Electric Boats

[twistedtree]

Can I chip in here? My claim to a voice is we have been involved in the recent design and build of a 78 foot hybrid electric boat. The end result is not what we initially envisioned but maybe as good as recent technology and application would allow. I'll throw out a number of points for consideration.

- with existing battery (LiPO) EV technology then the energy storage capacity limits propulsive applications to low speed harbor activities and silent maneuvering.
- any yacht claiming greater than this on electric will be lightly built to save propulsive power and unsuited to anything other than recreational cruising in sheltered waters.
- charging of any significant battery capacity is a problem. 3 phase shore power or hybrid drives are the solutions.
- conversion losses are killers. Solar to battery to propulsion, shore power to battery to propulsion at about 5/10% per conversion.
- solar is no good for propulsion, only maintenance loads and anchorage. We have 6.5 kW theoretical peak, still insufficient for overall needs ongoing. Solar improvements will be marginal as we are fighting the basic physics of the process, even with high band width prevoskites. Cost though, may improve further (thanks China).
- new battery technology is, on the short-term post prototype horizon (think Na, S, graphene ....) that will produce the 1000 mile EV 20 minute charge and a capable electric boat propulsion for coastal operations in the next 3-5 years.
- I welcome the day of reliable podded electric drives and "place anywhere" DC generators creating a serial hybrid system that is again, reliable. Maneuverability would be superb and space efficiency similarly creative. No rudders either though following seas may be interesting!
- lastly, with a system centralized around BIG batteries (140kWh), rather than a generator, we hope to see long silent periods at anchorage with much lower diesel maintenance. Time will tell.

Anyhow, some thoughts to mull over a beer or four.

Thanks for the reality check. And glad you got a great house power system.

 

[Benthic2]

Today, still the vast majority of new cars sold are gas and in the current used market it's about 100% gas cars. Big vehicles like boats, trucks and planes, just aren't even close.

The UK has banned the sale of gas & diesel cars after 2030. (That's only 7.5 years away!) California, New York and Washington will ban them in 2035.

Volvo will stop selling gas cars in 2030.
GM will stop in 2035
Ford and Mercedes will stop by 2040.

The future is closer than we think.

 

[rslifkin]

The UK has banned the sale of gas & diesel cars after 2030. (That's only 7.5 years away!) California, New York and Washington will ban them in 2035.

Volvo will stop selling gas cars in 2030.
GM will stop in 2035
Ford and Mercedes will stop by 2040.

The future is closer than we think.

Of course, like many things, there's always a chance that the dates will shift, or additional vehicle categories will be exempted depending on what's available, practical, etc. as the date approaches.



In many cases, big new developments happen when something pushes them to happen.

 

[Kit_L]

rslifkin wrote:

big new developments happen when something pushes them to happen.

That's what is happening, for sure.

Thinking about Hippo's back of the envelope calculations: I have not yet heard back from the NZ boat builder I linked to yet (the 10.4m electric hybrid cat), but looking up the variable speed diesel generators available here, a 50KWa one running at full load uses 10.7 litres/hour. What we don't know is in any (say) 10-hour period of cruising, and running electric engines from the batteries at an efficient cruise speed, how many hours of generator run time would that entail (assuming we run on batteries until they need charging, running the generator while underway until the batteries are changed, etc.)?

A large solar array will do that any time you are at anchor, and will contribute energy to the batteries while under way, but will not provide all we need to cruise as others have noted.

In the meantime, if we are considering whole of life CO2 production, it is much friendlier environmentally to use this vessel with the engines it has now, running on diesel, and simply reduce the number of long trips. Diesel here presently is ~$2.39 per litre.

 

[twistedtree]

rslifkin wrote:

That's what is happening, for sure.

Thinking about Hippo's back of the envelope calculations: I have not yet heard back from the NZ boat builder I linked to yet (the 10.4m electric hybrid cat), but looking up the variable speed diesel generators available here, a 50KWa one running at full load uses 10.7 litres/hour.

That's the same as a fixed speed generator would consume when producing 25kw.

What we don't know is in any (say) 10-hour period of cruising, and running electric engines from the batteries at an efficient cruise speed, how many hours of generator run time would that entail (assuming we run on batteries until they need charging, running the generator while underway until the batteries are changed, etc.)?

You need to look at the energy equation for the system. That's the inescapable physics involved, and the clearest way to assess efficiency.


