Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

NOHSHU MARU

IMO: 9796781
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Bahamas
Port of registry: Nassau
Technical efficiency: EIV 10.81 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MOL LNG TRANSPORT CO., LTD. · part of MOL

Report year

2022 at a glance

From the 2022 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

213

LNG carrier median 252 kg/nm (−15%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

7.33

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.4 (−29%)

Average speed

14.9 kn

LNG carrier median 14.1 kn (+6%)

Fuel per day at sea

76.2 t/day

Fuel consumed

15,155 t

CO₂ emitted

42,431 t

Distance sailed

71,036 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,776 h

199 days, 55% of the year

Within the LNG carrier fleet, 2025

Set against all 386 LNG carrier 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 189 kg/nm · median 190 (−1%)

152Ranks 191 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 14.9 kn · median 14.4 (+3%)

11.2Faster than 65% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 5.58 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (−22%)

5.06Ranks 95 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2022

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 ports0%
From the EU48%
Into the EU51%
At berth in the EU2%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

675 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 LNG carrier median is the middle ship of all LNG carrier ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

NOHSHU MARU
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

’192019’202020’212021’222022’232023’252025

Average speed, kn

NOHSHU MARU
LNG carrier median

13.014.015.016.0

’192019’202020’212021’222022’232023’252025

CO₂ per transport work (volume), g CO₂/m³·nm

NOHSHU MARU
LNG carrier median

2.55.07.510.012.5

’192019’202020’212021’222022’232023’252025

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2023→2025	+1.0 kn	−20%	−14%	+54%	−14%	1.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 20%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	−1.0 kn	+10%	+3%	−50%	−12%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile up 10%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	−0.3 kn	+12%	+10%	+572%	+138%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 12%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−0.4 kn	−14%	−15%	−51%	−65%	0.4 kn slower, fuel per mile down 14%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+0.9 kn	+6%	+12%	−45%	−21%	0.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 6%; 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	Hours at seah	Average speedknots at sea	Fuel kg/nmthis ship	CO₂ per transport work (cargo)g/t·nm, this ship	Laden fuel
2025LNG	MOL LNG TRANSPORT CO., LTD.	10,400	28,440	55,049	3,683	14.9	189	–	–
2024part-yearLNG	MOL LNG TRANSPORT CO., LTD.	966	2,616	4,453	239	18.6	217	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	8,398	23,193	35,699	2,564	13.9	235	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	15,155	42,431	71,036	4,776	14.9	213	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	2,007	5,575	10,572	694	15.2	190	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	4,706	12,976	21,432	1,377	15.6	220	–	–
2019LNG / alt.	not published	8,014	22,133	38,729	2,627	14.7	207	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	MOL LNG TRANSPORT CO., LTD.	5.58	7.12	−22%	95 of 386	ClassNK	C
2024part-yearLNG	MOL LNG TRANSPORT CO., LTD.	–	–	–	–	ClassNK	C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	6.47	9.10	−29%	86 of 355	ClassNK	C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	7.33	10.4	−29%	105 of 379	ClassNK	C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	3.08	10.5	−71%	3 of 289	ClassNK	C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	8.86	10.7	−17%	71 of 267	ClassNK	C
2019LNG / alt.	not published	11.2	10.9	+3%	132 of 248	ClassNK	C

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. LNG carrier ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (volume) (TW), in g CO₂/m³·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 LNG carrier 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.