COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Full-length report Accompanying the document Report from the Commission 2024 Report from the European Commission on CO2 Emissions from Maritime Transport
Date: 2025-02-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Climate Action, European Commission
Subjects: EU environmental policy, application of EU law, energy consumption, energy efficiency, environmental monitoring, greenhouse gas, marine fuel, maritime transport, pollution from ships, reduction of gas emissions

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 12.2.2025  SWD(2025) 38 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Full-length report Accompanying the document Report from the Commission 2024 Report from the European Commission on CO2 Emissions from Maritime Transport {COM(2025) 39 final}  
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

2024 Report from the European 
Commission on CO2 Emissions from 
Maritime Transport  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Table of contents 

1. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................... 7 

1.1.  The 2024 Annual Report: scope and objectives .......................................................... 7 

1.2.  Context ........................................................................................................................ 8 

1.2.1. 

2023: Persistent economic and geopolitical uncertainties drive down maritime 
transport activity levels in Europe .................................................................................. 8 
EU regulatory and policy progress in the decarbonisation of maritime transport ......... 9 
1.2.2. 
1.2.3. 
Developments at the International Maritime Organization ......................................... 10 
1.2.4        Impact of maritime transport on global warming ........................................................ 11 

2.  CO2 emissions and related fuel consumption from the monitored fleet ............... 14 

2.1.  The Fleet: emissions and number of ships ................................................................ 14 

2.2. 

Ship types: emissions and number of ships .............................................................. 16 

2.3. 

Further analysis of CO2 emissions ............................................................................. 22 

2.3.1. 
2.3.2. 

2023 compared to 2022 ................................................................................................ 22 
Analysis over the period 2018-2023 ............................................................................. 24 

2.4 

Fuel consumption ...................................................................................................... 26 

The monitored voyages at a glance: shipping routes, speed, time spent at sea and 

3. 
distance travelled ....................................................................................................... 30 

3.1.  Main shipping routes ................................................................................................ 30 

3.2.  Time spent at sea ...................................................................................................... 31 

3.3  Distance travelled ...................................................................................................... 32 

3.4. 

Fleet speed ................................................................................................................ 35 

4. 

Technical and operational efficiency of the monitored fleet ................................ 37 

4.1.  Technical efficiency ................................................................................................... 37 

4.1.1.  Overview ....................................................................................................................... 37 
Evolution of the Technical Efficiency of the monitored fleet ....................................... 38 
4.1.2. 

4.2.  Operational efficiency ............................................................................................... 39 

4.2.1.  Overview: EEOI and AER ............................................................................................... 39 
Evolution of the operational efficiency of the monitored fleet .................................... 40 
4.2.2. 

5.  Assessing the implementation of the EU Maritime MRV Regulation..................... 42 

5.1 Quality and completeness of submitted data ............................................................... 42 

5.1.1 Outliers ................................................................................................................................ 42 
5.1.2 Non-compliant emissions reports and revisions ................................................................. 43 

2 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

5.2 Punctuality ..................................................................................................................... 43 

References.. ............................................................................................................... 44 

Annex 1 

Abbreviations and definitions .................................................................. 47 

Annex 2 

Outcomes of the sixth compliance cycle ................................................... 49 

A.2.1 Fuel/emissions monitoring methods .......................................................................... 49 

A.2.2 Verifiers and National Accreditation Bodies .............................................................. 50 

A.2.3 Port State Control inspections .................................................................................... 52 

Annex 3  Main extra-EU flows ................................................................................ 53 

Annex 4 

Technical and operational efficiency of the monitored fleet ..................... 54 

A.4.1 Technical efficiency (related to Section 4.1.1.) .......................................................... 54 

A.4.2 Operational efficiency (related to Section 4.2.) ......................................................... 60 

3 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Executive Summary 

Since 2018, the ‘EU Maritime MRV Regulation’1 , requires shipping companies to monitor and 
report their fuel consumption, greenhouse gas emissions 2 and other key parameters for their 
ships when sailing to/from and between ports of the European Economic Area (EEA).  

Every year, the European Commission publishes the reported aggregated data and prepares 
an annual report to analyse changes over the years. This report is the sixth one. It analyses 
the data from the period 2018-2023, following the release of the data in 2024.  

The monitored voyages for the 2023 reporting year emitted 126.7 million tonnes of CO2 into 
the atmosphere. These emissions were 7.9% lower than those reported in 2022 and nearly 
the same (-0.1 million tonnes) as the ones reported for 2021, which was a year marked by the 
long-lasting effects of the COVID-19 crisis. When compared to the reporting years preceding 
the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e. 2018 and 2019), which included emissions related to the United 
Kingdom, the 2023 reported emissions are around 13% lower 3.  

The emissions reported for 2023 originated from a fleet of almost 12 300 ships, the second 
highest number recorded so far (5.4% lower than in 2022 but 2.9% higher than in 2021).  

In 2023, the vast majority of ship types (12 out of 15) reported lower emissions compared to 
2022.    reflecting  the  lower  level  of  activity  experienced  by  most  of  the  subsectors  of  the 
maritime industry, in a year marked by the decrease in the volume of goods handled in EU 
ports  (-3.9%  compared  to  2022),  notably  due  to  the  restrictions  on  goods  transport  with 
Russia: The most significant absolute decrease in CO2 emissions can be seen in bulk carriers 
(-23%  compared  to  2022).  This  is  the  result  of  different  factors,  including  a  considerable 
decrease in the  number  of  bulk  carriers  calling  at  EEA  ports  in 2023  (-12%),  less  distance 
travelled  per  ship  (-8%),  or  the  effect  of  slower  speed  (-4%).  Russia's  war  of  aggression 
against Ukraine kept affecting energy imports. While CO2 emissions from Liquified natural gas 
(LNG) carriers, recorded a decrease (-11%) on 2022, they remain at a level much higher than 
in previous years (+42% on 2021). Oil tankers CO2 emissions experienced a slight decrease 
(-2%)  compared  to  2022.  The  CO2  emissions  from  passengers  ships  increased  by  6%  on 
2022, recording the highest level since 2018, thus confirming the full rebound of the sector 
after  the  COVID-19  years.  Container  ships  recorded  for  the  second  consecutive  year  a 
decrease in emissions of 6%, which reflects the general decrease in the handling of containers 
in main EU ports (-3.8% in 2023 compared to 2022), the decrease in the average distance 
reported by containership (-3%) and a reduction in the average speed of active container ships 
(-5%).  

Container  ships,  oil  tankers,  and  bulk  carriers  were  confirmed  as  the  top  emitters  in  2023. 
They were responsible for around 52% of total reported emissions in 2023. Container ships 
alone  were  responsible  for  28%  of  the  total  CO2  emissions.  Most  ship  types’  relative 
contribution to total reported emissions remained stable overall in 2018-2023, but passengers 
ships,  ro-pax  ships,  and  LNG  carriers  confirmed  the  increase  in  the  respective  share  of 

1 Regulation (EU) 2015/757 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 on the monitoring, reporting and 
verification of greenhouse gas emissions from maritime transport, and amending Directive 2009/16/EC, OJ L 123, 19.5.2015, p. 
55–76. 

2 Following the entry into force of amendments to Regulation (EU) 2015/757 in June 2023, the Regulation is not limited to CO 2 
emissions anymore but also covers greenhouse gas emissions. The monitoring and reporting requirements are extended to non-
CO2 gases only starting the reporting period 2024. The present report, which considers data reported over the period 2018-2022, 
therefore only covers CO2 emissions as reported within the EU MRV scope.  

3  The level of granularity of the data reported under the EU MRV maritime Regulation does not allow recalibrating the MRV data 
so as to exclude the emissions resulting from the application of the EU Maritime MRV Regulation to the United Kingdom for the 
reporting years 2018, 2019 and 2020. 

4 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

emissions visible since 2020, as a consequence of energy market dynamics and the rebound 
of passengers traffic after COVID-19.  

The distribution of the fleet’s total CO2 emissions between the different types of voyages and 
at  berth  that  was  recorded  in  2023  did  not  substantially  change  since  2021,  after  the 
withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU. Voyages starting or ending outside the EEA 
kept  representing  the  bulk  of  the  CO2  emissions  (around  two  thirds).  This  in  line  with  the 
volume of inward and outward trade flows recorded by Eurostat data, even if these voyages’ 
share slightly decreased in 2023, as a consequence of the decrease in the activity levels of 
the subsectors of the fleet which are most active on extra-EEA trade routes (bulk carriers and 
LNG carriers). 

In terms of fuel consumption, the monitored ships consumed 41 million tonnes of fuel in 2023. 
Fuel  consumption  over  the  period  2018-2023  remains  dominated  by  conventional  fossil 
marine fuels (heavy fuel oil, light fuel oil, gas oil, diesel oil) which accounted for 91% of the 
total mass of fuels reported in 2023. The reported fuel data confirmed in 2023 trends visible 
in the reported fuel consumption since 2021, namely the decrease in the share of light fuel oil 
(accounting for 15.6% of total reported fuel in 2023) compensated by an increase in the use 
of  heavy  fuel  oil  (reaching  55.3%  in  2023).  2023  saw  the  highest  recorded  level  of  LNG 
consumed by the fleet (around +11% higher than in 2022, accounting for more than 8% of 
total  reported  fuel  in  2023),  as  LNG  is  being  increasingly  used  by  ships  other  than  LNG 
carriers, with container ships, ro-pax, and passenger ships representing the lion share. The 
consumption of non-fossil bunker fuels remained negligible, as in all previous years.  

According to Eurostat data4, the total 2023 volume of inward trade flows decreased by 3.7%. 
Compared with 2022, the inflow from the United States (East Coast), Norway, Brazil, Egypt, 
Nigeria,  Libya,  and  Algeria  increased  in  2023,  while  the  inflows  from  the  United  Kingdom, 
Russia,  Türkiye  and  China  decreased.  The  total  2023  volume  of  outward  trade  flows 
decreased  by  1.7%.  Outflows  to  the  four  main  partners  (United  Kingdom,  United  States, 
Türkiye and China) remained overall constant on the levels of 2022 and total outflows are still 
dominated, as in previous years, by the outward flow to the UK. 

MRV data for 2018-2023 shows no indication of structural speed reduction for the MRV fleet 
during the period. 10 out of 15 ship types recorded higher average speed in 2023 compared 
to  2018,  with  some  having  considerably  increased  speed,  as  in  the  case  of  combination 
carriers (+32%), gas carriers (+20%), other ships (+19%), oil and chemical tankers (+14%), 
and passenger ships (+13%). Bulk carriers and container ships, the types which recorded the 
highest  reduction  in  emissions  in  2023,  were  amongst  the  few  ones continuing  decreasing 
speed compared to 2022, by 4% and 5% respectively.  

The  graphical  analysis  of  key  technical  and  operational  efficiency  indicators  shows  that  no 
significant changes took place in 2018-2023. Container ships, Ro-Pax ships, and oil tankers 
show the highest increases in the average size of active ships over the period.  

The completeness and correctness of the reported data, which improved over the period, is 
confirmed  by  increasing  data  correlation  values  between  key  technical  and  operational 
efficiency  indicators5  and  the  size  of  the  ships  reporting  under  the  EU  Maritime  MRV 
Regulation.  

4 Inward and outward trade flows are considered for the 15 main extra EU-27 flows, in terms of gross weight handled in EU ports.   

5 The Energy Efficiency Design Index (EEDI) and the Estimated Index Value (EIV) are assessed for the technical efficiency of 
ships.  The  Energy  Efficiency  Operational  Indicator  (EEOI)  and  the  Annual  Efficiency  Ratio  (AER)  are  assessed  for  their 
operational efficiency. 

5 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

In  terms  of  implementation  of  the  EU  Maritime  MRV  Regulation,  the  results  confirm  the 
continuing improvement in the quality and completeness of submitted data. However, more 
data were submitted with a delay in 2023 compared to 2022, which could be explained by the 
workload  on  shipping  companies  and  verifiers  linked  to  the  ETS  extension  to  maritime 
transport and the application of the new monitoring and reporting rules. 

6 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

1.  Introduction  

This report has been prepared using data from the implementation of the EU Regulation on 
the monitoring, reporting and verification of greenhouse gas emissions from maritime transport 
(Regulation  (EU)  2015/757),  hereafter  called  the  “EU  Maritime  MRV  Regulation”.  All 
information was extracted on 19 September 20246. Data provided or updated after this date is 
not reflected in this report. 

1.1. The 2024 Annual Report: scope and objectives 

This is the sixth report on CO2 emissions from ships entering and leaving ports in the European 
Economic Area (EEA), collected under the EU Maritime MRV Regulation. 

This regulation requires shipping companies to monitor and report on key indicators such as 
CO2 emissions, fuel consumption and other relevant information. This data is then checked by 
independent  verifiers  accredited  by  national  accreditation  bodies.  The  Commission 
subsequently publishes the verified data and analyses main trends in the form of an annual 
report7.  

The currently available set of MRV data is contributing to an enhanced understanding of the 
CO2  emissions  originating  from  the  maritime  transport  sector.  The  published  raw  data8 
represents a valuable asset to universities and research organisations, public authorities and 
other  market  actors  for  analyses  and  studies  on  the  maritime  sector  and  its  environmental 
performance.  This  data  is  important  to  support  policy  discussions  and  to  support  the 
implementation  and  track  the  effectiveness of  climate  policies. In addition,  it  constitutes an 
important input for the sector in order to take more effective and efficient climate measures. 

The  main  objective  of  this  report  is  to  examine  trends  in  emissions  and  energy  efficiency 
characteristics  over  the  six  available  reporting  cycles  since  the  entry  into  force  of  the  EU 
Maritime  MRV  Regulation  despite  different  disruptive  events  affecting  the  sector  over  the 
period, such as the COVID-19 pandemic (from 2020 to 2022), the UK’s withdrawal from the 
Union (from 2021), and the Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine (from 2022).  

