Bouba
Well-known member
You wouldn’t waste a ‘day each way’ charging.....a couple of hours max both ways...toilet and meal breaks...you probably won’t spend any extra time charging
Boat propulsion. Is electric actually green?
- Thread starter Tranona
- Start date
Refueler
Well-known member
Why are you wasting good fuel ? The only factor is that summer fuel should not be used in winter ... it has no Cold Properties Improver. But a small % petrol added will sort that.
But - that fuel will be fine in the spring or whenever the fuel and ambient temp is above freezing .. (if its sat during particularly cold spell - that is lower than about -5C - then better to wait till temp rises to +5 or more to allow fuel to regain ...
My fuel tanks at present have summer diesel in .. one has about 30lts in a 75lt tank .... other has about 20lts in a 40lt tank ... we have just had -20C last few days .. will have more days like that .. we wont come into reasonable temps till possibly April ... I have no worries about that fuel at all ..
Refueler
Well-known member
What they did not take into consideration - surprising ..... that technology of recovery from wells is improving constantly ....
As prices went up - capped wells were re-opened ...
Just the example of USA where a large % of US wells were capped due to US costs to extract was prohibitive ... but later - became viable ... a lot of wells were reopened.
Dellquay13
Well-known member
Have I been reading too much into bio-fame problems clogging filters if the fuel gets old?
It doesn’t get very cold in West Wales so I don’t worry about old fashioned waxy problems with diesel, just leaving 10month old B7 in my tank, I can’t use a full tank in a year.
I just realised my 5.5m motor boat with it’s 70hp 4t outboard burns its way through the same amount in less than two hours as I now use in a year. Now up for sale of course!
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
I sold my bigger RIB having done those sums frequently, and deciding not to take it out because of the cost. We used 12 litres of petrol last year. The sails managed the rest. Our boat could maybe go electric eventually. Easily driven short range cruiser, with a lot of area for solar. If we had 5-600w instead of just under 200, and some remote management, I think we could manage.
Bouba
Well-known member
The amount of time a boat sits there doing nothing...because you don’t have the time or bad weather...the cost of the boat, even sitting there doing nothing...makes the fuel cost insignificant, no matter what propulsion you use. If the argument is the environment...or the future availability of fuel...then that is different
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
Of course. We wouldn’t do anything til we needed to re engine anyway. We’d do it for the same reasons we have an EV and electric outboard for the tender. Smooth, quiet, clean, controllable.
Bouba
Well-known member
I definitely think that if you have a diesel mothership...then you should have an electric tender...unless your boat is of the size where the tender is big and you can safely store and distribute petrol....otherwise carrying petrol on a diesel boat is just smelly and dangerous
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
Our mothership is petrol. Even so, the electric outboard is just so good to use. Outboard motors suitable for ladies.
rotrax
Well-known member
Pray tell me why?
I have been transporting race fuel for motorbikes in cars, vans and pick up trucks for 50 years. Been carrying 10 litres of fuel in a pensioned off AdBlu container since 2009. No smell, no leakage, no spilling when filling. Never had a fuel container leak or smell.
I am cute enought to have worked out the best way to do it.
I used 4 litres of petrol last season, my four stroke Suzuki outboard is so frugal that canoeing is profligate by comparison.
Why would I spend 2K on an electric outboard when I have one that works fine, runs on fresh air-well almost-and has been made already. It is now repaying the enviromental damage making it caused. The enviromental cost of an electric outboard is as much as making a ICE one I suspect!
Chiara’s slave
Well-known member
I suspect you’re right. We needed a new outboard anyway, the electric chosen for ease of use, not because we think itks green.
dunedin
Well-known member
Yes, we use our dinghy outboard a reasonable amount- but struggle to use more than around 5L of petrol in a season. The greenest solution, as the ICOMIA report makes clear, is often to maintain and use what is already manufactured, not to bin and build and ship something new
Bouba
Well-known member
Filling your tiny outboard tank from a jerrycan on a pitching deck….
