Navalyze · Gas carrier (LPG) · Ship

KOKSIJDE

IMO: 9719305
Type: Gas carrier
Average cargo carried: 9,959 t
Flag (estimated): Belgium
Port of registry: Antwerpen
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.17 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Exmar Shipping BV · part of Exmar

Report year

2018 at a glance

From the 2018 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 4,503 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

85.8

Gas carrier (LPG) median 87.4 kg/nm (−2%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

59.9

g CO₂/t·nm · Gas carrier (LPG) median 53.1 (+13%)

Average speed

10.5 kn

Gas carrier (LPG) median 10.5 kn (+0%)

Fuel per day at sea

21.5 t/day

Fuel consumed

662 t

CO₂ emitted

2,081 t

Distance sailed

7,719 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

737 h

31 days, 8% of the year

Within the gas carrier (LPG) fleet, 2025

Set against all 355 gas carrier (LPG) 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 97.3 kg/nm · median 81.5 (+19%)

49.8Ranks 245 of 355, lowest first124

Average speedThis ship 13.4 kn · median 12.6 (+6%)

8.8Faster than 65% of gas carrier (LPG) ships14.6

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 30.9 g CO₂/t·nm · median 35.6 (−13%)

14.4Ranks 160 of 355, lowest first120

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Gas carrier (LPG) 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 EU0%
Into the EU79%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

35 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 Gas carrier (LPG) median is the middle ship of all gas carrier (LPG) ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

KOKSIJDE
Gas carrier (LPG) median

80.090.0100.0110.0

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

Average speed, kn

KOKSIJDE
Gas carrier (LPG) median

10.011.012.013.014.0

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

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

KOKSIJDE
Gas carrier (LPG) median

20.030.040.050.060.0

’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	−0.2 kn	+6%	+4%	+1%	+17%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.5 kn	−5%	−2%	+15%	−16%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile down 5%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−0.6 kn	+5%	+1%	−9%	+34%	0.6 kn slower, fuel per mile up 5%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	+2.0 kn	−11%	+4%	+32%	−20%	2.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 11%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	+0.6 kn	+2%	+7%	+4%	+2%	0.6 kn faster, fuel per mile up 2%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−1.4 kn	−3%	−14%	−1%	−22%	1.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 3%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+2.0 kn	+23%	+47%	+420%	−38%	2.0 kn faster, fuel per mile up 23%; 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
2025	Exmar Shipping BV	5,620	17,778	57,753	4,302	13.4	97.3	30.9	–
2024	Exmar Shipping BV	5,281	16,711	57,341	4,215	13.6	92.1	26.5	–
2023	not published	4,844	15,356	49,840	3,793	13.1	97.2	31.7	–
2022	not published	5,062	16,057	54,814	3,996	13.7	92.3	23.6	–
2021	not published	4,315	13,834	41,457	3,551	11.7	104	29.6	–
2020	not published	4,035	12,938	39,731	3,564	11.1	102	29.1	–
2019	not published	4,218	13,488	40,103	3,208	12.5	105	37.0	–
2018	not published	662	2,081	7,719	737	10.5	85.8	59.9	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Gas carrier (LPG) median	vs Gas carrier (LPG)	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Exmar Shipping BV	30.9	35.6	−13%	160 of 355	DNV	B+C
2024	Exmar Shipping BV	26.5	35.8	−26%	116 of 306	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	31.7	41.8	−24%	129 of 330	DNV	A+C
2022	not published	23.6	42.5	−44%	97 of 348	DNV	C
2021	not published	29.6	46.9	−37%	91 of 323	DNV	B
2020	not published	29.1	42.3	−31%	113 of 339	DNV	B
2019	not published	37.0	45.9	−19%	141 of 331	Lloyd's Register	B
2018	not published	59.9	53.1	+13%	162 of 297	Lloyd's Register	–

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Gas carrier (LPG) 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 gas carrier (LPG) 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.