Navalyze · Chemical tanker · Ship

BOW AQUARIUS

IMO: 9753791
Type: Chemical tanker
Average cargo carried: 27,285 t
Port of registry: Bergen
Technical efficiency: EEXI 5.25 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Odfjell Management AS

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 27,285 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

103.5 kg/nm

Chemical tanker median 79.7 kg/nm (+30%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

11.87

g CO₂/t·nm · Chemical tanker median 15.04 (−21%)

Average speed

13.1 kn

Chemical tanker median 11.1 kn (+18%)

Fuel per day at sea

32.6 t/day

Fuel consumed

2,868 t

CO₂ emitted

8,973 t

9,114 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

27,705 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

2,109 h

88 days, 24% of the year

Within the chemical tanker fleet, 2025

Set against all 1,460 chemical tanker 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 103.5 kg/nm · median 79.7 (+30%)

52.8Ranks 1,235 of 1,460, lowest first111.0

Average speedThis ship 13.1 kn · median 11.1 (+18%)

8.8Faster than 98% of chemical tanker ships12.4

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 11.87 g CO₂/t·nm · median 15.04 (−21%)

7.93Ranks 485 of 1,460, lowest first40.17

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Chemical tanker 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 ports4%
From the EU4%
Into the EU83%
At berth in the EU9%

55% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (4,977 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

9.3%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.1 t

Mainly from LNG; small for oil

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.016

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

Over the years

Full-year reports only. The Chemical tanker median is the middle ship of all chemical tanker ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel per mile, kg/nm

BOW AQUARIUS
Chemical tanker median

60.080.0100.0120.0140.0

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

Average speed, kn

BOW AQUARIUS
Chemical tanker median

8.010.012.014.0

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

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

BOW AQUARIUS
Chemical tanker median

7.510.012.515.017.5

’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	−0.4 kn	+9%	+6%	+22%	+31%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile up 9%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	−0.2 kn	−7%	−8%	−27%	−22%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 7%; in line with the speed change.
2022→2023	+3.1 kn	−22%	+2%	+340%	−17%	3.1 kn faster, fuel per mile down 22%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	+1.8 kn	+45%	+74%	−62%	+18%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile up 45%; in line with the speed change.
2020→2021	−3.1 kn	−6%	−30%	−28%	+18%	3.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+1.0 kn	−11%	−3%	+2%	−21%	1.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 11%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	+0.3 kn	+24%	+27%	+109%	+17%	0.3 kn faster, fuel per mile up 24%; 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025	Odfjell Management AS	2,868	8,973	27,705	2,109	13.1	103.5	11.87	–
2024	Odfjell Management AS	2,170	6,784	22,776	1,690	13.5	95.3	9.07	–
2023	not published	3,180	10,057	31,046	2,270	13.7	102.4	11.67	–
2022	not published	920	2,922	7,050	666	10.6	130.5	14.13	–
2021	not published	1,674	5,296	18,611	2,114	8.8	89.9	12.00	–
2020	not published	2,464	7,804	25,852	2,175	11.9	95.3	10.15	–
2019	not published	2,704	8,476	25,254	2,318	10.9	107.1	12.91	–
2018	not published	1,044	3,277	12,083	1,136	10.6	86.4	11.08	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Chemical tanker median	vs Chemical tanker	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Odfjell Management AS	11.87	15.04	−21%	485 of 1,460	DNV	B+C
2024	Odfjell Management AS	9.07	16.73	−46%	177 of 1,274	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	11.67	16.23	−28%	336 of 1,314	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	14.13	16.06	−12%	564 of 1,409	DNV	B
2021	not published	12.00	16.69	−28%	332 of 1,343	DNV	B
2020	not published	10.15	16.16	−37%	182 of 1,312	DNV	B
2019	not published	12.91	17.32	−25%	378 of 1,321	DNV	B
2018	not published	11.08	17.14	−35%	250 of 1,294	DNV	B

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Chemical tanker 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 chemical tanker 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.