This report is based on data from the EU Maritime MRV Regulation over the period  
2018-2023 

The  monitoring,  reporting,  and  verification  obligations  apply  to  ships  above  5 000  gross 
tonnage (GT) loading or unloading cargo or passengers at ports in the EEA. The Regulation 
covers CO2 emissions produced when a ship travels to or from an EEA port, while transporting 
goods or passengers for commercial purposes. The Regulation is flag-neutral, which means 
that ships must monitor and report their emissions regardless of their flag.  

The Regulation therefore covers the emissions of a ship travelling from Rotterdam to Shanghai 
(and vice versa). However, if a ship departs from Shanghai for Rotterdam and makes a stop 
at an intermediary port outside the EEA (e.g., port “A”) for cargo or passenger operations, only 

6 For the five previously published annual reports, related to the reporting periods from 2018 to 2022 the same principle, i.e. a 
cut-off date has been applied. For the purpose of this annual report, updated data as of 19 September 2024 has been used for 
these five previous periods (2018 to 2022). This means that the years 2018-2022 figures presented in this report might slightly 
differ from those published in the relevant annual reports.  

7 A detailed description of the monitoring, reporting and verification process (“The MRV system – Steps of the MRV process”) 
can be found in Annex 2 to the 2022 Annual Report from the European Commission on CO2 Emissions from Maritime Transport, 
at https://climate.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-03/swd_2023_54_en.pdf.  

8  The 
https://mrv.emsa.europa.eu/#public/emission-report.  

relevant  datasets  are  available 

for  download  as  spreadsheet  on 

the  THETIS-MRV  webpage  at 

7 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

the emissions related to the last leg of the voyage (in this case port A to Rotterdam) will be 
reported in the system. International voyages that take place within the EEA, such as a ship 
travelling from Le Havre to Rotterdam, are also covered, as well as domestic voyages, e.g., 
from  Brest  to  Le  Havre.  Emissions  produced  by  a  ship  in  an  EEA  port  are  also  covered, 
including when the ship is moored or anchored at a port whilst loading, unloading or hotelling.  

Despite  limiting  monitoring  requirements  to  large  ships  (above  5  000  GT),  the  Regulation 
covers  around  90%  of  all  CO2  emissions  in  the  EU  maritime  transport  sector,  whilst  only 
including around 55% of all ships calling into EEA ports. For reasons of proportionality and 
subsidiarity,  military  vessels,  naval  auxiliaries,  fish-catching  or  fish-processing  ships  are 
excluded from the Regulation. 

The  Regulation  underwent  a  major  revision  in  the  year  20239  to  prepare  for  the  EU  ETS 
extension to maritime transport starting 2024. The revision, which includes an extension of the 
Regulation’s scope to additional greenhouse gases (i.e. nitrous oxide and methane) and ship 
types  (i.e.  offshore  ships  and  general  cargo  ships  below  5 000  GT  but  not  below  400  GT) 
affects the monitoring and reporting system starting from the reporting period 2024. Since the 
present report only covers data from activities before 1 January 2024, it does not reflect the 
changes  in  the  Maritime  MRV  system  brought  in  by  the  2023  revision  of  the  Regulation. 
Further details on the functioning of the Maritime MRV system applicable  starting reporting 
period 2024 are described in section 1.2.2 of this report10.  

1.2. Context 

1.2.1.  2023: Persistent economic and geopolitical uncertainties 

drive down maritime transport activity levels in Europe  

At global level, the year 2023 saw a rebound of maritime trade volumes, driven by the recovery 
in the  world  economy  after the  consequences of  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and  better-than-
expected  economic  performance  in  large  economies.  Maritime  trade  recorded  a  2.4% 
increase (in transported million tons) after the contraction registered in the previous year 2022 
(UNCTAD,  2024).  The  increase  in  ton-miles  (i.e.  4.2%)  was  higher  than  the  increase  in 
maritime  trade  (as  traded  tons),  which  can  be  explained  by  the  changes  in  trade  patterns 
following Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, the disruptions affecting the Red Sea 
(starting end 2023), and Panama Canal (reduced water levels).  

At European level, 2023 saw a general decrease in goods handled in EU ports, which affected 
most maritime transport subsectors. Some (energy carriers and bulk carriers) were still highly 
impacted by the trade changes following Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, and few 
(Cruise sector and ferries) showed evident signs of a strong post-COVID19 rebound marking 
record activity levels.  

In more details, the gross weight of goods handled in EU ports in 2023 decreased by 3.9% 
compared  to  2022  and  reached  a  level  2.3%  lower  than  in  2021,  with  a  decrease  both for 
containerised trade (-3.8%) and bulk goods (-4%, dry and liquid combined)11(Eurostat, 2024).  

Trade  in  fossil  energy  imports  (i.e.  gas,  oil,  coal),  remained  affected  by  the  impact  of  the 
Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Since 2022, the replacement of gas imports by pipeline 

9 Through Regulation (EU) 2023/957, OJ L 130, 16.05.2023, p. 105–114,  http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/957/oj.  

10 A detailed explanation of the functioning of the Maritime MRV system following the 2023 revision is available in the General 
Guidance  Document  for  shipping companies  (Guidance  Document no.1),  published  under the section  ‘Documentation’  at the 
following page: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/transport/reducing-emissions-shipping-sector_en#documentation.  

11 Port calls made by bulk carriers in EEA ports decreased by 7.2% compared to 2022 and were still 1.5% fewer than in 2021. 

8 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

from  Russia  by  seaborne  transport  from  LNG  carriers  produced  a  spike  of  LNG  carriers 
activity, which in 2023 remained well above 2021 levels. In 2022 high natural gas prices and 
reduced gas availability also led to fuel switching to coal in electricity generation in Europe 
(IEA, 2022) which produced an increase in seaborne imports of coal until the first half of 2023 
(Eurostat, 2024).  

On the other hand, tourism in Europe (both domestically and internationally) was marked by 
strengthened  recovery  from  the  negative  consequences  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic  travel 
restrictions,  with  many  countries  exceeding  pre-pandemic  levels  (OECD,  2024).  This 
positively  affected  the  maritime  transport  sector,  with  the  cruise  segment  recording  a  10% 
increase in the number of port calls at EEA ports compared to pre-COVID 2019, while the Ro-
Pax sector recorded a 9.4% increase on the same year.   

The last weeks of 2023 finally witnessed the first consequences of a major disruption in world 
maritime transport, due to the crisis in the Red Sea which made transit through the Suez Canal 
challenging  and  caused  rerouting  through  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope  for  vessels  heading 
to/coming from EEA ports. The impacts of the Red Sea crisis, notably in terms of an increase 
in distance sailed and speed, are expected to become visible on 2024 MRV data12.  

1.2.2.  EU regulatory and policy progress in the decarbonisation of 

maritime transport  

Stemming from the 2021 ‘Fit for 55’ package of proposals to deliver the EU’s 2030 climate 
targets,  the  decarbonisation  of  shipping  is  now  firmly  embedded  in  the  EU’s  regulatory 
framework as most of the elements of the ‘basket of EU measures’ to decarbonise the sector 
have been adopted through 2023 and have entered into implementation in the year 2024.   

With the extension of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS)13 to maritime transport, the EU 
becomes  the  first  jurisdiction  to  include  shipping  emissions  into  a  cap-and-trade  system, 
resulting in a price signal on shipping emissions. Starting 1 January 2024, the EU ETS covers 
CO2 emissions14 from all large ships (of 5 000 gross tonnage and above) entering EEA ports, 
regardless of the flag they fly. The system covers the entirety (i.e. 100%) of emissions that 
occur between two EEA ports and when ships are within EEA ports, but only half (i.e. 50%) of 
emissions from voyages starting or ending outside of the EEA, thus allowing third countries to 
decide on appropriate action for the remaining share of emissions.  

Starting  from  the  reporting  period  2024,  shipping  companies  will  have  to  purchase  and 
surrender EU ETS emission allowances for each tonne of reported CO2 (or CO2 equivalent) 
emissions in the scope of the EU ETS system following a phase-in approach. The amount of 
due allowances is determined on the basis of the monitoring and reporting system established 
by the EU Maritime MRV Regulation, which, to that end, underwent a significant revision in 
the  year  2023.  Starting  1  January  2024,  the  MRV  system  will  include  methane  (CH4)  and 
nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions and, starting 1 January 2025, offshore and general cargo ships 
below 5 000 GT but not below 400 GT.  

In addition to the EU ETS extension to shipping, the year 2023 also saw the adoption of the 
FuelEU Maritime Regulation15 for implementation starting 1 January 2025. The Regulation will 
ensure that the greenhouse gas intensity of energy used on-board ships gradually decreases 

12 UNCTAD estimates that by June 2024 the number of ship transits through the Suez Canal was down by half compared to May 
2023 (UNCTAD, 2024). Rerouting vessels around Africa extends travel times and, if ships speed up as operators try to stick to 
schedules, emissions are also likely to increase.  

13 Through Directive (EU) 2023/959, OJ L 130, 16.5.2023, p. 134, http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2023/959/oj. 

14 Further extended to methane and nitrous oxide emissions starting 1 January 2026.  

15 Regulation (EU) 2023/1805, OJ L 234, 22.9.2023, p. 48, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1805/oj. 

9 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

over time, along with an obligation for passenger and container ships to use on-shore power 
supply while moored at the quayside in major EU ports as of 2030.  

Further elements of the ‘Fit for 55’ package to decarbonise maritime transport adopted in 2023 
include the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation (AFIR), which requires certain (larger) 
TEN-T ports to have OPS and LNG refuelling infrastructure available and mandates Member 
States to develop national policy frameworks for alternative fuels to be finalised by the end of 
2025,  and  the  revision  of  Renewable  Energy  Directive  (RED),  introducing  more  ambitious 
sector-specific targets in transport, including sub-targets for advanced biofuels and renewable 
fuels of non-biological origin.16 

In addition to legislative measures, the EU is further supporting the successful implementation 
of  shipping  decarbonisation  through  support  to  research,  innovation  and  deployment  of 
innovative solutions. Through the Innovation Fund, an estimated €40 billion will be reinvested 
in  the  period  2020-2030  to  support  the  demonstration  and  deployment  of  innovative  low-
carbon  technologies.  The  outcome  of  the  Call  IF23  published  in  October  2024  included  6 
maritime  projects  and  one  marine  fuel  related  project  with  a  total  support  above  EUR  200 
million17. The projects selected in 2024 add to the existing  Innovation Fund project portfolio 
which was already supporting  projects  related  with  the  maritime sector,  specifically,  on  the 
production and or commercialization of fuels such as Methanol, Ammonia, e-fuels, e-SAF, e-
methane, bio-fuels and projects focusing on the use of renewable energy in ports or innovative 
propulsion systems (e.g. fuel cell and wind sail). 

Moreover, the first H2 EU-wide auction (IF23 Auction) for the production of RFNBO (renewable 
fuel of non-biological origin) hydrogen granted support to 6 projects from which one to develop 
a world-leading green hydrogen and renewable ammonia project for production of maritime 
fuels. While the Innovation Fund focuses on higher Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and 
deployment, the EU also has invested in lower TRL projects for the maritime sector through 
Horizon Europe, in particular the Zero-Emission Waterborne Transport Partnership. Under this 
partnership, the EU will invest up to EUR 530 million until 2027, primarily in 5 areas related to 
shipping,  including  use  of  sustainable  alternative  fuels,  electrification,  energy  efficiency, 
design & retrofitting, digital and green ports.  

The EU is further supporting the decarbonisation of shipping at the global level, in particular 
within the International Maritime Organisation, as detailed in the next section.  

1.2.3.  Developments at the International Maritime Organization  

Throughout  2024,  the  Commission  maintained  its  support  for  ambitious  progress  at 
international level to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from shipping through effective global 
measures. Following the adoption in July 2023 of a revised IMO strategy on reduction of GHG 
emissions from ships, work has progressed towards developing a basket of mid-term GHG 
reduction measures involving:  

1.  a technical element, namely a goal-based marine fuel standard regulating the phased 

reduction of marine fuel's GHG intensity; and 

2.  an economic element, on the basis of a maritime GHG emissions pricing mechanism. 

To  this  end,  a  draft  legal  framework  for  these  regulations  was  established  during  the  81st 
session  of  the  IMO  Marine  Environment  Protection  Committee  (MEPC)  in  March  2024. 
Negotiations towards the development of these measures further advanced during the 82nd 
MEPC session from 30 September and 4 October 2024. As part of that development, policy 

16  The revision of the Directive on energy taxation, Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003, is still ongoing at the time 
of writing.  

17 These included the projects GreenWave, CORMORANT, INDIGO, REACH-REACH REMOTE, H2hydroShuttle, EO2 Energy 
Observer 2, Swap2Zero: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_5423.  

10 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

proposals were analysed as part of a Comprehensive Impact Assessment (CIA), consisting of 
four studies: a literature review, an assessment on the impacts on the fleet, an assessment 
on the impacts on States as well as a complementary assessment by means of several case 
studies.  

MEPC 82 also considered the review plan of IMO short-term GHG measures which, in force 
since  2023,  are  to  undergo  a  first  review  by  1  January  2026.  These  measures,  aiming  at 
reducing the carbon intensity of international shipping in 2030 by at least 40%, compared to 
2008 levels, include:  

1.  The Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (EEXI), requiring all ships of 400 GT and 
above to meet technical standards comparable to the Energy Efficiency Design Index 
(EEDI) requirements that already apply for newbuild ships. 

2.  The Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) implementing since 2023, a carbon intensity rating 
system for ships, with the objective to improve the operational performance of ships, 
including  through  a  performance  follow-up  within  the  Ship  Energy  Efficiency 
Management Plan (SEEMP). 

The schedule of the IMO strategy on reduction of GHG emissions from ships foresees the final 
agreed mid-term GHG measures are to be approved by MEPC at its session in spring 2025 
(MEPC 83), to be adopted by MEPC in autumn of 2025 for entry into force in 2027. 

