Navalyze · Container · Ship

CMA CGM KERGUELEN

IMO: 9702132
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 100,199 t
Flag (estimated): Malta
Port of registry: Valletta
Technical efficiency: EEXI 8.37 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: CMA SHIPS SAS · part of CMA CGM

Report year

2018 at a glance

From the 2018 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 152,052 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

364

Container median 182 kg/nm (+100%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

7.47

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 20.2 (−63%)

Average speed

17.7 kn

Container median 13.8 kn (+28%)

Fuel per day at sea

154.5 t/day

Fuel consumed

20,953 t

CO₂ emitted

65,402 t

Distance sailed

57,580 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,255 h

136 days, 37% 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 302 kg/nm · median 177 (+71%)

78.8Ranks 1,985 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 15.8 kn · median 13.3 (+19%)

9.1Faster than 88% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 9.41 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−42%)

7.22Ranks 506 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2018

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 ports19%
From the EU33%
Into the EU46%
At berth in the EU3%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,635 t

2.5% 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

CMA CGM KERGUELEN
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

CMA CGM KERGUELEN
Container median

10.012.014.016.018.0

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

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

CMA CGM KERGUELEN
Container median

5.010.015.020.025.0

’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	−0.6 kn	−10%	−13%	−54%	+11%	0.6 kn slower, fuel per mile down 10%; in line with the speed change.
2023→2024	+1.8 kn	+13%	+27%	+85%	+12%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile up 13%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+3.8 kn	+8%	+45%	+117%	−22%	3.8 kn faster, fuel per mile up 8%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−3.5 kn	−18%	−38%	−56%	+36%	3.5 kn slower, fuel per mile down 18%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−0.2 kn	+6%	+5%	+44%	+22%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	−2.1 kn	−1%	−13%	−47%	+11%	2.1 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	−1.1 kn	−13%	−18%	+26%	−30%	1.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 13%; in line with the speed change.

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	CMA SHIPS SAS	13,484	42,090	44,640	2,819	15.8	302	9.41	97%
2024	CMA SHIPS SAS	32,631	101,784	97,529	5,933	16.4	335	8.50	98%
2023	not published	15,676	48,907	52,725	3,620	14.6	297	7.61	98%
2022	not published	6,682	20,968	24,274	2,241	10.8	275	9.74	96%
2021	not published	18,388	57,377	54,927	3,830	14.3	335	7.15	97%
2020	not published	12,049	37,767	38,145	2,629	14.5	316	5.84	–
2019	not published	23,021	71,833	72,447	4,371	16.6	318	5.25	98%
2018	not published	20,953	65,402	57,580	3,255	17.7	364	7.47	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	CMA SHIPS SAS	9.41	16.3	−42%	506 of 2,208	ABS	C
2024	CMA SHIPS SAS	8.50	17.5	−51%	324 of 1,974	ABS	C
2023	not published	7.61	19.4	−61%	213 of 1,899	ABS	C
2022	not published	9.74	19.1	−49%	301 of 1,825	ABS	A
2021	not published	7.15	17.9	−60%	150 of 1,781	ABS	C
2020	not published	5.84	17.6	−67%	49 of 1,797	ABS	C
2019	not published	5.25	18.9	−72%	11 of 1,788	ABS	C
2018	not published	7.47	20.2	−63%	97 of 1,705	ABS	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.