Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

CLEAN VISION

IMO: 9655456
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Malta
Port of registry: Valleta
Technical efficiency: EEXI 6.75 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: IA
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Dynagas Ltd

Report year

2021 at a glance

From the 2021 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

256

LNG carrier median 257 kg/nm (−0%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

19.9

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.5 (+90%)

Average speed

11.9 kn

LNG carrier median 14.6 kn (−18%)

Fuel per day at sea

73.3 t/day

Fuel consumed

16,956 t

CO₂ emitted

48,276 t

Distance sailed

66,278 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

5,552 h

231 days, 63% 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 220 kg/nm · median 190 (+16%)

152Ranks 267 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 15.4 kn · median 14.4 (+7%)

11.2Faster than 80% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 5.22 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (−27%)

5.06Ranks 54 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2021

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 ports1%
From the EU50%
Into the EU45%
At berth in the EU3%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,516 t

3.1% 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 VISION
LNG carrier median

0.0100.0200.0300.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

CLEAN VISION
LNG carrier median

0.050.0100.0150.0200.0

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

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

CLEAN VISION
LNG carrier median

5.010.015.020.0

’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	−135.2 kn	+670%	−21%	−95%	−52%	135.2 kn slower, fuel per mile up 670%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+136.0 kn	−88%	+26%	+787%	+70%	136.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 88%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+3.8 kn	−4%	+29%	−23%	+1%	3.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−1.1 kn	−4%	−13%	−21%	−68%	1.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−0.4 kn	−2%	−6%	+36%	+173%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 2%; in line with the speed change.
2019→2020	−0.3 kn	−6%	−8%	−48%	−20%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 6%; in line with the speed change.
2018→2019	+1.6 kn	+9%	+25%	+363%	−9%	1.6 kn faster, fuel per mile up 9%; 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	3,984	10,700	18,083	1,177	15.4	220	–	–
2024LNG	Dynagas Ltd	10,256	27,932	358,329	2,380	150.6	28.6	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	9,469	26,133	40,394	2,767	14.6	234	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	12,799	36,407	52,218	4,830	10.8	245	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	16,956	48,276	66,278	5,552	11.9	256	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	12,796	35,308	48,795	3,955	12.3	262	–	–
2019LNG / alt.	not published	26,241	73,288	94,011	7,460	12.6	279	–	–
2018LNG / alt.	not published	5,184	14,340	20,302	1,842	11.0	255	–	–

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	5.22	7.12	−27%	54 of 386	EMICERT	A+C
2024LNG	Dynagas Ltd	11.0	7.39	+48%	242 of 312	EMICERT	A+C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	6.44	9.10	−29%	84 of 355	EMICERT	A+C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	6.40	10.4	−38%	60 of 379	EMICERT	A+C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	19.9	10.5	+90%	259 of 289	EMICERT	A+C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	7.28	10.7	−32%	40 of 267	EMICERT	A+C
2019LNG / alt.	not published	9.15	10.9	−16%	69 of 248	EMICERT	A+C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	10.1	10.9	−7%	73 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.