1.2.4          Impact of maritime transport on global warming 

CO2 is emitted from ships as the result of the combustion of fuels in the ship’s combustion 
machinery (i.e., main engines, auxiliary engines, boilers, etc.) and is the largest part of the 
GHG emissions released from ships. However other GHGs may be emitted such as methane 
(CH4) from ships using gas or dual fuel engines or from the cargo tanks in Liquified Natural 
Gas (LNG) carriers, while nitrous oxide (N2O) can be released during the combustion of certain 
fuels such as ammonia. Refrigerants used for air conditioning and for cargo cooling processes 
and  various  gases  can  also  be  a  source  of  greenhouse  gases  from  ships.  Meanwhile,  air 
pollutants such as sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx), fine and ultrafine particulate 
matters, as well as black carbon (BC) can also be released during the combustion of marine 
fuels and in some cases can be a driver of global warming. 

According  to  the  Fourth  IMO  GHG  Study,  in  2018  the  CO2  emissions  from  international 
shipping  accounted  for  between  2.02%  and  2.51%  of  the  total  global  anthropogenic  CO2 
emissions (IMO , 2020).  

The last IMO inventory of shipping emissions published in 2020 (and covering the period 2012-
2018),  provided  the  following  breakdown  of  CO2-equivalent  emissions  by  type  for  voyage-
based18 international shipping emissions (see Figure 1): 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure  1  Contribution  of  different GHG  emissions  expressed  in  CO2e  to voyage-based  international GHG  emissions  in  2018; 
Source: Fourth IMO GHG Study 

The figure shows that the impact of CO2 emissions on total emissions from maritime transport 
accounts for 91.32% of total GHG emissions when including black carbon emissions, which 
represent the second most significant contribution (6.85% of the total), before nitrous oxide 
(1.35% of the total) and methane emissions (0.48% of the total).   

Black carbon,  while  not classified  as  a  GHG,  does  represent  a  significant  climate  pollutant 
(IMO  ,  2020).  Due  to  their  dark  colour,  black  carbon  particles  absorb  a  high  proportion  of 
incoming solar radiation, directly warming the atmosphere. The climate impact of black carbon 
may also be more pronounced at a regional level such as in the Arctic because when black 
carbon settles on snow or ice, their ability to reflect sunlight is reduced (EEA & EMSA, 2021). 
International maritime transport is thought to contribute to about 1-2% of global black carbon 
emissions (EEA & EMSA, 2021). Research indicates that the use of distillate fuels by ships 
may reduce black carbon by 33% compared to traditional Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) while diesel 
particulate  filters  (DPFs)  may  reduce  black  carbon  by  more  than  90%  (ICCT,  2019).  Fuel 
treatment, better engine maintenance, better fuel combustion, exhaust treatment systems, but 
also operational practices aiming at improving fuel efficiency (such as slow-steaming and de-
rating) could further contribute to black carbon emissions reduction.   

Over the period analysed under the Fourth IMO Study (2012-2018), total GHG emissions (as 
CO2-equivalent) from  shipping  increased  by  9.6% (from  977  million  tonnes to  1  076  million 
tonnes). CO2 emissions increased by 5.6% and were projected to increase from about 90% of 
2008 emissions in 2018 to 90-130% of 2008 emissions by 2050 for a range of plausible long-
term  economic  and  energy  scenarios.  In  the  period  2012-2018,  methane  emissions  were 
found to have increased by 150%, far greater than the use of LNG as a marine fuel. Black 
Carbon emissions, increased by 11.6% for total shipping (i.e. from 59 to 62 kilo tonnes). The 
deployment of dual fuel and LNG-powered ships and the growing use of new fuels such as 
ammonia are likely to further contribute to the increase in methane and nitrous oxide in the 
near future.  

Latest studies on trends in international shipping for the period 2018 – 2022 have found that 
emissions have not decreased since the latest IMO inventory and remained in 2022 around 
2008 levels (UMAS, UCL, 2024). Over the same period, also gains in carbon intensity of the 
world fleet were found to be rather limited, i.e. to 1.1% average annual reduction during 2018-
2022, thus lower than higher attained improvements in the period 2008 - 2018. Data reported 
under  the  IMO  Data  Collection  System  (DCS)  shows  only  a  minor  (-1%)  reduction  in  fuel 
consumed by the world reporting fleet in 2023 compared to 2022. 2023 data further highlighted 
that the uptake of lower carbon alternative fuels in international shipping remains slow, with 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

around  94%  of  all  reported  fuel  being  represented  by  Heavy  Fuel  Oil,  Light  Fuel  Oil  or 
Diesel/Gas Oil, and fossil LNG accounting for most of the rest (IMO, 2024).  

Figure 2 Aggregated annual amount of each fuel type reported by ships to to the IMO Data Collection System from 2019 to 2023 
(Source: IMO,  MEPC 82/6/38) 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

2.  CO2  emissions  and  related  fuel  consumption  from 
the monitored fleet 

2.1. The Fleet: emissions and number of ships 

In 2023, 12 344 ships submitted an emissions report for a total of 126.7 million tonnes of CO2 
emissions (see Figure 3).19   

Emissions  reported  for  the  year  2023  are  low  compared  to  previous  years.  They  are  7.9% 
lower than the ones reported for 2022 and when compared to the reporting years preceding 
the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e. 2018 and 2019), which included emissions related to the United 
Kingdom,  they  are  around  13%  lower.  The  2023  emissions  are  comparable  to  the  level  of 
emissions reported in 2021, which was a year marked by the long-lasting effects of the COVID-
19 crisis.  

Since the entry into force of the MRV system, 2019 remains the year with the highest total 
CO2 emissions on record. 2020 saw the highest year-on-year (-11.9%) drop in total reported 
emissions due to the economic effects of COVID-19. 2021 recorded a partial recovery from 
the pandemic’s effect on the global economy but the comparison with 2019 proves challenging 
since 2021 was also the first year affected by the new geographical scope of the MRV system 
following  the  United  Kingdom’s  withdrawal  from  the  EU20.  The  following  year,  2022,  clearly 
showed a rebound in emissions levels linked to further recovery from the COVID-19 economic 
downturn, in a year marked by the economic and geopolitical consequences of the Russia’s 
war of aggression against Ukraine.  

Figure 3 Total fleet CO2 emissions, 2018-2023 

19 Emissions reports of ships declaring zero emissions and no fuel consumption under the MRV scope have been discarded from 
this  Report.  The  relevant figures and  analysis  from  previous  reporting years  have  been  adjusted  accordingly.  The  number  of 
ships  reporting zero  emissions  is decreasing:  638  in  2018  down to  184  in  2023.  Following the  2023 revision  of  the  EU MRV 
Maritime Regulation, shipping companies are now required to submit partial emissions reports in the case of a change of shipping 
company during the reporting period: 113 partial emissions reports were submitted in the year 2023.   

20 As in the fourth and fifth MRV Annual Reports, it was not possible to recalculate historical data before 2021 so as to exclude 
the emissions resulting from the application of the EU Maritime MRV Regulation to the United Kingdom. This is  because the 
legislation does not require shipping companies to report emissions at voyage level. Therefore, throughout this report, the figures 
presented for the reporting years after 2020 are based on the reported data, which excludes the Regulation’s application to the 
United Kingdom (but only to EEA countries, including the EU-27). By contrast, the reported data for the reporting years 2018, 
2019 and 2020 includes the Regulation’s application to the United Kingdom, which is accounted for as part of the EEA (the EU-
28).  

14 

 
  
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

The  total  number  of  ships  submitting  emission  reports  for  the  reporting  year  2023  was  the 
second  highest  on  record  and  nearly  3%  higher  than  the  one  recorded  in  the  year  2021, 
despite total reported emissions being comparable. The first year of implementation of the EU 
MRV system (2018), remains the period with the lowest number of submitted emission reports.  

Figure 4: Total number of ships for which emissions report has been submitted; 2018-2023 

The analysis of the composition of the fleet reporting under MRV over the period 2018-2023 
reveals that in 2023, there was many more ships submitting an emissions report for the first 
time in the MRV system compared to previous years (9% of total reports in 2023 against an 
average of around 5% during the period). The share of ships having submitted a report in each 
of the six reporting periods so far represented 37% of total reporting ships in 2023.   

The distribution of the fleet’s total CO2 emissions over the different types of voyages and at 
berth (see Figure 5) confirms the slight decrease in the share of extra-EEA voyages (incoming 
and outgoing) recorded in 2022: these reached the lowest level in the year 2023  since the 
withdrawal of the UK from the EU, down to 65.4% in 2023 from 67.6% in 2021, a decrease 
almost entirely matched by the increase in the share of intra-EEA voyages21, while emissions 
at berth remained stable. In absolute terms, the emissions released during extra-EEA voyages 
decreased by around 10% in 2023 compared to 2022 against the overall decrease of 7.9%, 
while  emissions  from  intra-EEA  voyages  decreased  by  only  2.2%.  The  decrease  of  the 
emissions from extra-EEA activities in 2023 is a consequence of the decrease in the activity 
levels of the subsectors of the MRV fleet which are most active on extra-EEA trade routes, 
such as bulk carriers and LNG carriers22, in addition to the increase in activity for those which 
are most active in intra-EEA routes (such as passengers ships)23.     

21 This is because, as a consequence of the UK withdrawal from the EU, voyages between the UK and an EEA country are no 
longer considered intra-EEA voyages but rather extra-EEA voyages.  

22 On average, extra-EEA emissions across the 2018-2023 period accounted for 86% of total reported emissions for bulk carriers 
and for 92% for LNG carriers.  

23 Figure 7 further details the distribution of emissions by geographical scope and by ship type.  

15 

 
 
  
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 5: 2018 to 2023 share of fleet emissions per voyage type and at berth 

2.2. Ship types: emissions and number of ships 

For  most  of  the  ship  types  reporting  under  the  EU  Maritime  MRV  Regulation,  the  highest 
emission levels were recorded in the years preceding COVID-19 and the UK’s withdrawal from 
the EU, i.e. before 2020. Four ship types recorded their highest reported levels after 2020: 
emissions  for  bulk  carriers  and  LNG  carriers  peaked  in  2022,  as  a  consequence  of  the 
disruption to regional trade and energy markets caused by the Russian war of aggression on 
Ukraine.  Emissions  for  passenger  ships  and  the  category  ‘other  ship  types’  recorded  the 
highest values in 2023.  

In the  year  2023,  containerships  remains  the  ship  type  releasing  the  most  CO2  emissions, 
followed by oil tankers and bulk carriers (see Figure 6). These ship types are also the most 
numerous in the MRV system (see Figure 11). In 2023 all ship types showed a decrease in 
emissions compared to 2022, except passenger ships24 which increased by 7% and ‘other ship 
types’ which increased by over 40% (see Figure 7). 

24 All passenger ships reporting under MRV in the year 2023 were in fact cruise ships. Other passenger ships with cargo capacity 
reported as Ro-Pax ships.   

16 

 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 6: Total emissions per ship type; 2018 to 2023; descending 2022 order; levels given for 2023 (without UK) 

The  most  significant  absolute  decrease  in  emissions  can  be  seen  in  bulk  carriers  (by  4.5 
million tons, i.e. -23%) which also recorded a considerable decrease in the levels of active 
ships  in  2023  (-12%,  see  Figure  7  and  Figure  11).  General  cargo  ships,  LNG  carriers, 
combination carriers, refrigerated cargo carriers and chemical tankers recorded decreases in 
reported emissions of between 11% and 17%. The decrease in emissions from containerships 
of 6% is particularly significant given the high proportion of containerships in the EU MRV fleet 
and the increase in number of containerships that reported under MRV in 2023 (+54 ships).  

17 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 7: Change of emissions in 2023 compared to 2022 per ship type, in absolute and relative terms 

Figure 8 allows to further analyse changes in total emissions reported, by ship and voyage 
type (including a differentiation between CO2 emitted at sea and at berth), between 2022 and 
2023.  

18 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 8: Change in emissions by ship type, differentiated by type of voyage; 2022 (without UK) on 2021 (without UK); ship types 
sorted by change of total emissions 

The  most  significant  changes  in  emissions  by  voyage  type  from  2022  to  2023  are  the 
reductions in CO2 emissions from bulk carriers on incoming and outgoing extra-EEA voyages. 
Other significant reductions can be observed from containerships on outgoing and (to a lesser 
extent) incoming extra-EEA voyages, while emissions from these ships on intra-EEA voyages 
increased. For both incoming and outgoing extra-EU voyages the emissions from LNG carriers 
are also significantly less than in the 2022 reporting period. On the other hand, emissions from 
passenger ships increased for extra-EEA voyages (slightly more on incoming voyages than 
outgoing) and, more substantially, at berth although they decreased on intra-EEA voyages.  

As illustrated in Figure 9 containerships remain by far the top emitters in the MRV system. 
Taken together, the three main emitters by ship type (i.e. containerships, oil tankers and bulk 
carriers)  still  account  for  more  than  half  of  all  reported  emissions,  at  52%  of  total  MRV 
emissions (down from the 59% peak recorded in 2020).  

In  terms  of  type  of  activity,  these  three  ship  types  are  the  biggest  emitters  on  extra-EEA 
voyages (both incoming and outgoing) while emissions from intra-EEA voyages only represent 
a minor share of total emissions for bulk carriers and oil tankers. This reflects the differences 
in  trading  characteristics  of  these  ship  segments.  While  oil  tankers  and  bulk  carriers  are 
usually deployed in extra-EU trade activities, i.e. they transport cargo from/to an extra-EEA 
port to/from one single port in the EEA, containerships, on their way to/from extra-EEA ports, 
are more likely to call multiple EEA ports as part of their scheduled service, thus reporting a 
higher share of intra-EEA and at berth emissions, in addition to extra-EEA voyages.  

