Inboard engines and a changing world

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

The fallacy is of course not understanding who will pay for the upkeep of that grid, all users will of course, but all users don’t have Solar arrays that they can use to force a utility to pay more for power than it costs them to generate.

So who wins? The rich guy who has a private house and Solar. Who loses? The poor guy who doesn’t, because they both will pay the additional cost that will be passed into the price of electricity.

Around here, actual electrical consumption and delivery/infrastructure charges are separate line items, so the rich guy with solar only saves by drawing less energy from the grid. The fixed charges still apply.

It’s really similar to the electric car thing, they pay nothing for the upkeep of the roads and bridges etc. Who does is the poor who can’t afford a new electric car, so the poor get to pay for the upkeep of the transportation infrastructure, and the wealthy get a free ride.

I'm pretty sure that "user" taxes generated from fuel sales do not pay 100% of road costs. This link suggests that in the US it's roughly just a third. Which sort of makes sense because even if you only ever walk or ride a bike, your veggies didn't walk themselves in from the farm.


Again, not completely a free ride there.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Your proposal (fees based upon vehicle weight & annual distance traveled) might work for roadway infrastructure funding. In my limited understanding, I favour it.

It does not, however, do anything towards reducing pollution (a public good), which will require "other" measure.

That is because it’s not supposed to. It doesn’t help the homeless or unwed Mothers, fight crime or decrease illegal drug use ,all which are I assume also a public good.
I didn’t throw in mileage as it’s certainly logical, but how do you do that, have people state their mileage?

I know you think electric’s should get a break to increase their usage, but it won’t, not really. An SUV from a financial perspective can’t be justified, almost none actually “need” one, yet they are all over the place, proving to me anyway that the fact they cost more to purchase and operate doesn’t override the desire to own one.

What gets how taxes are spent in trouble is well meaning people robbing from one pocket to fund something that in their opinion is noble.

But charging EV’s more than their fair share doesn’t surprise me at all, not because they are EV’s but simply because it’s a money grab and fall right in line with Government logic, one group wants to give away all kinds of money to them, another sees them as a cash cow.
In my opinion neither is correct, an EV should pay it fair share based on how much wear and tear it causes, no more or no less.

We the people have subsidized SUV’s and trucks, which is wrong we shouldn’t have, but we did. That subsidy too, should end.

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by GordMay

It does not, however, do anything towards reducing pollution (a public good), which will require "other" measure.

I laid out how I thought fossil fuel should be priced, in my opinion that’s the only way not to hurt people at lower incomes.
But no, other measures don’t need to be taken, if EV’s are more economical, smoother, quieter, need less maintenance etc. they will take over the market.
If you leave it alone, if it’s superior it will work, get the Government involved with a bunch of well meaning idiots with no knowledge and they will I assure you screw it up.
By that I mean look at almost any elected representative, they have no background that makes them know about this, they will vote whichever way enriches them the most or gets them re-elected.
My concern is that we will see a flood of inefficient SUV’s and Trucks, which won’t do nearly as much good as an efficient vehicle could.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Electric boat propulsion is only viable for boats that return to a Marina almost daily. They are tethered to the plug.
....

Not so. It is also viable for the cruisers who are willing or almost willing to go engineless.

I am one of those folks.

[Buzzman]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

You are describing how market based pricing is SUPPOSED TO WORK.

I'm describing how home solar net metering ACTUALLY WORKS.

Most net metering plans for home based generation guarantee the homeowner can sell their power first and the utility must take it. Result, they produce power that isn't needed and the utility must buy it at inflated prices. The antithesis of market based pricing.

Of course, the batteries being used to cover base load technically work but financially don't. This is where using batteries that already exist can make it viable. If you've already covered the cost of the car batteries as part of the car, the net cost to use those to provide some base load capability can make sense financially as the sales would happen at peak time when the price is high.

Well, actually, that's not how it works at all.

