Electric Boat Completes 1,400 Mile Voyage to Alaska under 100% Solar Power

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
." I have a brand new Kabota engine, d905 sitting on the floor of my garage if I put it in my boat and made the trip . do you think I would get the favorable press."

So your purpose in boating is to get favorable press? not enjoying either the trip or the destination?

Certainly a unique reason to go boating.

Slow moving in the north , you might have enjoyed the heat from the diesel stack or the engine coolant .
 
Last edited:
JWellington said:
Why could we know for this boat when we dont know or the filthy diesel powered boats?
Click to expand...

Why are diesel powered boats "filthy"???

Seems like there is a push to go "clean" with everything, COVID, energy ("clean" is such a subjective term), I wonder what or who is getting dirty???

I do find it remarkable that the folks in this article were able to make the trip with a rather meager 1700 watts of available power, not sure if this was at 100% capacity or derated for the lack of sunlight in the area. 1700 watts works out to 2.28 horsepower, so remarkable indeed.

I personally do not have anything against electric power, here is an electric powered boat I am somewhat fond of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Lexington_(CV-2)

I guess I just don't understand why "Electric is good" and "Diesel is bad"... Seems the last time we went this route, we were at war, and having some direct experience with this, would prefer to avoid it if it all possible...

Have a fine Navy day!

Garry

EDIT: One of my favorite solar powered vessels...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_barquentine_Esmeralda
 
Last edited:
I thought I’ve made it pretty clear in my responses that solar electric isn’t ready for prime time yet ,and that diesel can be used conservatively with much better outcomes,I don’t know how I could’ve made it any clearer. Nobody wishes more that electric power Boat was possible than me .I spent 12 years sitting right on top of a 375 horse diesel ,I’m not a big fan of all the noise and everything else that goes along with it. I was really rooting for Tesla,To be successful with there electric semi ,but they must be having problems it’s not out yet ,it’s unlikely electric power for Boats will ever be the norm anytime soon
 
diesel-electric yes but not yet for 20-40 recreational boats.
total electric in the future for long distance cruising recreational boats - not in my life time because IMO solar panels and batteries still need to improved and the control circuitry needs to be simplified for the average Joe/Josephine.
 
Since there is talk of fully electric airline travel, I think if they can solve that they can solve electric boating. Technology evolves. Batteries today are far better than a few years ago and will get better still. Also, technology feeds itself. More powerful computers allow for more technology breakthroughs at a faster rate. It's all a matter of time. But for now, why to we have to penalize our energy producers in the US? We still need fossil fuel for most of our energy needs. Why do we think importing it makes it better?
 
Back in the50s there was talk about nuclear powered planes. The program was scrapped after being deemed to be too dangerous and also too heavy necessitating upgrading all airport runways to handle the weight.
Electric planes are still experimental.
Electric boats are still in development and I expect we will see practical electric boats first.
 
fryedaze said:
Do you understand the California generation capability? They don't have enough. They brown out frequently on high demand days. Arizona makes a fortune selling Calif power. The state forces solar rule that require utilities to pay other states to take excess during the day. They will shutdown the last nuke soon. Try replacing 2000 MWe with animic wind and solar.
California deregulated utilities, it spread across the US and then they re-regulated after if fell apart.
Great ideas are always coming out of the California voters.
Crap! I did it again[emoji8]
Click to expand...

I do. And I disagree with what you state here.
 
Last edited:
BandB said:
Wifey B: Why must you turn thread after thread off topic with your anti-science ill informed rants? :mad:

You're entitled to your views but you just insist on pushing your conspiracy theories. I have my views but I've kept out of this discussion.
Click to expand...

+1
 
The race for the next generation of Electric Vehicle (EV) batteries is on, and two of the biggest names in the tech industry have already picked sides.

Bill Gates and Elon Musk are going after the raw ingredients for the super battery.
 
I have had a Tesla since 2014. I must admit that the driving experience of an electric motor is so far superior to gas. I still have some gas powered cars but they frustrate me. Having seemingly infinite torque from start combined with a single speed transmission makes my other performance cars seems like noisy slow toys. Wait wait wait to get the gas powered car in the right rpm range and it kicks down two gears on the highway to pass..ugh. Torque rules.

