Electric Propulsion Motors

A conversation among Whalers
jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Sat Feb 06, 2021 7:51 am

I just noticed PURE WATERCRAFT in Washington (state) is manufacturing an electric propulsion motor, battery, and charging system, and adapting them to boats made by other manufacturers. They offer a version of their propulsion motor as their PURE OUTBOARD SYSTEM.

https://www.purewatercraft.com/product/pure-outboard/

The PURE OUTBOARD is marketed as an equivalent to a 50-HP conventional outboard engine, and sells for $16,500, with one battery pack included. However, the specifications for the PURE OUTBOARD require use of two battery packs, which increases the price to $25,000.

Specifications:

HP: 20 to 50-HP equivalent
Weight: 105-lbs
Water Resistance: IP67
Voltage: 350 Volts
Propeller Top RPM: 1,500-RPM
Propeller: 16-inch diameter three-bladed
Motor: 25 kW continuous power permanent magnet alternating current motor, passively cooled underwater in line with propeller
Integrated power trim and tilt



System pricing:
$16,5000, comprised of:
  • $6,000 for the of motor, throttle, and cables
  • $2,000 for the battery charging unit
  • $8,500 for the battery pack.

Battery pack specifications:
Voltage: 350-Volts nominal
Capacity: 8.8 kW-hours; multiple packs can be combined for larger capacity
Energy Density: 165 Watt-hours per kilogram
Cells: Lithium-Ion
Weight: 118-lbs
Water Resistance: IP67
Provides active thermal management to preserve battery life
Cycle life: approximately 1,500

Part of the marketing of the PURE OUTBOARD engine stresses the following advantages:
  • quiet
  • zero maintenance
  • long life
  • lower lifetime cost
  • smooth shifting between forward and reverse without gears disengaging and re-engaging

How do the benefits and cost compare to a conventional 50-HP gasoline outboard engine in your view?

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Sat Feb 06, 2021 7:57 am

PURE WATERCRAFT also sell boats rigged with their PURE OUTBOARD motor. For example, they offer a TRACKER bass boat, a 17-foot model, with two battery packs at $36,000.

The specifications for the combination are:

Top speed: 24-MPH
Weight: 1,231-lbs
Range at 5-MPH: 41-miles
Range at top speed: 20-miles

https://www.purewatercraft.com/product/tracker-pro-team-175-txw-bass-boat/

Are these specifications for speed and range acceptable for a 17-foot recreational boat?

Jefecinco
Posts: 1592
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 6:35 pm
Location: Gulf Shores, AL

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby Jefecinco » Sat Feb 06, 2021 10:32 am

That Tracker boat is a huge departure from other bass boats which typically have the capability of much higher top speeds and longer ranges. One of the characteristics of bass angling is the frequent moves to locate fish. It is uncommon to find bass in schools although a few may be found in the same location if it is attractive and large enough to support more than one fish. Moving around to find fish in large bodies of water requires greater range then 41 miles at 5 MPH. The boats may be more suitable to small lakes but I suspect there will be little demand for their Tracker.

Panbo.com recently published an announcement from ePropulsion promoting their 2021 marine electric propulsion systems with a rating as high as 9.9 HP. The products are interesting and they advertise a hydrogenation capability, a nice feature for towed dingies.
Butch

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Sat Feb 06, 2021 11:04 am

BUTCH--thanks for the comments on the usual operation of boats with special designs for a particular species.

I found the low speed and short range to also be a problem in a boat intended for angling.

The 20-foot $37,000 pontoon boat has similar speed and endurance figures:
Top speed 14-MPH and range 10-miles
Speed 5-MPH and range 50-miles

https://www.purewatercraft.com/product/suntracker-20dlx-party-barge-pontoon-boat/

The 5-MPH and 50-mile range might be more typical for a pontoon. I see a lot of people out in pontoon boats just cruising a short distance off the shore line at slow speeds with a boat load (literally) of people aboard.

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Sat Feb 06, 2021 11:09 am

One element of the PURE WATERCRAFT electric propulsion motor system that jumps out for me is the battery voltage: 350-Volts. Add water to an environment with conductors carrying 350-Volts and you have an enormous shock hazard.

