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

Vehicle Carrier 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)
#165 of 479 vehicle carriers
CO₂ intensity
14.6 g CO₂/dwt·nm
vs segment average (16.35)
-11% greener
B

CII band distribution

174 at D/E
A 118B 104C 148D 126E 48

544 rated vessels · 83 of the D/E set dock within 12 months

Docking pipeline — D/E vessels per quarter

12
Q3
18
Q4
17
'27 Q1
17
'27 Q2
14
'27 Q3
11
'27 Q4
9
'28 Q1
11
'28 Q2

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

Top eligible retrofit measures for this segment

MeasureEligible CO₂ reductionCapex band PaybackConfidence
Turbocharger cut-out 380 1–3% €80k–250k vendor claim
Propeller redesign / replacement 355 5–10% €400k–1,200k vendor claim
Rotor sails (per unit) 298 route-dependent €1,500k–3,500k vendor claim
Suction wing sails (per unit) 298 route-dependent €1,000k–2,500k vendor claim
Methanol dual-fuel conversion 87 5–15% €8,000k–20,000k vendor claim
Shaft generator / PTO 5 3–6% €500–1,500/kW vendor claim

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

Retrofit opportunity in this segment

112
D/E vessels with at least one eligible measure
€125–327M
capex range, top measure per vessel (112 of 112 with computable scaling)
0.03–0.06 Mt
annual CO₂ reduction available (vendor-claimed ranges × reported emissions)

Retrofit prospects — worst band first

VesselBand Age Drop year
HOEGH TROOPER · <25k E 31y 2026
MORNING COURIER · <25k E 21y 2026
JASPER ARROW · <25k E 21y 2026
GLOVIS CARDINAL · <25k E 14y 2026
IVORY ARROW · <25k E 22y 2026
See all 544 rated vehicle carriers with exposure and dock windows. Sign in →

Why there is no AER ranking here

Under the IMO CII scheme, vehicle carriers are measured against gross tonnage, not deadweight — so a DWT-based AER ranking would order these ships by the wrong emissions metric. Rather than publish a misleading table, we show the GT-based CII bands above, which are the correct comparison. The per-vessel emissions data remains available on each vessel page.

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.