Navalyze

Navalyze · Market view

EU shipping emissions, 2019

Every ship over 5,000 GT calling at EU and EEA ports reports its fuel and emissions to THETIS-MRV. This view reads all 12,420 public reports for 2019. The technical view shows how ships perform; the commercial view puts a price on it through the EU Emissions Trading System.

The 2019 public files name ships but not the companies managing them, and shipping entered the EU ETS in 2024. This year is therefore compared ship by ship, without company or allowance figures.

The year at a glance

CO₂ emitted
147.3 Mt
+1.3% on 2018
Ships reporting
12,420
12,420 reports, 0 part-year
Fuel burned
47.2 Mt
+1.4% on 2018
Distance sailed
347 million nm
Ships in the benchmark, derived from CO₂ per mile
Ships burning LNG
261
+40.3% on 2018
CO₂ at berth
7.2%
Share of all CO₂ emitted alongside in port

Emissions over time

All reporting years on one axis. The selected year is highlighted.

Show as table
YearReportsShipsCO₂Allowances due
201812,26012,260145.4 Mt–
201912,42012,420147.3 Mt–
202012,11812,118129.7 Mt–
202112,48512,485126.8 Mt–
202213,47413,474137.5 Mt–
202312,82912,829128.6 Mt–
202415,21214,467152.7 Mt36.3 Mt
202518,94617,871157.7 Mt62.9 Mt

Where the emissions sit

Container ships emit 30% of the total. Passenger segments weigh far more than their ship count suggests. Click a segment for its operators and detail.

Show as table
SegmentReportsCO₂ShareAllowances dueMedian speedFuel/day
Container1,85244.8 Mt30.4%–13.7 kn54.4 t
Oil tanker2,00720.1 Mt13.6%–9.7 kn29.9 t
Bulk carrier3,67517.3 Mt11.8%–10.3 kn21.9 t
Ro-pax40414.9 Mt10.1%–15.8 kn61.6 t
Chemical tanker1,3639.7 Mt6.6%–10.1 kn20.5 t
LNG carrier2578.0 Mt5.4%–13.5 kn97.8 t
Passenger1797.0 Mt4.8%–12.9 kn87.4 t
General cargo1,2476.7 Mt4.6%–9.7 kn13.0 t
Ro-ro2776.2 Mt4.2%–14.8 kn37.5 t
Vehicle carrier4354.8 Mt3.3%–14.2 kn35.6 t
Gas carrier (LPG)3433.0 Mt2.1%–10.4 kn21.9 t
Reefer1521.7 Mt1.2%–15.2 kn31.4 t
Con-ro761.5 Mt1.0%–15.6 kn48.0 t
Other1421.2 Mt0.8%–10.1 kn20.2 t
Combination11113 kt0.1%–8.0 kn19.7 t

How wide the performance gap is

Spread of CO₂ per transport work within each segment, on each segment's own basis (cargo, pax, volume or dwt). The box holds the middle half of the fleet, the line runs from the best 10% to the worst 10%.

How to read it. Take container ships: the median ship emits 18.9 g CO₂/t·nm. Half the fleet sits inside the box, between 0.6× and 1.8× of that. The best 10% are below 0.4×, the worst 10% above 2.9×. Left of the median is better. The longer the bar, the bigger the gap between the best and worst ships in that segment.
0.25×0.5×median2×4×
  • Container18.9 g CO₂/t·nm
  • Oil tanker8.83 g CO₂/t·nm
  • Bulk carrier8.38 g CO₂/t·nm
  • Ro-pax (pax)569 g CO₂/pax·nm
  • Ro-pax (freight)223 g CO₂/t·nm freight
  • Chemical tanker17.3 g CO₂/t·nm
  • LNG carrier10.9 g CO₂/m³·nm
  • Passenger589 g CO₂/pax·nm
  • General cargo25 g CO₂/dwt·nm
  • Ro-ro90.9 g CO₂/t·nm
  • Vehicle carrier59 g CO₂/t·nm
  • Gas carrier (LPG)45.9 g CO₂/t·nm
  • Reefer62.6 g CO₂/t·nm
  • Con-ro9.58 g CO₂/m³·nm

Much of this spread is ship size, not operation: bigger ships move a tonne of cargo for less fuel. The next chart separates the two for container ships.

