ro-pax 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.