Also, the electrical currents on the conductors will not be a steady DC voltage. They will be an alternating current, which further increases the shock hazard.

I realize it is common for boats at the dock to have 120-VAC or even 240-VAC conductor coming onto the boat, but, hey, they don't usually make direct connection to something underwater.

Any leakage current into the water could be dangerous to swimmers. Also, it might not be particularly good for attracting fish.

biggiefl
Posts: 897
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: south Tampa Bay area
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby biggiefl » Mon Feb 08, 2021 11:55 am

A range of 20 miles with two battery packs seems awfully low. A 50-HP four-stroke-power-cycle engine will burn less than 2-GPH at cruise with about 12-MPG or more. A distance of 20-miles would takes much less than 2-gallons of fuel.

Would you be able to charge both battery packs for around $2?

If you could, how long would it take for you to break even on $20,000 or more for the engine?

With 1500 cycles life span on the batteries, how many years before you had to buy another $17,000 set of batteries--three to five years?

The only person I can see actually buying one of these would be Jay Leno for his TV show.
On my 24th Whaler. Currently in the stable: 86 18' Outrage, 81 13' Sport(original owner), 87 11' Sport, 69 Squall(for sale cheap).

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:31 pm

I like to apply similar cost analysis as Nick has done. My approach is that the fuel for the engine is the electricity, and the battery is just the fuel tank.

If the batteries are recharged 1,500-times, and the batteries are recharged from zero to full capacity, and the full capacity energy storage is 8.8 kW-hours per battery, and the total charger efficiency at conversion of utility power to battery charge is 0.75, then for two batteries the total energy needed for restoration of charge--adding "a full tank of fuel"--would be

2 × 8,800-watts × 1,500 /0.75 = 35,200,000-Watt or 35,200-kW

If we figure that the cost for the power from the utility is going to be about $0.12/kW-hour, then the cost for the power will be

35,200 kW-hours × $0.12/kW-hour = $4,224

(Here I have used the average price in the USA for electrical power from a utility of $0.12 per 1000-Watt-hours. The time dimensions is really not important as far as I can see as the billing is for energy used over time. At the recharging rate I don't expect that any premium would be applied for rapid energy consumption.)

That would be the cost if all charging were done at just a typical utility cost for electricity. This might be feasible if the batteries were always recharged at your own dock and at times when utility power costs were low. If you have to purchase this energy at a fuel dock and pay for the time to sit there and recharge and for the convenience, I don't think the cost-per-kiloWattt-hour is going to the same as the utility base rate. It could easily be double or triple or more.

To this we add the cost of the battery (the "fuel tank") to hold all that energy: $17,000. This gives us a total cost for electrical energy to operate the boat as $21,224 over the 1,500 cycles of battery recharging.

Note that the costs could be a bit higher because it is not clearly known exactly how efficient the battery charger will be at taking energy input from utility power and converting it to stored energy in the battery. I am just taking a reasonable guess that the overall efficiency might be about 1-Watt of utility power will translate into 0.75-Watt of stored energy in the battery. It could be less efficient than that.

Now we look at how much gasoline fuel could be purchased with $21,224 dollars at today's prices. Here I am going to use the on-the-highway price of gasoline in my area at this moment, which is about $2.12 per gallon. That implies the volume of gasoline that would have equivalent energy cost would be 10,000-gallons. Gasoline prices at a fuel dock are, of course, higher, but I expect that so would electricity costs at a recharging dock be higher.

Now I want to compare the range. The maximum range of the electric engine for each full battery charge is specified to be 41-miles at the 5-MPH speed. So 1,500 recharges suggest the range is going to be 41 × 1,500-miles, or 61,500-miles.

To compare to gasoline, we now have to calculate what MPG we need to get 61,500-miles from 10,000-gallons of fuel:

61,500-miles / 10,000-gallons = 6.15-MPG

If only going 5-MPH, I am confident a modern outboard engine can get 6.15-MPG pushing any small boat that needs only 25 to 50-HP. I can get 6-MPG with my 225-HP engine pushing my 24-foot at 5-MPH.

So on my analysis, there really is not much operating cost savings with electrical power.