- It takes a certain amount of energy to move the boat at a certain speed. It doesn't matter if it's an electric or diesel or peddle power, it takes the same amount of energy to move the boat that speed. Don't be fooled into thinking that electric propulsion is more efficient when you are really just moving the boat slower. Moving slower reduces the energy requirement, not switching to an electric drive.



- That energy has to come from somewhere, and let's look at the case of direct diesel drive vs this variable speed generator. First, a diesel consumes fuel 90% based on the HP or kWh power output, not based on rpm, and not based on engine size. There is some variation, but it's quite small. With direct diesel drive, the engine shaft power produced directly drives the prop. So power produced (shaft power) is directly converter to boat movement. I'm ignoring shaft friction and prop efficiency because they will be the same regardless of electric vs direct drive.


- Now with the variable speed generator, or a fixed speed generator for that matter, the engine shaft power generates electricity with let's say a 10% loss. That electricity then drives an electric motor again creating shaft power, but with another 10% loss. If you have a really good generator end, really good VFD electronics, and a really good electric motor, the loss from diesel engine shaft power to electric motor shaft power might only be 15% instead of 20%. But the bottom line is that only 85% of the diesel shaft power appears as shaft power to the prop to create boat movement.


So you have created a less efficient system, not a more efficient system. The advantage is that it can be powered by solar in addition to the diesel generator. If you can provide 15% of your propulsion energy via solar, then you will have recovered the lost 15% and be back to break even. At this point you will have a significantly more complex and expensive propulsion system that is equally efficient to a direct drive. If you can produce 25% of your propulsion power from solar, you now have a boat that is 10% more efficient. Also keep in mind that captured solar energy has to be stored in a battery, removed from the battery, and fed through the same VFD+electric motor, so those losses need to be accounted for.



But I ran a few numbers in this or another thread on the subject and it looked like solar that can realistically be collected on a boat is only about 10% of the propulsion energy. There were some assumption about "duty cycle", i.e. how much time you spend underway vs available solar charging hours.



Someone noted that electric boats work if your operation will be slow speed and for short duration. The physics above is why. Going slow requires less energy in the first place, and has nothing to do with being electric. Short duration is a very low duty cycle allowing enough time between operation to capture renewable energy.

A large solar array will do that any time you are at anchor, and will contribute energy to the batteries while under way, but will not provide all we need to cruise as others have noted.

In the meantime, if we are considering whole of life CO2 production, it is much friendlier environmentally to use this vessel with the engines it has now, running on diesel, and simply reduce the number of long trips. Diesel here presently is ~$2.39 per litre.

 

[Kit_L]

@ twistedtree:

So you have created a less efficient system, not a more efficient system.

I see that clearly, TT. The only advantage of the hybrid system I was sketching is that the generator is the only diesel-burning engine you'd need, rather than the two drive engines and the generator in my boat. I can only see this as being a possible advantage in a new build (new engines are the single largest expense apart from the hull).

And, on your analysis (which I am sure is sound) such a new build will be a relatively slow boat, and will demonstrate a characteristic use pattern (slow, short hops, and then recharge). In time, I think that will be fine for many.

For me, my interest is in the many possible solutions that are emerging. I still have not heard back from the NZ builder, but as a result of these exchanges here, I know what questions to ask:

What is the range of the vessel given the three battery options

What proportion of cruising time does the generator need to operate?

What SOG is possible running on the generator alone?

Thanks for your detailed reply.

 

[guy with a boat]

You need to look at the energy equation for the system. That's the inescapable physics involved, and the clearest way to assess efficiency.

- It takes a certain amount of energy to move the boat at a certain speed. It doesn't matter if it's an electric or diesel or peddle power, it takes the same amount of energy to move the boat that speed. Don't be fooled into thinking that electric propulsion is more efficient when you are really just moving the boat slower. Moving slower reduces the energy requirement, not switching to an electric drive.

- That energy has to come from somewhere, and let's look at the case of direct diesel drive vs this variable speed generator. First, a diesel consumes fuel 90% based on the HP or kWh power output, not based on rpm, and not based on engine size. There is some variation, but it's quite small. With direct diesel drive, the engine shaft power produced directly drives the prop. So power produced (shaft power) is directly converter to boat movement. I'm ignoring shaft friction and prop efficiency because they will be the same regardless of electric vs direct drive.

- Now with the variable speed generator, or a fixed speed generator for that matter, the engine shaft power generates electricity with let's say a 10% loss. That electricity then drives an electric motor again creating shaft power, but with another 10% loss. If you have a really good generator end, really good VFD electronics, and a really good electric motor, the loss from diesel engine shaft power to electric motor shaft power might only be 15% instead of 20%. But the bottom line is that only 85% of the diesel shaft power appears as shaft power to the prop to create boat movement.

