Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

LNG MERAK

IMO: 9834301
Type: LNG carrier
Flag (estimated): Hong Kong (China)
Port of registry: Hong Kong
Technical efficiency: EEXI 4.96 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel (estimated): Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD. · part of MOL

Report year

2020 at a glance

From the 2020 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

236

LNG carrier median 297 kg/nm (−20%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

12.9

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 10.7 (+20%)

Average speed

13.8 kn

LNG carrier median 14.7 kn (−6%)

Fuel per day at sea

78.0 t/day

Fuel consumed

16,441 t

CO₂ emitted

46,383 t

Distance sailed

69,629 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

5,061 h

211 days, 58% 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 177 kg/nm · median 190 (−7%)

152Ranks 127 of 386, lowest first319

Average speedThis ship 15.8 kn · median 14.4 (+10%)

11.2Faster than 89% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 5.90 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (−17%)

5.06Ranks 125 of 386, lowest first16.1

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG carrier 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 ports34%
From the EU22%
Into the EU39%
At berth in the EU5%

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

2,194 t

4.7% 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

LNG MERAK
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0

’202020’212021’222022’232023’242024’252025

Average speed, kn

LNG MERAK
LNG carrier median

13.014.015.016.017.0

’202020’212021’222022’232023’242024’252025

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

LNG MERAK
LNG carrier median

4.06.08.010.012.014.0

’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
2024→2025	+0.4 kn	−15%	−12%	−72%	–	0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile down 15%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	+0.0 kn	+8%	+8%	−21%	–	Same speed, fuel per mile up 8%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−0.6 kn	−6%	−9%	−5%	+2%	0.6 kn slower, fuel per mile down 6%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	−1.0 kn	+2%	−4%	−1%	+2%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile up 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+3.2 kn	−15%	+5%	+29%	−55%	3.2 kn faster, fuel per mile down 15%; 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
2025LNG	MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.	3,243	8,891	18,306	1,157	15.8	177	–	–
2024LNG	MOL LNG SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.	13,849	37,887	66,506	4,328	15.4	208	–	–
2023LNG / alt.	not published	16,269	44,997	84,524	5,480	15.4	193	–	–
2022LNG / alt.	not published	18,179	50,538	88,782	5,554	16.0	205	–	–
2021LNG / alt.	not published	18,008	50,351	89,744	5,287	17.0	201	–	–
2020LNG / alt.	not published	16,441	46,383	69,629	5,061	13.8	236	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	MOL GLOBAL SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.	5.90	7.12	−17%	125 of 386	ClassNK	B+C
2024LNG	MOL LNG SHIP MANAGEMENT PTE. LTD.	–	–	–	–	ClassNK	B+C
2023LNG / alt.	not published	5.98	9.10	−34%	56 of 355	ClassNK	B+C
2022LNG / alt.	not published	5.85	10.4	−44%	36 of 379	DNV	A+B+C
2021LNG / alt.	not published	5.76	10.5	−45%	29 of 289	DNV	A+B+C
2020LNG / alt.	not published	12.9	10.7	+20%	186 of 267	DNV	A+B+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.