Figure 9: Share of overall fleet CO2 emissions by ship type; 2023 (without UK), in % 

As illustrated in Figure 10, the drop in emissions from bulk carriers impacted their share on 
total reported emissions, which reached the lowest level on record (down to a share of 11% 
from  14%  in  2022).  While  the  relative  share  of  most  ship  types  remained  stable,  2023 
emissions confirmed the increase in the share of LNG carriers and Passenger and Ro-Pax 

19 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

ships, as a consequence of energy market dynamics following the Russian full-scale invasion 
of Ukraine and the complete rebound over pre-COVID levels for passengers traffic.  

Figure 10: Ship types’ share in fleet CO2 emissions; 2018 - 2023 

In terms of number of ships active in the EU MRV system, 5 ship types keep representing the 
lion’s share: bulk carriers (29%), oil tankers (15%), container ships (15%), chemical tankers 
(11%) and general cargo ships (9%) account for 79% of emission reports submitted in 2023, 
a trend in line with the previous five years (see Figure 11). This confirms the overall stability 
in the composition of the active fleet per ship type under the EU MRV system. 

20 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Number of ships per ship type for the period 2018-2023; including 2023 relative change 
on 2022

-12%

s
p
i
h
s

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

4.500
4.000
3.500
3.000
2.500
2.000
1.500
1.000
500
0

2%

-6%

-7%

-6%

-3%

-2%

-8%

-6%

48%

-6%

12%

-6%

5%

-22%

2018

2019

2020

2021 (without UK)

2022 (without UK)

2023(without UK)

Ship type

Figure 11: Number of ships per ship type; 2018 to 2023; descending 2023 order; percentage change in 2023 compared to 2022  

The year 2022 remains to date the one recording the highest number of ships active under 
the  MRV  scope,  which  decreased  by  around  5%  in  the  year  2023,  with  most  ship  types 
submitting less emissions reports than in the previous year. In absolute terms, the greatest 
reduction in the number of active ships between 2022 and 2023 was from bulk carriers (-12% 
or  503  ships),  oil  tankers  (-4%  or  -114  ships)  and  LNG  carriers  (-8%  or  -30  ships).  The 
decrease in active bulk carriers stands out and accounted for the large majority (i.e. 71%) of 
the total decrease in the MRV fleet for 2023 (707 fewer ships). Such a sharp decrease in the 
number  of  bulk  carriers active  in the  scope  is  an indicator  to  a return  to  normal  for  activity 
levels after the disruptive year 2022 for the subsector, as the size of the active fleet in 2023 
was roughly in line (+0.3%) with the one reporting in the year 2021.  

Only four ship types recorded an increase in the number of reporting ships in 2023, namely 
ships categorised as ‘other ship types’ (107 ships or +48%), containerships (42 ships or +2%), 
passenger ships (23 ships or +12%), and container/ro-ro cargo ships (3 ships or +5%). With 
the exception of the latter one, these ship types confirmed the trend in the increase of active 
ships recorded starting 2021 and reached in 2023 the highest number of active ships since 
2018. The large increase in the number of ships reporting under the category ‘Other ship types’ 
is at least partially explained by the fact that some ships decided to change their “ship type” 
category  in  2023,  as  revealed  by  cross-checking  the  IMO  numbers  reported  in  previous 
reporting  periods  under  MRV25.  The  increase  in the  containership  and  passenger  ship fleet 
size under MRV is in line with developments for the global fleet26.  

25 Of all ships reporting as ‘Other ship types’ in 2023 34% have reported as general cargo ships and 3% as bulk carriers in 2022.  

26 350 new containerships were delivered globally in 2023 totalling an aggregate capacity of 2.2 million TEU, the highest on record 
(BIMCO, 2024). 14 new cruise ships from the members of the Cruise Line Industry Association alone were scheduled to enter 
service in 2023 (CLIA, 2023).  

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 12: Change in number of ships per ship type; 2023 (without UK) on 2022 (without UK) 

2.3. Further analysis of CO2 emissions 

In  principle,  the  annual  reported  fleet  CO2  emissions  can  vary  over  time  due  to  four  main 
factors, the last three of which also have an impact on the average emissions per ship:  

1.  More/fewer  ships  active within  the  scope of  the  EU  Maritime  MRV  Regulation  (i.e. 

more/fewer ships submitting an emissions report during the year); 

2.  Active ships within the scope of the Regulation are used to a different degree (i.e. 

more or less distance is travelled during the year); 

3.  Active ships within the scope of the Regulation are more/less energy efficient (i.e. 

more/less emissions per distance travelled); 

4.  Active ships within the scope of the Regulation use energy carriers that are more/less 

carbon intensive (i.e. higher/lower CO2 emissions per gram of combusted fuel). 

Below, changes in CO2 emissions are further analysed for specific ship types, first focussing 
on  the  latest  developments  (2023 compared  to 2022), followed  by an  analysis  of  identified 
trends in the first six reporting periods (2018 to 2023).  

2.3.1.  2023 compared to 2022 

The analysis of key changes in emissions per ship type in reporting year 2023 compared to 
2022 focuses on the three ship types (bulk carriers, oil tankers and containerships) responsible 
for  the  highest  combined  share  (i.e.  52%)  of  total  CO2  emissions.  The  analysis  further 
considers passenger ships, the type recording the highest increase in reported emissions on 
2022 (+6%) after the category “other ship type”. 

22 

 
 
  
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Table 1 Analysis of 2023 CO2 emissions compared to 2022 

The 3 largest CO2 emitters in the 2023 EU MRV fleet as well as passenger ships (% change) 

Ship type 

Total CO2 
emissions  

Number of 
reporting 
ships  

Average 
change of 
CO2 
emissions 
per ship  

Average 
change 
of 
nautical 
miles 
per ship 

Average 
speed  

Total 
travelled 
nautical 
miles  

Bulk carriers 

Oil tankers 

Containerships 

Passenger 
ships 

-23% 

-12% 

-13 % 

- 8% 

-4% 

-19% 

-2% 

-6% 

+4% 

+5% 

+2% 

-1% 

-6% 

+2% 

-9% 

-3% 

-5% 

-0.4% 

+6% 

+12% 

-5% 

-5% 

+12% 

+6% 

Analysing the emissions trends for these 4 ship types, it can be concluded that: 

1.  The  significant  decrease  (-23%)  in  emissions  from  bulk  carriers  is  linked  to  the 
decrease in the overall activity of the subsector, which is shown in port activity data 
(decrease in bulk goods handled in port). MRV data shows that in the year 2023 less 
bulker  carriers  were  active  under  scope  than  in  2022  and  those  which  were  active 
travelled  shorter  cumulated  distances.  In  addition,  as  showed  in  Figure  22,  bulk 
carriers  sailed  almost  4%  slower  than  in  2022 which  further  contributed  to  reducing 
emissions.  

2.  The small decrease (-2%) in overall emissions from oil tankers between 2022 and 2023 
resulted from the combined effect of the decrease in the number of active ships which 
however sailed longer cumulated distances at higher average speed (+2%, see Figure 
22).  

3.  The containerships sector recorded for the second consecutive year an increase in the 
number of active ship, coupled with a decrease in the activity levels of ships, which not 
only  sailed  shorter  cumulated  distances  but  also  at  a  slower  speed.  These  factors 
resulted in a significant decrease in reported emissions (-6% compared to 2022 and 
around -12% compared to 2021). It is also worth noting that average emissions per 
containership have continuously decreased since 2018, which may be an indication of 
the improvement of the technical efficiency of the ships under MRV scope, driven by 
fleet renewal and deployment of bigger and more efficient containerships27.  

4.  Passenger  ships,  which  include  cruise  ships,  experienced  a  full  rebound  from  the 
decrease  in activity  triggered by  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  and  recorded  in the year 
2023  a  considerable  increase  of  emissions,  driven  not  only  by  the  fact  that  more 
passenger ships were active under scope, but also by the increase of total distance 
sailed  and,  more  importantly,  speed  (+11%  on average),  which  resulted  in this  ship 

27 The average size of containerships active within MRV scope (expressed in dwt) has increased by 18% since 2018.  

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

type being the only one reporting an increase in emissions per nautical mile in 2023. 
2023 marked thus the year with the highest emissions from this type since 2018.    

2.3.2.  Analysis over the period 2018-2023 

2023  was  the  EU  Maritime  MRV  system's  sixth  reporting  period.  An  analysis  of  the  data 
reported in the period 2018 to 2023 potentially allows to identify certain trends over time. An 
analysis of trends is, however, limited due to two orders of factors: first, the composition of the 
active fleet within the scope of the EU Maritime MRV system changes annually28 and, second, 
different major disruptive events have marked the years after 201929.  

An  analysis  of  the  average  annual  CO2  emissions  per  ship  type  (see  Figure  13)  reveals  a 
cluster of 9 ship types with similar average emissions of between 4 000 and 9 000 tonnes CO2 
per  ship  in  2023.  The  remaining  6  ship  types  feature  much  higher  average  annual  CO2 
emissions, ranging from 17 190 tonnes CO2 for container/ro-ro cargo ships to 34 650 tonnes 
for passenger ships in 2023. Of these 6 ship types, only container ships show a continuously 
decreasing trend  of  the average  annual  CO2  emissions  (decreasing  by  about  a  third  in the 
period  2018-2023).  Average  annual  CO2  emissions  of  LNG  carriers,  Ro-Pax  ships  and 
especially  of  passenger  ships  show  strong  fluctuations  over  time,  an  indication  that  the 
relevant market segments have been affected by disruptive trends in the period (such as the 
COVID-19 economic downturn and the Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine)30.  

Figure 13: Average annual CO2 emissions per ship per ship type 

28 To date, only 4 520 ships have reported in each of the six reporting periods which corresponds to between 35% and 39% of 
the total number of ships for which a report has been submitted in a year.  

29 This is the case of the economic consequences of COVID-19 (starting 2020), of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU 
(since 2021) which impacted the geographical scope of the EU Maritime MRV Regulation, and of Russia’s full-scale invasion of 
Ukraine (since 2022).   

30 The average CO2 emissions per ship within the scope of the EU Maritime MRV Regulation may vary over time for three, not 
mutually  exclusive  reasons: the  activity  of  the ships  (i.e.  fuel consumption,  which mainly  depends  on  distance  travelled), the 
energy efficiency of the ships, and the carbon intensity of the energy used onboard ships. 

24 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

The analysis of the emissions per nautical mile of the MRV fleet (expressed as tonCO2/nm) 
reveals a decrease in 2023 of 2.5% on 2022, well above the average annual reduction of 1% 
for  the  period  2018-2023.  During  the  period  2018-2023  all  ship  types  recorded  an 
improvement in the reported emissions per nautical mile, with the only exception of passenger 
ships, which reported 2.6% more emissions per travelled nautical miles in 2023 compared to 
2018.  

The analysis of the average age per ship between 2018 and 2023 confirms trends valid for 
the world shipping fleet (UNCTAD, 2024), both in terms of differences between ship types and 
increasing average age31. All ship types under the MRV system recorded a higher average age 
in 2023 compared to what was reported in 2018. The average age has also been continuously 
increasing for all ship types except passenger ships for which the average age has fluctuated 
around 14 years32. LNG carriers, oil tankers, gas carriers, bulk carriers and chemical tankers 
are currently the types of ships with the lowest average age (ranging from 9 to 12 years) while 
refrigerated  cargo  ships,  containerships,  ro-pax  and  (container)  ro-ro  ships  as  well  as 
passenger ships are generally much older (14 to 25 years). 

31 2023, in line with 2022, saw a decrease in scrapping rates, with only 431 vessels sent to dismantling at the global level 11 less 
than in 2022, reaching the lowest levels in over a decade. 

32 In the case of passenger ships it is worth stressing that the fleet composition greatly changed in the years most affected by 
COVID-19 (2020 and 2021), when many ships reporting in previous years remained inactive.   

25 

 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

2.4  Fuel consumption 

In 2023, the EU MRV fleet consumed in total 41 million tonnes of fuel within the geographical 
scope of the Regulation, 7.6% less than in 2022 (Figure 14). It is worth noting that the change 
in  the  amount  of  consumed  fuel  is  not  always  aligned  with  the  change  in  total  reported 
emissions.  Such  a  difference  can  be  explained by  changes  in  the  fuel  mix  of  the  reporting 
fleet, which experienced a slight decrease in the average applied emissions factor, due to the 
increase in the use of less carbon intensive fuels (mainly LNG, whose consumption peaked in 
2023).   

Figure 14: 2018 to 2023 total fuel consumption of EU MRV fleet and shares per fuel type 

The analysis of the amount and type of fuel reported over the period 2018-2023 highlights the 
change in 2020 triggered by the application of MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 14, which set 
limits on the sulphur content of bunker fuel oils and in particular of some of its requirements 
becoming stricter at the beginning of 202033, leading to a large reduction in the use of Heavy 
Fuel Oil (HFO) and a significant increase in the use of Light Fuel Oil (LFO), which continued 
affecting in the following reporting periods. The year 2023, however, further amplified a trend 
recorded since 2021, namely a gradual increase in the consumption of HFO, almost entirely 
met by the decrease in the consumption of LFO. Different factors may be driving such a trend, 
including  price  changes  for  marine  fossil  fuels  triggered  by  the  2022  energy  crisis  or  the 
increasing uptake of exhaust gas cleaning systems in the fleet (which make possible the use 
of HFO within the latest IMO sulphur regulations). 

In 2023, 91% of the total mass of fuels reported were conventional marine fuels (HFO, LFO, 
MGO or MDO), the rest being alternative fuels, namely LNG (8.1%), ‘other’ fuels (0.7%), LPG 
(0.1%) and methanol (0.02%). For all ship types, except LNG carriers34, Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) 

33 Outside Emission Control Areas, the maximum allowed sulphur content of the fuel has been reduced from 3.5% to 0.5% m/m. 
To comply  with this sulphur  limit, ships can  either  use  energy carriers  with  a  lower sulphur content  (Very  low  sulphur fuel  oil 
(VLSFO), low sulphur marine gas oil, LNG, LPG, methanol or ethanol) or can keep on using heavy fuel oil in combination with an 
exhaust gas cleaning system. 

