Keyboard Shortcuts
ctrl + shift + ? :
Show all keyboard shortcuts
ctrl + g :
Navigate to a group
ctrl + shift + f :
Find
ctrl + / :
Quick actions
esc to dismiss
Likes
Search
[Electric Boats] High end electric/diesel yacht
|
David Goldsmith
50 feet and 850hp is mid-sized now? Its all relative I guess, but that's not really the crew I run with. Filling up their 800 gallon tanks would cost more than my entire electric conversion will. The big detail they leave out of these materials is the battery capacity, they say the two 23kw (!) motors will run the boat at 8 knots, but for how many miles? Who is willing to bet its under 8 and the whole electric drive system will be removed within five years.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
The stated range of a 1000 miles on 800 or so gallons of fuel is a pretty big tale to tell, and all that junk about a 'hybrid' hull that is a cross between a round bilge displacement boat and a V-bottom planing boat, come on, and just because it wasn't enough of a contradiction they throw in prop tunnels just to make things even less efficient. If docking without the engines running is really so important that all that extra machinery is required then that's great, but at this point a project like this is so cynical and so removed from anything resembling 'efficient' or the implied 'green' of being a 'hybrid' it becomes a joke. If I had the seven figures to throw around on a yacht I'd do a little more due diligence than talking with the salesman and try to find something really innovative, something that pushes the state of the art and does something new. I hate to keep piling on, I mean, I do love boats, any boat, and I'd sure take a ride on this guy just like anything else and the guy that also loves boats and loves this would probably shouldn't have nice things to says about my old sailboat and that's fine too; but the styling, its like an over grown circa 1995 Sea Ray. There is so much really striking and beautiful design out there in the 'mid-range' yacht world, this thing doesn't do it for me. David On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:04 PM, fulldec2001 <fulldec2001@...> wrote:
|
|
|
qc_ca_666
Hi all!
The big detail they leave out of these materials is the batteryExtract from their web site: ========================================================= Autonomy Lithium-ion batteries are currently used due to their high energy density. Other traditional lead batteries and zinc-carbon batteries have a much lower energy density. Two battery packs to choose from are available for the Magellano 50: a 21 kWh battery pack (range of 5 nm), or a 42 kWh battery pack with a range of over 10 nautical miles at zero emissions. For a short daily outing of 20 nautical miles, this means an average 50% reduction in diesel consumption (compared to sailing at 7 knots on diesel power) ========================================================= Pierre |
|
--- On Tue, 11/23/10, qc_ca_666 wrote:
|
|
|
David Goldsmith
Thanks for pointing that out, I just didn't explore their materials completely enough to find that spec.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I believe my point still stands though and I think they've dug themselves a little deeper. To claim 'zero emissions' they really need to point out that while the electric drives don't emit anything, the diesel generators (two 20kw as I remember) that are used to charge them do, and they probably emit more than the main engines would to do the same work, though that is a complex problem that I doubt anyone here can answer with authority (I couldn't either without a great deal of qualifications to the answer.) As for reducing fuel consumption for a short outing. If you're charging the batteries with the generators then you're not saving anything, if you're charging at the dock then you're just displacing the emissions and again, it might be more or it might be less depending on distance to the power generation state, efficiency of the power grid, type of power plant, efficiency of battery chargers, etc. In general, point-source fuel use creates fewer emissions, but like I said, there are so many factors involved it can go either way. They've got a bunch of best possible scenarios there, like the idea that the owner is going to idle along at 7 knots, well below hull speed, instead of shooting off at the 22 knots of cruising speed advertised. So, ultimately, my point is, what's the point of this thing? Complexity? Moving around energy enough times that people lose track and think they're getting something for nothing? Boasting to your friends you have a 'hybrid?' I don't have any experience in power boats of this size, is it often a problem maneuvering because the engines don't idle low enough? This doesn't strike me as a fishing boat and I doubt (and this is just an unjustified assumption on my part) that the owners of such a vessel would spend the kind of additional money, and put up with the additional complexity and reduced performance just so they can sneak out of the marine early in the morning without waking their neighbors. I also didn't see it described that the electric motors could work in tandem with the diesels for additional total power, but they were two separate systems that could drive the same props but not at the same time. They say they have orders, and that's fine, I hope their owners get the value they want out of these. Anyone selling and using electric motors on boats is a good thing as far as I'm concerned even if the specific application seems to be driven more by marketing and sales than any sort of efficiency or other ethical consideration (that's fine, that's their job.) Its not really the product I don't like, its the implications in the way its described which strikes me as dishonest. David On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 11:40 AM, qc_ca_666 <qc_ca_666@...> wrote:
|
|
|
On the issue of emissions, the whole point of plug-in hybrid cars is that the energy you get from the electric grid is generated more cleanly per kWh than from an ICE due to more efficiency in a large-scale power plant. ?Shouldn't the same hold true for a plug-in hybrid boat? John