So you have created a less efficient system, not a more efficient system. The advantage is that it can be powered by solar in addition to the diesel generator. If you can provide 15% of your propulsion energy via solar, then you will have recovered the lost 15% and be back to break even. At this point you will have a significantly more complex and expensive propulsion system that is equally efficient to a direct drive. If you can produce 25% of your propulsion power from solar, you now have a boat that is 10% more efficient. Also keep in mind that captured solar energy has to be stored in a battery, removed from the battery, and fed through the same VFD+electric motor, so those losses need to be accounted for.

But I ran a few numbers in this or another thread on the subject and it looked like solar that can realistically be collected on a boat is only about 10% of the propulsion energy. There were some assumption about "duty cycle", i.e. how much time you spend underway vs available solar charging hours.

Someone noted that electric boats work if your operation will be slow speed and for short duration. The physics above is why. Going slow requires less energy in the first place, and has nothing to do with being electric. Short duration is a very low duty cycle allowing enough time between operation to capture renewable energy.

This should be made into a “super-sticky” and be automatically posted in every thread about electric and hybrid boats. There are many ways to mix and max components and reinvent the concepts, but the limitations due to physics cannot be ignored.

 

[Simi 60]

This should be made into a “super-sticky” and be automatically posted in every thread about electric and hybrid boats. There are many ways to mix and max components and reinvent the concepts, but the limitations due to physics cannot be ignored.

 

[Simi 60]

rslifkin wrote:

That's what is happening, for sure.

Thinking about Hippo's back of the envelope calculations: I have not yet heard back from the NZ boat builder I linked to yet (the 10.4m electric hybrid cat), but looking up the variable speed diesel generators available here, a 50KWa one running at full load uses 10.7 litres/hour. What we don't know is in any (say) 10-hour period of cruising, and running electric engines from the batteries at an efficient cruise speed, how many hours of generator run time would that entail (assuming we run on batteries until they need charging, running the generator while underway until the batteries are changed, etc.)?

.

1 litre/nm has been achievable for a few decades now on diesel driven 40ft cats aimed at a 10 knot cruise speeds
No need for $100k of batteries etc to do it.

 

[Kit_L]

1 litre/nm has been achievable for a few decades now on diesel driven 40ft cats aimed at a 10 knot cruise speeds
No need for $100k of batteries etc to do it.

I would be delighted with that kind of result; I did have that with the 39' sharpie trawler I used to own (single Perkins, shaft drive).

If talking about a 40' cat, what size (what sort of horsepower, IOW) engines would one need for 9–10kn? Are there calculators for these sorts of questions? or more like guidelines?

 

[rslifkin]

1 litre/nm has been achievable for a few decades now on diesel driven 40ft cats aimed at a 10 knot cruise speeds
No need for $100k of batteries etc to do it.

True, but depending on cruising style and how often you either stay in 1 place for a while or could plug in to recharge, you might only have to burn diesel at all half the time with the hybrid setup. Just a matter of when it's cost effective or practical enough.

 

[Nick14]

Slightly O/T though still tangentially related (regarding interest in 'electric' power as a potentially more environmentally-friendly alternative to fossil fuel), an article in the New York Times this morning shows the futility of any one nation trying to combat climate change on its own. It's going to take a unified global response, otherwise individual efforts will be largely pointless:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/24/world/africa/congo-oil-gas-auction.html

We can't even get this one country to have a united position and response, and have a dysfunctional system of government where literally one senator can single-handedly stop the process (I'm looking at you Manchin). I think the prospects of a unified, comprehensive, and effective global response are nil to none, especially in a world being shaken by an energy shortage in part caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine and subsequent boycotting of Russian oil.

Yes, the long term answer (as I've ranted about many times) is to change the electric power grid from burning things to renewables. But that will take 1) a long time, 2) a LOT of money, and 3) requires effective, scalable means of storing electricity that do not yet exist. The problem is what to do and what will happen in the shorter term, as evidenced by what is happening in the Congo.

 

[backinblue]

Slightly O/T though still tangentially related (regarding interest in 'electric' power as a potentially more environmentally-friendly alternative to fossil fuel), an article in the New York Times this morning shows the futility of any one nation trying to combat climate change on its own. It's going to take a unified global response, otherwise individual efforts will be largely pointless:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/24/world/africa/congo-oil-gas-auction.html

We can't even get this one country to have a united position and response, and have a dysfunctional system of government where literally one senator can single-handedly stop the process (I'm looking at you Manchin). I think the prospects of a unified, comprehensive, and effective global response are nil to none, especially in a world being shaken by an energy shortage in part caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine and subsequent boycotting of Russian oil.