34 For LNG carriers, LNG accounts for 76% of total reported fuel consumption, followed by HFO (12%), and LFO (6%).  

26 

71.8%69.6%45.3%48.0%49.8%55.3%7.6%8.0%27.6%25.8%22.0%15.6%12.5%13.0%13.9%13.0%14.2%13.8%4.2%4.5%5.8%6.9%6.5%6.3%3.5%4.5%6.2%5.6%6.8%8.1%47.347.641.740.844.441.005101520253035404550552018201920202021 (without UK)2022 (without UK)2023 (without UK)Fuel consumption by fuel type [million tonnes]Total fleet fuel consumption by fuel type for the period 2018-2023Heavy fuel oilLight fuel oilGas oilDiesel oilLNGOtherFuel type 
  
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

is the fuel type with the highest share of total 2023 fuel consumption. Despite this, the year 
2023 clearly shows the acceleration in the uptake of LNG consumption in the MRV fleet, which 
is  likely  to  continue  in  the  coming  years  as  more  of  LNG-capable  ships  currently  on  the 
orderbook35 across different segments enter into operation.   

The share of LNG in the fuel consumption of the entire fleet increased every year over the 
period 2018-2023, with the exception of 2021, because of the reduction of LNG consumed by 
LNG carriers, in line with the decrease of seaborne LNG imports to Europe. As a result, the 
amount  of  LNG  consumed  by  the  fleet  over  the  period  2018-2023  more  than  doubled 
(i.e.+104%) and its relative share of the total went from 3.5% (2018) to 8.1% (2023).  

In 2023 the fuel consumption of LNG carriers, which usually use for propulsion part of the LNG 
transported as cargo, remained highly dominated by LNG (76% of total fuel consumption in 
tonnes for the type, the highest share on record). Despite this, the amount of LNG consumed 
by LNG carriers slightly decreased in absolute terms compared to 2022, as LNG seaborne 
imports to Europe slightly decreased on the previous year (IGU, 2024). This, combined with 
the significant increase in the LNG consumption by other ship types, drove the share of LNG 
carriers in total LNG consumption to the lowest relative value on record, 78% of total reported 
LNG, as in Figure 15.  

Figure 15: Total LNG consumption and distribution of the consumption over LNG and non-LNG carriers 

As shown in  Figure 16, beyond LNG carriers all remaining ship types, with the only exception 
of bulk carriers, reported some LNG consumption in 2023. The increase in LNG consumption 
compared to 2022 was most prominent for passenger ships (which consumed 6 times more 
LNG than in 2022), vehicle carriers (which consumed nearly 3 times more), and Ro-Pax ships 
(which consumed about twice as much LNG than in 2022). Different factors can explained the 
increased use of LNG in 2023, one being the lower LNG price in 2023 after the market tension 
experienced in 2022, and another one being the increased use of dual fuel engines that allow 

35 As of June 2024, there were 832 ships on order with the ability to use LNG as propulsion fuel, of which 339 LNG carriers, 171 
containerships, 157 vehicle carriers, 93 tankers, 22 cruise ships, and 16 bulk carriers. Measured in gross tonnage, 49.5% of ships 
on order are designed to be able to operate on alternative fuels (i.e. fuels different from HFO, LFO, MGO or MDO), compared to 
7.4%  of  ships  currently  in  operation.  In  addition  to  LNG-capable  ships,  alternative  fuel-capable  ships  on  order  include:  10 
hydrogen-capable ships, 25 ammonia-capable ships, 96 LPG-capable ships, more than 200 methanol-capable ships, and 433 
battery/hybrids ships (DNV, 2024).  

27 

 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

ships to be operated on either LNG or conventional liquid marine fuels. In terms of LNG share 
in the fuel mix by type, LNG plays the larger role for gas carriers (12%), followed by passenger 
ships (7%), Ro-pax ships (4%), Containerships (2%) and Vehicle carriers (2%). For all other 
ship types the share of LNG in total fuel consumption reported was 1% or less.  

Ship type 

 Figure 16: LNG consumed by ship types other than LNG carriers 

Consumption of Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), either as butane or propane, has increased 
by a third on the previous year and is continuously on the rise since 2020. In relative terms on 
the overall fuel mix of the MRV, its role  remains however very limited, representing around 
0.1% of all fuel consumed in 2023 (24 000 tonnes).   

The amount of methanol consumption peaked in 2023 at 7 356 tonnes, which represents an 
increase  by  around  8%  compared  to  2022,  still  accounting  only  for  0.02%  of  total  fuel 
consumption  in  the  MRV  system.  The  fleet  reporting  methanol  consumption  remains 
extremely limited, being composed by only 11 ships, out of which eight are chemical carriers 
(accounting for 90% of total reported methanol). As methanol-capable ships of different types 
are  currently  on  order,  this  is  expected to change in the  coming  years,  in particular for  the 
containership, bulk carriers, and vehicle carriers segments36.   

No  ethanol  consumption  was  reported  in  2023,  the  only  year  having  recorded  ethanol 
consumption being 2020, with only 560 tonnes.  

36 As of June 2024, there were 173 methanol-capable containerships on order as well as 24 bulk carriers and 20 vehicle carriers 
(DNV, 2024) 

28 

 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Beyond the standard fuel types applied to the MRV reporting for the year 202337, ships can 
report under the category ‘Other fuel types’ any alternative fuel which do not match the other 
standard categories. 2020 remains to date the year in which most fuel was reported under this 
category  (0.48  million  tonnes),  and  2023  recorded  levels  comparable  to  the  two  previous 
years, with 0.30 million tonnes, i.e. around 0.7% of total reported fuel in the year.  

37 The 2023 revision of the MRV Regulation introduced a different fuel categorization, based on 23 standard fuel types as detailed 
in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2015/757. Since Annex I will start being applied to the reporting period 2024, fuel reporting for the 
year 2023, as analysed in the current report, is not affected by the revision.  

29 

 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

3. The  monitored  voyages  at  a  glance:  shipping  routes, 

speed, time spent at sea and distance travelled 

3.1. Main shipping routes 

Similar  to  what  was  reported  in  the  previous  five  annual  emission  reports,  EU  MRV  data 
continues to largely corroborate the data provided by Eurostat in terms of EU trade flows by 
gross  weight  of  freight  handled  in  main  ports.  The  Eurostat  data  show  a  high  demand  for 
waterborne transport services between the EU and countries such as the United States and 
neighbouring non-EU countries such as the United Kingdom, Norway and Türkiye.  

Table 6 in Annex 3 provides the 15 main extra EU-27 flows by gross weight handled (in millions 
of tonnes) in main ports in the years 2018 to 2023. Eleven of the flows are inward flows, while 
four are outward flows.  

Figure 17: Main extra EU flows; Source: (Eurostat, 2024) 

The 15 countries related to these flows remained fairly stable over the last six years however 
for  the  first  time  in  this  period  inwards  flows  from  Algeria  exceeded  those  from  Canada, 
pushing Canada outside the top 15 in 2023. The position of other countries within the top 15 
in terms of annual volume of the flow also varies over time. Compared to 2022, inflows from 
the United States (East Coast), Norway, Brazil, Egypt, Nigeria, Libya, and Algeria increased 
in  2023.  On  the  other  hand,  inward  flows  from  the  United  Kingdom,  Türkiye  and  China 
decreased  in  2023  compared  to  2022.  Inward  flows  from  Russia  (Black  Sea)  more  than 
halved. Concerning outwards flows, the volumes of goods handled in EEA ports towards the 
4 largest flows (United Kingdom, United States, Türkiye and China) is very consistent between 
2022 and 2023. Total EU outflows are still dominated by the outward flow to the UK. 

30 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

3.2. Time spent at sea 

The time that ships are active within the scope of the EU Maritime MRV Regulation during a 
reporting period can be expected to differ between ship types due to their different operational 
profiles. These differences in operating profiles are visible by comparing the average time at 
sea  (see  Figure  18):  ship  types  that  often  sail  according  to  a  regular  schedule  (such  as 
container ships, passenger ships, Ro-ro/Ro-Pax ships) show a higher average time at sea, 
while ships types which are most often engaged in tramp trade without a fixed schedule or 
route (such as bulk carriers and tankers) spend a lower average time at sea within the scope 
of the EU MRV.  

Average time at sea by ship type for the period 2018-2023

e
p
y
t

p
i
h
S

Ro-ro ship

Ro-pax ship

Container/ro-ro cargo ship

Passenger ship

LNG carrier

Container ship

Other ship types

General cargo ship

Gas carrier

Chemical tanker

Oil tanker

Vehicle carrier

Refrigerated cargo carrier

Combination carrier

Bulk carrier

0

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

6.000

Average time at sea [hours]

2018

2019

2020

2021 (without UK)

2022 (without UK)

2023 (without UK)

Figure 18: Average time at sea by ship type; 2018-2023; sorted by 2023 average time at sea 

Goods  shipped  by  dry  bulk  carriers  are  often  traded  on  the  spot  market,  leading  to  a  high 
fluctuation in the number of individual bulk carriers that are used for trade to/from Europe as 
well  as  a  high  variety  in  the  specific  bulk  carrier  that  actually  performs  the  voyage.  For 
instance, a specific bulk carrier may only be chartered for a few voyages to an EEA port in a 
given year and the rest of the time trade or wait for contracts in other regions of the world.  

Lower  average  time  at  sea  does  not  only  depends  on  the  frequency  of  port  calls  in  EEA 
countries, but also on time spent in ports: the longer time a ship may wait in an EEA port in 
between voyages, the lower the time at sea reported under the MRV system.  

In this respect, bulk carriers are most likely to spend days in port without transport activity, as 
they wait for the next assignment in between short-term contracts. In contrast, ships like Ro-
ro, Ro-Pax, and, to a lesser extent, Passenger ships are more likely to consistently call the 

31 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

same (EEA) ports as part of a timetabled route, which does not foresee much idle time/days 
over the year.   

As a result, individual bulk carriers have the lowest average time spent at sea in the EU MRV 
system38 whereas Ro-ro ships have the highest average time spent at sea in all reporting years. 
On the other hand, because bulk carriers are one of the most numerous ship types in the MRV 
fleet and the long voyages associated with transporting bulk good from all areas of the world, 
the aggregate total time at sea of the entire bulk carrier fleet is still the highest of all ship types 
right after container ships. 

Changes in the average time at sea for the different ship types across the reporting years can 
be related to different factors: the amount of idle time39, shifts in trade patterns within the scope 
of the EU MRV (e.g. trade on shorter intra-EEA routes), and/or shifts in activity outside of the 
EU MRV (i.e. an increase in activities falling outside the EU MRV scope will negatively affect 
the average time at sea reported under the EU MRV scope). Such shifts can be linked to the 
UK’s withdrawal from the EU and/or shifts in the economic activities between regions. 

Between  2022  and  2023  the  average  time  spent  at  sea  within  the  scope  of  the  EU  MRV 
decreased slightly (less than 5%) for 9 out of the 15 ship types (see Figure 18). For passenger 
ships the decrease was more significant (-18% less average time at sea). This decrease in 
time  spent  at  sea  was  met  for  passenger  ships  by  an  increase  in  at-berth  emissions  (as 
presented in Figure 8) as well as the increase in speed (as illustrated in Figure 22).  For 4 
vessel types, the average time spent at sea increased but only to a small degree (less than 
2%),  except  for  combination  carriers  for  which the  increase  was  7%.  The  number  of  ships 
covered in this ship category is small, never exceeding 15 in the 2018-2023 period, which may 
explain why the average time spent at sea is among the most variable for this ship type.  

3.3 Distance travelled  

Figure 19 presents the average distance travelled per ship by type for the period 2018-2023. 
As for the average time spent at sea, differences are due to the different operational profile by 
ship type: ships that often sail according to a regular schedule show a higher average distance 
travelled,  while  ship  types  which  are  most  often  engaged  in  tramp  trade  without  a  fixed 
schedule show a lower average distance travelled. During the 2018-2023 period, Ro-Pax and 
Ro-ro ships consistently recorded the highest average distance per ship within the scope of 
the  MRV  Regulation  (above  60  000  nautical  miles).  This  is  because  these  ships  are  likely 
sailing  on  a  fixed  service  between  EEA  ports  throughout  the  year,  so  all  of  the  distance 
travelled in the year is reported under the MRV Regulation. In contrast, bulk carriers have had 
the lowest average distance travelled for all years (except 2020 when many passenger ships 
lay idle because of COVID-19) because the voyages of bulk carriers serving the tramp market 
are unpredictable and only the distances travelled on voyages to/from EEA ports is reported 
under the MRV Regulation.  

38 Except for 2020 when COVID-19 led many passenger ships to lie idle for long periods of time due to leisure travel restrictions.  

39 Time at anchorage is not part of the time at sea. 

32 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 19: Average annual distance travelled per ship by type of ship for the period 2018-2023 

In  terms  of  total  aggregated  distance  travelled  by  ship  type,  Figure  20  clearly  shows  that 
containerships,  bulk  carriers  and  oil  tankers  have  consistently  recorded  the  longest  total 
distances travelled during the 2018-2023 period.  

33 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 20: Total distance sailed per ship type 2018-2023 

34 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

3.4. Fleet speed 

The speed at which a ship sails is an important determinant of the ships’ operational energy 
efficiency. By reducing their speed, ships can significantly reduce the fuel consumption of their 
main engines. Reduced power demand leads, in many cases, to a net reduction of the ships’ 
fuel  consumption,  and  therefore  CO2  emissions,  even  if  the  fuel  consumption  of  the  ships’ 
auxiliary engines may increase due to longer transit times and/or extra ship capacity has to 
be  used  to  carry  out  the  same  amount  of  transport  work.  The  CO2  reduction  benefits  of 
reduced speed are likely to be highly variable per ship type and individual ship design but in 
general, a reduction of the speed of ships can, per unit of time, reduce the energy consumption 
of the propulsion engines significantly – a 10% speed reduction can, for example, reduce the 
main engine energy consumption by approximately 27% per hour (CE Delft, 2022) 40.  

