Navalyze · Container · Ship

MSC LAGOS X

IMO: 9605152
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 84,952 t
Port of registry: Madeira
Technical efficiency: EEXI 10.94 g CO₂/t·nm
Former names: MSC ANTALYA, JUDITH SCHULTE

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Judith Oceanway Limited

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 84,952 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

292.1 kg/nm

Container median 177.0 kg/nm (+65%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

10.74

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 16.30 (−34%)

Average speed

13.8 kn

Container median 13.3 kn (+4%)

Fuel per day at sea

96.5 t/day

Fuel consumed

3,174 t

CO₂ emitted

9,914 t

10,070 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

10,867 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

789 h

33 days, 9% 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 per mileThis ship 292.1 kg/nm · median 177.0 (+65%)

78.8Ranks 1,932 of 2,208, lowest first302.4

Average speedThis ship 13.8 kn · median 13.3 (+4%)

9.1Faster than 57% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 10.74 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.30 (−34%)

7.22Ranks 662 of 2,208, lowest first46.89

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container 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 ports10%
From the EU42%
Into the EU46%
At berth in the EU3%

56% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (5,592 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

3.1%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.2 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 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 per mile, kg/nm

MSC LAGOS X
Container median

100.0200.0300.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

MSC LAGOS X
Container median

8.010.012.014.016.018.0

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

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

MSC LAGOS X
Container median

10.015.020.025.0

’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	−1.9 kn	+9%	−5%	−54%	−16%	1.9 kn slower, fuel per mile up 9%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+6.7 kn	+3%	+82%	+470%	−3%	6.7 kn faster, fuel per mile up 3%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−2.2 kn	−1%	−21%	−50%	+13%	2.2 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	−1.7 kn	+17%	+2%	−24%	−18%	1.7 kn slower, fuel per mile up 17%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−3.7 kn	−13%	−33%	−75%	+27%	3.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 13%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+0.8 kn	−8%	−3%	−29%	−27%	0.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 8%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−0.1 kn	−26%	−27%	+51%	−38%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 26%; 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
2025	Judith Oceanway Limited	3,174	9,914	10,867	789	13.8	292.1	10.74	–
2024	Judith Oceanway Limited	6,388	20,013	23,877	1,517	15.7	267.6	12.82	–
2023	not published	1,084	3,401	4,191	467	9.0	258.7	13.22	–
2022	not published	2,189	6,862	8,417	748	11.2	260.0	11.65	–
2021	not published	2,455	7,659	11,071	858	12.9	221.7	14.17	–
2020	not published	11,405	35,746	44,607	2,683	16.6	255.7	11.13	–
2019	not published	17,428	54,399	62,704	3,980	15.8	277.9	15.17	–
2018	not published	15,544	48,451	41,424	2,602	15.9	375.2	24.29	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Judith Oceanway Limited	10.74	16.30	−34%	662 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	Judith Oceanway Limited	12.82	17.52	−27%	673 of 1,974	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	13.22	19.40	−32%	617 of 1,899	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	11.65	19.13	−39%	458 of 1,825	DNV	B+C
2021	not published	14.17	17.90	−21%	650 of 1,781	DNV	B+C
2020	not published	11.13	17.58	−37%	453 of 1,797	DNV	B+C
2019	not published	15.17	18.88	−20%	665 of 1,788	DNV	B+C
2018	not published	24.29	20.22	+20%	1,020 of 1,705	DNV	B+C

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.