Navalyze · General cargo · Ship

PELICANA

IMO: 9401790
Type: General cargo ship
Flag (estimated): Norway
Port of registry: Bergen
Technical efficiency: EEXI 6.39 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Masterbulk AS

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel kg/nm

100

General cargo median 35.2 kg/nm (+185%)

CO₂ per transport work (dwt)

15.0

g CO₂/dwt·nm · General cargo median 25.5 (−41%)

Average speed

8.5 kn

General cargo median 9.3 kn (−9%)

Fuel per day at sea

20.5 t/day

Fuel consumed

154 t

CO₂ emitted

492 t

499 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

1,535 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

180 h

8 days, 2% of the year

Within the general cargo fleet, 2025

Set against all 2,723 general cargo 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 100 kg/nm · median 35.2 (+185%)

17.4Ranks 2,677 of 2,723, lowest first78.8

Average speedThis ship 8.5 kn · median 9.3 (−9%)

6.9Faster than 32% of general cargo ships12.0

CO₂ per transport work (dwt)This ship 15.0 g CO₂/dwt·nm · median 25.5 (−41%)

10.2Ranks 466 of 2,723, lowest first52.7

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%General cargo medianThis ship

Where the emissions happen, 2025

THETIS splits each ship's emissions 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 EU44%
Into the EU40%
At berth in the EU16%

58% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (284 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

77 t

15.6% of the ship's CO₂, alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.0 t

Mainly from LNG; small for oil, biofuel and methanol

CO₂eq uplift

+7 t

+1.4% CO₂eq on top of CO₂ alone, from CH₄ and N₂O; counted in full from 2026

Over the years

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

Fuel kg/nm

PELICANA
General cargo median

20.040.060.080.0100.0120.0

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

Average speed, kn

PELICANA
General cargo median

8.010.012.014.0

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

CO₂ per transport work (dwt), g CO₂/dwt·nm

PELICANA
General cargo median

5.010.015.020.025.030.0

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

Year on year

Year	Average speed	Fuel kg/nm	Fuel per day at sea	Distance	CO₂ per transport work	Reading
2024→2025	−1.8 kn	−3%	−20%	−88%	+7%	1.8 kn slower, fuel per mile down 3%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	−1.2 kn	+19%	+7%	−12%	+53%	1.2 kn slower, fuel per mile up 19%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−1.2 kn	−14%	−22%	−63%	−62%	1.2 kn slower, fuel per mile down 14%; in line with the speed change.
2021→2022	+0.0 kn	−9%	−9%	+302%	+93%	Same speed, fuel per mile down 9%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	+1.1 kn	+14%	+24%	−69%	+45%	1.1 kn faster, fuel per mile up 14%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	+0.5 kn	−7%	−3%	−0%	−38%	0.5 kn faster, fuel per mile down 7%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2018→2019	−1.0 kn	−8%	−15%	−26%	−25%	1.0 kn slower, fuel per mile down 8%; 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	Hours at seah	Average speedknots at sea	Fuel kg/nmthis ship	CO₂ per transport work (cargo)g/t·nm, this ship	Laden fuel
2025	Masterbulk AS	154	492	1,535	180	8.5	100	–	–
2024	Masterbulk AS	1,348	4,264	13,089	1,269	10.3	103	–	–
2023	not published	1,291	4,053	14,929	1,302	11.5	86.5	–	–
2022	not published	4,106	12,838	40,838	3,225	12.7	101	–	–
2021	not published	1,119	3,498	10,162	799	12.7	110	–	–
2020	not published	3,127	9,808	32,262	2,778	11.6	96.9	–	–
2019	not published	3,387	10,584	32,420	2,929	11.1	105	–	–
2018	not published	4,988	15,579	44,020	3,648	12.1	113	–	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/dwt·nm	General cargo median	vs General cargo	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Masterbulk AS	15.0	25.5	−41%	466 of 2,723	DNV	B
2024	Masterbulk AS	14.0	19.3	−27%	368 of 1,111	DNV	B
2023	not published	9.13	20.7	−56%	161 of 1,045	DNV	B
2022	not published	23.9	21.6	+11%	599 of 1,034	DNV	B
2021	not published	12.4	22.7	−46%	154 of 1,142	DNV	B
2020	not published	8.53	24.5	−65%	58 of 1,167	DNV	B
2019	not published	13.7	25.0	−45%	153 of 1,154	DNV	B
2018	not published	18.2	24.9	−27%	269 of 1,044	DNV	B

Fuel per mile and CO₂ per tonne-mile are the ship's own reported KPIs. General cargo ships are benchmarked on CO₂ per transport work (dwt) (TW), in g CO₂/dwt·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 general cargo 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.