The troubling thing for me is that my recent annual fuel consumption on my boat has only been about 200-gallons per year. This means that I would need about 50-years to consume that much fuel. Or looking at distance, I probably am putting less than 600-miles under the keel each year these days, so to go 61,500-miles is going to take me over 100-years. I will allow that over 50 to 100-years, the boat might need a new fuel tank.

I am not sure there is any cost savings incentive in the electric propulsion. The speed and range limitations are serious compromises for the sort of boating I like to do. The availability of recharging facilities are marinas is also worry.

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:44 pm

Regarding getting electrical power from a marina dock if you are staying over night: right now there often is no added charge for electrical power because it has been built into the dockage fee. But if even small boats that are paying the minimum dockage fee are going to start consuming kiloWatts of electrical energy re-charing a propulsion battery, I would expect there could be more metering of the power used.

The notion of the battery pack being good for 1,500 recharging cycles might suggest 1,500 days of use. On that basis we could consider days available to use the boat per year. My boating is all done North of 45-degrees latitude, and I figure there are only 90-days in the boating season or let's say 13-weeks. I don't think you can go boating every day because of the weather. Lets figure there are 50-days a year for boating where I am located. Having 1,500 cycles means I would get 30-years from the battery pack. That sounds good, but there is no guarantee the batteries will be that durable. I have a 1990 boat and its fuel tank is 30-years-old, and it is still quite durable.

dtmackey
Posts: 760
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:29 pm

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby dtmackey » Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:24 pm

I've seen a few on small dingy sized boat and that may be fine, but for a boat larger than that I don't understand how this would work. I can only imagine the fuel dock wait as it takes a lot longer to charge a battery that would be the equivalent of 30 - 100 gallons of fuel. Not to mention in the salt environment, electricity and wiring adds challenges due to the corrosive nature and salt air. Are these electric motors air cooled sucking in salt air?

All my iPhones barely go two years before there's a noticeable drop in battery capacity, so I have my doubts over the long term use of the battery packs.

There's already plenty of data out there showing that the current infrastructure isn't prepared to support the electrofied world that some envision, but it's the chicken or the egg scenario right now.

D-

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Thu Feb 11, 2021 11:30 am

The PURE OUTBOARD is said to be a 50-HP equivalent engine. (The claim of 50-HP equivalent power is based on the notion that the propeller efficiency is improved compared to gasoline outboard engines.) The specifications say the electric motor is a 25 kW motor. Converting kW to HP means the 25 kW motor is a 33.5-HP motor. This engine with batteries, throttle control, and recharging unit, the PURE OUTBOARD costs $25,000.

The 2021 Chevrolet BOLT is the top-rated electric vehicle in Consumer's Reports. It has a 200-HP electric motor. With some government rebates and sales incentives, you can buy one new in my area for under $28,000 retail. You get a 200-HP motor instead of a 33.5-HP motor, and the cost is only $3,000 more than the PURE OUTBOARD. Oh, and you get a complete car included.

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Thu Feb 11, 2021 11:43 am

dtmackey wrote:Are these electric motors air cooled sucking in salt air?


In the case of the PURE OUTBOARD, the electric motor is said to be "passively cooled underwater in line with propeller."

Don SSDD
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 6:58 am
Location: Nova Scotia

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby Don SSDD » Sun Feb 14, 2021 6:21 am

These electric outboards may be an option on waters where gasoline outboards are prohibited [like] small lakes. The speed and range would be acceptable in that application.

I believe innovation in battery technology is occurring at a faster than ever pace, and in five to ten years batteries will weigh a lot less and have considerably more power. For instance, there is a company now offering a lithium 12-Volt motor vehicle battery that weighs 15-lbs. Tesla supposedly will soon have a vehicle with a 1,000 mile range on one charge.

