Navalyze · Chemical tanker · Ship

MTM KOBE

IMO: 9776456
Type: Chemical tanker
Average cargo carried: 15,503 t
Port of registry: Singapore
Technical efficiency: EEDI 7.13 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MTM Ship Management Pte Ltd · part of MTM Ship Management

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 15,503 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

64.4 kg/nm

Chemical tanker median 79.7 kg/nm (−19%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

13.15

g CO₂/t·nm · Chemical tanker median 15.04 (−13%)

Average speed

10.5 kn

Chemical tanker median 11.1 kn (−5%)

Fuel per day at sea

16.2 t/day

Fuel consumed

1,214 t

CO₂ emitted

3,844 t

3,904 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

18,858 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

1,801 h

75 days, 21% 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 64.4 kg/nm · median 79.7 (−19%)

52.8Ranks 365 of 1,460, lowest first111.0

Average speedThis ship 10.5 kn · median 11.1 (−5%)

8.8Faster than 33% of chemical tanker ships12.4

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 13.15 g CO₂/t·nm · median 15.04 (−13%)

7.93Ranks 594 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 ports32%
From the EU30%
Into the EU23%
At berth in the EU15%

74% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (2,830 t).

Fuel burned laden

85%

15% in ballast or unladen

CO₂ at berth

15.3%

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

MTM KOBE
Chemical tanker median

50.060.070.080.090.0100.0

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

Average speed, kn

MTM KOBE
Chemical tanker median

6.08.010.012.014.0

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

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

MTM KOBE
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	−0.3 kn	+13%	+9%	−44%	+25%	0.3 kn slower, fuel per mile up 13%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+1.2 kn	−12%	−1%	+21%	−8%	1.2 kn faster, fuel per mile down 12%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+2.3 kn	+23%	+60%	+72%	+11%	2.3 kn faster, fuel per mile up 23%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−4.2 kn	+2%	−35%	−6%	−5%	4.2 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−1.9 kn	−1%	−15%	−40%	+2%	1.9 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+1.7 kn	−16%	−3%	+64%	−16%	1.7 kn faster, fuel per mile down 16%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	+1.5 kn	+22%	+40%	−4%	+38%	1.5 kn faster, fuel per mile up 22%; 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
2025	MTM Ship Management Pte Ltd	1,214	3,844	18,858	1,801	10.5	64.4	13.15	85%
2024	MTM Ship Management Pte Ltd	1,909	5,973	33,434	3,090	10.8	57.1	10.48	95%
2023	not published	1,781	5,593	27,544	2,865	9.6	64.7	11.43	94%
2022	not published	844	2,656	16,013	2,185	7.3	52.7	10.34	95%
2021	not published	882	2,773	17,070	1,479	11.5	51.7	10.91	77%
2020	not published	1,492	4,705	28,456	2,123	13.4	52.4	10.71	96%
2019	not published	1,078	3,382	17,310	1,476	11.7	62.3	12.70	88%
2018	not published	921	2,891	17,998	1,766	10.2	51.2	9.17	90%

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Chemical tanker median	vs Chemical tanker	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	MTM Ship Management Pte Ltd	13.15	15.04	−13%	594 of 1,460	Lloyd's Register	A+C
2024	MTM Ship Management Pte Ltd	10.48	16.73	−37%	282 of 1,274	Lloyd's Register	A+C
2023	not published	11.43	16.23	−30%	317 of 1,314	Lloyd's Register	A
2022	not published	10.34	16.06	−36%	241 of 1,409	Lloyd's Register	A+B+C
2021	not published	10.91	16.69	−35%	246 of 1,343	Lloyd's Register	A+B+C
2020	not published	10.71	16.16	−34%	226 of 1,312	Lloyd's Register	B+C
2019	not published	12.70	17.32	−27%	365 of 1,321	Lloyd's Register	A+C
2018	not published	9.17	17.14	−46%	116 of 1,294	Lloyd's Register	B+C

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.