Electric harbors are coming.

[jviss]

I can't let this one go without questioning your sources for this? (Sounds like oil lobby propaganda.)

Dave is correct. Light oils are broken down very quickly on/in the water, it's when they mix with mud and soil and sand that the weathering is slowed down.

This, from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, hardly an oil lobby propagandist:

"Oil chemicals entering the ocean have many fates. Volatile chemicals are lost by evaporation to the atmosphere. Other chemicals are broken up by photochemical reactions (catalyzed by sunlight). Bacteria can degrade certain oil components.

The combination of biological, physical, and chemical processes is usually referred to as weathering. These weathering reactions have different rates depending on the chemical structure of the oil, habitat conditions (such as water temperature or oxygen and nutrient supply), and mixing of the water by wind, waves, and currents. In some spills, oil does not last much beyond weeks to months."

Mixing Oil and Water

A "sheen" from a minor dribble of fuel oil or gasoline on the surface, or remnants of 2-stroke oil, is nothing to get worked up about. But, it's not a good idea to apply a dispersant (like Dawn) (and it's illegal). All oil and fuel spills are to be reported, as a matter of law - regardless of the amount (zero tolerance).

 

[Head Sail]

Submarines have been electric powered by battery banks since WWII.
Their diesel engines were more for recharging than as propulsion. I understand they could charge them up from shore power in minutes because of the voltage differential they designed into the system. Or, so I've heard.

-Will (Dragonfly)

Yes, but they were weapons of war never claiming to save the world from man made climate change. Electric propulsion was required for silence not efficiency.

 

[Will Gilmore]

Yes, but they were weapons of war never claiming to save the world from man made climate change. Electric propulsion was required for silence not efficiency.

My point was really about how old the technology was for going to sea in large electric powered boats. The fact that it was a submarine and less interested in weight conservation works against my original illustration about how feasible an electric ferry would be. I think it still works, though.

-Will (Dragonfly)

 

[Will Gilmore]

Nikola Tesla calculated that an electric train running off a steam powered generator would be more efficient than a steam locamotive with direct drive. I don't know anything about the details of his arguement, only that he made the statement in his autobiography. He also had dreams of converting a large ship to electric induction drive. I suspect that was what the Philadelphia Experiment was really all about. Seawater, being electrically conductive and also representing a low resistance path to ground for ionized air, could potentially provide an inductive source of electric power to a coil/capacitor circuit moving through it.

-Will (Dragonfly)

 

[jssailem]

I suspect that was what the Philadelphia Experiment was really all about.

Na.. That was time travel... You're thinking the story "Hunt for Red October".

 

[jviss]

Electric propulsion was required for silence running underwater not efficiency.

I edited your quote, above. I think silence was a happy side effect. The fundamental reason was that you coudn't run underwater without electric power; IC engines require a lot of air, and exhaust pollutants. Snorkels came much later, and didn't allow deep submersion.

 

[Head Sail]

I edited your quote, above. I think silence was a happy side effect. The fundamental reason was that you coudn't run underwater without electric power; IC engines require a lot of air, and exhaust pollutants. Snorkels came much later, and didn't allow deep submersion.

Agree, submarines electric propulsion underwater is for very specific reasons. Reducing greenhouses gases was NOT one of them. On the otherhand, hybrid ferries are touted as being good for the environment. That would be true if the ferries are charged with a renewable source such as hydro power which is what we have in the PNW but not diesel power.

 

[jviss]

Agree, submarines electric propulsion underwater is for very specific reasons. Reducing greenhouses gases was NOT one of them. On the otherhand, hybrid ferries are touted as being good for the environment. That would be true if the ferries are charged with a renewable source such as hydro power which is what we have in the PNW but not diesel power.

Or nuke. We have lots of ferries here, but Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant was shut down in May. It could have kept on, but I'm pretty sure it's the inexpensive oil and natural gas from fracking that hastened its demise.

 

[Ken13559]

Speaking of engine noise: Do Japanese motorcycles have any other throttle position besides wide open and screaming?

That's a fantastic idea! Why didn't they design adjustable throttle?
Patent it and could make tons of money

Ken Y

 

[TomY]

I found them online, the Center Harbor Yacht Club. " Visiting dinghies may tie up on the inside of our floats, but outboard motors are not welcome." This is clearly an exception, by a long shot, lunatic fringe.

They didn't seem like lunatics so I decided to ask and received a courteous reply back. I even asked about electrics and they are all banned but not for the reason that you assumed.