Bouba
Well-known member
They might be wrong…if nobody changes then nothing changes…with little 2 hp outboards for tenders etc…we may have reached a tipping point in favour of electric…this can’t happen unless people actively change
Greenheart
Well-known member
Seems like an odd question for the magazine to have asked. Do any real people (excluding online attention-seekers) choose electric rather than internal combustion for its "greenness" rather than to escape the noise, vibration and mechanical and other failures associated with ICE?
I always thought that for a small yacht, electric power's strong attraction is its clean simplicity (dependability, assuming it receives the amps), smoothness and near-silence. I didn't envisage a problem with the weak range for my use, because it encouraged (in fact, required) old-fashioned minimal reliance on engine. I really liked that, till I decided I don't want to waste any more of my time afloat, beating against the wind, but that's a separate matter.
Whatever its shortcomings (except cost, which can't be ignored) I'd still like an electric auxiliary in order to escape mechanical issues and noise. But I'd never kid myself it would be greener than maintaining a functional petrol or diesel. How much use would an electric auxiliary have to be given before it covers the carbon cost of its own needless production and the associated scrapping of a functional ICE that only ever got light use?
Even for new-built vessels, isn't hybrid propulsion ideal - electric for short-range inshore peace (much better than starting a diesel without running it long enough to reach working temperature), and diesel for distance/offshore work?
EDITED FOR CLARITY
I always thought that for a small yacht, electric power's strong attraction is its clean simplicity (dependability, assuming it receives the amps), smoothness and near-silence. I didn't envisage a problem with the weak range for my use, because it encouraged (in fact, required) old-fashioned minimal reliance on engine. I really liked that, till I decided I don't want to waste any more of my time afloat, beating against the wind, but that's a separate matter.
Whatever its shortcomings (except cost, which can't be ignored) I'd still like an electric auxiliary in order to escape mechanical issues and noise. But I'd never kid myself it would be greener than maintaining a functional petrol or diesel. How much use would an electric auxiliary have to be given before it covers the carbon cost of its own needless production and the associated scrapping of a functional ICE that only ever got light use?
Even for new-built vessels, isn't hybrid propulsion ideal - electric for short-range inshore peace (much better than starting a diesel without running it long enough to reach working temperature), and diesel for distance/offshore work?
EDITED FOR CLARITY
Last edited:
Bouba
Well-known member
The environment could be local...if you boat in a sensitive area, marine national park, crystal clear water etc...you might not want to leave a spillage or oil slick ...as well as air and noise pollution
Ribtecer
Well-known member
Isn't CO2 the logo for a Contessa?
Serious question; how will constant charging of a powerful battery effect electrolytic corrosion elsewhere on the boat? Has this been done and what were the results?
Also surely the dangers of falling over board and suffering electrocution in the water will increase significantly if all the boats are moored up and wired to a 3 phase supply? I remember an article warning of the dangers of falling in in a marina with so many boats being hooked up to shore power, I seem to remember A/C unit got alot of blame because of their big draw on power and the boats potential leakage.
Interested in possible thoughts.
Serious question; how will constant charging of a powerful battery effect electrolytic corrosion elsewhere on the boat? Has this been done and what were the results?
Also surely the dangers of falling over board and suffering electrocution in the water will increase significantly if all the boats are moored up and wired to a 3 phase supply? I remember an article warning of the dangers of falling in in a marina with so many boats being hooked up to shore power, I seem to remember A/C unit got alot of blame because of their big draw on power and the boats potential leakage.
Interested in possible thoughts.
Tranona
Well-known member
A couple of observations on points raised.
First, the average annual usage. I made the point about the use of straight averages in statistics. It is only a point value derived from dividing the total hours run in the population by the size of the population. It tells nothing about the distribution . I expect the full report will include the details of the sample they used and why they think it represents the population. However I guess it would include boats of varying size and age used in a wide variety of situations, many of which will be inactive for a portion of their lives. In the YM article a (UK) surveyor commented that he sees few boats with averages of more than 50 a year (also see post#2). Posters here often make a point about how little they use their engines, and on many posts here how little fuel they use in a year. 100 hours at 5 knots is 500 miles or 10 days solid motoring. Even my old charter boat that spent 7 seasons at up to 20 weeks a season in the almost windless Ionian (plus nearly 1000 miles motoring across the Med) only averaged 350 hours a year.