Yes, the long term answer (as I've ranted about many times) is to change the electric power grid from burning things to renewables. But that will take 1) a long time, 2) a LOT of money, and 3) requires effective, scalable means of storing electricity that do not yet exist. The problem is what to do and what will happen in the shorter term, as evidenced by what is happening in the Congo.

I can't respond directly to the Manchin comment at the risk of being political, so I will try to comment in the hopes I'm within the TF guidelines. It's hard not to have some poitical policies enter into discussions about alternative energy vs. fossil fuels. Anyway, I think we are united in that the majority of Americans agree that climate change is real and that alternatives to fossil fuels are needed. What divides us is how and when we get there. World leaders flying on private jets around the world to go to climate conferences instead of getting on a zoom call is disgusting and the height of hypocricy (not to mention a certain climate czar who's own residence puts out 21x the amount of CO2 as the average American home). Lead by example instead of rhetoric.

Also, this is a global issue, not just a U.S. issue. If the U.S. becomes 100% carbon nuetral, it doesn't save the planet by itself. Importing oil to the U.S. rather than producing it domestically is inefficient and wasteful. It may help with our own carbon footprint but adds to the global problem.

Our govt is set up so that congress needs to approve major legislation. Any President should not subvert that process just because he or his party doesn't agree (that includes both parties). Thank God for representatives who are willing to stand up against the party leaders and vote the way their constituants want them to.

 

[Chris Leigh-Jones]

In a past life I was involved in the creation of an industry for marine Sea Water Scrubbing of exhaust gas from large ships in emissions control areas (ECA's). That included getting None Governmental Agencies to become supportive and in developing governing legislation within the various national and supranational bodies such as IMO and the European Union. We eventually got to a fair and reasonable place but it was a 10-20 year time line and needed some serious and consistent input. Good luck on getting our world to agree on anything short of Armageddon to twist their arms for the common good. That's just human nature for better or worse.

Me now? I'm going sailing.

 

[backinblue]

Sailing is always a great idea!

 

[Simi 60]

I would be delighted with that kind of result; I did have that with the 39' sharpie trawler I used to own (single Perkins, shaft drive).

If talking about a 40' cat, what size (what sort of horsepower, IOW) engines would one need for 9–10kn? Are there calculators for these sorts of questions? or more like guidelines?

Some detail here on Catchcry
She cruised from Brisbane to Sabah and back, some 10,000 NM

A larger variant of the same hulls was equally successful with similar engine size

Shaun Arber designed "Iron Butterfly" uses less again with I think, 50hp Nanni but with lower top end speed

 

[Simi 60]

 

[BruceK]

Spotted this re discussion above of electric powered aircraft:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07...-aircraft-electric-motors-emissions/101272566
[Rex(Regional Express) uses a 60+ Saab340 fleet(nothing like an A340!) on regional/commuter routes,and B737-800s on intercity routes]

 

[Kit_L]

@Simi60: thank you; a lovely ball-park set of figures. Out boat is a very similar weight, too, as well as construction. Lots to think about.

 

[Hippocampus]

