Electric Boat Completes 1,400 Mile Voyage to Alaska under 100% Solar Power

[Shrew]

This reminds me a bit of the story of Bertha Benz and her contribution to the automobile.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertha_Benz

On 5 August 1888, 39-year-old Bertha Benz drove from Mannheim to Pforzheim with her sons Richard and Eugen, thirteen and fifteen years old respectively, in a Model III, without telling her husband and without permission of the authorities, thus becoming the first person to drive an automobile a significant distance.[1] Before this historic trip, motorized drives were merely very short trials, returning to the point of origin, made with assistance of mechanics. Following wagon tracks, this pioneering tour covered a one-way distance of about 106 km (66 mi).[10][11]

Although the ostensible purpose of the trip was to visit her mother, Bertha Benz had other motives — to prove to her husband, who had failed to adequately consider marketing his invention, that the automobile in which they both had heavily invested would become a financial success once it was shown to be useful to the general public; and to give her husband the confidence that his constructions had a future.

Much like what is going on with Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin, and SpaceX. Shows it's possible first, then let he world figure out what to do with it.

 

[rslifkin]

I'll continue with the smoke bomb, as yet I have not seen a viable electric alternative for pushing 70 tonne through the water @ 8 knots day in, day out.

The tech definitely hasn't gotten to that point yet. But if people keep pushing boundaries, it'll certainly get closer.

 

[twistedtree]

We’ve also had diesel electric boats for many decades, just larger ones. I think the first came online as the first diesel-powered ship in the first few years of the previous century. The efficiency is probably not the same reasoning as a locomotive or maybe it is, I’m not sure.

Likewise I’m not sure why any efficiency that exists doesn’t seem to scale to smaller yachts instead of warships and large utility vessels, other than having to fit two power units inside instead of one? Some “get home” systems utilize an electric motor able to be coupled to the main shaft, powered by a onboard generator; just as some are powered by a hydraulic motor able to be coupled to the main shaft powered by a PTO hydraulic pump on an auxiliary diesel engine.

Things like diesel electric locomotives, cruise ships, and tugs are not about energy efficiency. Instead, in the case of locomotives, it's about building a transmission to couple the diesel engine to the wheels. Socalrider described this well. In the case of cruise ships and tugs its about manauverability. With pods and thrusters a cruise ship can self-dock. That's huge compared to requiring multiple assistance tugs for every docking and undocking event, especially when they often dock every day. And with tugs it's about being able to direct the thrust anywhere, anytime. Also, assistance tugs operate in basically two modes. Small HP requirements to shuttle around from place to place, then HUGE HP requirements when pushing a ship around. I recently read about such a tug that was equipped with a giant engine for pushing, and a much smaller engine for shuttling around. Both engines drive the same electric pod drives, but with very different power capabilities.


But in the absence of some sort of regenerative power, you can count on always losing energy efficiency with a diesel electric. And boats don't have any regenerative opportunity, which is why hybrids don't make sense from an energy efficiency stand point. Now they can provide a more desirable (quiet) mode of operation, and can provide an opportunity to include renewables like solar and grid power (to the degree it's renewable), but if you are looking for energy efficiency, it's moving things in the wrong direction.

 

[markpierce]

Demand for electricity in California exceeds supply and is costing more. Greater use of electric-driven vehicles will only worsen the situation.

 

[socalrider]

Demand for electricity in California exceeds supply and is costing more. Greater use of electric-driven vehicles will only worsen the situation.

Nope. More energy sold is the best hope for our screwed-up utilities - they need to amortize their insane fixed costs over more MWh sold to drive down per unit costs.

 

[Benthic2]

Nope. More energy sold is the best hope for our screwed-up utilities - they need to amortize their insane fixed costs over more MWh sold to drive down per unit costs.

No kidding PG&E has to sell a lot of power to pay all it's fines. Utilities should be forced to issue stock to pay fines so the owners get punished, not the customers.

 

[OldDan1943]

No kidding PG&E has to sell a lot of power to pay all it's fines. Utilities should be forced to issue stock to pay fines so the owners get punished, not the customers.

