A “green”dilemma. What would you do?

[Captain Larry-DH]

A challenging question.

I think I would use the Torqeedo as the primary motor and keep the Tohatsu as a back up.

We have a Torqeedo and are generally pleased with it despite the two major shortcomings, the range/speed issue and recharging. The recharging issue is a big one, an ICE can be "recharged" quickly from a can of gasoline, the Torqeedo needs up to 10 hours. In the short time we have owned the Torqeedo we have had to balance charging with use, planning ahead for how much we can use the motor before recharging. It will sometimes interfere with spontaneity, does the battery have enough charge to get us to the impromptu gathering across the harbor and back?

If you haven't discovered it yet, the props are easily broken leaving you with a one blade or no blade prop. Learned the hard way.

Dave - Thanks for your thoughts, and yes we bought a spare prop. However, I realized yesterday that we didn't have a 17mm deep-socket (needed to change it) on the mother ship. It's there now.
I have 1670 watts of solar aboard the boat, so charging the Torqueedo is a non-issue, but you're right - that 10-hour charge time is. It would be nice to have a spare battery in reserve that's always fully charged... except for the cost. If we had that we could also use the Torqeedo at wide-open-throttle without much concern about range and recovery time. I'd love to find a used one on the market that's in good condition from a little old lady who only used it in fresh water to go to church (haha).

 

[DArcy]

I have 1670 watts of solar aboard the boat

You could power my house on that! I have solar envy.

except for the cost

I'd guess you could sell the Tohatsu for more than the price of a couple new Torqueedo batteries. Solves all your problems

 

[dlochner]

I'd guess you could sell the Tohatsu for more than the price of a couple new Torqueedo batteries. Solves all your problems

LOL! Have you priced a new 910wh Torqeedo battery? That Tohatsu better be platinum plated.

Torqeedo Replacement/Spare 915 Wh - 1148-00

Torqeedo Spare 915 Wh Battery for Travel 1103 / 1003 / 503 / 603S Electric Outboard Motors Features: High-performance spare or replacement lithium battery for Torqeedo 1103 / 1003 / 503 / 603S Same size package as standard 530 Wh battery, but pac

www.defender.com

 

[DArcy]

LOL! Have you priced a new 910wh Torqeedo battery? That Tohatsu better be platinum plated.

Torqeedo Replacement/Spare 915 Wh - 1148-00

Torqeedo Spare 915 Wh Battery for Travel 1103 / 1003 / 503 / 603S Electric Outboard Motors Features: High-performance spare or replacement lithium battery for Torqeedo 1103 / 1003 / 503 / 603S Same size package as standard 530 Wh battery, but pac

www.defender.com

I did, they are around $1000. I don't know the Tohatsu but @Captain Larry-DH was really selling it in the original post, must be worth a bundle.

 

[jssailem]

10 Boat bucks.
what is the life span? 3-5-10 years. Maybe not so bad. What will be the cost to get rid of it? 10 years from now will they pay you or will you pay the ‘Them’ to have it recycled.

 

[thinwater]

Safety can also be a factor. What items would you not sell or even give away, if they were in well used (possibly sound but unknown) condition?

• tethers
• jacklines
• harness
• carabiners
• PFD
• climbing rope
• ladder
• liferaft

In most of these cases, if it retired from your use because you don't trust it, you should probably destroy it, at least rendering it not usable for its original purpose.

 

[shemandr]

Parachute.

 

[Benny17441]

I remember going out and purchasing a 2 stroke small outboard the last year model that they were legally allowed just to have a new one that hopefully would last longer than older models. My determinant factor for powering the dink still is power and weight and the 3.5HP Mercury weighing 18 lbs is still going strong. The use for my dink is utilitarian to get from boat to shore and to carry supplies with no need to get on plane. Sell that engine, you could make a fellow sailor very happy.

 

[Kings Gambit]

Last night we were out to watch fireworks and it was vividly apparent (in the beam of a flashlight) how much smoke was being put out. My wife and I decided together that we’re going to switch back to the Torqeedo and get rid of the 2-stroke ICE.
So here’s the question: Would you sell it, knowing that some people consider it a rare sought-after model because it‘s smooth running and has a superb power-weight ratio? Or would you junk it, forgoing $ to reduce pollution on our planet?

The root of the issue here is the common “one size fits all” approach to boating and many other things in our everyday lives. Of course, 2-strokes belch out a lot of smelly exhaust when idling or powering slowly that nobody likes, which is what I imagine you were doing. Not going anywhere? Tooling around watching the show? That would be the perfect job for the Torqueedo, or even a small 4-stroke OB. But when running on a plane, full out or nearly so with a 2-stroke OB at high torque, using it as designed for its best performance, combustion is much more efficient. (Rather like jet aircraft taxiing on the runway versus flying at high altitude. Oh those stinky jets!) There the 2-stroke does a job that electrics of that size probably will never do. It does not have to be all or nothing. Use the electric for its best purpose; the 2-stroke for its. Carry both, not as “spares” but for different usage. Yet even so, the amount of harmful emission saved per year by only intermittent use of the 2-stroke at best performance probably is going to be far less than you save mostly sailing over motoring the typical boater’s annual hours using the diesel. This is potentially the old “penny wise, pound foolish” phenomenon at work.