|
|
|
David,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I've been involved with electric car conversions for about 15 years, and I have seen the same emission arguments against electric cars. Some people have claimed that electric cars should have higher emissions per mile that average cars due to local power sources. There is now solid evidence to the contrary, the Nissan Leaf is recognized with EPA gas milage equivalent of 99mpg with holistic emissions much lower than the latest gasoline hybrids or hyper-efficient diesels. As far as "what's the point", their use case is different than my boating needs; however, that doesn't make their use case any less valid. I know a number of large power boaters that use their boats for "sunset harbor cruises" more than half the time that they cast off from the dock. That usage is low speed and could be entirely covered by shore power charging, the diesels would not need to be started at all. I agree that given the setup, the electric drives are probably not designed to add power beyond the capabilities of the IC engines, like some automotive hybrids, but again, the use case is different for a boat instead of a car. The statement that you have no experience with this type of boat makes your arguments against the concept more speculative than practical. I didn't see anything in their marketing info that was any more misleading than what you see in regular promotional propaganda for non-hybrid boats (or cars, or cell phones, or coffee makers, etc...) Like you, I personally don't believe that pleasure boats like the ones that we discuss in this group benefit from hybrid drive systems because of the additional complexity, weight, cost, etc. But I know that some people here feel differently and I'm not willing to discount other opinions just because I don't agree with them. We all get to spend our money and time however we like, so more power to whomever wants to buy one these yachts. And I'm guessing that even we will eventually gain benefits from this type of "leading edge" product with the lessons learned from supporting mainstream users. Fair winds, Eric Marina del Rey, CA --- In electricboats@..., David Goldsmith <suntreader@...> wrote:
|
|
|
David Goldsmith
John,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
That is sometimes offered as a reason for better emissions but it isn't always the case, and whether it is or is not comes down to a ton of factors. On one end of the scale if the marina (or your garage) was powered from a solar or wind station then even with all kinds of inefficiencies in the system there would be fewer emissions involved. At the other end if the power is coming from a coal plant hundreds of miles away then you're probably emitting less just burning the fuel where you are. This comes up when trying to figure out whether a gas range or an electric produced more emissions, if the power plant is burning the same natural gas as the stove is then its going to be more efficient to just burn it at the stove than to burn it at the power plan, convert it to electricity, send the electricity down the lines, and then convert it to heat, better to just make the heat at the point of use. It feels intuitive than an electric application produces fewer emissions than a fuel burning one but that's largely because the emissions aren't right in front of us with an electric. The case of plug-in hybrids is similar, if your power comes from coal (like most of ours in the US does) then you're probably making more emissions with a plug-in instead of just burning it where you need the the energy, you could start calculating your mileage in tons of coal instead of gallons of gas. Just as an experiment a few months ago I worked through some of the equations to try and figure out whether my gas law mower was producing more emissions than my neighbor's electric law mower. Our municipal power here comes from a coal plant. I burn about 2 gallons of gas a year in my mower. I didn't have the emissions levels for the local plant or any idea of the efficiency of the grid bringing the power over to our houses so those were just estimates in the equation. The solution was he was probably producing more emissions? using an electric mower than I was with my gas mower. His mower uses less power to do the job because of the limits of 120V electric outlets, but the exhaust from my gas mower makes a lot less of the bad emissions that a coal plant does. The equation could easily have tipped the other way with a more efficient power plant or a better distribution grid, but it would still be pretty close. Of course, the guy down the block who mows once a year does better than either of us! Its certainly true that a power plant can be more efficient with its fuel use per useful energy out, but most power plants aren't that modern and even most of the new ones aren't using the best technology either, even with the greater efficiency you have to take into account the transmission of the energy, which can sap over half of it in some cases. I guess the short answer is if you're burning fuel where you need the power then you know exactly what you're using, if you're plugging in then you have no idea, without a lot of work, how much energy is being used or what the emissions might be. David On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 4:20 PM, John Riehl <riehlj2002@...> wrote:
|
|
|
David Goldsmith
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Eric <ewdysar@...> wrote:
Respectfully, the EPA methodology isn't as foolproof as a single number can explain. Electric cars, unless they are being charged from a known renewable source, such as wind, solar, biomass, or hydro, do have emissions associated with their use, but determining those emissions is a case-by-case situation starting from their charging outlet and ending up at the mine or the well where the fuel originates. I have no doubt that electric cars, when compared to conventional cars, use less energy to drive around, but I think its more from their owners attention to weight, driving habits, and design of the vehicle rather than something inherent in using grid power instead of point of use power. ?
