Navalyze · Container · Ship

EMERALD TOWER

IMO: 9618288
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 67,951 t
Flag (estimated): Liberia
Port of registry: Monrovia
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.20 g CO₂/t·nm
Former names: MSC ALGHERO

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 75,162 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

319

Container median 172 kg/nm (+85%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

13.2

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 17.6 (−25%)

Average speed

16.7 kn

Container median 14.0 kn (+19%)

Fuel per day at sea

128.3 t/day

Fuel consumed

16,128 t

CO₂ emitted

50,240 t

Distance sailed

50,524 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,016 h

126 days, 34% 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 309 kg/nm · median 177 (+75%)

78.8Ranks 2,020 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 15.7 kn · median 13.3 (+18%)

9.1Faster than 86% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 14.2 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−13%)

7.22Ranks 945 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 ports22%
From the EU31%
Into the EU43%
At berth in the EU5%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

2,487 t

5.0% 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

EMERALD TOWER
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

EMERALD TOWER
Container median

12.014.016.018.020.0

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

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

EMERALD TOWER
Container median

10.012.515.017.520.022.5

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

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	+0.5 kn	+7%	+11%	+1,240%	+25%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile up 7%; in line with the speed change.
2023→2024	+3.1 kn	+4%	+31%	−95%	−25%	3.1 kn faster, fuel per mile up 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2023	−6.1 kn	−23%	−49%	+65%	+11%	6.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 23%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+1.5 kn	+12%	+21%	−55%	+3%	1.5 kn faster, fuel per mile up 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−1.5 kn	+0%	−8%	+80%	−0%	1.5 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+4.6 kn	+5%	+40%	−33%	+17%	4.6 kn faster, fuel per mile up 5%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).

Part-year reports are left out of these comparisons. 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
2025part-year	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	7,441	23,203	24,064	1,532	15.7	309	14.2	–
2025	Zodiac Maritime Ltd	7,441	23,203	24,064	1,532	15.7	309	14.2	–
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	517	1,609	1,796	118	15.2	288	11.4	–
2023	not published	10,437	32,527	37,756	3,125	12.1	276	15.2	–
2021	not published	8,173	25,451	22,852	1,259	18.2	358	13.7	–
2020	not published	16,128	50,240	50,524	3,016	16.7	319	13.2	–
2019	not published	8,946	27,878	28,083	1,540	18.2	319	13.2	–
2018	not published	12,794	39,936	41,973	3,088	13.6	305	11.3	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025part-year	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	–	–	–	–	DNV	B+C
2025	Zodiac Maritime Ltd	14.2	16.3	−13%	945 of 2,208	ABS	C
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	11.4	17.5	−35%	559 of 1,974	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	15.2	19.4	−22%	741 of 1,899	DNV	B+C
2021	not published	13.7	17.9	−24%	607 of 1,781	DNV	C
2020	not published	13.2	17.6	−25%	597 of 1,797	DNV	C
2019	not published	13.2	18.9	−30%	517 of 1,788	DNV	C
2018	not published	11.3	20.2	−44%	343 of 1,705	DNV	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.