Speed is a parameter which is difficult to compare between different ship types since  ships 
have  different  designs  and  serve  different  markets41.  Figure  21  shows  the  average  speeds 
across ship types for the year 2023.  

Average speed by ship type in 2023

e
p
y
t

p
i
h
S

Ro-pax ship

Vehicle carrier

Ro-ro ship

Container/ro-ro cargo ship

Refrigerated cargo carrier

LNG carrier

Passenger ship

Container ship

Gas carrier

Other ship types

Combination carrier

Chemical tanker

Oil tanker

Bulk carrier

General cargo ship

16,5

14,5

14,3

14,2

14,1

13,6

13,2

12,9

12,5

11,6

11,2

11,0

10,6

10,5

10,3

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Average speed [nautical miles/hour]

Figure 21: Average speed by ship type; 2023 (without UK); sorted by average speed 

40 It has to be considered, however, that due to the lower speed, ships need more time to cover a certain distance, reducing the 
main engine energy savings and increasing the energy consumption of the auxiliary engines per voyage. For an exemplary share 
of the auxiliary energy consumption of 5%/10%/20% in the overall energy consumption, a 10% speed reduction then translates 
into an overall energy saving of approximately 18%/16%/13%. 

41 Ro-Pax ships and refrigerated cargo ships are, for example, known to sail fast compared to oil tankers or bulk carriers as they 
serve very different needs.  

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Average speed by ship type for the period 2018-2023

Average speed [nautical miles/hour]
5
9

6

7

8

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

0

1

2

3

4

e
p
y
t

p
i
h
S

General cargo ship

Bulk carrier

Oil tanker

Chemical tanker

Combination carrier

Other ship types

Gas carrier

Container ship

Passenger ship

LNG carrier

Refrigerated cargo carrier

Container/ro-ro cargo ship

Ro-ro ship

Vehicle carrier

Ro-pax ship

2018

2019

2020

2021 (without UK)

2022 (without UK)

2023 (without UK)

Figure 22: Average speed by ship type; 2018-2023; alphabetical order 

Speed  variation  over  time is  a relevant  indicator to  understand  the  evolution  of  operational 
energy efficiency over the analysed period. In this context, the average speed by ship type 
was  calculated  based  on  figures  reported  by  the  monitored  fleet  (time  spent  at  sea  and 
distance travelled). The average speed by ship types over the period 2018-2023, as illustrated 
in Figure 22, shows that there is no indication of the MRV fleet structurally slowing down during 
the  period.  On  the  contrary,  most  ship types  (10  out  of  15  types)  recorded  higher  average 
speed in 2023 compared to 2018, with some having considerably increased speed, as in the 
case  of  combination  carriers  (+32%),  gas  Carriers  (+20%),  other  ships  (+19%),  oil  and 
chemical tankers (+14%), and passenger ships (+13%). Over the six available reporting years, 
the largest difference between the highest and lowest average speeds was observed for gas 
carriers and combination carriers as these two ship types considerably increased speed after 
2019 (by more than 2.5 knots), while the smallest different was recorded for ro-ro ships and 
refrigerated cargo carriers (less than 0.6 knots). 

The comparison of the average speed recorded in 2023 on the year 2022 highlights a marginal 
increase in speed (in the range of 1-2%) for most ship types while passenger ships (+11%) 
and  combination  carriers  (+7%)  stood  out  for  a  considerable  increase.  The  types  with  the 
highest  decrease  in  speed  in  2023  on  the  previous  year  were  containerships  (-5%),  bulk 
carriers (-4%), and general cargo ships (-4%).  

36 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

4. Technical  and  operational  efficiency  of  the  monitored 

fleet 

The energy/carbon efficiency of ships can be measured in terms of technical or operational 
efficiency and by means of various indicators. Technical efficiency indicators aim at measuring 
the energy consumption/the emissions of a ship, depending on its design, whereas operational 
efficiency  indicators  also  account  for  how  a  ship  is  operated.  For  all  the  indicators  in  this 
section, the lower the value, the higher the efficiency of the ship.  

The  year  2023  represents  the  sixth  reporting  year  of  the  EU  MRV  system.  As  such,  a 
substantial  amount  of  data  on  reporting  ships  has  become  available,  allowing  for  an 
assessment of the evolution of both the technical and operational efficiency of the monitored 
fleet, and also the robustness of the reported data.  

As  in  previous  years,  such  an  analysis  was  carried  out  by  means  of  a  graphical  analysis, 
plotting the relevant indicators per ship type against the cargo carrying capacity. This year’s 
analysis, the most representative results of which are shown in Annex 4, further corroborates 
two key findings which were highlighted in the fifth annual report: (1) The completeness and 
correctness of the reported data, which has been clearly improving over time, confirmed by 
the  subsequent  data  correlation  values’  gradual  increase,  particularly  when  comparing  the 
initial 2018 with 2023; (2) as in previous years, technical and operational efficiency trends did 
not significantly change, as shown by the different reporting periods’ regression curves overlap 
(as shown in Annex 4). 

Combining  the  above  observations,  it  can  be  concluded  that  the  sixth  MRV  reporting  year 
confirms  the  consistency  of  reported  data,  and  therefore  the  increasing  robustness  of  the 
monitoring, reporting and verification framework for maritime transport.  

4.1. Technical efficiency 

4.1.1.  Overview 

The  MRV  Regulation  requires  ships  to  report  their  technical  efficiency.  This  can  be  done 
through  three  indicators  depending  on  the  type  and  year  of  build  of  the  ship:  the  Energy 
Efficiency  Design  Index  (EEDI),  the  Energy  Efficiency  Existing  Ship  Index  (EEXI)  or  the 
Estimated Index Value (EIV)42. 

The  EEDI  is  an  energy  efficiency  measure  implemented  at  the  IMO  level  with  the  aim  to 
improve the technical energy efficiency of newbuild ships. Newbuild ships built after 1 January 
2013 or 1 January 2015 43 need to meet the minimum EEDI requirements in terms of CO2 per 
capacity nautical mile (CO2/t*nm). The EEDI requirements become more stringent over time, 
also depending on ship type and size. From January 2023, the EEXI applies to all ships  in 
international shipping of 400 GT and above. The EEXI is implemented at the IMO level and is 
similar  to  the  EEDI  in  terms  of  the formula used  to  calculate  the  index, however,  the  EEXI 
applies to existing ships and not only newbuilds44. For ships that were previously subject to the 
EEDI from newbuilding, the attained EEDI value can be taken as the attained EEXI provided 
that  it  is  equal  or  less  than  the required  EEXI  value  for the  ship type  and size45.  The  EEDI 

42 A fourth, residual, possibility, i.e. report the entry ‘not applicable’, but only applies to a minority of ship types.  

43 Depending on the ship type and size.   

44 This is required for ships subject to the EEXI requirement on the basis of MARPOL, Annex VI, Chapter 4, Regulations 22.  

45 See Marpol Annex VI Regulation 23.3 (Attained EEXI) 

37 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

required values can be less strict than the required EEXI values, depending on the date of 
construction and corresponding EEDI phase. 

The  EIV  is  a  simplified version  of the  EEDI  and  EEXI  to be reported for  certain ship types 
which are out of scope of EEDI or EEXI.   

Specific EU MRV reporting requirements regarding the technical carbon efficiency of ships are 
as follows (European Commission, 2024): 

•  The attained EEDI and EEXI has to be reported where required by and in accordance 

with MARPOL Annex VI, Regulations 22 and 23.46  

•  The EIV has to be reported for ships not covered by the EEDI or the EEXI (for example 

due to ship size) but which are ship types as listed in: 

o  MEPC.231(65),  paragraph  3:  bulk  carrier,  gas  carrier,  tanker,  containership, 
general cargo ship, refrigerated cargo carrier, combination carrier, ro-ro cargo 
ship, ro-ro cargo ship (vehicle), ro-ro passenger ship and LNG carrier. 

o  MEPC.233(65), paragraph 5: cruise passenger ships having non-conventional 
propulsion, including diesel-electric propulsion, turbine propulsion, and hybrid 
propulsion systems. 

•  Ships of ship types not covered by the above MARPOL Annex VI Regulations or MEPC 
Resolutions are not required to report their technical efficiency which explains why for 
some ships the ‘not applicable’ value was entered in the technical efficiency section. 

In  2023,  a  total  of  2 459  ships  reported  their  EEDI,  6  091  reported  their  EEXI  and  2  924 
reported  their  EIV  (with an  additional  279  ‘not  applicable’  reports).  This  is  quite different to 
2022 when a total of 4 232 ships reported their EEDI and 8 423 ships reported their EIV (with 
an additional 300 ‘not applicable’ reports). The difference can be explained by the introduction 
of the EEXI measure which had to be reported for the first time in 2023. This lead many ships 
which  previously  reported  their  EIV  (being  a  ship  type  covered  by  the  EEDI  but  delivered 
before the IMO requirements started) to report their EEXI instead. The decrease in the number 
of ships reporting their EEDI can also be explained by ships instead reporting their EEXI.  

4.1.2.  Evolution of the Technical Efficiency of the monitored fleet 

The technical efficiency of the monitored fleet was further analysed by means of a graphical 
analysis, by plotting EEDI and EIV values47 against a ship’s capacity (DWT or Gross Tonnage). 
Regression  curves  with  R2-values  have  then  been  calculated.  Similarly  to  previous  years, 
technical  efficiency  trends  did  not  significantly  change,  as  shown  by  the  different 
reporting  periods’  regression  curves  shown  in  Annex  4.  These  overlap  for  the  most 
representative  ship  types  in  the  monitored  fleet,  for  which  a  high  correlation  between  the 
technical  efficiency  index  value  and  the  carrying  capacity  was  recorded.  In  addition,  an 
improvement in correlation values is visible for the overall period 2018-2023, across different 
ship types.  

As  a  representative  example,  the  graph  below  shows  the  EIV’s  graphical  analysis  for  bulk 
carriers.  Robust  R2  correlation  values  were  calculated  (above  0.6)  for  a  total  of  nine  ship 
types,  representing  74%  of  total  emissions reported  in  2023.  The  graphs  produced for this 
analysis, showing the most significant values, are presented in Annex 4.  

46  Regulation  19  (Application)  and Regulation  20  (Attained  EEDI)  are  part  of  Chapter  4  (Regulations on  energy  efficiency  for 
ships) of Annex VI of the IMO MARPOL Convention. 

47 EEXI values were not part of the graphical analysis since 2023 was the first year in which EEXI was reported.   

38 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 23: Plot of attained EIV values for bulk carriers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

4.2. Operational efficiency 

4.2.1.  Overview: EEOI and AER 

According  to  the  EU  MRV  Maritime  Regulation,  ships  have  to  monitor  their  average 
operational energy efficiency by using at least four indicators: 

1.  Fuel consumption per distance; 

2.  Fuel consumption per transport work 48; 

3.  CO2 emissions per distance; 

4.  CO2 emissions per transport work (also referred to as Energy Efficiency Operational 

Indicator (EEOI)). 

which are calculated as follows: 

1.  Fuel consumption per distance =  

Total annual fuel consumption
Total distance travelled

2.  Fuel consumption per transport work =  

Total annual fuel consumption
Total transport work

48 Transport work expresses the product of distance travelled per the amount of cargo carried over the period. For an overview 
of the metrics applied under the EU MRV to the different ship types, see Table 10 in Annex 4.  

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

3.  CO2 emissions per distance =  

Total annual CO2 emissions
Total distance travelled

4.  CO2 emissions per transport work =  

Total annual CO2 emissions
Total transport work

The  metric  for  the  transport  work  can  thereby  differ,  depending  on  the  ship  type  (see 
Implementing Regulation 2016/1927), e.g. depending on whether cargo or passengers or both 
are transported. The majority of the ships applies a metric which uses the mass of the cargo 
transported, measuring their transport work in tonne nautical miles. (see Table 8 in the Annex 
for more details about the indicators reported per ship type).  

The Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI) is defined, in its most simple form, as the 
ratio of mass of CO2 emitted per unit of transport work. As it varies according to the actual 
cargo carried, this indicator reflects the carbon intensity of the transport service rendered by 
each individual ship. Thus, it is highly influenced by the actual loading of vessels (including 
ballast  voyages).  Keeping  everything  else  equal,  ships  with  higher  payload  utilisation  will 
therefore benefit from a lower EEOI. 

The principal challenge with regards to the operational efficiency of ships lies in the fact that 
there are various factors that have an impact on the operational efficiency of a ship. Some of 
these factors, such as the speed of a ship, can be determined by the operator, while others, 
like voyage conditions (wind, waves etc.), cannot. Analysing operational efficiency at ship type 
level and on an annual basis allows to average out factors such as voyage conditions and for 
ships, like liner ships or ferries, which operate on the same/comparable routes in the different 
years,  a change of the ships’  operational  efficiency between the years will  likely  be  mainly 
linked to a change in the operation of the ship, like a speed reduction.  

Based on the data reported by the companies, an additional operational efficiency indicator, 
the AER (Annual Efficiency Ratio) can be determined. This indicator works with a proxy for 
the ships’ transport work, i.e. the deadweight tonnage, resulting in the following metric: g CO₂/ 
(dwt*nautical  miles).  Comparing  the  different  indicators,  the  AER  features  comparably  less 
variation,  since  the  proxy  for  the  ships’  transport  work,  i.e.  the  deadweight  tonnage,  is 
constant.  

4.2.2.  Evolution of the operational efficiency of the monitored fleet 

The evolution of the operational efficiency of the fleet was analysed by means of a graphical 
analysis, applied to both EEOI and AER indicators. To this end, the AER and EEOI per ship 
type have been plotted against the cargo carrying capacity (in DWT, GT or both). Regression 
curves with R2-values have then been calculated.  

The analysis highlights that, also in 2023, the operational efficiency trends did not significantly 
change, as shown by the different reporting periods’ regression curves overlap, resulting from 
the currently established technological and commercial status-quo of the maritime trade.  

