Maritime Intelligence Network
One Account. Three Powerful Platforms.
TrustedDocks ACTIVE New-Ships PortTracker

Chemical Tanker Emissions & Retrofit Radar

Ships ranked by AER (Annual Efficiency Ratio) — grams of CO₂ emitted per tonne of deadweight carried one nautical mile (g CO₂/dwt·nm), the IMO carbon-intensity metric behind the CII rating — from official EU MRV emissions data for reporting year 2025. Lower is greener. Pick a segment and size class to see the greenest vessels first.

Segment rank (2025)
#1,364 of 1,422 chemical tankers
CO₂ intensity
18.9 g CO₂/dwt·nm
vs segment average (9.4)
+101% higher
E

CII band distribution

414 at D/E
A 388B 445C 451D 293E 121

1,698 rated vessels · 175 of the D/E set dock within 12 months

Docking pipeline — D/E vessels per quarter

34
Q3
23
Q4
46
'27 Q1
33
'27 Q2
32
'27 Q3
37
'27 Q4
31
'28 Q1
28
'28 Q2

Windows estimated from the class-expiry docking model, not bookings.

Top eligible retrofit measures for this segment

MeasureEligible CO₂ reductionCapex band PaybackConfidence
Propeller redesign / replacement 1,299 5–10% €400k–1,200k vendor claim
Turbocharger cut-out 968 1–3% €80k–250k vendor claim
Bulbous bow reprofiling 929 2–6% €300k–900k vendor claim
Rotor sails (per unit) 882 route-dependent €1,500k–3,500k vendor claim
Suction wing sails (per unit) 882 route-dependent €1,000k–2,500k vendor claim
Methanol dual-fuel conversion 696 5–15% €8,000k–20,000k vendor claim

Capex bands are indicative vendor/literature priors. Payback appears once price parameters are configured.

Retrofit opportunity in this segment

262
D/E vessels with at least one eligible measure
€693–1,706M
capex range, top measure per vessel (262 of 262 with computable scaling)
0.09–0.20 Mt
annual CO₂ reduction available (vendor-claimed ranges × reported emissions)

