Navalyze · Container · Ship

MSC NAIROBI X

IMO: 9605243
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 72,419 t
Flag (estimated): Liberia
Port of registry: Monrovia
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.55 g CO₂/t·nm
Former names: MSC ALGECIRAS, JOSEPH SCHULTE

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MSC Shipmanagement Ltd · part of MSC Group

Report year

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 72,340 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

292

Container median 172 kg/nm (+69%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

12.7

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 17.6 (−28%)

Average speed

19.0 kn

Container median 14.0 kn (+36%)

Fuel per day at sea

132.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

14,462 t

CO₂ emitted

45,600 t

Distance sailed

49,556 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,613 h

109 days, 30% 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 kg/nmThis ship 248 kg/nm · median 177 (+40%)

78.8Ranks 1,634 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 13.2 kn · median 13.3 (−1%)

9.1Faster than 48% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 10.7 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−34%)

7.22Ranks 658 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2020

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 ports15%
From the EU39%
Into the EU42%
At berth in the EU4%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,692 t

3.7% 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 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 kg/nm

MSC NAIROBI X
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

MSC NAIROBI X
Container median

5.010.015.020.0

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

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

MSC NAIROBI X
Container median

5.010.015.020.025.0

’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	−1.8 kn	+2%	−10%	+304%	+34%	1.8 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+8.2 kn	−12%	+95%	+32%	−43%	8.2 kn faster, fuel per mile down 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−6.1 kn	−2%	−49%	+1,657%	−9%	6.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	−2.3 kn	+9%	−8%	−91%	+40%	2.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 9%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−3.8 kn	−11%	−29%	−91%	−14%	3.8 kn slower, fuel per mile down 11%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+2.1 kn	−3%	+9%	+26%	−14%	2.1 kn faster, fuel per mile down 3%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	+4.1 kn	−3%	+28%	+110%	+23%	4.1 kn faster, fuel per mile down 3%; 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
2025	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	9,394	29,341	37,830	2,858	13.2	248	10.7	–
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	2,281	7,104	9,358	624	15.0	244	8.01	–
2023	not published	1,956	6,177	7,064	1,046	6.8	277	14.0	–
2022	not published	114	357	402	31	12.9	283	15.3	–
2021	not published	1,151	3,607	4,425	291	15.2	260	11.0	–
2020	not published	14,462	45,600	49,556	2,613	19.0	292	12.7	–
2019	not published	11,743	36,660	39,176	2,324	16.9	300	14.8	–
2018	not published	5,734	17,983	18,642	1,455	12.8	308	12.0	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	10.7	16.3	−34%	658 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	8.01	17.5	−54%	274 of 1,974	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	14.0	19.4	−28%	672 of 1,899	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	15.3	19.1	−20%	725 of 1,825	DNV	B+C
2021	not published	11.0	17.9	−39%	401 of 1,781	DNV	B+C
2020	not published	12.7	17.6	−28%	553 of 1,797	DNV	B+C
2019	not published	14.8	18.9	−22%	644 of 1,788	DNV	B+C
2018	not published	12.0	20.2	−41%	384 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.