The second point is about the scale of the CO2 problem of the recreational boating industry. The estimates in the report put it at 0.1% of global emissions and 0.7% in US and 0.4% of transportation in the US and Europe respectively. This perhaps why it is so low on the priority list for policy makers (if it is even there at all!). More importantly it reinforces what has always been the case that propulsion methods are derived from automotive or industrial industries. Scale limits the amount of boat specific investment and innovation. This is clearly illustrated by Oceanvolt which is the only company that has so far been successful in developing higher powered electric propulsion systems that owe little nothing to automotive or industrial technology. This comes at a price - their latest pod drive for boats of 45' upwards comes in at a cool £60k roughly 4 times the price of a diesel saildrive of similar power. However, if the battery problem could be solved then in line electric motors are relatively cheap, but that really does not help the decarbonisation targets much as the majority of cost is in the making of the boat and particularly batteries, not in the running costs.
I can't see any major changes in boat specific propulsion technology, only derivative from other industries where development is forced by legislation. I can, however see new products coming in that take advantage of new technologies and offer a different kind of boating experience. The electric powered foiling powerboats are a good example.
Remember the report is wide ranging and propulsion systems is only a part of it.
First, the average annual usage. I made the point about the use of straight averages in statistics. It is only a point value derived from dividing the total hours run in the population by the size of the population. It tells nothing about the distribution . I expect the full report will include the details of the sample they used and why they think it represents the population. However I guess it would include boats of varying size and age used in a wide variety of situations, many of which will be inactive for a portion of their lives. In the YM article a (UK) surveyor commented that he sees few boats with averages of more than 50 a year (also see post#2). Posters here often make a point about how little they use their engines, and on many posts here how little fuel they use in a year. 100 hours at 5 knots is 500 miles or 10 days solid motoring. Even my old charter boat that spent 7 seasons at up to 20 weeks a season in the almost windless Ionian (plus nearly 1000 miles motoring across the Med) only averaged 350 hours a year.
The second point is about the scale of the CO2 problem of the recreational boating industry. The estimates in the report put it at 0.1% of global emissions and 0.7% in US and 0.4% of transportation in the US and Europe respectively. This perhaps why it is so low on the priority list for policy makers (if it is even there at all!). More importantly it reinforces what has always been the case that propulsion methods are derived from automotive or industrial industries. Scale limits the amount of boat specific investment and innovation. This is clearly illustrated by Oceanvolt which is the only company that has so far been successful in developing higher powered electric propulsion systems that owe little nothing to automotive or industrial technology. This comes at a price - their latest pod drive for boats of 45' upwards comes in at a cool £60k roughly 4 times the price of a diesel saildrive of similar power. However, if the battery problem could be solved then in line electric motors are relatively cheap, but that really does not help the decarbonisation targets much as the majority of cost is in the making of the boat and particularly batteries, not in the running costs.
I can't see any major changes in boat specific propulsion technology, only derivative from other industries where development is forced by legislation. I can, however see new products coming in that take advantage of new technologies and offer a different kind of boating experience. The electric powered foiling powerboats are a good example.
Remember the report is wide ranging and propulsion systems is only a part of it.
Tranona
Well-known member
You are right. On peoples' wish list "green" gets tacked onto the end to make the list look good. Same with cars. Rarely do manufacturers' ads mention environmentally friendly for EVs (probably because they don't want to be accused of lying!) but major on those things that always sells cars - power, fun, sophistication and so on.
The things you list are those on the wish list, but few are prepared to accept the limitations, particularly cost and lack of range that go with those benefits. No, hybrid is definitely not the answer for sailing yacht auxiliaries, shown by all the studies and the lack of takeup in the market despite technically viable products having been on the market for 15 years or more. Again cost plays a big part, but they really only become attractive when the power demands for the domestic side of the vessel exceed propulsion demands. So larger (45'+) yachts, particularly Cats can go electric by using a hybrid instead of a freestanding generator. Bit simplistic as there are a number of different hybrid configurations on the market offering different combinations of ICE and electric propulsion
Greenheart
Well-known member
The more I read about industry trends, new products and evolving market preferences, the more content I am to go my own way without attempting to understand other people's choices. Thank heavens we only need to do what we want! At least for the time being.
