Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

CLEAN OCEAN

IMO: 9637492
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Marshall Islands
Port of registry: Majuro
Technical efficiency: EEXI 6.69 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: IA
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Dynagas Ltd

Report year

2023 at a glance

From the 2023 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

247

LNG carrier median 231 kg/nm (+7%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

6.77

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 9.10 (−26%)

Average speed

15.1 kn

LNG carrier median 14.2 kn (+6%)

Fuel per day at sea

89.5 t/day

Fuel consumed

15,160 t

CO₂ emitted

41,811 t

Distance sailed

61,485 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,067 h

169 days, 46% 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 216 kg/nm · median 190 (+13%)

152Ranks 259 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 14.3 kn · median 14.4 (−1%)

11.2Faster than 48% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 5.71 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (−20%)

5.06Ranks 111 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2023

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 ports4%
From the EU61%
Into the EU33%
At berth in the EU1%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

360 t

0.9% 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 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

CLEAN OCEAN
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

CLEAN OCEAN
LNG carrier median

11.012.013.014.015.016.0

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

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

CLEAN OCEAN
LNG carrier median

4.06.08.010.012.0

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

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	−7%	−2%	−70%	−28%	0.7 kn faster, fuel per mile down 7%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−1.5 kn	−6%	−16%	−0%	+17%	1.5 kn slower, fuel per mile down 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+1.0 kn	+14%	+22%	−19%	+24%	1.0 kn faster, fuel per mile up 14%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	+1.3 kn	−12%	−3%	+29%	–	1.3 kn faster, fuel per mile down 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−0.4 kn	−3%	−6%	−17%	–	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 3%; in line with the speed change.
2019→2020	+0.8 kn	−11%	−5%	+148%	−19%	0.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 11%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	+1.1 kn	−2%	+8%	+64%	+17%	1.1 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; 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	Dynagas Ltd	4,017	10,839	18,591	1,300	14.3	216	–	–
2024LNG	Dynagas Ltd	14,209	38,620	61,312	4,513	13.6	232	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	15,160	41,811	61,485	4,067	15.1	247	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	16,431	45,360	75,740	5,356	14.1	217	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	14,502	41,043	58,902	4,587	12.8	246	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	17,925	49,989	70,557	5,347	13.2	254	–	–
2019LNG / alt.	not published	8,130	22,747	28,496	2,296	12.4	285	–	–
2018LNG / alt.	not published	5,065	13,993	17,396	1,543	11.3	291	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	Dynagas Ltd	5.71	7.12	−20%	111 of 386	EMICERT	A+C
2024LNG	Dynagas Ltd	7.89	7.39	+7%	168 of 312	EMICERT	A+C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	6.77	9.10	−26%	96 of 355	EMICERT	A+C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	5.47	10.4	−47%	21 of 379	EMICERT	A+C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	–	–	–	–	EMICERT	A+C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	7.22	10.7	−33%	38 of 267	EMICERT	A+C
2019LNG / alt.	not published	8.89	10.9	−18%	66 of 248	EMICERT	A+C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	7.57	10.9	−31%	34 of 197	EMICERT	A+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.