In a "net" metering situation, the homeowner uses the power generated from their roof *first*, so all loads in the house take precedence.

So on a hot sunny day, when solar is at peak production, the fridges, freezers and A/C are using the majority of the power.

What little does get exported is purchased by the retailer at a set cost, agreed on contract with the generator (homeowner) and is fixed. Does not fluctuate with market price. It's, naturally, fixed at a low rate so the utility makes money by re-selling the PV-gen back to other grid users.

If they had to buy additional power on the spot market it would be an order of magnitude more expensive than the cheap, flat rate, rooftop PV gen.

AND, given the nature of the beast, they don't actually buy anything unless there is demand in the grid. No demand, no export.

Having lots of 'distributed energy' sources is actually good for retailers, as they don't need to upgrade cable size to carry heavier loads, as the power is produced locally.

The only issue really is the voltage instability and once that's managed efficiently (which it could be once enough domestic/residential batteries are connected to the grid) then it will be win win.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

... But no, other measures don’t need to be taken, if EV’s are more economical, smoother, quieter, need less maintenance etc. they will take over the market.
If you leave it alone, if it’s superior it will work, get the Government involved with a bunch of well meaning idiots with no knowledge and they will I assure you screw it up...

The narrow orthodoxy of free markets, libertarianism, and individualism says that markets will solve all our problems, and government intervention is bad, but ignores several mainstream economics principles:
Market Failure
Public Goods
Externalities

[Buzzman]

But back to the topic at hand. Inboard engines.

Electric motors have two features that make them ideal for smaller sail boats (i.e the most common, up to 8m size) which is they don't smell, aren't messy, and are very compact, which makes them viable in the compact, space-limited area usually found under the cockpit where inboards live.

Ok, Ok, then there's the 'battery issue'. They take up a lot of space.

But we are probably still (in lead acid experience) thinking of "batteries" as these chunky, black, plastic-covered blocks around 8" x 12" x 14", that have always been tricky to find a spot for.

Have a look at your phone. Or your laptop. The battery is about as thick as a biscuit (cookie to you Downside-Uppers).

Imagine if the entire underside of the cockpit floor could be a battery? It might need to be an 1" thick, but that's a lot of area/volume.

Or what if the battery (especially the lighter weight lithium technologies) were mounted in the cabin roof, between deck and salon ceiling? Even bigger area in which to store energy in a compact manner. Or in 'packs' underneath the deck, between the deack support beams? Or under the sole, like they are in most auto EVs these days?

What we need are innovative solutions, not curmudgeonly nay-sayers.

Sure. It will be a while before we see drug-running cigar boats powered by batteries. But think about military 'stealth boats'...??

Reckon the SEALs et al wouldn't like to be able to 'sneak up on' an enemy in a silent boat, blacked out, with little or no heat signature other than the personal on board....???

Tell me they aren't already working on this....

And, if not, then why not?

[OldMan]

Originally Posted by Buzzman

.....snip


AND, given the nature of the beast, they don't actually buy anything unless there is demand in the grid. No demand, no export.

The residential systems I'm familiar with actually export ALL extra power. The inverter monitors the grid for 2 things: to set it's internal oscillator to match grid cycle/time; and it sets it's voltage point to ~3V above the grid (lowers internal resistance) so it's always the first choice source. The net meter simply tracks in/out power.


FWIW, when grid power goes out, so does a net meter solar system. Kinda sucks when the sun is shining and you have an expensive solar system on the roof, and it doesn't work because the grid is dead.

[Buzzman]

Exactly. So if there is no demand from the grid, the PV gen has nowhere to go, so it doesn't.

Not arguing with you, just sayin...

No demand, little electrons don't move.

Nothing gets measured.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Buzzman

But back to the topic at hand. Inboard engines.

Electric motors have two features that make them ideal for smaller sail boats (i.e the most common, up to 8m size) which is they don't smell, aren't messy, and are very compact, which makes them viable in the compact, space-limited area usually found under the cockpit where inboards live.

