Tesla style ski boat?? Think it could happen?

[granddaddy55]

14 minutes ago, gordon20mxz said:

Absolutely not proven.  Sorry, they are manipulating the data.  Unfortunately, the government has be closing land based temperature monitoring stations in the cooler areas and keeping the monitoring stations in the hotter areas (around cities).  It's a terrible thing, but even the scientists are being swayed by the political agenda.  The government data at this point just sucks (NOAA and NASA).  You just don't know who or what to believe.  But it is a BIG stretch to think human activity is affect the global temperature, either higher or lower.  You just can't draw that conclusion from the data that we have and the time scale that the data has been collected.

Remember NASA  has been retasked to climate change cause they couldn't use "global warming"

The One good thing about battery, built in lead ballast

[gordon20mxz]

27 minutes ago, sunvalleylaw said:

Whether or not climate change is caused by human consumption of carbon fuel resources (not going to get into that argument on a boat forum where I just want to talk boats), I think it is cool if there was an alternative power source for them.  I think the quieter motor and other characteristics (the motors seem to have lots of power and torque) would be pretty cool if the batteries and motor gets figured out for boats.  We shall see what happens.  

I agree.  I'm done.

Back to boats.  My season is almost over, I have about another 3 weeks of water high enough to launch.  Bummer!

Do have a long Labor Day weekend at the river, 3 days, I hope the weather is good.

[85 Barefoot]

I actually wrote a response but I took it down.  Probably getting too close to the hot topics line.

Bottom line, I would fully support Tesla or anyone else's efforts to find a cheaper, cleaner, economically viable alternative to our carbon-based nautical usage!  Why anyone would want to cling to gas pumps is beyond me.

[05hammerhead]

1 hour ago, 1HELLUVALIFE said:

Still burning fossil fuels to charge your "green" cars and boats. 

 

This is just not true. Nuclear is a great alternative.  

 

One thing that I think a lot of people are missing and Musk has started to try and capture it is that power plants dont just turn on and off as people use their power.  They dont add more coal to the fire when you decide to flip on your lights or crank up your AC.  They have to consistently run their plants to the max capacity that they believe people could use and will always be overproducing to the needs.  They try to keep this number around 10% I believe but in time like late evening when peoples ACs start turning off and lights are off etc, the plants are still running(Yes they can turn them down a little) and this waste number gets larger and larger, I believe its around 30%.  If instead of wasting this energy you could capture it in large cap batteries(like tesla has started doing) and use that energy during peak usage hours, you would DRASTICALLY reduce overall usage.  This energy could be used for AC, lights etc or even more dramatic, could be used to charge your car.   This could result in greater utilization of nuclear energy as well as reducing fossil fuel usage.  The problem with this is getting people on board with having these storage systems ($$$) and secondarily getting them to do things like charge their car at 2 AM vs at 530 PM when they get home from work and energy levels are at peak usage. 

[oldjeep]

Just now, 05hammerhead said:

This is just not true. Nuclear is a great alternative.  

 

Nuclear is an alternative however getting plants approved and finding anywhere to store the waste is a huge problem.  The local plant has been getting temp permission after temp permission to store their waste in casks on the site since there is no where to take it.

[sidekicknicholas]

Epic made one too -

 

 

Edited August 31, 2016 by sidekicknicholas

[05hammerhead]

Just now, oldjeep said:

Nuclear is an alternative however getting plants approved and finding anywhere to store the waste is a huge problem.  The local plant has been getting temp permission after temp permission to store their waste in casks on the site since there is no where to take it.

True, and until the government understands the need to use weapons grade uranium so they can burn more than 70% of the rods, that will never change.  I understand the reason not to, but leads to this problem.  Nuclear submarines can burn up to 99% of the fuel and at that point its a pretty safe rod and much more easily disposed of. 

[2008vlx]

http://boesch.swiss/en/boats/boesch-620-acapulco-de-luxe here in switzerland waterski boat are aviable by this swiss manufacturer. they offer 2 electric option on almost all of their boats.

