Navalyze · Container · Ship

YM EVOLUTION

IMO: 9496460
Type: Container ship
Average cargo carried: 26,049 t
Port of registry: Keelung
Technical efficiency: EEXI 13.47 g CO₂/t·nm

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation · part of Yang Ming

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report. Carries about 26,049 t of cargo on average.

Fuel per mile

157.3 kg/nm

Container median 177.0 kg/nm (−11%)

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)

18.69

g CO₂/t·nm · Container median 16.30 (+15%)

Average speed

13.2 kn

Container median 13.3 kn (−1%)

Fuel per day at sea

49.7 t/day

Fuel consumed

857 t

CO₂ emitted

2,652 t

2,694 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

5,447 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

414 h

17 days, 5% of the year

Within the container fleet, 2025

Set against all 2,208 container 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 157.3 kg/nm · median 177.0 (−11%)

78.8Ranks 976 of 2,208, lowest first302.4

Average speedThis ship 13.2 kn · median 13.3 (−1%)

9.1Faster than 47% of container ships16.0

CO₂ per transport work (cargo)This ship 18.69 g CO₂/t·nm · median 16.30 (+15%)

7.22Ranks 1,270 of 2,208, lowest first46.89

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%Container 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 ports45%
From the EU26%
Into the EU23%
At berth in the EU5%

65% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (1,730 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

5.3%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

0.0 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 Container median is the middle ship of all container ships reporting that year; it moves with the fleet, so a ship can gain on it without changing itself.

Fuel per mile, kg/nm

YM EVOLUTION
Container median

140.0160.0180.0200.0

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

Average speed, kn

YM EVOLUTION
Container median

12.014.016.018.0

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

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

YM EVOLUTION
Container median

12.014.016.018.020.022.0

’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	+1.0 kn	+7%	+15%	−87%	+15%	1.0 kn faster, fuel per mile up 7%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2023→2024	−1.3 kn	−12%	−21%	−41%	−11%	1.3 kn slower, fuel per mile down 12%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2022→2023	−2.1 kn	−5%	−17%	−8%	−7%	2.1 kn slower, fuel per mile down 5%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2021→2022	+2.2 kn	+9%	+27%	+32%	+22%	2.2 kn faster, fuel per mile up 9%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2020→2021	+1.3 kn	+15%	+27%	−16%	+19%	1.3 kn faster, fuel per mile up 15%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2019→2020	−0.6 kn	−14%	−18%	−9%	−16%	0.6 kn slower, fuel per mile down 14%; in line with the speed change.
2018→2019	−4.0 kn	−17%	−37%	−17%	−21%	4.0 kn slower, fuel per mile down 17%; 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	Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation	857	2,652	5,447	414	13.2	157.3	18.69	–
2024	Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation	6,182	19,257	42,131	3,441	12.2	146.7	16.28	–
2023	not published	11,908	37,240	71,094	5,261	13.5	167.5	18.38	–
2022	not published	13,658	42,585	77,662	4,988	15.6	175.9	19.85	–
2021	not published	9,489	29,687	58,873	4,407	13.4	161.2	16.33	–
2020	not published	9,848	30,959	70,232	5,810	12.1	140.2	13.72	–
2019	not published	12,523	39,356	76,995	6,056	12.7	162.6	16.39	–
2018	not published	18,210	57,023	92,543	5,538	16.7	196.8	20.77	–

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/t·nm	Container median	vs Container	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025	Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation	18.69	16.30	+15%	1,270 of 2,208	DNV	B+C
2024	Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation	16.28	17.52	−7%	910 of 1,974	DNV	A+C
2023	not published	18.38	19.40	−5%	889 of 1,899	DNV	A+C
2022	not published	19.85	19.13	+4%	933 of 1,825	DNV	A+C
2021	not published	16.33	17.90	−9%	805 of 1,781	DNV	A+C
2020	not published	13.72	17.58	−22%	640 of 1,797	DNV	A+C
2019	not published	16.39	18.88	−13%	740 of 1,788	DNV	A+C
2018	not published	20.77	20.22	+3%	881 of 1,705	DNV	A+C

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