Show as table
SegmentMetricBest 10%Q1MedianQ3Worst 10%Ships
Containerg CO₂/t·nm7.8612.0218.8834.5155.281,788
Oil tankerg CO₂/t·nm4.606.268.8313.6724.951,919
Bulk carrierg CO₂/t·nm4.896.408.3811.1315.463,360
Ro-pax (pax)g CO₂/pax·nm25.39148.91569.031,037.211,693.83394
Ro-pax (freight)g CO₂/t·nm freight30.9688.50222.56595.371,225.41394
Chemical tankerg CO₂/t·nm9.3112.2917.3226.8143.271,321
LNG carrierg CO₂/m³·nm6.458.5910.8714.3422.37248
Passengerg CO₂/pax·nm353.03397.93589.201,017.451,627.50177
General cargog CO₂/dwt·nm11.1918.4624.9635.3955.611,154
Ro-rog CO₂/t·nm50.6567.7590.89156.72296.43271
Vehicle carrierg CO₂/t·nm43.1250.0658.9578.84123.20426
Gas carrier (LPG)g CO₂/t·nm14.4425.5545.8588.47134.26331
Reeferg CO₂/t·nm34.4847.7062.5886.69123.91147
Con-rog CO₂/m³·nm5.677.509.5825.9571.1767

Size explains most of the container gap

Container ships grouped by the average cargo they carried (derived from CO₂ per mile and per tonne-mile). Within a band the spread narrows sharply.

  • <10k t50.6 g
  • 10–30k t23.8 g
  • 30–60k t15.8 g
  • 60–100k t11.0 g
  • >100k t7.2 g
Show as table
Cargo bandShipsQ1MedianQ3SpeedFuel/day
<10k t45340.8750.5962.5110.6 kn21.3 t
10–30k t48719.7023.7928.7413.1 kn42.4 t
30–60k t31614.3015.8317.7714.6 kn77.1 t
60–100k t2779.9410.9712.5815.3 kn100.0 t
>100k t2556.437.178.2615.9 kn113.6 t

Efficiency trend by segment

Median CO₂ per transport work of each segment, indexed to 2018 = 100. Lower is better.

  • Container
  • Oil tanker
  • Bulk carrier
  • Ro-pax
  • LNG carrier
  • General cargo
Show as table
YearContainerOil tankerBulk carrierRo-paxLNG carrierGeneral cargo
201820.228.868.50728.9210.9224.89
201918.888.838.38569.0310.8724.96
202017.589.038.24750.9110.7124.50
202117.908.868.57815.1910.4622.70
202219.138.518.71626.3210.3821.57
202319.408.448.27680.049.1020.67
202417.528.068.09546.687.3919.25
202516.307.957.89566.517.1220.44

Note on 2025: from 2025 the EU MRV Regulation also covers general cargo ships of 400–5,000 GT and offshore ships from 400 GT. Small ships emit more CO₂ per tonne-mile, so to compare like with like the 2025 median for general cargo uses only the 1,199 of 2,706 ships that also reported in 2024, the last year of the old scope.

Fuel fingerprint: who burns LNG

Burning LNG lowers the CO₂ released per tonne of fuel. Ships whose ratio sits well below oil's 3.1 are counted here.

In 2019, 199 of them were LNG carriers and 3 container ships.

Who verifies the reports

Accredited verifiers check every MRV report before it is published. Their share of all CO₂ and of all ships, by brand. Pick a segment above to see it per ship type.

Share of CO₂Share of ships
  • DNV30.8% / 24.1%
  • ABS18.6% / 17.3%
  • Lloyd's Register11.5% / 12.0%
  • RINA10.8% / 8.1%
  • Verifavia7.4% / 8.1%
  • ClassNK6.5% / 9.4%
  • Bureau Veritas6.1% / 7.8%
  • China Classification Society2.6% / 3.3%
  • EMICERT1.7% / 3.1%
  • Korean Register1.7% / 2.5%
  • 9 others2.3% / 4.2%

How fuel is measured

Each ship's monitoring plan names one or more of the four MRV methods for measuring fuel and emissions.

A · Bunker delivery notes
49%
Fuel bought, corrected by tank soundings
B · Bunker tank monitoring
33%
Tank readings on board
C · Flow meters
33%
Meters on the fuel lines to engines and boilers
D · Direct measurement
0%
CO₂ measured in the exhaust

Most common combinations

  • A44%
  • C21%
  • B21%
  • B + C9%
  • A + B3%
  • A + C2%
  • A + B + C1%
  • A + D0%

Share of 11,823 emission reports that name a method; a report can name several.

What we exclude, and why

  • Benchmarks use 11,709 full-year reports. Part-year reports (0, usually a change of company) and ships reporting no fuel (338) count towards totals only.
  • Each segment is measured by its own CO₂ per transport work: per passenger-mile for passenger ships, per cubic-metre-mile for LNG carriers and con-ros, per deadweight-mile for general cargo, per tonne-mile for the rest.
  • The worst 1% per segment and implausibly low values (under half the best 1%) are trimmed as reporting errors.
  • Distance, speed and cargo carried are derived from the published ratios; THETIS has no distance or deadweight column.
  • Allowances: not applicable before 2024. Offshore ships are excluded until 2027. Euro figures use the EUA price you set, default €75/t.
  • Source: EMSA THETIS-MRV public emission reports, mrv.emsa.europa.eu, checked weekly.