As  a  representative  example,  the  graph  below  shows  the  EEOI  graphical  analysis  for  gas 
carriers. Ten ship types have shown robust R2 correlation values (above 0.6), representing 
84% of total reported emissions in 2023. The graphs for the most significant ones are grouped 
in Annex 4. 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 24: Plot of attained EEOI values of gas carriers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

5. Assessing the implementation of the EU Maritime 

MRV Regulation 

With  the  aim  of  continuous  improvement  in  the  implementation  of  the  EU  maritime  MRV 
Regulation,  the  Commission  and  the  European  Maritime  Safety  Agency  support  shipping 
companies and verifiers through different means, including guidance documents, webinars, 
and dedicated functional helpdesks. Periodic meetings are also organised through the year in 
which outstanding issues concerning the Regulation’s implementation can be discussed.  

5.1 Quality and completeness of submitted data 

5.1.1 Outliers  

Some of the verified emissions reports include a few outliers, i.e. relatively easily identifiable, 
obvious mistakes.49 Figure 25 shows that both the number of emissions reports containing one 
or more outliers and the impact of outliers on total fleet CO2 emissions has been consistently 
decreasing  over  the  period  2018-2023,  recording  its  lowest  level  in  2023.  Only  54  reports 
(0.44% of total reports) contained one or more outliers in 2023, down from 465 (4% of total 
reports) in 2018, with the few outliers reported in 2023 concerning data elements which have 
no  impact  on  the  levels  of  reported  emissions50.  The  emissions  reports  containing  outliers 
accounted for only 0.16% of total reported emissions in 2023.  

In 2023, 14 verifiers verified emissions reports containing 1 or more outliers and only 4 verifiers 
processed more emissions reports containing outliers compared to 2022.  

Figure 25: Quality of submitted data, impact of outliers  

49 Across the whole present report, in view of ensuring the accuracy of data, clear outliers identified during the analytical process 
have been discarded, as in previous years. 

50 Most of detected outliers concern ship (e.g. size) or cargo (e.g. split ballast/laden) details.   

42 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

5.1.2 Non-compliant emissions reports and revisions  

After the first reporting year, for which 149 cases were recorded, the number of initially non-
compliant emission reports has continuously decreased over the years, down to only one case 
in 2023. The number of revisions required after first submission of the emissions report to the 
verifier  has  continuously  decreased  over  time,  accounting  only  for  40%  of  total  submitted 
reports (down from 90% in 2018).  

5.2 Punctuality  

For  the  EU  MRV  reporting  period  2023,  shipping  companies  had  to  submit  their  verified 
emissions  report  to  the  Commission  and  the  flag  State  by  30  April  2024.  Only  53%  of  the 
emissions reports were submitted to the Commission by the deadline, a value in line with 2022 
but notably lower than the highest one recorded in 2021 (65%). The share of emissions reports 
submitted by shipping companies for verification to the verifiers prior to the end of April has 
also worsened, down to 73% in 2023 from 80% in 2018.   

The  data  over  the  period  2018-2023  confirms  that  the  submission  to  the  European 
Commission of a large share of verified emissions reports is often finalised after the deadline 
of 30 April, which still allows companies to obtain a valid document of compliance by 30 June, 
when the document of compliance of the previous compliance cycle is set to expire. By that 
date, 88% of the emissions reports for 2023 were submitted to the European Commission, 
which is lower than what recorded in 2021 (91%).  

The  worsening  of  punctuality  indicators  in  respect  of  the  reporting  period  2023  can  be 
explained by the considerable workload on shipping companies and verifiers brought by the 
revision  of  the  existing  monitoring  plans  (due  by  1  April  2024)  triggered  by  the  entry  into 
application of the new monitoring and reporting rules in 202451.   

51  As  a  consequence  of 
OJ L 130, 16.5.2023, p. 105, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/957/oj. 

revision  of 

the 

the  Maritime  MRV  system  adopted  with  Regulation (EU) 2023/957, 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

References 

BIMCO. (2024, January 10).  Record deliveries could push container fleet above 30 
million  TEU  in  2024.  Retrieved  from  Baltic  and  International  Maritime  Council 
(BIMCO):  https://www.bimco.org/news-and-trends/market-reports/shipping-number-of-the-
week/20240110-snow 

CE Delft. (2022). Blue Speeds for Shipping economic analysis and legal framework to achieve 

environmental benefits. Delft: CE Delft. 

CLIA.  (2023).  State  of  the  Cruise  Industry  2023.  Retrieved  from  https://cruising.org/-

/media/clia-media/research/2023/2023-clia-state-of-the-cruise-industry-report_low-
res.ashx 

DNV. (2024). Energy Transition Outlook 2024, Maritime Forecast to 2050. Hamburg: DNV AS. 

EEA  &  EMSA.  (2021).  European  Maritime  Transport  Environmental  Report  (EMTER). 

Luxembourg: Publications office of the European Union. 

EEA. (2024). EEA greenhouse gases — data viewer. Retrieved from European Environmental 
Agency: https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/maps-and-charts/greenhouse-gases-
viewer-data-viewers?activeTab=570bee2d-1316-48cf-adde-4b640f92119b 

EMSA. (2021). Impact of COVID-19 on the maritime sector in the EU. Lisbon: EMSA. 

European Commission. (2024, August 21). EU reaches 90% gas storage target 10 weeks 
ahead of deadline. Retrieved from DG Energy: https://energy.ec.europa.eu/news/eu-
reaches-90-gas-storage-target-10-weeks-ahead-deadline-2024-08-21_en 

European  Commission.  (2024,  July  4).  Guidance  Document  -  The  EU  ETS  and  MRV 
from 

for  shipping  companies.  Retrieved 

Maritime 
https://climate.ec.europa.eu/document/download/31875b4f-39b9-4cde-a4e2-
fbb8f65ee703_en?filename=policy_transport_shipping_gd1_maritime_en.pdf 

-  General  guidance 

Eurostat. 

(2021).  Maritime 

freight 

and 

vessels 

statistics.  Retrieved 

from 

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/index.php?title=Maritime_ports_freight_and_passenger_statistics&oldid=2
18671 

Eurostat.  (2023).  Glossary:  Global-warming  potential  (GWP).  Retrieved  from  Eurostat: 

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Glossary:Global-
warming_potential_(GWP) 

Eurostat. (2023, October 31). Gross weight of goods handled in main ports by direction and 

type of cargo - quarterly data [mar_go_qmc]. 

Eurostat. (2023). Gross weight of goods handled in main ports by direction and type of cargo 

- quarterly data [mar_go_qmc]. 

Eurostat.  (2024,  November  11).  EU  imports  of  energy  products  -  latest  developments. 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-

Retrieved 

Eurostat: 

from 

44 

 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

explained/index.php?title=EU_imports_of_energy_products_-
_latest_developments#Overview 

Eurostat. (2024, November 26). Maritime transport of goods - annual data (2023). Retrieved 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-

from 
explained/index.php?title=Maritime_transport_of_goods_-_annual_data 

Eurostat: 

General Secretariat of the Council. (2023, October). Infographic - Where does the EU’s gas 
Infographics: 
Retrieved 

come 
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/eu-gas-supply/ 

from? 

from 

General Secretariat of the Council. (2023). Infographic - Where does the EU’s gas come 
Infographics: 

from? 
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/eu-gas-supply/ 

Retrieved 

from 

ICCT.  (2019,  February  25).  IMO  agrees  that  we  can  control  black  carbon  emissions  from 
ships. But will we? Retrieved from The International Council on Clean Transportation: 
https://theicct.org/imo-agrees-that-we-can-control-black-carbon-emissions-from-
ships-but-will-
we/#:~:text=Banning%20HFO%20can%20reduce%20black,could%20still%20harm%
20the%20climate). 

IEA. (2022). Coal 2022 Analysis and Forecasts to 2025. International Energy Agency . 

IGU. (2024). 2024 World LNG Report. London : International Gas Union. 

IMO. (2020). Fourth Greenhouse Gas Study 2020.  

IMO. 

(2022). 

Energy 

Efficiency 

Measures. 

Retrieved 

from 

IMO: 

https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/Technical-and-Operational-
Measures.aspx 

IMO. (2023). Report on annual carbon intensity and efficiency of the existing fleet (Reporting 

years: 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022).  

IMO. (2024, May 24). Getting ready for low sulphur ship fuel oil limits in the Mediterranean. 
https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/Pages/WhatsNew-

IMO: 

from 

Retrieved 
2081.aspx 

IMO. (2024, October). Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 82), 30 September 
– 
: 
Retrieved 
https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/MeetingSummaries/Pages/MEPC-82nd-
session.aspx 

from  Meeting 

Summaries 

October 

2024. 

4 

IMO.  (2024).  Report  of  fuel  oil  consumption  data  submitted  to  the  IMO  Ship  Fuel  Oil 

Consumption Database in GISIS (Reporting year: 2023).  

OECD. (2023). ITF Transport Outlook 2023. Paris: OECD Publishing. 

UMAS, UCL. (2024, November 13). Transition Trends: International Shipping Emissions from 
https://www.u-mas.co.uk/wp-

2018 
content/uploads/2024/11/UCL-UMAS-2024-Transition-Trends-Report-Final.pdf 

2022.  Retrieved 

from  UMAS: 

to 

45 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

UNCTAD. (2024). Review of Maritime Transport 2024. Geneva: United Nations Publication. 

UNTAD. (2024). Navigating Troubled Waters: Impact to global trade of disruption of shipping 

routes in the Red sea, Black sea and Panama Canal.  

46 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Annex 1 Abbreviations and definitions 

Table 2 Abbreviations and definitions 

Abbreviation 

Meaning 

AER 

AFIR 

BDN 

CII 

DCS 

DoC 

dwt 

EC 

EEA 

EEDI 

EEOI 

EEXI 

EIV 

Annual Efficiency Ratio 

Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation 

Bunker Delivery Note 

Carbon Intensity Indicator 

Data Collection System 

Document of Compliance 

Deadweight tonnage 

European Commission 

European Economic Area (EU-27 + Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein) 

Energy Efficiency Design Indicator 

Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator 

Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index  

Estimated Index Value 

EMSA 

European Maritime Safety Agency 

ETD 

ER 

EU 

GHG 

GT 

HFO 

IAPP  

IGU 

Energy Taxation Directive 

Emissions Report 

European Union 

Greenhouse Gas  

Gross tonnage 

Heavy Fuel Oil 

International Air Pollution Prevention 

International Gas Union  

47 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

International Maritime Organization 

Liquefied Natural Gas 

Liquefied Petroleum Gas 

Long Range Identification and Tracking 

IMO 

LNG 

LPG 

LRIT 

MARINFO 

EMSA’s internal database fed by information bought from commercial 
providers 

MARPOL 

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 

MEPC 

Marine Environmental Protection Committee 

m/m 

MP 

MRV 

MS 

NAB 

Mass per mass 

Monitoring Plan 

Monitoring, Reporting, Verification 

Member State 

National Accreditation Body 

n miles 

Nautical miles 

Pax 

PSC 

RED 

Passenger 

Port State Control 

Renewable Energy Directive 

Ro-ro ship 

Roll-on/roll -off ship 

Ro-Pax ship 

SEEMP 

TEN-T 

THETIS-MRV 

Roll-on/roll-off passenger ship 
(vessel built for freight vehicle transport along with passenger 
accommodation) 

Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan 

Trans-European Transport Network 

EMSA web-based application established for the implementation of the 
EU Maritime MRV Regulation (e.g. to be used by companies to generate 
emissions reports). 

UNCTAD 

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development  

VLSFO 

Very Low Sulphur Fuel Oil 

48 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Annex 2 Outcomes of the sixth compliance cycle 

A.2.1 Fuel/emissions monitoring methods 

Under the EU MRV Regulation, companies can apply four different fuel/emission monitoring 
methods: Bunker Fuel Delivery Note (BDN) and period stock takes of fuel tanks (Method A), 
bunker  fuel  tank  monitoring  on-board  (Method  B),  flow  meters  for  applicable  combustion 
processes (Method C) and direct CO2 emissions measuring (Method D). Ships can also apply 
a combination of these methods.  

Share of ships that have applied method A-D alone or in combination; 2018 to 2023 

Table 3 Fuel monitoring methods 

A 

B 

C 

D 

Ships applying one 
method only 

Ships applying 
more than one 
method 

Ships applying 
methods A and B 

Ships applying 
method C only 

2018 

2019 

2020 

2021 

2022 

2023 

48% 

34% 

33% 

0% 

51% 

32% 

30% 

0% 

51% 

32% 

31% 

0% 

51% 

31% 

31% 

0% 

54% 

29% 

31% 

0% 

56% 

33% 

30% 

0% 

85% 

86% 

87% 

87% 

87% 

82% 

15% 

14% 

13% 

13% 

13% 

18% 

3% 

3% 

3% 

2% 

2% 

3% 

21% 

20% 

20% 

20% 

20% 

15% 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

A.2.2 Verifiers and National Accreditation Bodies 

In the reporting period 2023, 19 different accredited verifiers performed verification activities 
required for the shipping companies’ compliance with the EU Maritime MRV Regulation. The 
five largest of the verifiers covered around 72% of the emissions reports that were submitted 
in 2023. Eight different national accreditation bodies (NABs) have accredited the 19 verifiers 
active  in  the  2022  reporting  period.  Three  of  these  NABs  have  accredited  more  than  one 
verifier.  

4 of the 19 verifiers are not located in an EEA country (see Table 5) and the highest number 
of verifiers is located in Greece (6 out of the 19). 