My uneducated thinking is.
Big usage is passage. For near shore/ coastal boats this means 400-500nm allowing 10-15% reserve. For both coasts and Europe/med this should be adequate. For voyaging boats 1500-2500nm depending upon which ocean would serve ~90% of operators. Although sitting in my harbor now there’s the Plymouth 400 which went Plymouth England to Plymouth Massachusetts on electric alone it was a ultralight tri autonomous with no crew. Not the weight of a cruising boat so not applicable as an example.
So diesel will be involved.
Even as a full time international cruiser 10% or less of the time we were on voyage or passage. Most coastal or inter island hops were less than 25nm. Nearly all less than 75nm as when coastal you prefer to avoid night travel. On average travel one out of three to four days. By travel mean any movement at all.
Also you don’t usually have the same concern about a “day’s work “ when coastal. There’s no concern about about exhausting food and spare supplies. So slow is usually just fine as long as you have the ability to time your transits to the local currents. This is a biggie and the divide is between long term cruisers and those confined by work obligations.
So in terms of the niche market of cruisers think hybrid makes sense with the following caveats.
The overwhelming amount of time is spent not moving. (True for most). All house power demands are supplied by solar/wind. That includes watermaker, frig/freezers and HVAC. Boat is designed from the ground up for natural ventilation and insulation to minimize HVAC and maximize efficiency of the other house systems. Our prior boat had excellent ventilation, shading, high efficiency efficiency low output DC watermaker, water cooled frig/freezers so genset runs were extremely rare. Current boat has 3 AC units, diesel hydronic heat, and high output AC watermaker. In use the Ac +/or DC frig and freezers are our biggest draw. Offerings (even non hybrid or electric) should evolve away from current trawler design toward greater house efficiency.
Coastal and some near coastal transits should be electric. Here to my limited understanding parallel may have the leg up. With an either/or there maybe greater room to achieve maximal efficiency and possibly redundancy.
Most diesel energy is lost to waste heat and friction. Perhaps a technology to have some fraction of waste heat captured to drive a turbine maybe possible. That in turn could drive electric production. Engines have evolved and frictional losses should continue to decrease.
But the basic physics remain weight means you’re displaying more water and have more water to move aside. True regardless of mode of propulsion. It’s here I think there’s the greatest bang for the buck. If I was building new that’s where my focus would be. Lightest most efficient hull and infill. Would probably also want maximal surface area for solar and parallel hybrid twins given my program. Would want independence from fossil fuels when at rest. That would suffice for anything I might wish to do. Think for semi production Arksen might be the best example of that thinking. Dennis’ Artnautica 58’ might be the best example of a efficient hull mated to a efficient power train with his low HP engine mated to a variable pitched prop. Deep Water the best comprise for the non voyager although their 50’ crossed the pond. These can be done non hybrid (although hybrid offered). Multiple short run and one offs along these lines have been recently splashed. Be interesting to see how Nordhavn and KK respond.

 

[darkside]

If you want to voyage, rather than coast hop, you need to recharge the batteries, and get some distance by other means.
That means wind or solar (I'm ignoring diesel as primary propulsion)
Enough solar is a only possible on a butt ugly catamaran that is compromised for every other use, except the voyage.
Perhaps an electric trawler, with a fair amount of solar, and yes a small generator to get out of trouble, plus the ability to fly a good stabilized kite (parasailor or similar) is the best voyaging option for now.
When the kite is performing well you can top up with regeneration via the props.
The modern generation's motorsailor.

 

[JRO]

Trolling at 2 knots is floating not boating … That’s a hollowed out log going with currents.
We are just a few years away from hydrogen-electric powered boats, cars, planes, cities, and golf carts.. If Cummins and the other big boys get it together they will profit from the transition rather than close up. We will be able to re-power with hydrogen-electric systems after abandoning our diesels and Idiotic gasoline powered engines. Too bad the transition is not happening today. Solar panels will become as rare as admitted insurrectionists.

 

[Hippocampus]

Not so fast. There’s significant problems to to surmount using PEM fuel cell for small marine applications. H has low energy density. Potentially you could get around this given most boats sit more than they travel by using regenerative fuel cells mated to solar but you’re still confounded by the space requirements of gas storage and limited surface area available for solar. So range is limited. For car and truck not as big an issue as a 200-300m range would be quite acceptable. Similarly size matters so in larger scales (ships) storage is less of a limiting factor. But in the range common for the recreational cruiser it is.
Reality is we are the tits on the bull. Our market is so small our technologies are derivatives of other larger markets be it car, truck, military, air or off grid living. As such for this technology we face problems. We’re too big to scale up automotive and too small to scale down stationary systems for electrical production. Neither does ship technology work. Think through the space requirements for a H fuel cell of any form being placed in a 40 to 70 foot boat. Then look at range. Then look at the modest increase in range a regenerative system depending upon solar would produce. Perhaps feasible for short hop coastal vessels using shore power to generate on board H or obtain H generated elsewhere but not suitable for many folks cruising once you add in the electrical demands of house draws such as food frig+freezer and HVAC. Do a energy budget on your current boat. What are you willing to give up? For sailboat races boats were measured in tons. It was a measure of volume not weight. How much volume of your interior are you willing to give up? Was briefly involved in trying to build motorsailors locally. Hulls are ~10% for total costs. This is compared to finished spaces. Dead space storage such for a gas (not gasoline) tanks would be relatively cheap on a ship. Their costs don’t have the same relationship with LOA we do. But for a cruising boat operating costs are based on LOA. Gas storage space in a cruising boat would be dead space you would be paying for during the boats entire life for a vessel incapable of passage.
Same problems exist for H internal combustion engines as for fuel cell mated to electric engine. It’s the inherent issue of fuel energy density. H was used for some of the earliest internal combustion engines. Been around as long as gasoline or diesel. Never took off for that reason.
Still think the smart money is in ultralight efficient hulls with weight conscious infill. Agree technology moves along so would consider designs that allow non destructive repowering to permit drop in replacement. What ever the placement of the ER should have removable overhead the any spaces above the ER removable sole and overhead. Given the uncertainties at present still favor diesel/biofuel hybrid and maximize efficiency for systems and hull.

