Ship Emissions Register

Chemical tanker · Norway flag · built 2013

JO PROVEL

IMO 9592692 EU ETS8 reporting years

CO₂ reported 2025
0 t
Gross tonnage
42,420

Vessel particulars

IMO number
9592692
Previously reported as
TORM EMILIE
Ship type
Chemical tanker
Gross tonnage
42,420
Length overall
228.0 m
Beam
32.3 m
Year built
2013
Flag state
Norway
Builder
STX Offshore & Shipbuilding
Port of registry
Frederikshavn
Technical efficiency (design)
EEXI (4.04 gCO₂/t·nm)
Verifier
DNV, Germany
Accreditation
VS-16026-01
Compliance document issued
2026-01-26
Compliance document expires
2027-06-30

Flag state is derived from rapportert, not reported directly, and reflects the registry at the time of reporting.

Efficiency against its own type2024

Position 500 of 1,566 qualifying oil tankers by EEOI, at the 32th percentile. The dashed line is the type median, 7.6; this vessel reported 6.2.

0255075100more efficientless efficientThis vessel: 32th percentile, EEOI 6.2

EEOI divides emissions by transport work, which for this vessel and year was 605,878,444 tonn-nmover 10,661 nautical miles.

Reported CO₂ by year

2018: 10,987 t201810,9872019: 5,661 t20192020: 11,149 t20202021: 11,030 t20212022: 12,397 t20222023: 5,289 t20232024: 3,738 t20242025: 0 t20250

Between 2018 and 2025 reported CO₂ fell by 100.0%.

Annual returns2018–2025

Year CO₂ (t) Fuel (t) Distance (nm) At sea (h) At berth (t) kg CO₂/nm EEOI Percentile
2025 0 0 0 0
2024 3,738 1,190 10,661 826 188 350.6 6.2 32
2023 5,289 1,684 14,483 1,378 363 365.2 9.3 63
2022 12,397 3,922 34,794 4,050 712 356.3 10.2 68
2021 11,030 3,515 29,217 2,928 356 377.5 12.6 76
2020 11,149 3,548 29,480 2,669 528 378.2 12.6 73
2019 5,661 1,810 16,081 1,781 110 352.0 21.4 91
2018 10,987 3,502 22,842 2,369 1,081 481.0 8.7 51

Verifier history

From reporting yearVerifierAccredited in
2018VERIFAVIA (UK) LTDUnited Kingdom
2020NORMEC VERIFAVIA SASFrance
2023DNVGermany

A change of accredited verifier is shown because it matters for audit and data continuity. It is not in itself a sign of anything being wrong.

Sources and how to read this

What this page is built on

Reporting years
8
Ranked by efficiency
yes
Vessel particulars
5 of 5
Movement data
not observed
Name history
yes
Photograph
none licensed
Sanctions record
none
Inspection record
none in US waters
Caveats that apply to every vessel page

EEOI above 100,000 is withheld. Those values come from returns where reported transport work is near zero, which makes the ratio meaningless rather than extreme. Median across the dataset is around 12.

Emission categories overlap. In the MRV return, emissions at berth are also counted inside the voyage legs, so the categories do not sum to the total. They are shown side by side rather than stacked for that reason.

Distance is derived, intensity is reported. The MRV return publishes CO₂ per nautical mile but not the distance itself, which is null in all 106,564 rows of the source. The distance column is therefore filled from the ranking step, which reconstructs it, and is blank for years where a vessel was not ranked. That is why a row can show an intensity without a distance.

Percentile is within type and year. It is the vessel's position among qualifying ships of the same type that year, where lower is more efficient. A blank means the vessel did not qualify for ranking that year.

Sister ships share a builder, a type and a build year within two years of this vessel. That holds hull and machinery roughly constant and leaves operation as the variable, which is why they are listed before nearest-by-tonnage.

Methane and nitrous oxide start in 2024. They were not reported before that period, so earlier years cannot be compared against them.

Technical efficiency is a design figure fixed at construction. A vessel can hold a good index and still emit heavily by sailing fast, waiting at anchor or carrying little.

Inspection records cover United States waters only. An empty record is not evidence of a clean history elsewhere.

Empty means unreported, never zero. Nothing here is modelled, estimated or interpolated. See the methodology.

Something wrong on this page? See corrections. We do not hold the source registers and cannot amend them, but we will fix anything we have got wrong in reproducing them.

Comparable vesselssister ships and nearest by tonnage