And I get to time shift and solar charge them.
 
Did us taxpayers subsidize the purchase of your electric cars? :confused::facepalm::rolleyes:
 
markpierce said:
Did us taxpayers subsidize the purchase of your electric cars? :confused::facepalm::rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Of course you did if you live in California as Tesla was getting ready to relocate and was convinced to stay. Subsidies, favorable treatment of taxation. Cali could not afford to have the leader in electric cars leave.
 
markpierce said:
Did us taxpayers subsidize the purchase of your electric cars? :confused::facepalm::rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Is this directed at me?

As for electric cars themselves, yes I did get a credit when I bought it. I think most of us that bought them then didn’t need the credit as we would have bought them anyways, as we wanted to experience first hand new ideas and technology. It was a good society bet though I believe.

The US tax code is used to inform and enforce desired social goals, like the tax advantage for being married or the mortgage rate deduction for buying a house. Single people,subsidize married people and renters subsidize owners. Or for encouraging more oil and gas drilling (far larger than EV tax credits; is this subsidizing the gas car market or a desire for energy “independence” or a political trade to benefit oil and gas producing states for support on other programs?). Or indeed for jump starting the electric vehicle market. There are some policies we can agree to and so,e we disagree with but it would be almost hypocritical to accept some and criticize others for accepting others.

On balance, I believe it’s fair to say anyone would be happy with the ratio of taxes I pay to the services I use, per capita. Probably true of most trawler owners.
 
Last edited:
bowball said:
Is this directed at me?

As for electric cars themselves, yes I did get a credit when I bought it. I think most of us that bought them then didn’t need the credit as we would have bought them anyways, as we wanted to experience first hand new ideas and technology. It was a good society bet though I believe.
Click to expand...

Thus, a waste of taxpayers' money. (Subsidy not needed.)
 
markpierce said:
Thus, a waste of taxpayers' money. (Subsidy not needed.)
Click to expand...

Agreed from that perspective. Not stating the government always gets it right - at least on the individual level. Especially when early adaptors have different motives than pure economic ones.

But extending your logic, how many would still buy houses if they couldn’t deduct their mortgage interest? Probably the vast majority still. So hence that’s a waste too?
 
bowball said:
But extending your logic, how many would still buy houses if they couldn’t deduct their mortgage interest? Probably the vast majority still. So hence that’s a waste too?
Click to expand...
Actually bowball, the answer there is definitely plenty - just like the Tesla thing. Because here in Australia, mortgage interest is not a tax deductible item, much though we might wish it was, but we have one of the highest percentages of people owning their own home in the world. In fact, I'm not sure but that the USA might be in the minority of administrations where mortgage interest is deductible..?
 
markpierce said:
Thus, a waste of taxpayers' money. (Subsidy not needed.)
Click to expand...

The subsidies were not a waste as they helped to get a new industry off the ground that is going to help our environment, employ thousands of people ( who will pay taxes on their earnings ) and advance technology at a greater rate. At one point tax incentives were needed to encourage the oil companies to invest in drilling equipment and look for oil, because that was a high risk proposition 100 years ago. They are still getting those incentives today and are some of the most profitable companies in the world. I think giving Exxon a tax break is a bigger waste than helping the average American buy a car.

As for whether the grid can support charging car batteries and rolling blackouts, there is a huge surplus of power available at night when factories, stores and businesses are closed. I think the majority of car charging will take place overnight and eventually there will be power storage like Tesla's house battery that will ease demand during the daytime for power. The technology for home storage is likely to come from the electric car industry which is advancing battery technology. Also, utilities will start charging different rates for different times of day to incentivize people to dry their clothes and run their dishwashers at night, further alleviating demand.
 
"Since there is talk of fully electric airline travel, I think if they can solve that they can solve electric"

The aircraft goal today is electric travel from down town to an airport in a crowded city.

Co generation , (turbine cruise , electric help on take off) will be required for most distance over 100-150 miles .

Ocean crossing range will require turbines , tho what fuel they will burn is unknown.

Space travel will probably be a nuke, squirting .
 
FF said:
"Since there is talk of fully electric airline travel, I think if they can solve that they can solve electric"

The aircraft goal today is electric travel from down town to an airport in a crowded city.

