Navalyze · Container · Ship

MSC AGADIR

IMO: 9619464
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 66,848 t
Flag (estimated): Hong Kong (China)
Port of registry: Hong Kong
Technical efficiency: EEXI 10.90 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Waterorchid Hill Limited

Report year

2022 at a glance

From the 2022 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 66,218 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

313

Container median 178 kg/nm (+77%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

14.7

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 19.1 (−23%)

Average speed

14.7 kn

Container median 13.6 kn (+8%)

Fuel per day at sea

110.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

12,369 t

CO₂ emitted

38,522 t

Distance sailed

39,467 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,678 h

112 days, 31% 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 283 kg/nm · median 177 (+60%)

78.8Ranks 1,879 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 14.3 kn · median 13.3 (+8%)

9.1Faster than 66% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 13.2 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−19%)

7.22Ranks 874 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2022

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 ports25%
From the EU50%
Into the EU18%
At berth in the EU7%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

2,654 t

6.9% 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 AGADIR
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

MSC AGADIR
Container median

13.014.015.016.017.0

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

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

MSC AGADIR
Container median

10.012.515.017.520.022.5

’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	−0.7 kn	−9%	−13%	+6%	+8%	0.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 9%; in line with the speed change.
2023→2024	+1.8 kn	+18%	+34%	+3%	+4%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile up 18%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−1.5 kn	−16%	−25%	+15%	−20%	1.5 kn slower, fuel per mile down 16%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	+0.7 kn	−1%	+4%	−6%	+1%	0.7 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−2.7 kn	+6%	−11%	+9%	+4%	2.7 kn slower, fuel per mile up 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+2.0 kn	−0%	+13%	−37%	−0%	2.0 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−0.5 kn	−0%	−3%	−5%	+6%	0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; 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	Waterorchid Hill Limited	13,986	43,606	49,418	3,453	14.3	283	13.2	–
2024	Waterorchid Hill Limited	14,441	44,994	46,454	3,104	15.0	311	12.3	–
2023	not published	11,906	37,089	45,212	3,435	13.2	263	11.8	–
2022	not published	12,369	38,522	39,467	2,678	14.7	313	14.7	–
2021	not published	13,269	41,356	41,877	2,984	14.0	317	14.6	–
2020	not published	11,515	35,984	38,370	2,304	16.7	300	14.1	–
2019	not published	18,344	57,197	60,923	4,135	14.7	301	14.2	–
2018	not published	19,294	60,160	64,019	4,221	15.2	301	13.4	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Waterorchid Hill Limited	13.2	16.3	−19%	874 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	Waterorchid Hill Limited	12.3	17.5	−30%	624 of 1,974	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	11.8	19.4	−39%	515 of 1,899	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	14.7	19.1	−23%	679 of 1,825	DNV	B+C
2021	not published	14.6	17.9	−18%	686 of 1,781	DNV	B+C
2020	not published	14.1	17.6	−20%	674 of 1,797	DNV	B+C
2019	not published	14.2	18.9	−25%	585 of 1,788	DNV	B+C
2018	not published	13.4	20.2	−34%	457 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.