Same way with water treatment and distribution. Calif is famous for asking for water conservation and people conserve then, increasing the price of water to make up for revenue loss. Calif has done this time and time again. Either way, the consumer is screwed.

 

[OldDan1943]

Why should the utilities sell to the consumer when they can get more by selling it on the grid. Then the utility company can raise the rate to the consumer.

The utility maintains two separate operations.
It is the magic of accounting.

 

[Peter B]

We have had diesel/electric locomotives for decades. Simple technology using a relatively small diesel motor to power a generator which supplies power to run the electric motors that drive the locomotive.

I've often wondered why nobody builds a boat in the 50' length range that uses similar technology. Electric motors to provide propulsion and the power for those electric motors coming from a relatively small diesel engine(s).

You guys who are a lot smarter than I am, what say you?

Actually this is an excellent point. I have often wondered this myself. No doubt there are reasons - like the cost of a sufficiently high powered enough electric motor, and the fact you then have to find room for two motors, instead of it all combined in the one. Locomotives don't have that problem.

However, taking the theme of using a small motor to generate enough electricity to drive a much more powerful one - this is finally becoming a reality in the form of the hydrogen powered fuel cell technology doing just that. Driving an electric motor which does not have to be charged from the power grid, because the vehicle is making its own, and the only emission is good old H2O..! I think this development is really interesting and exciting. Already here in Qld, they are constructing large hydrogen generating facilities looking towards this future.

 

[Benthic2]

Why should the utilities sell to the consumer when they can get more by selling it on the grid. Then the utility company can raise the rate to the consumer.

The utility maintains two separate operations.
It is the magic of accounting.

The utility would much rather sell to the consumer. Think of it as selling retail vs wholesale. The price to the grid has to be low enough that some other utility can take it and sell it to their customer at a profit. If a utility sells to its own customers it gets the full retail price.

 

[darkside]

A nice 34' diesel electric built in my town. 2400nm at 8kn is quite good range for that length
https://boatingnz.co.nz/boat-reviews/herley-3400-electric-power-catamaran/

 

[Benthic2]

Every new technology goes through the following phases: unbelievable.....useless.....interesting.....not economical.....economical in some applications.....economical in more applications.....mainstream acceptance......

Aren't you curious? Any technological gains will benefit all cruisers.....why are you hostile to this idea ???

Seriously guys...if the idea of electric trawlers upsets you, ask yourself "why ?"

Are you invested in the Oil/Gas industry ? Are you afraid of modernity ? Does a new idea threaten your way of life?

 

[Hippocampus]

People are inconsistent and more moved by emotion than rational thought on occasion. Still, there’s inextricable progress of applied science which has occurred throughout history. Earth centric v sun centric solar system. Darwinian thinking v creationism. Molecular biology (vaccines) v antivaxxers. Yes, in all cases there will be those operating on belief not science so flat earthers and conspiracy theorists will persist.
At present there’s no scientific reason an electric world not a hydrocarbon world couldn’t exist. It is no longer a scientific problem but rather an engineering problem. Maybe we’re at the diode level instead of the printed circuit board level. But the science and theory of computers existed as soon as under the aegis of the military binary theory was developed.
The transformation was sudden in that case but getting to our current computorized world is all derivative.
Several commentators have written about changes in gestalt in science. My personal favorite is Thomas Kuhn who is well worth the read. Others have written about the genius of engineers and how ultimately they not the politicians have changed our world and lives.
So here we are. Stuck in a transitional period. Many of us will be inconsistent. I know I am. I knocked down a 1927 circa house to build a zero footprint house. We sell electrical power back to the grid. Due to local law it wasn’t feasible to not hook into the grid. My local provider is in transit to leave nuclear generation of electricity to offshore wind. Due to incentives adaptation of roof top solar and solar fields on open land has flourished so unlike statements here in my area HC generation has fallen. Personally we make enough to allow for charging a fully electric car. We will replace one of our cars with electric when one of the current ones dies.
Still, I just went out and bought a 540hp diesel boat. Yes at anchor it will run on solar but underway it’s most inefficient. Building a zero footprint house was expensive. On the order of 20-25% greater. Every spec changed from insulation, construction materials, HVAC, roofing, windows/doors. We also increased costs further in an attempt to have as near zero maintenance as possible. However, cost is amortized over the period ownership with the flip to being revenue positive at ~5 years due to tax policy and incentives. However, entry into this favorably situation requires deep enough pockets for the original investment. Paying 30-35% more for a house isn’t feasible or wise for many. Some will not accept the concessions required. Once again income inequality means it’s more expensive to be poor.