Co generation , (turbine cruise , electric help on take off) will be required for most distance over 100-150 miles .

Ocean crossing range will require turbines , tho what fuel they will burn is unknown.

Space travel will probably be a nuke, squirting .[/QUOTE


It's a different matter for boats. A yacht with solar panels can just sit in the middle of the sea and recharge
its batteries, a plane cant. Big difference, right?
Click to expand...
 
JWellington said:
It's a different matter for boats. A yacht with solar panels can just sit in the middle of the sea and recharge
its batteries, a plane cant. Big difference, right?
Click to expand...

A boat would seem to have an advantage of never running out of fuel with unlimited refueling stations.
 
JWellington said:
FF said:
"Since there is talk of fully electric airline travel, I think if they can solve that they can solve electric"

The aircraft goal today is electric travel from down town to an airport in a crowded city.

Co generation , (turbine cruise , electric help on take off) will be required for most distance over 100-150 miles .

Ocean crossing range will require turbines , tho what fuel they will burn is unknown.

Space travel will probably be a nuke, squirting .[/QUOTE


It's a different matter for boats. A yacht with solar panels can just sit in the middle of the sea and recharge
its batteries, a plane cant. Big difference, right?
Click to expand...

Maybe not that big a difference. If it's dark and stormy and dangerous conditions at sea, a boat can't just float around w/o power safely.
Click to expand...
 
backinblue said:
JWellington said:
Maybe not that big a difference. If it's dark and stormy and dangerous conditions at sea, a boat can't just float around w/o power safely.
Click to expand...

Electric-powered boat/ship "just floating around" means all required schedules are thrown out the port hole... so to say. And, if the weather stays bleak of solar light for too long then availability of sustenance goods may become impacted.

Boats do have much better capability to be electric than an airplane. In that, boats can easily support/carry the added weight of secondary power sources in several different configurations of different types.

Atmospheric CO2 based Full-Cycle, Carbon Neutral liquid hydrocarbon fuels are on the verge of appearing. That will mean... generators aboard boats that may be needed to assist solar charging of batteries will be able to run without putting fossil fuel Carbon Positive new exhaust fumes into atmosphere. But, rather using fuels that are actually recycled from atmosphere to engine to atmosphere to engine - etc. etc. etc. That is why it's called Full-Cycle, Carbon Neutral fuel.

These new-source fuels will include gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. They will be fungible with refined fossil fuels and drop-in ready to work in any engine that currently uses fossil fuels. These breakthrough, atmospherically situated Carbon Neutral fuels will continue useful actions and replenishment... over and again!

:thumb: :D
Click to expand...
 
Art said:
backinblue said:
Electric-powered boat/ship "just floating around" means all required schedules are thrown out the port hole... so to say. And, if the weather stays bleak of solar light for too long then availability of sustenance goods may become impacted.

Boats do have much better capability to be electric than an airplane. In that, boats can easily support/carry the added weight of secondary power sources in several different configurations of different types.

Atmospheric CO2 based Full-Cycle, Carbon Neutral liquid hydrocarbon fuels are on the verge of appearing. That will mean... generators aboard boats that may be needed to assist solar charging of batteries will be able to run without putting fossil fuel Carbon Positive new exhaust fumes into atmosphere. But, rather using fuels that are actually recycled from atmosphere to engine to atmosphere to engine - etc. etc. etc. That is why it's called Full-Cycle, Carbon Neutral fuel.

These new-source fuels will include gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. They will be fungible with refined fossil fuels and drop-in ready to work in any engine that currently uses fossil fuels. These breakthrough, atmospherically situated Carbon Neutral fuels will continue useful actions and replenishment... over and again!

:thumb: :D
Click to expand...


All that already exists , and keeps getting better, just as in cars. The Alva Yachts 65 already has 20 kW solar capacity, and 2 - 300 kWh battery capacity. Charge all day in the sun, run all nite on battery, and the genset is always there too for when no sun for a long time.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O C Diver
2002 Cherubini Independence 45, Fort Myers, FL $350K
Replies
15
Views
3K
rslifkin
R
M
Electric Pilot Boat
Replies
0
Views
344
Mako
M

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom