Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

GASLOG SEATTLE

IMO: 9634086
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Bermuda
Port of registry: Hamilton
Technical efficiency: EEXI 6.80 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: GasLog LNG Services Ltd.

Report year

2022 at a glance

From the 2022 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

307

LNG carrier median 252 kg/nm (+22%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

10.0

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.4 (−3%)

Average speed

13.1 kn

LNG carrier median 14.1 kn (−7%)

Fuel per day at sea

96.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

10,714 t

CO₂ emitted

30,600 t

Distance sailed

34,880 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,655 h

111 days, 30% of the year

Within the LNG carrier fleet, 2025

Set against all 386 LNG carrier 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 212 kg/nm · median 190 (+11%)

152Ranks 252 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 14.4 kn · median 14.4 (+0%)

11.2Faster than 51% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 7.80 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+10%)

5.06Ranks 222 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier 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 ports0%
From the EU39%
Into the EU59%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

6,557 t

61% of all fuel; 39% in ballast or unladen

CO₂ at berth

508 t

1.7% 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 LNG carrier median is the middle ship of all LNG carrier ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

GASLOG SEATTLE
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

GASLOG SEATTLE
LNG carrier median

12.014.016.018.0

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

CO₂ per transport work (volume), g CO₂/m³·nm

GASLOG SEATTLE
LNG carrier median

6.08.010.012.014.0

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

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	−0.9 kn	+1%	−4%	+145%	−3%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.4 kn	−19%	−16%	−13%	+1%	0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile down 19%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+1.8 kn	−16%	−5%	−7%	−20%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 16%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−1.1 kn	+25%	+16%	+199%	−21%	1.1 kn slower, fuel per mile up 25%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−3.7 kn	−9%	−28%	−38%	+16%	3.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 9%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2020	+1.7 kn	+15%	+27%	+63%	+23%	1.7 kn faster, fuel per mile up 15%; 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
2025LNG	GasLog LNG Services Ltd.	14,634	39,335	69,013	4,778	14.4	212	–	–
2024LNG	GasLog LNG Services Ltd.	5,903	15,833	28,226	1,846	15.3	209	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	8,358	23,301	32,481	2,186	14.9	257	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	10,714	30,600	34,880	2,655	13.1	307	–	61%
2021LNG / alt.	not published	2,860	7,886	11,652	819	14.2	246	–	48%
2020LNG / alt.	not published	5,117	14,138	18,922	1,059	17.9	270	–	43%
2018LNG / alt.	not published	2,734	7,529	11,633	716	16.2	235	–	54%

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	GasLog LNG Services Ltd.	7.80	7.12	+10%	222 of 386	ABS	B+C
2024LNG	GasLog LNG Services Ltd.	8.02	7.39	+9%	178 of 312	ABS	B+C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	7.98	9.10	−12%	149 of 355	ABS	B+C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	10.0	10.4	−3%	181 of 379	ABS	B+C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	12.7	10.5	+21%	193 of 289	ABS	B+C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	10.9	10.7	+2%	138 of 267	ABS	B+C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	8.90	10.9	−18%	51 of 197	ABS	B+C

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. LNG carrier ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (volume) (TW), in g CO₂/m³·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 LNG carrier 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.