This doesn’t exist for recreational boats. This is discretionary spending. There are no incentives nor tax implications. Cost of entry is borne entirely by the customer. In an ideal world I would be on a super efficient low displacement narrow but long Al cruiser driven by small diesels with all house requirements supplied by solar and wind. My preferred cruising style doesn’t include marinas to a significant degree so LOA isn’t a game stopper. Operating costs are the same or less than traditional FD. But cost of entry is a game stopper for many of us. At present given the absence of a used market and the premium all early adaptors pay in any advance cost of entry is driven much higher. Again expensive to be poor.
You see this here on this site. When talking of new construction one group is or lusts after boats with the smallest footprint and greatest use of engineering and design advances. The other knows the sea is a totally unforgiving mistress. They employ all advances that can be incorporated on a traditional proven platform. The rest of us do what we can within the constrains of our cruising kitties and existing platforms. However, it’s inevitable the move away from HC power generation and/or limitation of its need will continue.

 

[Codger2]

A nice 34' diesel electric built in my town. 2400nm at 8kn is quite good range for that length
https://boatingnz.co.nz/boat-reviews/herley-3400-electric-power-catamaran/View attachment 121368

Yes, they are catching on all over the planet. I decided to rid myself of diesel powered boats, not because of wanting a zero carbon based boat, but because I am sick and tired of changing filters, buying fuel at $4.00+/gal, changing zincs every 6 months to a year, constantly scarring myself on sharp hose clamp ends while moving around the engine room and worrying about fuel leaks and spills.



I decided to enter the all electric boat age by first putting my toe in the water. (Small Duffy 22' with a head, refrigerator, bar & inverter to run the coffee maker, TV & microwave.) It has 16-6 volt AGM batts and can cruise for 6.5 hours at 5 knots. (I realize that 6.5 knots is not a long cruise but my prostate is currently a 2 hour model!) Like the guy who fell off the Empire State Building, as he passed an open window on the 44th floor, people heard him say, "so far-so good!)


This little electric boat has been and continues to be great fun at a fraction of the cost of my previous 10 diesel powered ones.

 

[twistedtree]

I think it's all about market segmentation, where new products fit, and when. Applicable markets start out small and grow (hopefully) over time based on two thing; awareness and product applicability. A product may be useful to a very large group of people, but it takes time to spread the word, overcome doubt, and ramp up to meet demand. But typically products are only useful to a small group of people because of what they do and/or their cost. Product development works on expanding the usefulness and lowering the cost, thereby increasing the addressable market. People spend their lives studying and writing books about this, and it's the tightrope that every company walks.


All of us have lived through the computer evolution, and it's really an exception in many ways. Yet because we have seen and experience it, we tend to expect similar growth from all new inventions. A huge part of the growth in computers and related technology is because of silicon chip growth. Gordon Moore, founder of both Fairchild and Intel, observed that transistor density in integrated circuits was doubling about every 2 years. This became known as Moore's Law, and explains the exponential growth in the broader computer industry. And it's compounded more because not only can you fit twice as much stuff on a chip every two years, it becomes cheaper, and because everything is closer together you can run it faster. The result has been explosive growth of nearly everything that in any way relates to electronics, computers, or software.