No argument there. Boats are pleasure objects, they're all wonderful when they fulfill the desires of their owners, and I'd never tell someone they had a 'bad boat' as long as it made them happy. Electrics are a great way to power a whole lot of boats out there, but 50 foot planing cruisers isn't one of them, at least not yet. Personally, I'd rather have electrics over an engine any day as long as it met my needs, but that's personal, a lot of people just love big loud engines and more power to them (no pun intended), boats are for personal fun after all. ?
My discussion certainly is speculative, I haven't been on the boat and probably never will be (but would love a ride if anyone is offering!) maybe someone with some experience running large yachts like this one could weigh in on how they see the electrics being advantageous? For all I know slow speed maneuvering may very well be a big problem with large planning boats, and the engines idle being too loud early in the morning may be a big problem too, I'm sure someone with some experience could give some more examples. Advertising materials get away with an awful lot, legally anyone can pretty much say anything they like, whether that is a good thing or not is an entirely different discussion that has nothing to do with electric boats so thankfully we don't have to get into it, but personally (just me talking here), I think its a stretch to talk about zero emissions and about 'hybrid' because these terms imply something to consumers, and what it implies isn't what this boat does. I'd say the same thing about a whole lot of advertising out there, not trying to single these guys out. ?
I'm certainly willing to discount, ridicule, even mock the opinions of others if they're sufficiently stupid, it doesn't happen often, and it hasn't happened around here, but I reserve that right:) You make a good point that this is a pleasure boat, and I didn't mean to suggest that any of our boats are 'efficient' or anything like that, its all surplus when it goes into our toys and that's wonderful, from the silliest little lake schooner to the ugliest mega yacht, and certainly to my ancient sailboat, boats are all just fun things not to be taken too seriously. If they would have just described the boat and its systems then I'd probably be more interested in its drive than anything else, but when they go on about how its a planing hull & a displacement hull & has prop tunnels & and is super efficient because it can put around at 8 knots on the electrics, well, come on, I can't let that go:) ?
Sure, no problem with any and everyone buying anything they like. I would question whether there is anything here that's going to trickle down to the rest of us. I mean, they'll probably build what, ten of these total? The systems aren't completely specified but I would guess the components are all off-the-shelf items (at least as much as they can be in boats) rather than representing a break through in motors, controllers, batteries, or gearing. There won't be enough to bring down costs on the components, and the system isn't one that would scale down to the more pedestrian boats discussed around here. At this point in the technology, motors and controllers are mature technologies that are slowly developing but there isn't much more in the way of efficiency to get out of an electric motor. The next big tech needs to come in batteries and the next big technology will move not just boats but transportation, consumer items, and probably just about everything else forward will be energy storage, so I wouldn't think this particular product is going to make that happen either. Can we talk about how great that new Hunter 27e is? I drive by the plant all the time, if the group would like to put together some questions I'm sure I could make an appointment to go and talk to the designers and see some being built (if they're in production yet.) David ?
|
|
|
Carel Ruysink
?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
?
|
to navigate to use esc to dismiss