The simplicity of an electric motor as compared to petroleum with all the sensors, injectors, exhaust complexity, emissions, oil changes, you name it, will be very attractive once the range is extended and the recharging time is reduced to acceptable numbers. When will that happen is the big question.
1986 Outrage 18 with 2001 Honda 130 HP
Former Owner 1991 Guardian 19 with 1994 Evinrude V4 140HP
Former owner 1987 Montauk with 1998 Mercury 90HP
Nova Scotia

Jefecinco
Posts: 1592
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 6:35 pm
Location: Gulf Shores, AL

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby Jefecinco » Sun Feb 14, 2021 10:26 am

In the early 1980s the US Army Corps of Engineers began specifying vacuum epoxy impregnation of windings on large portable electric power generators in the 750kW range. I suspect state of the art of protecting windings from salt laden air has improved over the past 40 years. I doubt corrosion will be a significant problem for motors designed for use in a salt water environment.
Butch

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Sun Feb 14, 2021 11:02 am

Don SSDD wrote:I believe innovation in battery technology is occurring at a faster than ever pace, and in five to ten years batteries will weigh a lot less and have considerably more power.


The concept of a battery is primarily associated with chemical reactions which are able to store electrical charges. Unless there is some fantastic new chemistry invented immediately and perfected into useful manufacturing on a global scale, I don't see how in five years or even ten years that storing electric energy using chemical reactions in a storage battery will produce the predicted outcomes of "a lot less weight" and "considerably more power." The energy density per pound of various chemical reactions has already been explored for several decades. There may be improvements in manufacturing methods that produce longer service life or improved safety, but to assume there is a big breakthrough to entirely new technology only five years in the future is perhaps overly optimistic.

Don SSDD wrote:The simplicity of an electric motor as compared to petroleum with all the sensors, injectors, exhaust complexity, emissions, oil changes...


The actual electric motor is rather simplified compared to modern internal combustion engines, and the electric motor has only one moving part. But the assumption that there is overall simplification is not justified. The electric motors are generally permanent-magnet alternating-current (PMAC) motors, and they are powered by a battery that delivers just a constant direct current and voltage. In between the battery and the motor there must be very sophisticated electronics that modulate and regulate the direct current into complex alternating current waveforms in order to control the electric motor speed and direction of rotation. These electronic drive assemblies are just one part of the electronics needed.

Generally the electric motor does not directly drive the axles, so an intervening gear case or transmission is needed.

To control modern batteries, the batteries themselves contain electronics which must monitor the individual cells for voltage and temperature, and prevent the battery from being damaged if certain conditions exist, either caused by the load on the battery or the charging current applied to the battery. Also the battery temperature needs to be regulated and may need cooling or heating.

The batteries must be continually recharged. The source of the electrical energy to recharge the battery must be compatible with the battery, so that means a direct current of suitable voltage and with proper current limiting. To create such a source of recharging requires that regular home AC power at either 120 or 240 Volts must be converted into the proper DC voltage and current. These recharging convertors are part of the overall system of the "electric motor" in a vehicle of any kind and are on the vehicle.

In the case of automobiles, there is the possibility to generate electrical power during deceleration, a process known as regenerative braking. In order for this to occur there must be some sort of controller that switches modes so the motor can become a generator and battery can become a load.

Looking at the total system we see there are really several components, and not just a simple electric motor:
--a battery with its own electronic protection system
--a motor drive electronics assembly to create the AC polyphase drive signals
--a multi-phase winding PMAC motor
--a mechanical gear case
--a regenerative braking module
--a re-charging module

At every stage of the conversion of energy to a new form from another form, the process is not perfectly efficient and some energy is lost in the form of heat. For this reason all of the above need cooling (or perhaps heating in very cold temperatures) to remain at a suitable working temperature. This adds another electric motor to pump cooling fluid. There may be more than one cooling system as each component needs a particular sort of fluid for lubrication. Each cooling system needs an electric motor to move the fluid.

The application to boats is a bit unique because boats are usually only operated in a narrow range of temperatures, and the motor can be cooled by being immersed into the seawater.

In automobiles the passenger compartment requires cooling or heating. For cooling, a compressor for air conditioning must be driven by an electric motor. For heating, an electric heating element will need to be controlled and a fan motor must be operated.

Also, all the usual 12-Volt DC items on a vehicle like lamps, displays, radios, door locks, power window motors, must have power, so another electronic module is needed to convert the main battery (usually about 400 to 500-Volts) power down to 12-Volt power. This module may also need cooling. Usually there is also a 12-Volt battery, and it needs charging.