 

[Project_Mayhem]

Try Amsoil's Outboard Premix 100:1 to reduce the amount of smoke and oil going into the environment

 

[Ken13559]

Sell it... Instead of using the money on personal wants/needs send it to a Green charity. They will take the money and use it to fly to the next Green conference........

Yes I do wonder how the Greenies gets around across country

 

[Jacktar]

So big picture , how do you charge the electric motor battery, from main boat motor using fossil fuels, a solar charger, or hooked up to shore power produced most likely by fossil fuel. Perspective my friend.

 

[shemandr]

Again, if your source of charging is fossil fuel, ( and it is mostly), using an electric motor is no more clean than a fossil fuel burning internal combustion engine - 2 or 4cycle. It is worse. If I am wrong about this I'd like for some more expert opinion to challenge that statement.

 

[dlochner]

So big picture , how do you charge the electric motor battery, from main boat motor using fossil fuels, a solar charger, or hooked up to shore power produced most likely by fossil fuel. Perspective my friend.

Again, if your source of charging is fossil fuel, ( and it is mostly), using an electric motor is no more clean than a fossil fuel burning internal combustion engine - 2 or 4cycle. It is worse. If I am wrong about this I'd like for some more expert opinion to challenge that statement.

Our electric outboard battery is charged by solar and when motoring. In the past 7 months we have not connected to shore power. All of our electrical needs have been met by solar or while motoring and charging off the alternator. True, when the alternator is producing electricity it does increase fuel consumption by a barely measurable amount, a few ounces an hour, far less than an outboard consumes.

 

[Ralph Johnstone]

It is worse.

Yes, EV's using dirty electricity are far worse than an IC engine.

In burning a non renewable hydrocarbon fuel to produce electricity, the largest energy losses are:

1. Burning the fuel to produce steam sees a loss of energy through thermal inefficiency.
2. Passing the steam through a turbine loses energy when the steam is finally condensed back to water and gives up heat to the environment.
3. The generator (driven by the turbine) loses energy in the form of heat from the heating of the rotor and armature.
4. The electricity loses energy as it passes through the transmission wires to the demand.

If the turbine is turned by initially burning fuel, all of the inefficiencies are overcome by burning more fuel which produces more CO2. Harmful to the environment.

If the turbine was turned by falling water in a hydroelectric dam, all of these inefficiencies are overcome by passing more water. Not harmful to the environment.

If you look at the world production of electricity, according to the web (which is a crap shoot at best), very roughly, somewhere around 50% of all electricity comes from coal, gas, and oil.

Hmmmmmmm, electric cars using dirty electricity are being pushed on us when our environment is collapsing due to CO2 overloading.

 

[jviss]

our environment is collapsing due to CO2 overloading.

I don't agree. First, I don't buy that human-caused CO2 emissions are contributing measurably to the inexorable warming of the planet as we gradually exit the last glaciation. CAGW is the biggest hoax perpetrated on the world population in history. Second, there is abundant evidence that increases in CO2 in the atmosphere are helping, particularly in increased crop yields.

What is the evidence of "collapse?"

(Note, Ralph and I argue a lot, and I'm fine with that. Also, if this tangent is considered to Sails Call, or even prohibited, I'm fine with dropping it.)

 

[rgranger]

I don't agree. First, I don't buy that human-caused CO2 emissions are contributing measurably to the inexorable warming of the planet as we gradually exit the last glaciation. CAGW is the biggest hoax perpetrated on the world population in history. Second, there is abundant evidence that increases in CO2 in the atmosphere are helping, particularly in increased crop yields.

What is the evidence of "collapse?"

(Note, Ralph and I argue a lot, and I'm fine with that. Also, if this tangent is considered to Sails Call, or even prohibited, I'm fine with dropping it.)

Oh boy.... I see this getting moved to the sails call lounge

Here goes
Whether you believe climate change is anthropogenic or not… there is no denying the fact that the climate has changed A LOT in our lifetimes. As a kid, I used to play hockey on the pond behind my mother’s house. That pond has not frozen in 20 years.

And even if you don’t believe CO2 in the atmosphere increases air temperature (*see below) there are a lot of good reasons to move our energy sector away from hydrocarbon fuels. Here are a few examples

• All of our herbicides are derived from petroleum (FOOD Production)
• All of our insecticides are derived from petroleum (FOOD Production)
• ALL of the hydrogen used to make ammonium (Haber Process) from nitrogen comes from natural gas... that ammonium is used to make nitrates... which is used to make fertilizer . Without manmade fertilizer, we would only be able to support about 3 billion people on the planet. (FOOD Production)
• ALL detergent is derived from petroleum (Public Health)
• Most of our medicines are derived from petroleum (Public Health)
• Most of our textiles are produced from petroleum (We could not produce enough cotton without massive deforestation)
• PLASTIC! Manufacturing and construction is highly reliant on plastic as is most of our commercial packaging.
• Many of our specialty chemicals are derived from petroleum (i.e epoxy, poly ester, carbon fiber, mylar, Teflon, etc).
• Many of our industrial-infrastructure materials are derived from petroleum (i.e. paint, glues, tar, asphalt, varnish, dyes,)

AND!!!! we still put petroleum in our tanks and burn it. DUMB!

