Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

FEDOR LITKE

IMO: 9768370
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Cyprus
Port of registry: Limassol
Technical efficiency: EIV 9.21 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: PC3
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Dynagas Ltd

Report year

2019 at a glance

From the 2019 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

339

LNG carrier median 308 kg/nm (+10%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

11.3

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.9 (+4%)

Average speed

14.4 kn

LNG carrier median 13.5 kn (+7%)

Fuel per day at sea

117.0 t/day

Fuel consumed

14,718 t

CO₂ emitted

40,901 t

Distance sailed

43,478 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,019 h

126 days, 34% 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 309 kg/nm · median 190 (+62%)

152Ranks 336 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 14.9 kn · median 14.4 (+3%)

11.2Faster than 61% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 10.0 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+41%)

5.06Ranks 292 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2019

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 EU43%
Into the EU57%
At berth in the EU0%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

20 t

0.1% 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

FEDOR LITKE
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0400.0

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

Average speed, kn

FEDOR LITKE
LNG carrier median

12.013.014.015.016.0

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

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

FEDOR LITKE
LNG carrier median

6.08.010.012.014.0

’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	−0.4 kn	−6%	−9%	−7%	−4%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 6%; in line with the speed change.
2023→2024	−0.2 kn	−6%	−7%	+29%	−14%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 6%; in line with the speed change.
2022→2023	+1.8 kn	+12%	+27%	−17%	+15%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile up 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−0.1 kn	−17%	−18%	+20%	−14%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 17%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	+1.0 kn	−0%	+8%	+5%	−1%	1.0 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−1.6 kn	+12%	−1%	+58%	+9%	1.6 kn slower, fuel per mile up 12%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+0.4 kn	+2%	+5%	−56%	+0%	0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile flat.

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	Dynagas Ltd	26,741	72,160	86,505	5,815	14.9	309	–	–
2024LNG	Dynagas Ltd	30,635	81,998	93,237	6,084	15.3	329	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	25,224	69,451	72,194	4,654	15.5	349	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	27,086	75,398	86,584	6,321	13.7	313	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	27,331	75,980	72,159	5,230	13.8	379	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	26,053	72,292	68,767	5,379	12.8	379	–	–
2019LNG / alt.	not published	14,718	40,901	43,478	3,019	14.4	339	–	–
2018LNG / alt.	not published	33,257	91,665	99,878	7,137	14.0	333	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	Dynagas Ltd	10.0	7.12	+41%	292 of 386	EMICERT	A+C
2024LNG	Dynagas Ltd	10.5	7.39	+42%	232 of 312	EMICERT	A+C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	12.1	9.10	+33%	265 of 355	EMICERT	A+C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	10.5	10.4	+1%	193 of 379	EMICERT	A+C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	12.2	10.5	+17%	184 of 289	EMICERT	A+C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	12.4	10.7	+15%	179 of 267	EMICERT	A+C
2019LNG / alt.	not published	11.3	10.9	+4%	133 of 248	EMICERT	A+C
2018LNG / alt.	not published	11.3	10.9	+4%	110 of 197	EMICERT	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.