Navalyze · Container · Ship

OOCL JAPAN

IMO: 9776195
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 115,910 t
Flag (estimated): Hong Kong (China)
Port of registry: Hong Kong
Technical efficiency: EEDI 7.68 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel (estimated): Oil blended with biofuel or another alternative fuel

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd · part of COSCO Shipping

Report year

2018 at a glance

From the 2018 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 141,420 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

305

Container median 182 kg/nm (+68%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

6.76

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 20.2 (−67%)

Average speed

16.2 kn

Container median 13.8 kn (+17%)

Fuel per day at sea

118.6 t/day

Fuel consumed

26,864 t

CO₂ emitted

84,133 t

Distance sailed

88,005 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

5,436 h

227 days, 62% 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 286 kg/nm · median 177 (+61%)

78.8Ranks 1,901 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 14.5 kn · median 13.3 (+9%)

9.1Faster than 69% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 7.58 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−53%)

7.22Ranks 276 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2018

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 ports14%
From the EU44%
Into the EU40%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,851 t

2.2% 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

OOCL JAPAN
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

OOCL JAPAN
Container median

13.014.015.016.017.0

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

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

OOCL JAPAN
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	−0.5 kn	+2%	−2%	−30%	+1%	0.5 kn slower, fuel per mile up 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.7 kn	+8%	+14%	+82%	+15%	0.7 kn faster, fuel per mile up 8%; in line with the speed change.
2022→2023	−1.1 kn	−7%	−14%	−19%	+1%	1.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 7%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	+0.1 kn	−2%	−2%	+4%	+8%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 2%; in line with the speed change.
2020→2021	−0.4 kn	+2%	−1%	−49%	−2%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+0.4 kn	+1%	+4%	−6%	−1%	0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile flat.
2018→2019	−0.9 kn	−9%	−14%	−4%	−9%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile down 9%; in line with the speed change.

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
2025Bio blend	Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd	12,506	38,447	43,760	3,022	14.5	286	7.58	98%
2024	Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd	17,624	55,068	62,934	4,186	15.0	280	7.47	98%
2023	not published	8,928	28,079	34,538	2,421	14.3	259	6.47	96%
2022	not published	11,906	37,338	42,632	2,765	15.4	279	6.38	97%
2021	not published	11,729	36,850	41,045	2,678	15.3	286	5.93	98%
2020	not published	22,495	70,464	80,115	5,096	15.7	281	6.06	–
2019	not published	23,564	73,755	84,876	5,557	15.3	278	6.15	–
2018	not published	26,864	84,133	88,005	5,436	16.2	305	6.76	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025Bio blend	Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd	7.58	16.3	−53%	276 of 2,208	ABS	A+C
2024	Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd	7.47	17.5	−57%	215 of 1,974	ABS	A+C
2023	not published	6.47	19.4	−67%	104 of 1,899	ABS	B+C
2022	not published	6.38	19.1	−67%	71 of 1,825	ABS	B+C
2021	not published	5.93	17.9	−67%	50 of 1,781	ABS	B+C
2020	not published	6.06	17.6	−66%	72 of 1,797	ABS	B+C
2019	not published	6.15	18.9	−67%	52 of 1,788	ABS	B+C
2018	not published	6.76	20.2	−67%	41 of 1,705	ABS	–

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.