[twitchee2]

nvm

Edited August 31, 2016 by twitchee2
nvm

[67King]

Sheesh, why does it seem that everytime Tesla comes up, it has to devolve into a political argument on just about every site I ever read?  Whether or not we agree on anthropogenic climate change has no bearing on this.  We do know we are adding to the CO2 levels, and we know it is a greenhouse gas.  No one outside of flat Earthers will deny that.  So it stands as somewhat natural that there will be folks who'll pin things on progress, and try to make bogeymen out of some things other people like (sheesh, I've got 8 freakin' cars, race one, and tow it wiht a big ole Cummins powered Dodge).  The rest, really, isn't relevant.  There's a market, be it driven by perception or reality isn't relevant - the market is there.  And FWIW, Elon Musk was building Teslas (the Roadster, which I personally hated) long before grants, and even before teh political climate was in his favor.  But personally, I love Tesla as a company.  Not many American companies are pushing technology, and manufacturing their products, here to the degree that Tesla is.  

 

Anyway, here's the problem I see with it.  Rough numbers.  11GPH gas consumption is somewhere near the neighborhood of 170HP-hr.  That's equivalent to 130 KW-hr.  Tesla's battery options range from 60 to 90KW.  So you can get between 30-45 minutes of use out of our boats while doing watersports before having to recharge, which takes hours with a 240V system, and overnight with a 110.  I'm not sure how much more room there would be for extra batteries......remember these things have to keep cool.  I could see electric working maybe for a fishing boat, maybe for a general runabout.  But not a dedicated towboat.

[oldjeep]

Just now, 67King said:

Anyway, here's the problem I see with it.  Rough numbers.  11GPH gas consumption is somewhere near the neighborhood of 170HP-hr.  That's equivalent to 130 KW-hr.  Tesla's battery options range from 60 to 90KW.  So you can get between 30-45 minutes of use out of our boats while doing watersports before having to recharge, which takes hours with a 240V system, and overnight with a 110.  I'm not sure how much more room there would be for extra batteries......remember these things have to keep cool.  I could see electric working maybe for a fishing boat, maybe for a general runabout.  But not a dedicated towboat.

Extra batteries could double as ballast  and a boat is surrounded with a nearly unlimited  supply of coolant.  Unfortunately that would mean plowing all that extra weight through the nowake zones and never being able to achieve more than maybe 20 MPH.

Edited August 31, 2016 by oldjeep

[85 Barefoot]

1 minute ago, 67King said:

Sheesh, why does it seem that everytime Tesla comes up, it has to devolve into a political argument on just about every site I ever read?  Whether or not we agree on anthropogenic climate change has no bearing on this.  We do know we are adding to the CO2 levels, and we know it is a greenhouse gas.  No one outside of flat Earthers will deny that.  So it stands as somewhat natural that there will be folks who'll pin things on progress, and try to make bogeymen out of some things other people like (sheesh, I've got 8 freakin' cars, race one, and tow it wiht a big ole Cummins powered Dodge).  The rest, really, isn't relevant.  There's a market, be it driven by perception or reality isn't relevant - the market is there.  And FWIW, Elon Musk was building Teslas (the Roadster, which I personally hated) long before grants, and even before teh political climate was in his favor.  But personally, I love Tesla as a company.  Not many American companies are pushing technology, and manufacturing their products, here to the degree that Tesla is.  

 

Anyway, here's the problem I see with it.  Rough numbers.  11GPH gas consumption is somewhere near the neighborhood of 170HP-hr.  That's equivalent to 130 KW-hr.  Tesla's battery options range from 60 to 90KW.  So you can get between 30-45 minutes of use out of our boats while doing watersports before having to recharge, which takes hours with a 240V system, and overnight with a 110.  I'm not sure how much more room there would be for extra batteries......remember these things have to keep cool.  I could see electric working maybe for a fishing boat, maybe for a general runabout.  But not a dedicated towboat.

Two people in this thread already!

I respect Musk as well.  I love immigrant-American success stories who succeed and are an inspiration for us.