"Thanks for your inquiry, and I'm glad you made it to CHYC this past season. Our no outboard rule has been in effect for many years, and is to prevent damage to other dinghies at the dock. Our club and facilities are on the small side, and we have found this rule to be helpful in terms of space and wear and tear on the dinghies. We have the same policy for both gas and electric outboard motors, although I recognize the latter is smaller and more unobtrusive. If you can remove the outboard and put it inside your dinghy while tied up at the float, that's fine."

 

[jviss]

Wow, that's interesting. But still, clearly unconventional. Keeps out folks like me, who are not about to take my 15HP outboard off the transom and row to the the dock.

I find their explanation specious. I am not aware of , nor have witnessed nor heard about damage to dinghies at dinghy docks due to outboards, especially ones in the water with the motor not tilted up. I'm calling B.S. on that and just assuming they are luddites, or extreme traditionalists who prefer to live as in days gone by.

I've encountered folks who row their dinghies who are not content to just do that, but sneer at outboard users, and seem to hate them, or at least disdain them, the same way some urban cyclists hate cars and car drivers.

 

[TomY]

Wow, that's interesting. But still, clearly unconventional. Keeps out folks like me, who are not about to take my 15HP outboard off the transom and row to the the dock.

I find their explanation specious. I am not aware of , nor have witnessed nor heard about damage to dinghies at dinghy docks due to outboards, especially ones in the water with the motor not tilted up. I'm calling B.S. on that and just assuming they are luddites, or extreme traditionalists who prefer to live as in days gone by.

I've encountered folks who row their dinghies who are not content to just do that, but sneer at outboard users, and seem to hate them, or at least disdain them, the same way some urban cyclists hate cars and car drivers.

I thought their reply was courteous and reasoned. Private clubs often make their own rules.

I met several members young and old, no 'hate, sneers, luddites, extremists, etc.' at all.

Like many dinghy docks on the coast of Maine, tenders are at best split 50/50 hard vs. inflatable. For many club members, their row boat is their only boat and could be a nice boat.

Rowers are common and they don't sneer, they mostly smile enjoying a nice row. This is my friend Parker. He owns a powerboat.

 

[jviss]

How is an inflatable with an outboard more likely than a hard dinghy to damage a hard dinghy? Just doesn't pass the smell test. Hard dinghies are hard, and often have pointy ends. And oars.

 

[JamesG161]

After just reading this thread from start to finish[ for the most part] all I can say is...



_____
Here is a few thoughts...
1) My Boat and Dinghy are 100% Solar Powered [ or maybe 99.9%]
2) I have hoped for a favorable Climate Changes on weekends [no winds so far this year]
3) The Admiral Makes me clean my boat shoes to eliminate my Carbon Footprint aboard.

Jim...

PS: Before you react to my item 1) above. Think about it for a bit.

 

[jviss]

After just reading this thread from start to finish[ for the most part] all I can say is...



_____
Here is a few thoughts...
1) My Boat and Dinghy are 100% Solar Powered [ or maybe 99.9%]
2) I have hoped for a favorable Climate Changes on weekends [no winds so far this year]
3) The Admiral Makes me clean my boat shoes to eliminate my Carbon Footprint aboard.

Jim...

PS: Before you react to my item 1) above. Think about it for a bit.

Yes, good point, Jim. Where were we? Electric harbors are coming?

It's inevitable as the technology of electric propulsion of transportation accelerates around the world.

Considering that electric propulsion has been available for more than 100 years, in fact, was debuted as a marine propulsion mechanism more that 15 years before the introduction of the diesel engine for this purpose; it seems unlikely that electric will displace or surpass it any time soon, if ever. Much of it is driven by battery technology, which has made remarkable strides in the past 20 years or so. But even the best, most exotic battery technology has much, much lower energy density than gasoline. For example, LiPo batteries, which are still dangerous to charge, have an energy density of about 500 Wh/l (Watt-hours per litre). Gasoline is 187,000 Wh/l. So, you can carry much more energy, get it almost anywhere, and "recharge" instantly. Not so with electric. Gas can, and does go bad - eventually. Batteries go bad, too, and self-discharge, certainly. And batteries are enormously more expensive than gasoline, on an energy use basis. Batteries eventually degrade and must be replaced. With gas, you get brand new fuel every time you "recharge."

Electric propulsion is useful in certain limited applications, it's trendy, fashionable, allows for copious virtue-signalling, but in my estimation will not replace I.C. engine propulsion for yachts and dinghies in the far foreseeable future (barring draconian legislation). My view is the same about electric cars, solar, and wind, FWIW.

