Navalyze · LNG carrier · Ship

GASLOG SEATTLE

IMO: 9634086
Type: LNG carrier
Port of registry: Hamilton
Technical efficiency: EEXI 6.80 g CO₂/t·nm
Fuel: Mostly LNG

ISM company (DoC holder) in 2025: GasLog LNG Services Ltd.

Report year

2025 at a glance

From the 2025 THETIS-MRV report.

Fuel per mile

212.1 kg/nm

LNG carrier median 190.4 kg/nm (+11%)

CO₂ per transport work (volume)

7.80

g CO₂/m³·nm · LNG carrier median 7.12 (+10%)

Average speed

14.4 kn

LNG carrier median 14.4 kn (+0%)

Fuel per day at sea

73.5 t/day

Fuel consumed

14,634 t

CO₂ emitted

39,335 t

50,301 t CO₂eq incl. CH₄ and N₂O

Distance sailed

69,013 nm

CO₂ ÷ CO₂ per mile

Time at sea

4,778 h

199 days, 55% 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 per mileThis ship 212.1 kg/nm · median 190.4 (+11%)

152.1Ranks 252 of 386, lowest first319.4

Average speedThis ship 14.4 kn · median 14.4 (+0%)

11.2Faster than 51% of LNG carrier ships15.9

CO₂ per transport work (volume)This ship 7.80 g CO₂/m³·nm · median 7.12 (+10%)

5.06Ranks 222 of 386, lowest first16.14

Middle 80% of shipsMiddle 50%LNG 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 ports0%
From the EU40%
Into the EU58%
At berth in the EU2%

51% of this ship's CO₂ falls under the EU ETS (20,105 t).

Fuel burned laden

–

Not reported

CO₂ at berth

2.2%

Alongside in EU ports

Methane (CH₄)

376.6 t

LNG engines slip unburnt methane

CO₂eq ÷ CO₂

1.279

Uplift from CH₄ and N₂O, counted in full from 2026

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 per mile, kg/nm

GASLOG SEATTLE
LNG carrier median

150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0

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

Average speed, kn

GASLOG SEATTLE
LNG carrier median

12.014.016.018.0

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

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

GASLOG SEATTLE
LNG carrier median

6.08.010.012.014.0

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

Year on year

Year	Speed	Fuel per mile	Fuel per day	Distance	CO₂ per TW	Reading
2024→2025	−0.9 kn	+1%	−4%	+145%	−3%	0.9 kn slower, fuel per mile flat; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2023→2024	+0.4 kn	−19%	−16%	−13%	+1%	0.4 kn faster, fuel per mile down 19%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2022→2023	+1.8 kn	−16%	−5%	−7%	−20%	1.8 kn faster, fuel per mile down 16%; better than speed alone explains (hull, engine or trade).
2021→2022	−1.1 kn	+25%	+16%	+199%	−21%	1.1 kn slower, fuel per mile up 25%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2020→2021	−3.7 kn	−9%	−28%	−38%	+16%	3.7 kn slower, fuel per mile down 9%; worse than speed alone explains (fouling, weather, loading or trade).
2018→2020	+1.7 kn	+15%	+27%	+63%	+23%	1.7 kn faster, fuel per mile up 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	At sea h	Speed kn	Fuel kg/nm	CO₂ g/t·nm	Laden fuel
2025LNG	GasLog LNG Services Ltd.	14,634	39,335	69,013	4,778	14.4	212.1	–	–
2024LNG	GasLog LNG Services Ltd.	5,903	15,833	28,226	1,846	15.3	209.1	–	–
2023LNG	not published	8,358	23,301	32,481	2,186	14.9	257.3	–	–
2022LNG	not published	10,714	30,600	34,880	2,655	13.1	307.2	–	61%
2021LNG	not published	2,860	7,886	11,652	819	14.2	245.5	–	48%
2020LNG	not published	5,117	14,138	18,922	1,059	17.9	270.4	–	43%
2018LNG	not published	2,734	7,529	11,633	716	16.2	235.0	–	54%

Benchmark and verification

Year	ISM company	CO₂ per TW, g CO₂/m³·nm	LNG carrier median	vs LNG carrier	Rank	Verifier	Methods
2025LNG	GasLog LNG Services Ltd.	7.80	7.12	+10%	222 of 386	ABS	B+C
2024LNG	GasLog LNG Services Ltd.	8.02	7.39	+9%	178 of 312	ABS	B+C
2023LNG	not published	7.98	9.10	−12%	149 of 355	ABS	B+C
2022LNG	not published	10.02	10.38	−3%	181 of 379	ABS	B+C
2021LNG	not published	12.69	10.46	+21%	193 of 289	ABS	B+C
2020LNG	not published	10.91	10.71	+2%	138 of 267	ABS	B+C
2018LNG	not published	8.90	10.92	−18%	51 of 197	ABS	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.