Table 4 Number of verifiers accredited per National Accreditation Body 

Number of verifiers* accredited per National Accreditation Body in 2018 to 2023 

National Accreditation Body 

2018 

2019 

2020 

2021  2022  2023 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

ACCREDIA – IT 

COFRAC - FR 

Croatian Accreditation Agency – HR 

German Accreditation Body (DAkkS) – DE 

The Danish Accreditation Fund (DANAK) – DK 

Dutch Accreditation Council (RvA) - NL 

Hellenic Accreditation System (ESYD) – EL 

Polish Centre for Accreditation (PCA) – PL 

Portuguese Institute for Accreditation (IPAC) – 
PT 

Swedish Board for Accreditation and 
Conformity Assessment (Swedac) - SE 

The United Kingdom Accreditation Service 
(UKAS) - UK 

1 

3 

1 

5 

0 

1 

6 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

3 

1 

5 

0 

1 

5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

1 

5 

0 

1 

5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

1 

5 

1 

1 

5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

0 

5 

0 

1 

6 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

0 

5 

0 

1 

6 

1 

1 

1 

0 

*Verifiers with the same accreditation number are considered as one verifier. 

Total 

24 

21 

19 

20 

19 

19 

Table 5 Number of verifiers 

Number of verifiers per country in 2018 to 2023 

Country 

2018 

2019 

2020 

2021 

2022  2023 

1 

2 

Croatia 

France 

1 

2 

1 

2 

1 

2 

1 

2 

0 

2 

0 

2 

50 

 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

Germany 

Greece 

Italy 

Poland 

Portugal 

Sweden 

United Kingdom 

China 

India 

Japan 

Republic of Korea 

Russian Federation 

3 

6 

1 

1 

1 

1 

4 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

3 

5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

3 

5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

3 

5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 

6 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

3 

6 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

Total 

24 

21 

19 

20 

19 

19 

51 

 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

A.2.3 Port State Control inspections 

According  to Article 19(2)  of the  EU  MRV  Regulation (2015/757)  each Member  State shall 
ensure that any inspection of a ship in a port under its jurisdiction carried out following Directive 
2009/16/EC includes checking that a valid MRV Document of Compliance (DoC) is carried on 
board. Figure 26 provides an overview of the number and the outcome of the inspections of 
the  MRV  DoC  during  Port  State  Control  (PSC)  inspections  in  EEA  Member  States  for  the 
period 2019-2024 52, which refers to the six compliance years associated to the reporting years 
2018-2023. 

Total number and outcome of MRV DoC inspection carried out during the period 2019-
2024, excluding UK inspections 

s
n
o
i
t
c
e
p
s
n
i

f
o
r
e
b
m
u
N

12.000

10.000

8.000

6.000

4.000

2.000

0

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

Found on board

Not applicable

Not found on board

Not reported

Outcome

Figure 26: Total number and outcome of MRV DoC inspection as part of PSC inspection over the period 2019-2023 

During  the  compliance  checks  carried  out  in  respect  of  the  first  six  reporting  years,  up  to 
October  2024,  51  060  ships were  inspected  to  confirm the  presence  of  valid MRV  DoC  on 
board the ship. 70% of these ships were able to present a valid DoC, while 24% of the ships 
were not required to carry a valid MRV DoC onboard. On aggregate, over the six compliance 
cycles, only 3% of the inspected ships could not produce a valid DoC53 . The yearly share of 
ships for which a valid DoC was not found onboard has considerably decreased after the first 
two compliance years, during which much higher values were registered (7% in 2019 and 4% 
in 2020) and is currently stabilised below/around 2/3%. 

52 The date includes the dataset available at the time of writing, thus referring to inspections carried out from January 2019 to 
early October 2024.   

53 The value ‘not reported’ refers to cases where the PSC inspector did not declare the outcome of the inspection with respect to 
the MRV DoC. Those accounted for around 3.5% of inspected ships over the period.  

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Annex 3 Main extra-EU flows 

Table 6 provides the top 15 extra EU-27 flows by gross weight handled in main ports over the 
years 2018 to 2023, in millions of tonnes. Eleven of the flows are inward flows, while four are 
outward flows. The 15 countries related to these flows remained fairly stable over the last six 
years however for the first time in this period inwards flows from Algeria exceeded those from 
Canada, pushing Canada outside the top 15 in 2023. The position of other countries within 
the top 15 in terms of annual volume of the flow  also varies over time. Compared to 2022, 
inflows from the United States (East Coast), Norway, Brazil, Egypt and Nigeria increased in 
2023. On the other hand, inward flows from the United Kingdom, Russia (Baltic Sea), Türkiye 
and China decreased in 2023 compared to 2022. Inward flows from Russia (Black Sea) more 
than  halved.  Concerning  outwards  flows,  the  volumes  of  goods  handled  between  the  four 
countries is very consistent between 2022 and 2023.  

The top maritime flows in goods were, in declining order, inward flows of goods from the East 
Coast  of  the  United  States  –  East  Coast  (8.5%  of  the  total  extra-EU  seaborne  transport  in 
2023), the outward flow to the United Kingdom (5.4%), the inward flows from Norway (5.3%), 
the United Kingdom (4.9%), Brazil (3.8%), China (3.7%), Türkiye (3.6%), Egypt (3.4%), the 
outward flow to the East Coast of the USA (2.6%), and the inward flow from the Black Sea 
area of Russia (2.2%). 

Table 6 Top 15 extra EU-27 flows by gross weight handled in main ports 

Inward and outward flows from/to EU-27 ports (million tonnes) 

Source: Eurostat (2024) 

53 

201820192020202120222023Inward flows to EU ports from non-EU portsUSA: East coast91,3106,5100,0106,0147,4172,5NORWAY86,090,080,781,889,7107,7UNITED KINGDOM105,0104,8108,9101,1106,598,7BRAZIL86,576,268,574,676,377,0CHINA61,665,961,672,179,175,6TÜRKIYE73,282,281,392,288,773,5EGYPT50,054,247,544,454,168,7RUSSIA: BLACK SEA78,681,383,279,371,644,5NIGERIA35,046,239,434,432,738,8LIBYA28,128,09,132,926,335,9ALGERIA25,728,427,627,825,135,5Outward flows from EU ports to non-EU portsUNITED KINGDOM114,0108,3101,6117,7109,9108,4USA: East coast52,653,347,557,154,253,5TÜRKIYE46,148,048,949,245,543,4CHINA42,051,257,453,741,240,9 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Annex 4 Technical and operational efficiency of the 

monitored fleet 

A.4.1 Technical efficiency (related to Section 4.1.1.) 

Table 7 gives an overview of the number of ships that, per ship type, have reported, the EEDI, 
the EIV or ‘not applicable’ as technical efficiency indicator. 

Table 7 Number of ships which reported their EEDI, EIV or ‘not applicable’ in 2023 

Technical efficiency indicators reported per ship type 

Ship type 

# of ships 
which reported 
their EEDI in 
2023 

# of ships 
which reported 
their EEXI in 
2023 

# of ships 
which reported 
their EIV in 
2023 

# of ships 
that reported 
‘Not 
applicable’ in 
2023 

Bulk carrier 

Chemical tanker 

Combination carrier 

Container ship 

Container/Ro-ro cargo 
ship 

Gas carrier 

General cargo ship 

LNG carrier 

Oil tanker 

Other ship types 

Passenger ship 

Refrigerated cargo 
carrier 

Ro-Pax ship 

Ro-ro ship 

Vehicle carrier 

906 

404 

0 

212 

9 

74 

136 

84 

515 

2 

31 

11 

12 

15 

48 

1 595 

547 

2 

1 384 

13 

192 

504 

190 

911 

10 

156 

70 

140 

135 

242 

885 

307 

4 

213 

35 

51 

359 

78 

381 

142 

7 

51 

196 

59 

156 

25 

19 

0 

3 

0 

1 

5 

1 

11 

129 

11 

0 

32 

0 

0 

Total 

4 459 

6 091 

2 924 

237 

54 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Evolution of the Technical Efficiency of the monitored fleet – graphical analysis  

The figures below plot the Estimated Index Value (EIV) and Energy Efficiency Design Index 
(EEDI) values for nine ship types in the six reporting years (2018 to 2023) against the size of 
the relevant ships measured in deadweight tonnage (see dots with a different colour per year). 
As in previous annual reports, only graphs with robust R2-indicator (>0.6) for the correlation 
between  EEDI/EIV  and  the  respective  cargo  carrying  capacity  have  been  included  in  this 
report.  

The EIV/EEDI trendlines for 2018 to 2023 for the following ship types clearly overlap, which 
indicates that the technical efficiency of these subsegments of the fleet has not significantly 
changed.  The  ship types  included  in this  graphical  analysis  represents  in emissions  terms, 
74% of total reported emissions in 2023.  

The  correlation  values  are  generally  increasing  over  the  years,  with  nearly  all  ship  types 
showing a higher correlation value in 2023 than in 2018.  

The ship types for which the sample is too small (below 25 occurrences) or the regression line 
not reliable enough  to  draw  conclusions (e.g.  due to  high  variability/scatter)  have not  been 
shown. 

Figure 27: Plot of attained EIV values of bulk carriers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 28: Plot of attained EIV values of oil tankers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

Figure 29: Plot of attained EIV values of chemical tankers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

56 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 30: Plot of attained EEDI values of bulk carriers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

Figure 31: Plot of attained EEDI values of oil tankers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

57 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 32: Plot of attained EEDI values of chemical tankers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

Figure 33: Plot of attained EEDI values of LNG carriers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

58 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 34: Plot of attained EEDI values of container ships over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

Figure 35: Plot of attained EEDI values of general cargo ships over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

59 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

A.4.2 Operational efficiency (related to Section 4.2.) 

Operational efficiency indicators 

The  majority  of  the  ships  (have  to)  apply  a  metric  which  uses  the  mass  of  the  cargo 
transported, measuring their transport work in tonne nautical miles. In contrast, container/Ro-
ro  cargo  ships  and  LNG  carriers  apply  a  metric  which  uses  the  volume  of  the  cargo 
transported, measuring their  transport  work  in  cubic  metre nautical miles.  Passenger  ships 
naturally determine their transport work in terms of passenger nautical miles. Ro-Pax ships, 
which  transport  cargo  and  passengers,  report  two  indicators,  one  in  terms  of  passenger 
nautical miles and the other in terms of tonne nautical miles for the freight transported. Three 
categories of ship types (general cargo ships, vehicle carriers, other ship types) can, instead 
of  mass  of  the  cargo  transported,  alternatively  determine  their  transport  work  by means  of 
‘deadweight carried’54.  

Table 8 gives an overview of the different operational efficiency indicators and metrics that 
were  reported  in  2023.  The  table  hereunder  only  shows  the  CO2  efficiency  indicators.  The 
corresponding energy efficiency indicators are not presented in the table, but the same metrics 
hold (kg fuel/n miles instead of kg CO₂ / n mile etc.) and have been reported by the same ship 
types. 

Table 8 Operational efficiency indicators 

Indicators reported by ship type 

Operational efficiency 
indicator 

Annual average CO₂ emissions 
per distance 

Annual average CO₂ emissions 
per transport work (mass distance)  

Indicator Units 

Indicator reported by… 

[kg CO₂ / n mile] 

All ship types 

[g CO₂ / (m tonnes · n miles)] 

All ship types except  

•  Container/Ro-ro cargo 

ship,  
• 
LNG carrier,  
•  Passenger ships,  
•  Ro-pax ships 

Annual average CO₂ emissions 
per transport work (volume)  

[g CO₂ / (m³ · n miles)] 

Container/Ro-ro cargo ship 
LNG carrier 

Annual average CO₂ emissions 
per transport work (dwt carried)  

[g CO₂ / (dwt carried · n miles)] 

Mainly General cargo ships and 
Other ship types; very few ships 
of other types. 

Annual average CO₂ emissions 
per transport work (pax) 

[g CO₂ / (pax · n miles)] 

Passenger ships 
Ro-pax ships 

Annual average CO₂ emissions 
per transport work (freight)  

[g CO₂ / (m tonnes · n miles)] 

Ro-pax ships 

54 According to Implementing Regulation 2016/1928, deadweight carried (in metric tonnes) is the volume displacement multiplied 
with the water density, with the mass of fuel and lightweight subtracted. 

60 

 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Evolution of operational efficiency – a graphical analysis 

The figures below plot values for the Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI) and the 
Annual Efficiency Ratio (AER) for eleven ship types in the six reporting years (2018 to 2023), 
against  the  size of the relevant  ships - measured  in deadweight tonnage  or  gross  tonnage 
(see dots with a different colour per year)55.  

The EEOI/AER trendlines for 2018 to 2023 for most ship types clearly overlap, which indicates 
that the operational efficiency of these subsegments of the fleet has not significantly changed. 
The ship types included in this graphical analysis cover ten out of the fifteen unique ship types 
reporting under the EU MRV system, representing 84% of total reported emissions in 2023 
(up from 74% in 2022).  

The  correlation  values  are  generally  increasing  over  the  years,  with  almost  all  ship  types 
showing a higher correlation value in 2023 than in 2018.  

The ship types for which the sample is too small (<25 occurrences), or the regression line is 
not reliable enough to draw conclusions (e.g. due to high variability/scatter), have not been 
shown 56. 

Figure 36: Plot of attained EEOI values of gas carriers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

55 As in previous annual reports, only graphs with a robust R2-indicator (>0.6) for the correlation between EEOI/AER and the 
respective cargo carrying capacity have been included in this report.  

56 For passenger ships (cruise liners) and  Ro-Pax vessels no EEOI/AER regression curve is presented since the long-lasting 
effects of the COVID-19 pandemic impacting the period 2020-2022 resulted in higher and more fluctuant EEOI and AER values 
for these types of vessels, limiting therefore the interest of applying a regression analysis.  

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 37: Plot of attained EEOI values of container ships over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

Figure 38: Plot of attained AER values of oil tankers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

62 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 39: Plot of attained AER values of general ro-ro ships over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

Figure 40: Plot of attained AER values of container-ro-ro cargo ships over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 41: Plot of attained AER values of container ships over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

Figure 42: Plot of attained AER values of vehicle carriers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

64 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 43: Plot of attained AER values of bulk carriers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

Figure 44: Plot of attained AER values of chemical tankers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

65 

 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Figure 45: Plot of attained AER values of LNG carriers over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

Figure 50: Plot of attained AER values of combination carrier ships over the reporting years and associated trendlines 

66