Navalyze · Container · Ship

MAERSK HANGZHOU

IMO: 9784300
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 118,637 t
Flag (estimated): Singapore
Port of registry: Singapore
Technical efficiency: EEDI 7.82 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 126,537 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

251

Container median 182 kg/nm (+38%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

6.18

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 20.2 (−69%)

Average speed

17.0 kn

Container median 13.8 kn (+23%)

Fuel per day at sea

102.4 t/day

Fuel consumed

12,993 t

CO₂ emitted

40,509 t

Distance sailed

51,801 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,045 h

127 days, 35% 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 (+43%)

78.8Ranks 1,674 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 16.4 kn · median 13.3 (+23%)

9.1Faster than 94% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 6.63 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−59%)

7.22Ranks 141 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 ports13%
From the EU27%
Into the EU59%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

12,993 t

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

CO₂ at berth

628 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 HANGZHOU
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0

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

Average speed, kn

MAERSK HANGZHOU
Container median

7.510.012.515.017.5

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

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

MAERSK HANGZHOU
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	−9%	−8%	−71%	−27%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 9%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	+6.5 kn	+24%	+108%	+985%	+14%	6.5 kn faster, fuel per mile up 24%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+0.9 kn	+4%	+15%	−36%	+4%	0.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−3.7 kn	−9%	−36%	−6%	−15%	3.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 9%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−3.2 kn	−1%	−21%	+13%	+6%	3.2 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	−0.4 kn	−1%	−4%	−64%	+36%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile flat.
2018→2019	−1.0 kn	−3%	−9%	−30%	+0%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile down 3%; 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
2025	Maersk A/S	7,106	22,141	28,149	1,716	16.4	252	6.63	99%
2024	Maersk A/S	26,844	83,633	96,308	5,983	16.1	279	9.03	99%
2023	not published	1,999	6,253	8,878	927	9.6	225	7.90	89%
2022	not published	2,992	9,354	13,785	1,590	8.7	217	7.58	92%
2021	not published	3,490	10,899	14,623	1,178	12.4	239	8.95	–
2020	not published	3,124	9,749	12,975	833	15.6	241	8.41	100%
2019	not published	8,838	27,532	36,411	2,272	16.0	243	6.19	100%
2018	not published	12,993	40,509	51,801	3,045	17.0	251	6.18	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	6.63	16.3	−59%	141 of 2,208	ABS	C
2024	Maersk A/S	9.03	17.5	−48%	375 of 1,974	ABS	C
2023	not published	7.90	19.4	−59%	237 of 1,899	ABS	C
2022	not published	7.58	19.1	−60%	193 of 1,825	ABS	C
2021	not published	8.95	17.9	−50%	240 of 1,781	ABS	C
2020	not published	8.41	17.6	−52%	255 of 1,797	ABS	C
2019	not published	6.19	18.9	−67%	54 of 1,788	ABS	C
2018	not published	6.18	20.2	−69%	12 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.