But Moore's law is very unique and doesn't apply to everything. I hear over and over again how much solar efficiency has advanced and projections of future growth. But technologically, solar has advanced very little. In the 20+ years that I've been using it, efficiency had increased from the high teens to now about 22%. That's very small growth. What HAS happened is about 10 years ago a bunch of people built huge production plants creating a glut in the market and prices dropped from $5 per watt to just under $1 per watt. A five-fold price reduction makes a huge difference, and transformed solar from a hobby/lifestyle/micro-off-grid market into a market where large scale deployment made economic sense. It's not because the panels are suddenly much better. It's because there was a one time cliff in the price.


Batteries are much the same. Lithium Ion has been a major advance over lead acid, but keep in mind that it's been around for 20+ years. Tesla is probably single handed responsible for pushing the technology more into the main stream, all at investor expense. They both refined how to properly use the batteries, and created a seed market to get volume product kick started. These batteries are going through a similar cost reduction that solar experience, but there aren't massive innovations in the batteries themselves.


Getting back to market segmentation, and boats in particular, there aren't massive increased in solar efficiency on the horizon, and even if there were, it can only increase a theoretical max of 5x. Even a more plausible, but still unlikely increase of 2x isn't going to produce enough power for mast boat application. And the power density of batteries is so far off from diesel they will never carry to energy of a boat that runs any distance or any speed. Comparing diesel with 25% of the contained energy being usable, vs LFP batteries with 100% being usable, you need 8 times as much space on a boat to store the same usable energy in LFP vs diesel. And you also need to look at refuel time. I don't have time to run the math, but it would take many, many times longer to recharge batteries vs filling a diesel tank.


Now this doesn't mean it's not applicable anywhere for boats. It's just very specific, narrow segments on the market. Short range, low speed day boats that return to a dock with ample power are likely pretty viable. And there have been some interesting commercial ferry projects where they did some unique and extensive shore-side infrastructure to address recharging while the ferry is docked.


My long winded point in all this is that although we are seeing viability in segments of the market, I'm not seeing how is scales very far.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Walt writes;
“This little electric boat has been and continues to be great fun at a fraction of the cost of my previous 10 diesel powered ones.”

Aww com’on Walt. Since when have you been overly concerned bout the cost of things?

The image is way different tho.

 

[socalrider]

My long winded point in all this is that although we are seeing viability in segments of the market, I'm not seeing how is scales very far.

The price declines in solar and batteries are not "one time cliff" drops - they are very standard manufacturing cost curves, where with each doubling of capacity, unit price drops, say, 20%. This has happened with lots of technologies and continues to happen with PV and storage.

And cumulative capacity continues to grow massively - to the point now where the industry doesn't require special tax treatment (many of us are lobbying for the elimination of tax incentives for solar and wind - ideally in concert with elimination of fossil subsidies).

In Texas (ERCOT) for example, cumulative wind and solar installations are set to *double* from 2020-2022. And not from a tiny number to twice that tiny number: from 30GW to 60GW. For perspective, the entire California power grid is about 45GW.

Right now as I type at 830am (not great solar time), the CA (CAISO) grid is being powered by 31% renewable energy (61% is PV, 21% is wind).

We're well past the "not sure if this will scale" part of this industry transformation. The big thinkers are focused now on how to get from, say, 80% renewables grid to 100% renewable grid, and how to efficiently integrate all those EVs. The issues are quite similar to those we face when looking at powering our cruisers (thinking of the "solar vs generator" thread) - what happens in that one-in-five-yeaes there's no sun or wind for weeks on end? Maybe we should keep a generator in the engine room just in case...

 

[Hippocampus]

