Navalyze · Oil tanker · Ship

HAI SHANG

IMO: 9792852
Type: Oil tanker
Average cargo carried: 42,270 t
Port of registry: Monrovia
Technical efficiency: EEDI 3.11 g CO₂/t·nm
Ice class: IA
Former names: ARGIRONISSOS, CAMPO SQUARE

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Eletson Shipmanagement Inc.

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 42,270 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

138.9 kg/nm

Oil tanker median 128.5 kg/nm (+8%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

10.43

g CO₂/t·nm · Oil tanker median 7.95 (+31%)

Average speed

10.0 kn

Oil tanker median 10.7 kn (−7%)

Fuel per day at sea

33.2 t/day

Fuel consumed

4,255 t

CO₂ emitted

13,501 t

13,710 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

30,623 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,073 h

128 days, 35% of the year

Within the oil tanker fleet, 2025

Set against all 1,665 oil 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 138.9 kg/nm · median 128.5 (+8%)

76.1Ranks 1,017 of 1,665, lowest first190.8

Average speedThis ship 10.0 kn · median 10.7 (−7%)

8.0Faster than 29% of oil tanker ships12.1

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 10.43 g CO₂/t·nm · median 7.95 (+31%)

4.51Ranks 1,101 of 1,665, lowest first27.66

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Oil 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 ports3%
From the EU46%
Into the EU41%
At berth in the EU10%

46% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (6,201 t).

Fuel burned laden

43%

57% in ballast or unladen

CO₂ at berth

10.4%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.2 t

Mainly from LNG; small for oil

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.015

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

Over the years

Full-year reports only. The Oil tanker median is the middle ship of all oil 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

HAI SHANG
Oil tanker median

100.0120.0140.0160.0180.0

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

Average speed, kn

HAI SHANG
Oil tanker median

6.08.010.012.014.0

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

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

HAI SHANG
Oil tanker median

4.06.08.010.012.0

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

Year on year

Year	Speed	Fuel per mile	Fuel per day	Distance	CO₂ per TW	Reading
2024→2025	−1.4 kn	+2%	−11%	+115%	+99%	1.4 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	−0.7 kn	+34%	+26%	−60%	−13%	0.7 kn slower, fuel per mile up 34%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2023	+0.5 kn	−39%	−36%	+22%	+12%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile down 39%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	−1.0 kn	+30%	+20%	−2%	−31%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile up 30%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+2.9 kn	−3%	+26%	−25%	−17%	2.9 kn faster, fuel per mile down 3%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	+1.9 kn	−5%	+19%	+130%	+13%	1.9 kn faster, fuel per mile down 5%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).

Part-year reports are left out of these comparisons. 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
2025part-year	Eletson Shipmanagement Inc.	863	2,726	5,914	616	9.6	145.8	14.39	37%
2025	Zodiac Maritime Ltd	4,255	13,501	30,623	3,073	10.0	138.9	10.43	43%
2024	Eletson Shipmanagement Inc.	1,944	6,154	14,240	1,247	11.4	136.5	5.25	–
2023	not published	3,661	11,494	35,903	2,973	12.1	102.0	6.01	–
2021	not published	4,917	15,512	29,415	2,541	11.6	167.2	5.35	–
2020	not published	3,840	12,113	29,883	2,377	12.6	128.5	7.76	–
2019	not published	5,280	16,674	39,956	4,129	9.7	132.1	9.35	–
2018	not published	2,403	7,522	17,354	2,237	7.8	138.5	8.30	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Oil tanker median	vs Oil tanker	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025part-year	Eletson Shipmanagement Inc.	–	–	–	–	Lloyd's Register	A
2025	Zodiac Maritime Ltd	10.43	7.95	+31%	1,101 of 1,665	ABS	C
2024	Eletson Shipmanagement Inc.	5.25	8.06	−35%	340 of 1,787	Lloyd's Register	A
2023	not published	6.01	8.44	−29%	431 of 1,797	Lloyd's Register	A
2021	not published	5.35	8.86	−40%	293 of 1,789	Lloyd's Register	A
2020	not published	7.76	9.03	−14%	729 of 1,870	Lloyd's Register	–
2019	not published	9.35	8.83	+6%	1,046 of 1,919	Lloyd's Register	–
2018	not published	8.30	8.86	−6%	802 of 1,779	Lloyd's Register	–

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Oil 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 oil 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.