Navalyze · Container · Ship

MSC PALAK

IMO: 9735206
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 71,909 t
Flag (estimated): Portugal
Port of registry: Madeira
Technical efficiency: EEXI 8.99 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MSC Shipmanagement Ltd · part of MSC Group

Report year

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 73,491 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

308

Container median 172 kg/nm (+79%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

13.1

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 17.6 (−26%)

Average speed

16.7 kn

Container median 14.0 kn (+19%)

Fuel per day at sea

123.4 t/day

Fuel consumed

10,048 t

CO₂ emitted

31,298 t

Distance sailed

32,634 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

1,954 h

81 days, 22% 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 293 kg/nm · median 177 (+65%)

78.8Ranks 1,939 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 12.6 kn · median 13.3 (−5%)

9.1Faster than 39% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 12.7 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−22%)

7.22Ranks 839 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2020

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 ports27%
From the EU33%
Into the EU36%
At berth in the EU5%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,433 t

4.6% 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

MSC PALAK
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

MSC PALAK
Container median

12.014.016.018.0

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

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

MSC PALAK
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	−2.4 kn	+2%	−14%	−83%	+4%	2.4 kn slower, fuel per mile up 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+3.0 kn	+20%	+50%	−8%	+14%	3.0 kn faster, fuel per mile up 20%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−1.9 kn	−20%	−31%	−3%	−18%	1.9 kn slower, fuel per mile down 20%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	−2.3 kn	−2%	−17%	+23%	+7%	2.3 kn slower, fuel per mile down 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−0.5 kn	−1%	−3%	−1%	−6%	0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+1.7 kn	+41%	+57%	+3%	+39%	1.7 kn faster, fuel per mile up 41%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+1.7 kn	−11%	+1%	−36%	−8%	1.7 kn faster, fuel per mile down 11%; 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	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	1,812	5,657	6,185	492	12.6	293	12.7	–
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	10,160	31,650	35,475	2,366	15.0	286	12.2	–
2023	not published	9,163	28,547	38,418	3,203	12.0	239	10.7	–
2022	not published	11,850	36,944	39,710	2,863	13.9	298	13.1	–
2021	not published	9,884	30,827	32,297	1,990	16.2	306	12.3	–
2020	not published	10,048	31,298	32,634	1,954	16.7	308	13.1	–
2019	not published	6,942	21,714	31,801	2,126	15.0	218	9.42	–
2018	not published	12,147	37,964	49,727	3,743	13.3	244	10.3	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	12.7	16.3	−22%	839 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	MSC Shipmanagement Ltd	12.2	17.5	−30%	620 of 1,974	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	10.7	19.4	−45%	437 of 1,899	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	13.1	19.1	−31%	566 of 1,825	DNV	C
2021	not published	12.3	17.9	−31%	486 of 1,781	DNV	C
2020	not published	13.1	17.6	−26%	579 of 1,797	DNV	C
2019	not published	9.42	18.9	−50%	283 of 1,788	DNV	C
2018	not published	10.3	20.2	−49%	280 of 1,705	DNV	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.