Both TT and SCR make excellent points. End of day for long distance travel and moving large pay loads some form of very energy dense “fuel” is required. Simple physics. At present don’t think anything beats diesel. Applicable to commercial transportation (shipping) but even there sail can decrease costs and diesel usage so sail assisted ships are making a return.
However in the recreational market the vast majority of vessels are near shore. Many can function with adequate performance and range under electric alone without dependency upon having their own alt energy generation. Get Nautiexpo emails and see early high speed surface, mixed surface/underwater and dinghies operating on battery alone for sale. Add in those with mixed propulsion. Batteries with onboard alt energy generation plus diesel when required and you see a definite increase in market acceptance. Several manufacturers offer either diesel, diesel plus electric or pure electric. Diesel plus electric would serve the needs of majority of readers here in my opinion. The thread about hammerhead or Al boats I shows we can decrease energy consumption dramatically. Yes at the expense of forgoing our concept of a full displacement stout vessel as the only platform for open ocean work. One can even see the influence of this thinking in the N41 and N51 to a minor degree. Respectfully disagree with TT. The science is there now. And he’s right it’s been here for quite some time. Perhaps not applicable to heavy displacement ships or recreational craft but doable for many recreational uses.

 

[twistedtree]

The price declines in solar and batteries are not "one time cliff" drops - they are very standard manufacturing cost curves, where with each doubling of capacity, unit price drops, say, 20%. This has happened with lots of technologies and continues to happen with PV and storage.

And cumulative capacity continues to grow massively - to the point now where the industry doesn't require special tax treatment (many of us are lobbying for the elimination of tax incentives for solar and wind - ideally in concert with elimination of fossil subsidies).

In Texas (ERCOT) for example, cumulative wind and solar installations are set to *double* from 2020-2022. And not from a tiny number to twice that tiny number: from 30GW to 60GW. For perspective, the entire California power grid is about 45GW.

Right now as I type at 830am (not great solar time), the CA (CAISO) grid is being powered by 31% renewable energy (61% is PV, 21% is wind).

We're well past the "not sure if this will scale" part of this industry transformation. The big thinkers are focused now on how to get from, say, 80% renewables grid to 100% renewable grid, and how to efficiently integrate all those EVs. The issues are quite similar to those we face when looking at powering our cruisers (thinking of the "solar vs generator" thread) - what happens in that one-in-five-yeaes there's no sun or wind for weeks on end? Maybe we should keep a generator in the engine room just in case...

Agreed, but we are talking in different contexts.


The "price cliff" was the one-time huge drop in solar circa 2008. That was unusual. Ongoing scale will of course nudge priced down, but not in increments of five-fold. I don't think we will see Moore's Law style price changes in solar, just more common scaling efficiencies.


And my comment about scaling, or the lack of it, was specifically in the context of boats. Terrestrial viability is very different. My house, for example, is 100% off grid, and has been forever.

 

[socalrider]

Agreed, but we are talking in different contexts.


The "price cliff" was the one-time huge drop in solar circa 2008. That was unusual. Ongoing scale will of course nudge priced down, but not in increments of five-fold. I don't think we will see Moore's Law style price changes in solar, just more common scaling efficiencies.


And my comment about scaling, or the lack of it, was specifically in the context of boats. Terrestrial viability is very different. My house, for example, is 100% off grid, and has been forever.

Got it - thanks for the clarification. But a point of clarification: the price declines vs installed capacity are fairly consistent and dramatic for 45 years or so. There was a rapid decline around 2008, but it wasn't a one-off. The declines continue - spot prices are around 20c/W right now. This chart is 2 years old:

Batteries are experiencing similar consistent and dramatic price declines, driven mainly by the EV market.

I fully agree with your characterization of boat applications - because, as you state, module efficiency is not increasing dramatically, boats are space-constrained regardless of how cheap the solar gets.

The exciting thing will be to see what new applications arise from very very cheap solar and storage - look at e-bikes, scooters, drones, etc. which are all driven by the new economics of storage. Another order-of-magnitude drop in storage prices (say 5-8 years) will bring about a host of cool stuff we can't even envision now. Some of it will apply to our beloved niche rec boating market (but probably not long-distance propulsion IMHO)

 

[twistedtree]

Respectfully disagree with TT. The science is there now. And he’s right it’s been here for quite some time. Perhaps not applicable to heavy displacement ships or recreational craft but doable for many recreational uses.