 

[twistedtree]

Trolling at 2 knots is floating not boating … That’s a hollowed out log going with currents.
We are just a few years away from hydrogen-electric powered boats, cars, planes, cities, and golf carts.. If Cummins and the other big boys get it together they will profit from the transition rather than close up. We will be able to re-power with hydrogen-electric systems after abandoning our diesels and Idiotic gasoline powered engines. Too bad the transition is not happening today. Solar panels will become as rare as admitted insurrectionists.

Can you tell us more about this? What does a hydrogen-electric power plant look like and how does it work?

 

[kthoennes]

...Our market is so small our technologies are derivatives of other larger markets be it car, truck, military, air or off grid living. As such for this technology we face problems. We’re too big to scale up automotive and too small to scale down stationary systems for electrical production...

I don't know, a quick google search shows there are 11.8 million recreational boats registered in the US alone. I assume that's everything from my inflatable dinghy with a 4-horse (has to be registered here because it has a motor) to the big boys I can only dream about. But that's just the US, and just recreational, so global plus even small commercial has to be a huge number. I would think if somebody could have developed a practical alternative power source for millions of water craft, we'd see something at least on the horizon by now, and it would be a gigantic money maker. But for all the whiz bang technology and flying drones on Mars and the Webb telescope peering into Romulan worlds, once you get a little beyond small electric outboards, I don't see anything practical or accessible on the horizon yet.

(I do read Boat International and the occasional features about large scale solar propulsion systems. Yeah, I know. But at a horrendous long term environmental cost when you trash those battery banks, and at a total cost far beyond mere mortals.)

 

[Hippocampus]

95% of boats in the US are less than 26’ in length. Boats you could consider serviceable as cruisers is even much smaller (sail, trawler, express, river, house etc.). They are probably well under 1m. Of those nearly all are used. Practically speaking this discussion is likely aimed at new construction only. So unfortunately it’s niche market even when considering the entire world not just the US. Furthermore, service life is decades. Much longer than cars or trucks
From Statistica looks like ~10,000 36’ and above is average sales of new boats. My guesstimate is maybe 30 to 40,000 worldwide. A niche market.

 

[backinblue]

With all the discussion about electric boats and greener power, why is sailing not making a comeback? I realize the physical requirements, but I watch super sailing yachts that raise and lower sails with a joystick. I haven't owned a sailboat in a long time, but with today's electrical aides, I can't imagine it's that difficult to control sails and seems to me to be an easier and proven way to travel rather than trying to figure out how to build an electrical power trawler.

 

[N4061]

Sailing

With all the discussion about electric boats and greener power, why is sailing not making a comeback? I realize the physical requirements, but I watch super sailing yachts that raise and lower sails with a joystick. I haven't owned a sailboat in a long time, but with today's electrical aides, I can't imagine it's that difficult to control sails and seems to me to be an easier and proven way to travel rather than trying to figure out how to build an electrical power trawler.

Well this is how we got to this point. Sailing, I’m finding out is not as simple as trawlers thus why many sailors turn to trawlers as they age. I can understand why sailing can reach its limits with some folks. Not saying electric is the answer but willing to enjoy the journey with electric boats to see how far they may take us.

John

 

[JRO]

Can you tell us more about this? What does a hydrogen-electric power plant look like and how does it work?

There is no magic. You’ve likely had a package delivered to you or taken a bus powered by a hydrogen-electric vehicle. Rather than me explaining to you the physics, it would be easier for me and more credible to you if you cranked up your “Google Machine”.
It’s unfortunate hydrogen technologies were shadowed by the most profitable business the world has ever known… Oil. The internal combustion engine will soon be a relic… Not tomorrow and not next year but relatively very soon.

 

[kthoennes]

Okay, I swallowed the bait and googled. Uh huh. 400 hydrogen refueling stations worldwide. 45 stations in the United States, 43 of them in screwball California. Yeah, that's ready for prime time.