Retrofit prospects — worst band first

VesselBand Age Drop year
MEHTAP · 25-60k E 18y 2026
MARIA IMMACULATA · <25k E 14y 2026
HARBOUR PROGRESS · <25k E 16y 2026
HERCULES SKY · <25k E 5y 2026
NAVE ATRIA · 25-60k E 14y 2026
See all 1,698 rated chemical tankers with exposure and dock windows. Sign in →
1,451
vessels ranked
3.48
greenest (g CO₂/dwt·nm)
8.28
segment median
# Vessel Size (DWT) Built Carbon intensity — AER (g CO₂/dwt·nm) Grade
1351 SCANDIC
IMO 9386249
11,505 2007
18.3
E
1352 NQ ZINNIA
IMO 9150327
10,128 1998
18.4
E
1353 KONGO STAR
IMO 9508823
13,011 2010
18.4
E
1354 MANAS
IMO 9447055
10,745 2008
18.5
E
1355 ANTON
IMO 9514456
8,402 2010
18.5
E
1356 IVER AMBITION
IMO 9439163
9,228 2009
18.6
E
1357 WILHELMINE ESSBERGER
IMO 9295440
8,631 2005
18.6
E
1358 SCOT FRANKFURT
IMO 9274537
8,182 2005
18.6
E
1359 COSIMA PG
IMO 9857822
7,392 2019
18.6
E
1360 OWL 4
IMO 9435557
13,075 2006
18.7
E
1361 ELARA
IMO 9309148
11,276 2006
18.9
E
1362 SCOT DRESDEN
IMO 9365245
8,158 2007
18.9
E
1363 VIVA
IMO 9156539
16,116 1999
18.9
E
1364 DENSA DERYA
IMO 9367358
8,011 2008
18.9
E
1365 TRANS EMERALD
IMO 9295452
8,650 2005
19.0
E
1366 LAMENTIN
IMO 9377054
11,320 2007
19.0
E
1367 MURRAY STAR
IMO 9527635
13,006 2011
19.0
E
1368 KARRUCA
IMO 9216470
7,721 2001
19.1
E
1369 GTM DENMARK
IMO 9528902
11,596 2011
19.1
E
1370 OLYMPUS
IMO 9310355
9,189 2006
19.1
E
1371 HELGA ESSBERGER
IMO 9172155
9,887 1999
19.1
E
1372 ANNETTE ESSBERGER
IMO 9327059
11,340 2006
19.2
E
1373 CAROLINE ESSBERGER
IMO 9439151
8,506 2009
19.2
E
1374 DH BLOSSOMING
IMO 9813046
8,702 2018
19.2
E
1375 AMUR STAR
IMO 9480368
13,019 2010
19.2
E
1376 ARABELLA
IMO 9909247
7,703 2021
19.3
E
1377 ERICUSA M
IMO 9367372
18,000 2009
19.3
E
1378 AGNES ESSBERGER
IMO 9327047
11,340 2006
19.3
E
1379 HABIP BAYRAK
IMO 9458183
8,404 2010
19.5
E
1380 ENDO OSTRO
IMO 9393656
7,335 2008
19.6
E
1381 BASAT
IMO 9447029
10,745 2008
19.6
E
1382 SIGRID THERESA
IMO 9392183
8,139 2008
19.6
E
1383 LIA IEVOLI
IMO 9148582
9,976 1999
19.6
E
1384 SPRING S
IMO 9416812
13,021 2009
19.6
E
1385 NQ LILIUM
IMO 9393395
8,110 2009
19.7
E
1386 EFE
IMO 9558763
7,623 2010
19.7
E
1387 IEVOLI SHINE
IMO 9172167
9,887 1998
19.8
E
1388 NORDSTRAUM
IMO 9523548
9,616 2012
19.8
E
1389 CARIBE MARIA
IMO 9337286
11,299 2007
19.9
E
1390 KATELINA
IMO 9485368
8,933 2014
20.3
E
1391 GISELA ESSBERGER
IMO 9147734
9,554 1998
20.3
E
1392 GIOIA MIA
IMO 9321419
8,057 2006
20.4
E
1393 HACI FATMA ANA
IMO 9458195
8,424 2011
20.4
E
1394 MED PAKIZE
IMO 9830604
8,219 2020
20.4
E
1395 STOC NIKE
IMO 9431032
7,770 2009
20.4
E
1396 GIOCONDA
IMO 9819052
7,746 2018
20.4
E
1397 FIYUH
IMO 9499371
26,215 2011
20.4
E
1398 DUZGIT ENDEAVOUR
IMO 9581007
15,995 2013
20.5
E
1399 NQ LAELIA
IMO 9393383
8,115 2008
20.5
E
1400 MED SERHAT
IMO 9461922
8,263 2020
20.5
E
Page 28 of 29 — 1,422 vessels
Engine intelligence

Which engines power the greenest fleets?

The main engine is the single largest CO₂ source on board — typically well over 80% of a ship's emissions come from propulsion. We aggregated this ranking the other way around: every engine design is scored by the measured carbon intensity of the vessels carrying it, licensee-built units merged under their design brand. The verdict from the 2025 data — modern dual-fuel designs like MAN B&W's ME-GI and WinGD's X-DF families, together with EGR/SCR-abated and ultra-long-stroke G-type engines, consistently power the most emission-friendly ships in service.

Emission-friendly engine ranking

AER (Annual Efficiency Ratio) = annual CO₂ emissions ÷ (deadweight × distance sailed), the IMO carbon-intensity metric used for CII ratings. It is built only from measured CO₂, distance and deadweight — not the self-reported cargo transport-work figure, which is unreliable. Implausible outliers (top 2% per segment) are excluded. Grade A–E reflects each vessel's rank within its segment. Source: EMSA THETIS-MRV.