Agreed, but in the context of my market segmentation comments. It's not a questions of whether it works, it's a question of where and when. Boats that travel short distance, move slowly (these two things determine the required amount of stored power), and returning to a power source at the end of the day (duty cycle between motoring and recharging) definitely works. Or a boat that spends enough idle time to recharge via solar in place of some other power source. That's a viable segment of the market for propulsion, and Walt's Duffy is a good example. But other segments like go-fast boats (need more stored energy), longer distance boats (need more stored energy), continuously operated boats (too high a motoring duty cycle), or boats that are away from a recharge power source for too long like on a week cruise anchoring, or even a weekend anchoring (too high a motoring duty cycle) aren't there yet. And getting there will happen at typical market expansion rates, not at Moore's Law rates.


Much of this is perception and expectations. As I said, we have largely been conditioned by the computer industry to expect miraculous advancements in very short time. But what applies in that space doesn't translate to most other spaces. So I think expectations need to be different. It will happen, just not at the lightening rate I think people generally expect.


And I also think that people see technological advances in one industry, like hybrid and/or electric cars, and assume the same is equally applicable and beneficial to boats. In some ways it is, but in many very important ways it's not. Hydrids are a big gain in vehicles because of regeneration, and that simply doesn't exist in boats. And diesel electrics are really about building transmission systems, not about energy efficiency. In fact they are almost universally worse in terms of energy efficiency. But consumers see success in one place and naturally anticipate is will apply to their boats. And regardless of the actual benefits, many people buy things that reflect/express their values, whether it's a sport fishing boat, or a super fast boat, or whatever. And manufacturers are happy to capitalize on that.


Today, I think the biggest and broadest benefit of "hybrid" technology on boats is in the house power system. Higher capacity and lower maintenance LFP batteries, solar, inverters, and you can have more of the comforts of home (I won't compare to "camping" ) with less generator time, expense, and noise. Interestingly, this is what Greenline owners consistently cite as something they really like about the boat.

 

[Simi 60]

Seriously guys...if the idea of electric trawlers upsets you, ask yourself "why ?"

Are you invested in the Oil/Gas industry ? Are you afraid of modernity ? Does a new idea threaten your way of life?

There are no electric trawlers
There are electric day boats
There are light electric catamarans
But I am yet to see a full displacement electric trawler.

I am all for solar and batteries, would be all over an electric boat when and if they become economically viable and fit for MY purpose

 

[fryedaze]

Nope. More energy sold is the best hope for our screwed-up utilities - they need to amortize their insane fixed costs over more MWh sold to drive down per unit costs.

Do you understand the California generation capability? They don't have enough. They brown out frequently on high demand days. Arizona makes a fortune selling Calif power. The state forces solar rule that require utilities to pay other states to take excess during the day. They will shutdown the last nuke soon. Try replacing 2000 MWe with animic wind and solar.
California deregulated utilities, it spread across the US and then they re-regulated after if fell apart.
Great ideas are always coming out of the California voters.
Crap! I did it again[emoji8]

 

[fryedaze]

If my boat was electric. It would use 100-120 KW/ hr to travel at my 7.8 knot speed. Other hull designs would use less. Let's say I am a coastal cruiser and travel 6 hrs a day for about 45 miles. I use 600 kw-hrs a day and need a battery at least that big( think 7 Tesla batteries). A 50 amp 220 volt pedestal can put out 11 kw/hr. I need 54.5 hrs to recharge. Cut my consumption in half and assume my boat only needs about 50 hp and I still need 24+ hrs to recharge.
People do not understand the magnitude of the energy they consume.

 

[BandB]

I find the new developments and the experimentation interesting and overall consider it very positive. I don't know where it will all lead or how far electric will go in boats or what all the benefits or consequences will be. This is all part of scientific research and development.

I think back a bit at certain advancements in my adult lifetime. Looking at cars, they are safer today and the pollute less. From the door protection to the catalytic convertors, we benefit. I consider that significant. I also remember researching early Hybrids. The pricing was scary as they would never recoup the initial price surcharge. Plus they didn't perform as well. Now years later, we've purchased 15 Honda hybrids this year and love them in all ways plus the employees driving them love them. They average about 50 mpg. Yes, I know there is electricity used to charge the batteries, but far less than I would have thought. The total energy costs in driving them is down significantly and the driving experience is great. This is compared to Honda's which were already getting great mileage in the regular models. I just look at how far we've come that a Honda Accord gets 28/38 mpg and they hybrid version gets 48/48.