I don't really see the electric vehicle as being substantially simpler than the internal combustion vehicle. The manufacturing of internal combustion engines has been improved over more than a century to the point where a vehicle's engine is not usually a big source of failure.

As for service, the battery itself is now a service item with an upper bound of possible re-charge cycles and with a ever decreasing energy storage capacity with each discharge-charge cycle. At least one electric vehicle (EV) manufacturer specifies that the undercarriage of the car must be washed at certain intervals if used in snowy regions that apply salt to the roads. And lubricating and cooling fluid levels must be checked and also be changed at intervals. Adding fluid or changing fluid is much more complicated that changing the oil in an internal combustion engine or in an automatic transmission.

I doubt that all the rather high-voltage and high-power electronic modules will have an infinite lifespan, and they are going to cost a lot more to replace than four or six spark plugs or a small engine spark control module. The electrical harnesses, particularly the main harness carrying the 400 or 500 AC and DC waveforms, could also be service items, and they will be more expensive than fan belts or water hoses.

To get a better sense of the overall complexity of an electric vehicle (EV), I recommend you watch this 40-minute presentation by Professor John D. Kelly. Professor Kelly tears down a Chevy BOLT. The Chevy BOLT is the highest rated EV in Consumer's Reports recent analysis. The presentation examines in detail the many systems associated with an EV. Watch at

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r37nqfnV9EU

By the way, when I say "tears down" I do not mean that in a derogatory sense. Professor Kelly offers much praise for the BOLT and admits he was sufficiently impressed to buy one .

Don SSDD wrote:...[electric motor propulsion] will be very attractive once the range is extended and the recharging time is reduced to acceptable numbers.


Reduction in re-charing time is already possible with the direct DC charge method, also called LEVEL 3 FAST CHARGING. There are commercial grade Level 3 charging stations that deliver re-charging current at around 500-Volt DC to a special optional module in the vehicle (and here again we add more complexity to the vehicle) called a direct-DC-charge regulator that regulates the charging to suit the battery. Such re-charging stations at present cost about $10,000 to $15,000. Since they use very high amounts of energy, they must be powered by 240-VAC power with similarly high capacity. Having one of these in your garage at your home is unlikely for most people due to the cost of the device itself, the cost of the installation, and load it creates on the home electrical system. The optional direct-DC-charge module may add another $700 to $1,000 to the vehicle price.

For more about re-charging stations at LEVEL 1, LEVEL 2, and LEVEL 3, see

http://www.evtown.org/about-ev-town/ev- ... evels.html

The overall goal of reducing dependence on electricity generated by fossil fuel is not provided in these vehicles themselves. They don't operate of photovoltaic self-generated power. For most of them, the energy they will run on will come from fossil-fuel generated utility power. Creation of mass-scale power generation with renewable methods is still a long way off.

Don SSDD
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 6:58 am
Location: Nova Scotia

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby Don SSDD » Mon Feb 15, 2021 7:07 am

R&D on new battery technology is proceeding now at a higher pace than ever before and I am an optimist that a new technology advance can happen any time.

I visited a business in Prince Edward Island that is partly owned by Mann Diesel, a part of VW. They make a living on hybrid electric/diesel installation in things like tugs amd they did one for an offshore drill rig. They were working on a stand alone wind and solar setup to be totally off the grid, for remote areas of Canada’s north for instance, or for use on Caribbean islands totally dependant on diesel for electricity. The setup includes battery storage of electricity generated by wind and solar to provide power when there is no wind or sun. Using wind and sun enables power generation in total in a very high percentage of the time, reducing the need to use a backup system.

The oil rig hybrid system uses regeneration from the anchor chains used to hold the drill in place precisely while drilling. It produced fuel savings of $40-50,000 per day.

Both the hybrid tugs and the drill rig used electric motors to do all the work, they used a diesel only to produce electricity. They also use large battery storage and very large capicitor setups.

This company uses several different types of batteries beyond lead acid or lithium in electrical storage and continues to experiment with new ways to build batteries, as are thousands of other engineers doing this type of R&D.

