Navalyze · Container · Ship

AL ZUBARA

IMO: 9708875
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 152,625 t
Flag (estimated): Germany
Port of registry: Hamburg
Technical efficiency: EEXI 5.39 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Hapag-Lloyd AG

Report year

2023 at a glance

From the 2023 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 113,701 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

252

Container median 165 kg/nm (+53%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

6.02

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 19.4 (−69%)

Average speed

13.4 kn

Container median 13.2 kn (+2%)

Fuel per day at sea

80.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

8,288 t

CO₂ emitted

22,489 t

Distance sailed

32,856 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,461 h

103 days, 28% 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 314 kg/nm · median 177 (+77%)

78.8Ranks 2,045 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 15.7 kn · median 13.3 (+18%)

9.1Faster than 86% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 6.42 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−61%)

7.22Ranks 110 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container 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 ports11%
From the EU80%
Into the EU3%
At berth in the EU6%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,365 t

6.1% 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 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

AL ZUBARA
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

AL ZUBARA
Container median

12.013.014.015.016.0

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

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

AL ZUBARA
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	+2.2 kn	+15%	+34%	+27%	−21%	2.2 kn faster, fuel per mile up 15%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	+0.1 kn	+8%	+10%	+19%	+35%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 8%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−0.6 kn	−8%	−12%	+16%	−10%	0.6 kn slower, fuel per mile down 8%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	+1.2 kn	+0%	+10%	−8%	+17%	1.2 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−2.4 kn	−4%	−19%	−40%	+1%	2.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 4%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+1.3 kn	−6%	+3%	+28%	−6%	1.3 kn faster, fuel per mile down 6%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−1.0 kn	+1%	−6%	−28%	−10%	1.0 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	Hapag-Lloyd AG	15,664	48,925	49,931	3,180	15.7	314	6.42	–
2024	Hapag-Lloyd AG	10,716	33,514	39,196	2,906	13.5	273	8.10	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	8,288	22,489	32,856	2,461	13.4	252	6.02	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	7,740	20,542	28,270	2,015	14.0	274	6.70	–
2021	not published	8,423	26,408	30,809	2,407	12.8	273	5.74	–
2020	not published	14,661	46,322	51,722	3,406	15.2	284	5.67	–
2019	not published	12,099	37,859	40,310	2,900	13.9	300	6.02	–
2018	not published	16,568	51,839	55,698	3,726	14.9	298	6.70	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Hapag-Lloyd AG	6.42	16.3	−61%	110 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	Hapag-Lloyd AG	8.10	17.5	−54%	282 of 1,974	DNV	C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	6.02	19.4	−69%	61 of 1,899	DNV	C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	6.70	19.1	−65%	106 of 1,825	DNV	C
2021	not published	5.74	17.9	−68%	36 of 1,781	DNV	A
2020	not published	5.67	17.6	−68%	29 of 1,797	DNV	A
2019	not published	6.02	18.9	−68%	38 of 1,788	DNV	A
2018	not published	6.70	20.2	−67%	36 of 1,705	DNV	A

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.