Navalyze · Vehicle carrier · Ship

HOEGH YOKOHAMA

IMO: 9185451
Type: Vehicle carrier
Average cargo carried: 2,771 t
Port of registry: Oslo
Technical efficiency: EEXI 15.69 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Hoegh Autoliners Management AS

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 2,771 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

86.0 kg/nm

Vehicle carrier median 99.9 kg/nm (−14%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

97.10

g CO₂/t·nm · Vehicle carrier median 55.36 (+75%)

Average speed

13.6 kn

Vehicle carrier median 14.4 kn (−6%)

Fuel per day at sea

28.0 t/day

Fuel consumed

5,474 t

CO₂ emitted

17,132 t

17,400 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

63,668 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,688 h

195 days, 54% of the year

Within the vehicle carrier fleet, 2025

Set against all 506 vehicle 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 per mileThis ship 86.0 kg/nm · median 99.9 (−14%)

79.6Ranks 85 of 506, lowest first119.0

Average speedThis ship 13.6 kn · median 14.4 (−6%)

12.0Faster than 33% of vehicle carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 97.10 g CO₂/t·nm · median 55.36 (+75%)

34.70Ranks 409 of 506, lowest first158.48

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Vehicle carrier medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2025

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 ports26%
From the EU30%
Into the EU40%
At berth in the EU4%

56% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (9,632 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

3.6%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.3 t

Mainly from LNG; small for oil

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.016

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

Over the years

Full-year reports only. The Vehicle carrier median is the middle ship of all vehicle carrier ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel per mile, kg/nm

HOEGH YOKOHAMA
Vehicle carrier median

80.090.0100.0110.0

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

Average speed, kn

HOEGH YOKOHAMA
Vehicle carrier median

11.012.013.014.015.0

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

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

HOEGH YOKOHAMA
Vehicle carrier median

40.060.080.0100

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

Year on year

Year	Speed	Fuel per mile	Fuel per day	Distance	CO₂ per TW	Reading
2024→2025	−0.8 kn	−2%	−8%	+48%	+40%	0.8 kn slower, fuel per mile down 2%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.5 kn	−4%	−1%	−25%	−10%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile down 4%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+0.5 kn	+3%	+7%	+3%	−12%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile up 3%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	−0.3 kn	+3%	+0%	+6%	−5%	Same speed, fuel per mile up 3%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	+0.4 kn	+0%	+2%	+2%	+8%	0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile flat; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+2.0 kn	−9%	+8%	+10%	+19%	2.0 kn faster, fuel per mile down 9%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−0.9 kn	+0%	−7%	+27%	−16%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025	Hoegh Autoliners Management AS	5,474	17,132	63,668	4,688	13.6	86.0	97.10	–
2024	Hoegh Autoliners Management AS	3,802	11,897	43,133	3,002	14.4	88.2	69.15	–
2023	not published	5,275	16,515	57,287	4,116	13.9	92.1	76.45	–
2022	not published	4,986	15,619	55,624	4,165	13.4	89.7	86.66	–
2021	not published	4,580	14,342	52,374	3,831	13.7	87.5	90.84	–
2020	not published	4,489	14,081	51,314	3,847	13.3	87.5	84.25	–
2019	not published	4,468	14,001	46,446	4,122	11.3	96.2	70.78	–
2018	not published	3,515	11,016	36,682	3,002	12.2	95.8	84.57	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Vehicle carrier median	vs Vehicle carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Hoegh Autoliners Management AS	97.10	55.36	+75%	409 of 506	DNV	B+C
2024	Hoegh Autoliners Management AS	69.15	55.31	+25%	224 of 335	DNV	B+C
2023	not published	76.45	56.64	+35%	327 of 417	DNV	B+C
2022	not published	86.66	57.66	+50%	372 of 463	DNV	B+C
2021	not published	90.84	59.57	+52%	374 of 459	DNV	A
2020	not published	84.25	57.26	+47%	350 of 449	DNV	A
2019	not published	70.78	58.95	+20%	296 of 426	DNV	A
2018	not published	84.57	62.35	+36%	322 of 434	DNV	A

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. Vehicle carrier 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 vehicle 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.