Ok, Ok, then there's the 'battery issue'. They take up a lot of space.

But we are probably still (in lead acid experience) thinking of "batteries" as these chunky, black, plastic-covered blocks around 8" x 12" x 14", that have always been tricky to find a spot for.

Have a look at your phone. Or your laptop. The battery is about as thick as a biscuit (cookie to you Downside-Uppers).

Imagine if the entire underside of the cockpit floor could be a battery? It might need to be an 1" thick, but that's a lot of area/volume.

Or what if the battery (especially the lighter weight lithium technologies) were mounted in the cabin roof, between deck and salon ceiling? Even bigger area in which to store energy in a compact manner. Or in 'packs' underneath the deck, between the deack support beams? Or under the sole, like they are in most auto EVs these days?

What we need are innovative solutions, not curmudgeonly nay-sayers.

Sure. It will be a while before we see drug-running cigar boats powered by batteries. But think about military 'stealth boats'...??

Reckon the SEALs et al wouldn't like to be able to 'sneak up on' an enemy in a silent boat, blacked out, with little or no heat signature other than the personal on board....???

Tell me they aren't already working on this....

And, if not, then why not?

There is one little problem with your cell phone battery analogy. That is a 3.2v ( lfp voltages ) wouldnt allow any other chemestry of lithium based battery on the boat) the electric propulsion motir viltage us 48 volts. So you need 16 of your cell phone batteries in series to get to 48 volts at approximately 12wh.

To get 200ah you are looking at just iver 6 kgs per cell plus ancilliry parts . Or 100 kgs for 200ah 48v bank to power the electric motor for about 2 hours at full throttle or 3.5 at 75% or hull speed.
Taking up about the same space as fla bank of same ah and voltage

[Buzzman]

FLA 200ah weighs around 50kg.

Has usable cap of only 60Ah (30% discharge for long life).

200Ah LiFePO batt uses 100% of capacity.

So you need three times as many FLAs to get the same usable capacity

So compare 18kg to 150kg.

QED.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Buzzman

And add to that the subsidies for the oil companies, miners, farming sector, etc etc etc...

The so-called 'level playing field' doesn't exist *unless* govts regulate to create it.

The trick is getting the balance right so it encourages, rathe than stifles, innovation. This is the problem with Protectionism. I get the argument that cheap imports kill off local jobs, and agree that this is severely problematic for society - even though it is "perfect" for the notion of open markets.

Perhaps what Trump (and ther est fo the G20) should be doing, is agteeing on ways to account for the difference in cost between nations.

For example. No welfare in China. So wages are lower. In Oz, we have universal healthcare, which China doesn't. So our 'cost of production' (the whole of society cost) is higher than China.

So we should implement a 'tax' based on these differences to 'even out' the differing market costs.

this would then (probably) make home production of steel, cars and so on more viable, even paying higher local wages.

Less imports, more local production, more wages, more tax for govt, more services can be provided.

Not saying it wouldn't be difficult.....

You do realize that my state has almost as much land as your entire country with about double the population and washington isnt the biggest in area or population . What works for your sub tropical wont work so good for the usa .

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Buzzman

FLA 200ah weighs around 50kg.

Has usable cap of only 60Ah (30% discharge for long life).

200Ah LiFePO batt uses 100% of capacity.

So you need three times as many FLAs to get the same usable capacity

So compare 18kg to 150kg.

QED.

Except you still miss the point of volyage . The propulsion motors are mostly 48 volt so multiply your battery numbers by 4 on all to get even close to the actual numbers

[newhaul]

Trojan t105 batteries ( fla ) 26 kg per 6 volt battery need 8 to make a 200ah 48 volt bank or 208 kg for the bank vs 100kg for the same in lfp but both take up the same space.

[newhaul]

Buzzman might i suggest you do some reserch into electric propulsion its a bit more complex than you seem to think it is