Now, I look at our stores and our manufacturing facilities. Oh, when they started messing with my light bulbs years ago, I didn't like it. Well, we now sell LED and change fixtures and bulbs in stores, primarily at first to do our own stores. In a 2000 square foot retail store, we save about $75 per month but in a 60,000 square foot store we save over $2000 per month. Then toss in what we save on changing bulbs.

We haven't figured out a way to justify solar for our home but we're currently doing our first trials on manufacturing facilities and retail. We don't own our retail buildings so had to find the right landlords to allow us. We do own our manufacturing buildings and just did two of them. The paybacks do not equal our normal investment criteria. We do save $3500 in state taxes per year on our SC installations, although increases US taxes by $700 or so. Normally we like 3 year paybacks on investments. When I first looked at solar it was 10-12 years. Now it's more like 7 years and with the tax rebates we're down to 5-6 years.

I'm not a scientist, but a consumer and a business man. However, just on these small endeavors, I'm saving energy and money. I like that combination. I'm nowhere close to considering electric to propel a boat. However, I'm happy some are working toward those goals. I'm happy for those from Greenline to even Feadship. I don't expect overnight success. I just try to take advantage of what happens along the way.

We have a large home in Fort Lauderdale. I'm amazed how low our electricity bills are. It's a combination of all LED, being built to 150 mph hurricane standards (especially the windows and roof) and insulation. It's about the same as our much smaller NC home was.

I'm glad there are leaders and I can jump in as a follower. There will be successes and failures, but five years and ten years and twenty years we will all be better off as a result.

 

[Art]

The need for atmospheric CO2 PPM drawdown is by far and away the most important immediate need to "in time" thwart global warming... before it becomes too late.

In that, after a certain climate temperature raise-elevation is reached the trade winds and oceanic currents will be forced to alter their trajectories, never again will they regain their current patterns. Therefrom, obliterating the stance of relatively regulator seasonal weather conditions in which civilization has thrived for many thousand years of population expansion/explosion.

This is mentioned due to these situations:

1. Existing and ongoing continuation of atmospheric CO2 parts per million [PPM] overload is the prime "abstract" absorber of solar heat. CO2 is the initiator and largest continuator item of climate warming. Atmospheric CO2 overload, resulting from fossil fuel exhaust fumes, must be soon reduced.

2. CO2 direct-air-capture [DAC] can be accomplished in great enough volume to place a hold on atmospheric warming. [Additionally, as a side note: Many other items also need to be tended in order to stop Earth's ocean and land overheating conditions]

3. Over 3 billion combustion engines are needed to keep running in order to have global economy stay healthy with societies functioning.

4. Electric battery and engine - cars, trucks, trains, planes, boats, ships, generators, small tools... etc... can not be produced soon enough to stop the constant influx of Carbon Positive fossil fuel emissions into atmosphere. Thus, climate warming continues.

Attainable Solution: Turn the captured atmospheric CO into Full-Cycle Carbon Neutrall gasoline, diesel and jet fuels. These carbon neutral, CO2 based fuels are drop-in fungible with refined crude oils. This new fuel source will dramatically help reduce the influx of CO2 into Earth's atmosphere.

One of my companies has for years been developing items to help enable this. The piece I depict above is just a slice of what's happening and what is coming. As needs to accomplish gain priority positions the means for accomplishment experience exponential advancements.

 

[Scooby5959]

Steam is still widely used

....In 1819 the Savannah became the first ship to cross the Atlantic Ocean employing steam power. Its small steam engine and pinewood fuel supply were good for only a part of the 24-day crossing. For most of the voyage the Savannah relied on a full spread of sail, but the voyage demonstrated the practicability of steam navigation on the ocean.....

