Navalyze · Container · Ship

COSCO SHIPPING NEBULA

IMO: 9795622
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 112,952 t
Flag (estimated): Hong Kong (China)
Port of registry: Hong Kong
Technical efficiency: EEXI 7.57 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Shanghai Ocean Shipping Co.，Ltd. · part of COSCO Shipping

Report year

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 153,113 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

321

Container median 172 kg/nm (+87%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

6.54

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 17.6 (−63%)

Average speed

17.7 kn

Container median 14.0 kn (+26%)

Fuel per day at sea

136.1 t/day

Fuel consumed

27,698 t

CO₂ emitted

86,359 t

Distance sailed

86,242 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,886 h

204 days, 56% 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 315 kg/nm · median 177 (+78%)

78.8Ranks 2,047 of 2,208, lowest first302

Average speedThis ship 15.6 kn · median 13.3 (+17%)

9.1Faster than 85% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 8.70 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.3 (−47%)

7.22Ranks 431 of 2,208, lowest first46.9

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2020

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 ports17%
From the EU49%
Into the EU32%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

1,788 t

2.1% 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

COSCO SHIPPING NEBULA
Container median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

COSCO SHIPPING NEBULA
Container median

12.014.016.018.0

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

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

COSCO SHIPPING NEBULA
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	−0.4 kn	+5%	+3%	+5%	+24%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile up 5%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.0 kn	−1%	−2%	+62%	−1%	Same speed, fuel per mile flat.
2022→2023	+0.6 kn	+0%	+5%	−39%	−7%	0.6 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−2.1 kn	−3%	−15%	−3%	+1%	2.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 3%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−0.2 kn	−3%	−3%	−2%	+14%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 3%; in line with the speed change.
2019→2020	−0.1 kn	−1%	−2%	−15%	−4%	Same speed, fuel per mile flat.
2018→2019	+0.4 kn	−4%	−1%	+402%	−1%	0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile down 4%; 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	Shanghai Ocean Shipping Co.，Ltd.	26,910	83,970	85,450	5,462	15.6	315	8.70	–
2024	Shanghai Ocean Shipping Co.，Ltd.	24,423	76,233	81,285	5,089	16.0	301	6.99	–
2023	not published	15,276	47,652	50,175	3,128	16.0	305	7.03	–
2022	not published	24,842	77,544	81,784	5,326	15.4	304	7.56	–
2021	not published	26,332	82,126	84,189	4,807	17.5	313	7.46	–
2020	not published	27,698	86,359	86,242	4,886	17.7	321	6.54	–
2019	not published	32,788	102,236	101,080	5,673	17.8	324	6.80	–
2018	not published	6,778	21,136	20,133	1,155	17.4	337	6.84	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Shanghai Ocean Shipping Co.，Ltd.	8.70	16.3	−47%	431 of 2,208	China Classification Society	A
2024	Shanghai Ocean Shipping Co.，Ltd.	6.99	17.5	−60%	150 of 1,974	China Classification Society	A
2023	not published	7.03	19.4	−64%	158 of 1,899	China Classification Society	A
2022	not published	7.56	19.1	−60%	192 of 1,825	China Classification Society	A
2021	not published	7.46	17.9	−58%	166 of 1,781	China Classification Society	A
2020	not published	6.54	17.6	−63%	129 of 1,797	China Classification Society	A
2019	not published	6.80	18.9	−64%	102 of 1,788	China Classification Society	A
2018	not published	6.84	20.2	−66%	46 of 1,705	China Classification Society	A

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.