My comment of faster charging related to the need to improve the speed to recharge an EV in an acceptable period of time--10 minutes--in order to see a change from internal combustion to EV’s in a meaningful way. A 10 minute recharge and a range on one charge of say 500 miles would be needed to see the change from fossil fuels to EV’s. I optimistically think we’ll see this happen in the next five to ten years. Replacing all fossil fuel automobiles with EV’s, once they have invented something to make them usable, will take 30 years or so.
1986 Outrage 18 with 2001 Honda 130 HP
Former Owner 1991 Guardian 19 with 1994 Evinrude V4 140HP
Former owner 1987 Montauk with 1998 Mercury 90HP
Nova Scotia

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Mon Feb 15, 2021 10:49 am

Don--your optimism about the next five to ten years producing game-changing technology in storage of electrical energy using chemical batteries is clear, but I don't understand what sort of unknown chemistry you think is going to arise. Chemical reactions among elements is a well-understood science, and unless the chemists have been missing something for the past 100-years, one would think that the possibility of discovering a more efficient storage of electrical energy in chemical form seems rather unlikely. I would be more impressed if you could say something like, "If a battery were made from element-A and element-B, then it would be more useful than lithium or lead batteries." I just need to know what elements are going to be in the technology breakthrough that is going to happen in less than ten years.

The mention of power generation from wave motion in water is an interesting concept. I spend most of my summer living on the shoreline of Lake Michigan, and many days I see endless waves coming ashore, representing an enormous amount of energy in moving the water that just goes to no real purpose but to erode the shoreline. But a practical way to extract that energy is elusive and presently unattainable.

When I was very young--in the 1950's--the future of energy was to be nuclear-generation. I remember reading literature produced by the local utility in a comic book motif that taught electricity generated by thousands of railroad train loads of coal could be replaced with teaspoons of Uranium. It is now 2021 and there are still giant unit-trains in continual operation bring coal from the West to the power plants in southeast Michigan, as well as fleets of 1,000-foot-long ships carrying coal down from ports on Lake Superior. About 65-years have elapsed, and I think there is only one nuclear-powered generating plant in Michigan. The rest are all coal. The U.S.A. needs to rethink nuclear-generated electrical power.

Our neighbor Ontario has become independent of coal-fired power generation, and are now 60-percent nuclear-energy electical generation. They are still burning natural gas, but only for about nine-percent. See

https://www.ontario.ca/page/end-coal

On that basis, an EV or electric boat in Ontario seems like a much better place to adopt electrical-motor propulsion.

Don SSDD
Posts: 313
Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2015 6:58 am
Location: Nova Scotia

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby Don SSDD » Mon Feb 15, 2021 6:40 pm

Jim, the unknown chemistry for a new battery is part of my optimism. I have hope.

There is another business launching some kind of device this month working to capture the power of the waves in the Bay of Fundy to produce electricity. We’ve seen several different inventors attempt this, the tides always damaged them to the point they gave up. You probably know, but others reading this may not know the Bay of Fundy has 40 foot tides. It’s a terrible place to have a boat, imagine using a mooring or dock with a 40 foot rise and fall? And then you have to overpower the current created by that tide if you are traveling into it. Could produce a lot of electricity if they figure it out.
1986 Outrage 18 with 2001 Honda 130 HP
Former Owner 1991 Guardian 19 with 1994 Evinrude V4 140HP
Former owner 1987 Montauk with 1998 Mercury 90HP
Nova Scotia

jimh
Posts: 11672
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2015 12:25 pm
Location: Michigan, Lower Peninsula
Contact:

Re: Electric Propulsion Motors

Postby jimh » Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:29 am

Extracting electrical energy from the movement of water has been done for a century. Impounding water with a dam and then controlling the outflow to pass through turbines to spin generators to make electricity is very efficient and practically cost free. The impoundment of the water is a wonderful way to STORE energy so it can be used as needed in the future.

But the eco-movement does not like dams and wants them removed so natural flow can be restored to rivers. If that thinking takes over, you can cross off clean renewable energy from impoundment of water behind dams. As for somehow impounding the Bay of Fundy to produce electricity, I am sure that is going to disrupt some biological process and be condemned an non-ecological.

I might be more cynical, or maybe that comic book from the local power utility I read when I was seven-years old influenced my thinking, but I have hopes for nuclear power generation to be the solution for the USA, just as it has been for Ontario.