Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

BW LILAC

IMO: 9758076
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Malta
Port of registry: Valletta
Technical efficiency: EEXI 4.42 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: BW Fleet Management AS · part of BW Group

Report year

2021 at a glance

From the 2021 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

208

LNG carrier median 257 kg/nm (−19%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

7.33

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.5 (−30%)

Average speed

16.9 kn

LNG carrier median 14.6 kn (+16%)

Fuel per day at sea

84.3 t/day

Fuel consumed

13,632 t

CO₂ emitted

38,313 t

Distance sailed

65,703 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,882 h

162 days, 44% 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 kg/nmThis ship 174 kg/nm · median 190 (−8%)

152Ranks 117 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 15.2 kn · median 14.4 (+6%)

11.2Faster than 76% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 6.06 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (−15%)

5.06Ranks 142 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2021

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 EU50%
Into the EU48%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

579 t

1.5% 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 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 kg/nm

BW LILAC
LNG carrier median

100.0150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

BW LILAC
LNG carrier median

13.014.015.016.017.0

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

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

BW LILAC
LNG carrier median

2.04.06.08.010.012.0

’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	+0.9 kn	+4%	+11%	+105%	+8%	0.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−1.6 kn	−13%	−22%	−36%	−0%	1.6 kn slower, fuel per mile down 13%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+1.2 kn	−12%	−5%	−47%	−29%	1.2 kn faster, fuel per mile down 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−2.2 kn	+6%	−8%	+72%	+8%	2.2 kn slower, fuel per mile up 6%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+0.5 kn	−7%	−4%	+45%	+3%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile down 7%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+1.0 kn	−16%	−10%	+2%	−11%	1.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 16%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	+1.8 kn	+99%	+124%	+103%	+120%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile up 99%; 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
2025LNG	BW Fleet Management AS	13,683	38,029	78,437	5,156	15.2	174	–	–
2024LNG	BW Fleet Management A/S	6,409	17,761	38,284	2,684	14.3	167	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	11,560	32,267	60,040	3,787	15.9	193	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	24,843	70,843	112,907	7,693	14.7	220	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	13,632	38,313	65,703	3,882	16.9	208	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	10,097	28,133	45,160	2,761	16.4	224	–	–
2019LNG / alt.	not published	11,693	32,617	44,168	2,876	15.4	265	–	–
2018LNG / alt.	not published	2,908	8,187	21,810	1,600	13.6	133	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	BW Fleet Management AS	6.06	7.12	−15%	142 of 386	DNV	B+C
2024LNG	BW Fleet Management A/S	5.61	7.39	−24%	85 of 312	DNV	B+C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	5.62	9.10	−38%	40 of 355	DNV	B+C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	7.95	10.4	−23%	132 of 379	DNV	B+C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	7.33	10.5	−30%	71 of 289	DNV	B+C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	7.13	10.7	−33%	37 of 267	DNV	B+C
2019LNG / alt.	not published	8.03	10.9	−26%	50 of 248	DNV	B+C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	3.65	10.9	−67%	12 of 197	DNV	B+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.