Navalyze · Container · Ship

MAERSK HONG KONG

IMO: 9784257
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 103,262 t
Flag (estimated): Singapore
Port of registry: Singapore
Technical efficiency: EEDI 8.39 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Maersk A/S · part of Maersk

Report year

2018 at a glance

From the 2018 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 117,008 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

265

Container median 182 kg/nm (+46%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

7.07

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 20.2 (−65%)

Average speed

16.2 kn

Container median 13.8 kn (+17%)

Fuel per day at sea

103.3 t/day

Fuel consumed

17,598 t

CO₂ emitted

54,866 t

Distance sailed

66,323 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,089 h

170 days, 47% 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 252 kg/nm · median 177 (+42%)

78.8Ranks 1,669 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 16.2 kn · median 13.3 (+22%)

9.1Faster than 92% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 7.62 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−53%)

7.22Ranks 283 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 ports15%
From the EU39%
Into the EU45%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

17,598 t

100% of all fuel; 0% in ballast or unladen

CO₂ at berth

867 t

1.6% 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

MAERSK HONG KONG
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0

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

Average speed, kn

MAERSK HONG KONG
Container median

8.010.012.014.016.018.0

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

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

MAERSK HONG KONG
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	−0.3 kn	−1%	−3%	−26%	+12%	0.3 kn slower, fuel per mile flat.
2023→2024	+5.9 kn	+21%	+89%	+423%	−10%	5.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 21%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+1.6 kn	+4%	+22%	+44%	+3%	1.6 kn faster, fuel per mile up 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−4.5 kn	−22%	−48%	−12%	−17%	4.5 kn slower, fuel per mile down 22%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−0.7 kn	+8%	+3%	−19%	+1%	0.7 kn slower, fuel per mile up 8%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	−2.1 kn	+27%	+11%	−57%	+55%	2.1 kn slower, fuel per mile up 27%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2019	+0.1 kn	−28%	−28%	−46%	−20%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 28%; 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	Hours at seah	Average speedknots at sea	Fuel kg/nmthis ship	CO₂ per transport work (cargo)g/t·nm, this ship	Laden fuel
2025	Maersk A/S	15,403	48,105	61,135	3,774	16.2	252	7.62	99%
2024	Maersk A/S	21,031	65,505	82,474	5,005	16.5	255	6.79	99%
2023	not published	3,325	10,379	15,771	1,490	10.6	211	7.56	94%
2022	not published	2,231	6,972	10,958	1,222	9.0	204	7.37	91%
2021	not published	3,236	10,101	12,434	918	13.5	260	8.92	–
2020	not published	3,702	11,553	15,353	1,078	14.2	241	8.81	100%
2019	not published	6,861	21,380	36,109	2,219	16.3	190	5.67	100%
2018	not published	17,598	54,866	66,323	4,089	16.2	265	7.07	100%

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Maersk A/S	7.62	16.3	−53%	283 of 2,208	ABS	C
2024	Maersk A/S	6.79	17.5	−61%	134 of 1,974	ABS	C
2023	not published	7.56	19.4	−61%	207 of 1,899	ABS	C
2022	not published	7.37	19.1	−61%	177 of 1,825	ABS	C
2021	not published	8.92	17.9	−50%	237 of 1,781	ABS	C
2020	not published	8.81	17.6	−50%	291 of 1,797	ABS	C
2019	not published	5.67	18.9	−70%	21 of 1,788	ABS	C
2018	not published	7.07	20.2	−65%	63 of 1,705	ABS	C

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.