 

[Will Gilmore]

My view is the same about electric cars, solar, and wind,

Each has its value and that value isn't limited solely to energy units and dollars. "Virtue signaling" I love the way you think jviss. The hipster movement alone can keep electric technology moving forward, but it really does have an esthetic value as well. All of the above appeal to me, even the "virtue signaling" (don't want to do the obvious and except myself from the frailties of human vanity), however there is much more to it than that. It's like giving to a charity. Not only do I want to appear to be a good person, but I really do want the cause to advance.

-Will (Dragonfly)

 

[dziedzicmj]

Their diesel engines were more for recharging than as propulsion.

Not even close. The diesel could drive them at 20 kt. or better; the electric motor at 6 kt. or less. This is why the submarine snorkel was invented.

 

[jviss]

Not even close. The diesel could drive them at 20 kt. or better; the electric motor at 6 kt. or less. This is why the submarine snorkel was invented.

Truth is, particularly in the U.S. Navy, the diesel was decoupled from the propeller shaft sometime in the 1930s, when the diesel was only a generator, and the props driven only electrically.

from wikipedia, Submarine/Propulsion/Diesel-electric

In 1928, the United States Navy's Bureau of Engineering proposed a diesel-electric transmission. Instead of driving the propeller directly while running on the surface, the submarine's diesel drove a generator that could either charge the submarine's batteries or drive the electric motor. This made electric motor speed independent of diesel engine speed, so the diesel could run at an optimum and non-critical speed. One or more diesel engines could be shut down for maintenance while the submarine continued to run on the remaining engine or battery power. The US pioneered this concept in 1929, in the S-class submarines S-3, S-6, and S-7. The first production submarines with this system were the Porpoise class of the 1930s, and it was used on most subsequent US diesel submarines through the 1960s. No other navy adopted the system before 1945, apart from the Royal Navy's U-class submarines, though some submarines of the Imperial Japanese Navy used separate diesel generators for low speed running.[65]

 

[TomY]

Torqueedo test drive: I've never touched one and there were no instructions in the bag so I didn't know what to expect.

It's an easily managed package though and the bags are well made. The engine bag is about the size of a tennis racket bag but weighs more. The battery bag is quite small and not as heavy as I expected.

I flopped the West Marine 260(or something) into the water. I was amazed at the weight capacity on the transom. Over a 1,000 pounds. But I couldn't, unless you were hauling bricks, how you get the weight in. With two people in it I couldn't imagine much room for gear. But it is a nice small RIB for 2 people and a little gear. But sorry, this is about the Torqueedo.

With no instructions (I'm sure they're online but I didn't have time) I went at it blind. The motor is nicely buckled in the case. Solid piece, heavier than I expected, it's still a very light engine to lift and put on the transom from the dock.

Next the handle piece is very intuitive, the big joints obvious and easy to lock. The batter next, same thing after I realized there was pin that had to be pulled. Pin back in - check.

It clearly states to connect engine cable first / last.

Then I was stumped! How do you turn it on? I assumed the plastic piece on a lanyard was the key, but there was another red piece that looked like it went in something. Clearly I was showing my lack of tech evolution (I still drive vehicles with crank up windows,...).

So phone google, PDF, in German,...arggg, scroll scroll scroll. There it is, simple the key is a magnet and the symbol is right on the housing. Click, it sticks and that's all you do. I gave the throttle a little twist and sure enough, thrust.

Thrust it's got. The chubby little RIB feels like it's being pushed by more than 2 or 3 HP motor. With me alone sitting on the one thwart in the RIB, the little screen was showing 5mph. If Leaned forward a bit it went up to 5.3,5.4 mph. Clearly not planing but impressive power to me.

It made alittle more noise than I expected but after throttling back, I realized it was mostly the ruckus of the wake and RIB. You could have a normal conversation at full throttle.

More at a 'cruise' speed, 3.5 mph it's very quiet and was pleasant to cruise around the small pond it's on. I snuck up on a loon and her chick. I was quite close and they still didn't dive. But I peeled off and left them alone.

I'm impressed with how well it seems to be designed and built. The meter was telling me state of charge, even watts used. With that it doesn't take long for any user of EV gear to conserve their energy.

All in all, this is a nice compact dinghy motor. Easy package to carry along with gear for many coastal sailors that drive to their boat for a few days of sailing.

Not trading in my oars yet though,....

 

[sail sfbay]

TomY,

Nice testimonia!! Looking forward to using my new Torqeedo in my West Marine PRU-3 inflatable.