Navalyze · Chemical tanker · Ship

EVA HONGKONG

IMO: 9800001
Type: Chemical tanker
Average cargo carried: 12,449 t
Flag (estimated): Philippines
Port of registry: Manila
Technical efficiency: EEDI 8.16 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: VICTORIA SHIP MANAGEMENT INC. · part of Victoria Ship Management

Report year

2023 at a glance

From the 2023 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 8,413 t of cargo on average.

Fuel kg/nm

75.4

Chemical tanker median 81.9 kg/nm (−8%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

28.1

g CO₂/t·nm · Chemical tanker median 16.2 (+73%)

Average speed

11.0 kn

Chemical tanker median 11.2 kn (−2%)

Fuel per day at sea

19.9 t/day

Fuel consumed

2,534 t

CO₂ emitted

7,951 t

Distance sailed

33,618 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

3,056 h

127 days, 35% of the year

Within the chemical tanker fleet, 2025

Set against all 1,460 chemical 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 kg/nmThis ship 110 kg/nm · median 79.7 (+38%)

52.8Ranks 1,301 of 1,460, lowest first111

Average speedThis ship 6.7 kn · median 11.1 (−40%)

8.8Faster than 3% of chemical tanker ships12.4

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 27.5 g CO₂/t·nm · median 15.0 (+83%)

7.93Ranks 1,137 of 1,460, lowest first40.2

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Chemical tanker medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2023

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 ports12%
From the EU39%
Into the EU39%
At berth in the EU10%

Fuel burned laden

1,576 t

62% of all fuel; 38% in ballast or unladen

CO₂ at berth

786 t

9.9% 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 Chemical tanker median is the middle ship of all chemical tanker ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel kg/nm

EVA HONGKONG
Chemical tanker median

60.080.0100.0120.0

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

Average speed, kn

EVA HONGKONG
Chemical tanker median

2.55.07.510.012.515.0

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

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

EVA HONGKONG
Chemical tanker median

10.015.020.025.030.0

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

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	+1.9 kn	+11%	+54%	−55%	+38%	1.9 kn faster, fuel per mile up 11%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−6.2 kn	+31%	−43%	−39%	−29%	6.2 kn slower, fuel per mile up 31%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	+2.0 kn	−9%	+10%	+329%	−2%	2.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 9%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2022	−5.1 kn	+27%	−18%	−19%	+115%	5.1 kn slower, fuel per mile up 27%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2019→2020	+1.0 kn	−13%	−6%	−5%	−19%	1.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 13%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	+3.0 kn	−14%	+11%	−44%	−38%	3.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 14%; 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	VICTORIA SHIP MANAGEMENT INC.	1,010	3,153	9,196	1,381	6.7	110	27.5	69%
2024	VICTORIA SHIP MANAGEMENT INC.	2,015	6,296	20,448	4,248	4.8	98.5	19.9	74%
2023	not published	2,534	7,951	33,618	3,056	11.0	75.4	28.1	62%
2022	not published	651	2,060	7,833	866	9.0	83.1	28.7	42%
2020	not published	629	1,969	9,627	681	14.1	65.4	13.4	82%
2019	not published	765	2,402	10,162	776	13.1	75.3	16.5	79%
2018	not published	1,582	4,966	18,065	1,787	10.1	87.6	26.8	74%

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Chemical tanker median	vs Chemical tanker	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	VICTORIA SHIP MANAGEMENT INC.	27.5	15.0	+83%	1,137 of 1,460	Bureau Veritas	C
2024	VICTORIA SHIP MANAGEMENT INC.	19.9	16.7	+19%	769 of 1,274	Bureau Veritas	C
2023	not published	28.1	16.2	+73%	997 of 1,314	Bureau Veritas	C
2022	not published	28.7	16.1	+79%	1,107 of 1,409	Bureau Veritas	C
2020	not published	13.4	16.2	−17%	433 of 1,312	Bureau Veritas	C
2019	not published	16.5	17.3	−5%	604 of 1,321	Bureau Veritas	C
2018	not published	26.8	17.1	+56%	974 of 1,294	Bureau Veritas	C

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