Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

EDUARD TOLL

IMO: 9750696
Type: LNG carrier
Port of registry: Nassau
Technical efficiency: EIV 11.66 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: PC3
Fuel: Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Seapeak Maritime Limited · part of Seapeak

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel per mile

316.6 kg/nm

LNG carrier median 190.4 kg/nm (+66%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

9.99

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 7.12 (+40%)

Average speed

13.8 kn

LNG carrier median 14.4 kn (−4%)

Fuel per day at sea

104.8 t/day

Fuel consumed

31,695 t

CO₂ emitted

85,852 t

109,889 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

100,115 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

7,255 h

302 days, 83% 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 per mileThis ship 316.6 kg/nm · median 190.4 (+66%)

152.1Ranks 345 of 386, lowest first319.4

Average speedThis ship 13.8 kn · median 14.4 (−4%)

11.2Faster than 36% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 9.99 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+40%)

5.06Ranks 291 of 386, lowest first16.14

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2025

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 ports0%
From the EU45%
Into the EU52%
At berth in the EU2%

51% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (43,894 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

2.3%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

824.9 t

LNG engines slip unburnt methane

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.280

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

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 per mile, kg/nm

EDUARD TOLL
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

EDUARD TOLL
LNG carrier median

13.014.015.016.0

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

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

EDUARD TOLL
LNG carrier median

6.08.010.012.014.0

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

Year on year

Year	Speed	Fuel per mile	Fuel per day	Distance	CO₂ per TW	Reading
2024→2025	+0.6 kn	−6%	−2%	+29%	−1%	0.6 kn faster, fuel per mile down 6%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−2.2 kn	+0%	−14%	+8%	−4%	2.2 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+1.1 kn	−1%	+6%	−7%	−3%	1.1 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−0.7 kn	−7%	−11%	+7%	−12%	0.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 7%; in line with the speed change.
2020→2021	+0.6 kn	+7%	+11%	−17%	+9%	0.6 kn faster, fuel per mile up 7%; in line with the speed change.
2019→2020	+0.0 kn	+7%	+7%	+69%	+18%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 7%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+0.8 kn	−6%	−1%	−34%	−13%	0.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 6%; 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025LNG	Seapeak Maritime Limited	31,695	85,852	100,115	7,255	13.8	316.6	–	–
2024LNG	Seapeak Maritime Limited	26,139	66,197	77,715	5,873	13.2	336.3	–	–
2023LNG	not published	24,055	62,746	71,697	4,666	15.4	335.5	–	–
2022LNG	not published	26,002	72,819	76,857	5,360	14.3	338.3	–	–
2021LNG	not published	26,305	72,487	72,117	4,813	15.0	364.8	–	–
2020LNG	not published	29,799	82,748	87,368	6,067	14.4	341.1	–	–
2019LNG	not published	16,446	45,851	51,664	3,591	14.4	318.3	–	–
2018LNG	not published	26,293	72,573	77,809	5,701	13.6	337.9	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	Seapeak Maritime Limited	9.99	7.12	+40%	291 of 386	DNV	A+C
2024LNG	Seapeak Maritime Limited	10.10	7.39	+37%	220 of 312	DNV	A+C
2023LNG	not published	10.56	9.10	+16%	225 of 355	DNV	A+C
2022LNG	not published	10.89	10.38	+5%	213 of 379	DNV	A+C
2021LNG	not published	12.40	10.46	+19%	188 of 289	DNV	A+C
2020LNG	not published	11.38	10.71	+6%	156 of 267	DNV	A+C
2019LNG	not published	9.67	10.87	−11%	86 of 248	DNV	A+C
2018LNG	not published	11.12	10.92	+2%	103 of 197	DNV	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.