Steam is the most powerful energy source available ,as far as I know ,but I’m a dummy so Set me straight .oceans are crossed with the worlds largest ships . Powered with steam every day both on the surface and under it .nuclear power anybody. Steam also makes about 80% of all that green energy otherwise known as electricity ,with wind and solar picking up the slack . Just as the savanna couldn’t carry enough wood to burn to generate that wonderful efficient steam .you can’t carry enough batteries and solar to make it practical either. sure wish you could I hate , hate internal combustion engines .I just spent most of the day today. Working on a 35 year old Perkins engine .diagnosing and removing a starter and removing a leaking raw water pump ,that cost $700 by the way ,not to mention $250 starter. Nobody would love electric powered boats more than I . Maybe the space aliens will show us the way.I wish they would hurry up . I don’t have much time left time is getting short for me

 

[Scooby5959]

I’ve had a lifetime of listening to that bs

The need for atmospheric CO2 PPM drawdown is by far and away the most important immediate need to "in time" thwart global warming... before it becomes too late.

In that, after a certain climate temperature raise-elevation is reached the trade winds and oceanic currents will be forced to alter their trajectories, never again will they regain their current patterns. Therefrom, obliterating the stance of relatively regulator seasonal weather conditions in which civilization has thrived for many thousand years of population expansion/explosion.

This is mentioned due to these situations:

1. Existing and ongoing continuation of atmospheric CO2 parts per million [PPM] overload is the prime "abstract" absorber of solar heat. CO2 is the initiator and largest continuator item of climate warming. Atmospheric CO2 overload, resulting from fossil fuel exhaust fumes, must be soon reduced.

2. CO2 direct-air-capture [DAC] can be accomplished in great enough volume to place a hold on atmospheric warming. [Additionally, as a side note: Many other items also need to be tended in order to stop Earth's ocean and land overheating conditions]

3. Over 3 billion combustion engines are needed to keep running in order to have global economy stay healthy with societies functioning.

4. Electric battery and engine - cars, trucks, trains, planes, boats, ships, generators, small tools... etc... can not be produced soon enough to stop the constant influx of Carbon Positive fossil fuel emissions into atmosphere. Thus, climate warming continues.

Attainable Solution: Turn the captured atmospheric CO into Full-Cycle Carbon Neutrall gasoline, diesel and jet fuels. These carbon neutral, CO2 based fuels are drop-in fungible with refined crude oils. This new fuel source will dramatically help reduce the influx of CO2 into Earth's atmosphere.

One of my companies has for years been developing items to help enable this. The piece I depict above is just a slice of what's happening and what is coming. As needs to accomplish gain priority positions the means for accomplishment experience exponential advancements.

I’m pretty sure the population has doubled in my lifetime.The best way to reduce CO2 emissions is by reducing demand. OK genius figure out a way to keep people from making so many babies .maybe you geniuses should keep your baby makers in your pants . Maybe you can get somebody to believe what you espouse enough to fund it ,so you can afford a nicer twin engine boat,While accomplishing nothing other than Coning people out of money ,spare me

 

[Hippocampus]

Scooby the other dynamic is the reorganization of fresh water location and amount which is currently actively occurring in response to MMCC. Many believe this is the ultimate driver for the current mass migrations we’re seeing. As food generation and fresh water supplies fall peoples move, governments become more corrupt and illegal activities increase. A concomitant decrease in numbers surviving long enough to reproduce (biologic quotient) occurs. So you’re right population control needs be considered. Not primarily in the first world where reproductive rates are nearly flat or even decreasing but in the swath that’s drying out. Unfortunately nature is to some degree self regulating. Expect that to occur in those populations.

 

[twistedtree]

Steam is the most powerful energy source available

Steam isn't really a power source. It's an intermediate way to transmit power, and especially a way to convert it from one form to another.


What steam is really good for is converting heat energy into rotational energy. Wood, coal, fuel oil, nukes, solar concentrators, etc are all heat sources. They are the energy source, but they create heat which is hard to use directly. So the heat is used to create steam to turn a turbine, and the turbine then does the work like turn a prop or a generator.