* I used to be a climate denyer (a long time ago) and one day I decided to conduct a simple experiment. I took two empty 2-liter soda bottles, placed a thermometer in both, filled one with CO2 (from my lab), capped it and capped the other with regular air. I then put them out in the yard for an hour. The one with CO2 was +8C warmer. If you want to repeat this experiment and don't have access to CO2 gas, take a water bottle and pour out half the water. Take another bottle pour out all of the water and replace half with carbonated water. Put a themometer in both close them up and put them out in the yard. See which one has hotter water after they sit for a while. Actually, use a mason jar so that you don't wast the plastic.

 

[jviss]

Oh boy.... I see this getting moved to the sails call lounge

Here goes
Weather you believe climate change is anthropogenic or not… there is no denying the fact that the climate has changed A LOT in our lifetimes. As a kid, I used to play hockey on the pond behind my mother’s house. That pond has not frozen in 20 years.

And even if you don’t believe CO2 in the atmosphere increases air temperature (*see below) there are a lot of good reasons to move our energy sector away from hydrocarbon fuels. Here are a few examples

• All of our herbicides are derived from petroleum (FOOD Production)
• All of our insecticides are derived from petroleum (FOOD Production)
• ALL of the hydrogen used to make ammonium (Haber Process) from nitrogen comes from natural gas... that ammonium is used to make nitrates... which is used to make fertilizer . Without manmade fertilizer, we would only be able to support about 3 billion people on the planet. (FOOD Production)
• ALL detergent is derived from petroleum (Public Health)
• Most of our medicines are derived from petroleum (Public Health)
• Most of our textiles are produced from petroleum (We could not produce enough cotton without massive deforestation)
• PLASTIC! Manufacturing and construction is highly reliant on plastic as is most of our commercial packaging.
• Many of our specialty chemicals are derived from petroleum (i.e epoxy, poly ester, carbon fiber, mylar, Teflon, etc).
• Many of our industrial-infrastructure materials are derived from petroleum (i.e. paint, glues, tar, asphalt, varnish, dyes,)

AND!!!! we still put petroleum in our tanks and burn it. DUMB!

* I used to be a climate denyer (a long time ago) and one day I decided to conduct a simple experiment. I took two empty 2-liter soda bottles, placed a thermometer in both, filled one with CO2 (from my lab), capped it and capped the other with regular air. I then put them out in the yard for an hour. The one with CO2 was +8C warmer. If you want to repeat this experiment and don't have access to CO2 gas, take a water bottle and pour out half the water. Take another bottle pour out all of the water and replace half with carbonated water. Put a themometer in both close them up and put them out in the yard. See which one has hotter water after they sit for a while. Actually, use a mason jar so that you don't wast the plastic.

Your experiment is silly. It says nothing about the greenhouse gas theory, since the bottle is the greenhouse in this case.

 

[dlochner]

Your experiment is silly. It says nothing about the greenhouse gas theory, since the bottle is the greenhouse in this case.

Well, actually it does. The basis of the GHT is some chemicals in the atmosphere can absorb and hold more heat than others. As the composition of air changes and includes of higher amounts of heat retaining gases atmospheric temperatures rise. His simple experiment demonstrates that atmospheres with higher levels of CO2 reach higher temperatures than atmospheres with lower levels of CO2.

There is no debate about the increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere. There is ample evidence from a variety of reputable sources that show this. Here is one source. Global Monitoring Laboratory - Carbon Cycle Greenhouse Gases

The term Greenhouse Effect is a metaphor to help those without a strong background in science to understand what is happening.

 

[dlochner]

Again, if your source of charging is fossil fuel, ( and it is mostly), using an electric motor is no more clean than a fossil fuel burning internal combustion engine - 2 or 4cycle. It is worse. If I am wrong about this I'd like for some more expert opinion to challenge that statement.

So big picture , how do you charge the electric motor battery, from main boat motor using fossil fuels, a solar charger, or hooked up to shore power produced most likely by fossil fuel. Perspective my friend.

The transition from one technology to another is seldom rapid. The transition from ICE to sustainable electric is moving along it is not perfect yet and it will take more time to further improve the efficiency of electric motors and batteries and more importantly to build the infrastructure to support electric vehicles. It is the proverbial chicken and egg. Without enough of a market for electric vehicles the infrastructure won't be built and without the infrastructure the market won't grow.

The electric generation mix changes almost daily as new renewable energy sources come online. As the mix turns to more renewable the positive effects of an electric vehicle increase and it will not be uniform across the country, some areas are moving quicker than others.

The argument against electric vehicles "they aren't as clean you think" is a red herring that distracts from the bigger picture. Those early adopters of electric vehicles are the stimulus for future development. Without them there would be no progress.