[Woodski]

I was fortunate enough to get a spin in the electric Nautique.  As noted you notice the total lack of IC engine noise, what you hear is the wash on the hull and the propeller noise very different to what is common.  The other notable aspect is the torque curve, pretty much instant and constant power / acceleration (devoid of any noise) which is actually an excellent scenario for the skier/boarder/footer.  The 2 motors are actually very small and take up little room leaving the area behind the pylon wide open, the gunnels in this particular setup were basically hard benches as they contained the batteries.  The layout was very much akin to a V drive wake boat configuration.  The overall weight was greater than its IC engine counterpart so there was a compromise there since it is on a CC196 targeted to slalom skiing, the assumption would obviously be as battery technology improved the 'power unit' weight and size requirements should approach the IC engine numbers.  All in all, a very cool boat but at the time the battery life was not acceptable for the typical use frequency.  The dock also needed a robust power source for recharging the batteries.

[RTS]

13 minutes ago, Woodski said:

The dock also needed a robust power source for recharging the batteries.

This, along with the inherent mixing of robust power and a water environment, would have me very concerned.

Big difference, in my opinion, of a 220V charging station in your garage versus the same out by the dock. Environmental (weather, etc.) as well as safety issues would need to be addressed...i.e. cost money.

[67King]

57 minutes ago, oldjeep said:

Extra batteries could double as ballast  and a boat is surrounded with a nearly unlimited  supply of coolant.  Unfortunately that would mean plowing all that extra weight through the nowake zones and never being able to achieve more than maybe 20 MPH.

The density of lithium is only half the density of water.......so they would be a VERY inefficient use of space for ballast. 

[sunvalleylaw]

18 minutes ago, Woodski said:

I was fortunate enough to get a spin in the electric Nautique.  As noted you notice the total lack of IC engine noise, what you hear is the wash on the hull and the propeller noise very different to what is common.  The other notable aspect is the torque curve, pretty much instant and constant power / acceleration (devoid of any noise) which is actually an excellent scenario for the skier/boarder/footer.  The 2 motors are actually very small and take up little room leaving the area behind the pylon wide open, the gunnels in this particular setup were basically hard benches as they contained the batteries.  The layout was very much akin to a V drive wake boat configuration.  The overall weight was greater than its IC engine counterpart so there was a compromise there since it is on a CC196 targeted to slalom skiing, the assumption would obviously be as battery technology improved the 'power unit' weight and size requirements should approach the IC engine numbers.  All in all, a very cool boat but at the time the battery life was not acceptable for the typical use frequency.  The dock also needed a robust power source for recharging the batteries.

Great information!  Given that that was 2011, I wonder what the advances available would be today.  I think this is something that will work sometime soon, if there is a demand, and someone willing to push it, as Musk did with cars.  

[Nitrousbird]

A couple issues with an electric boat:

1. Cost
2. Range
3. Recharging for anyone who doesn't garage their boat.  This is a huge no-go for those boaters with a dock or slip, as getting that kind of service out to a slip is very difficult (and quite possibly impossible for some situations) along with being expensive.  A difficult situation for those who do driveway storage and impossible for off-site storage.

An electric tow boat would execute well if #1 could be reduced and #2 could be increased.  Nothing can be done for #3.

[ORMailbuboater]

See government grant study attached.  Electric boats at present would not "save" the planet. 

Conclusion

Electric cars offer no savings in energy, money, or emissions at present. Electricity supply from renewables cannot cover but an insignificant portion of road vehicles. The numerical values in this article allow easy updates as conditions change in the future.

https://www.masterresource.org/electric-vehicles/energy-usage-cost-gasoline-vs-electric/

 

[85 Barefoot]

19 minutes ago, ORMailbuboater said:

See government grant study attached.  Electric boats at present would not "save" the planet. 

Conclusion

Electric cars offer no savings in energy, money, or emissions at present. Electricity supply from renewables cannot cover but an insignificant portion of road vehicles. The numerical values in this article allow easy updates as conditions change in the future.

https://www.masterresource.org/electric-vehicles/energy-usage-cost-gasoline-vs-electric/

 

Government grant study?  The IER is a non-profit funded by corporations and receives no government funding.  Read their site.   It's a position paper writing machine against anything green or alternative from fossil fuels.  One of their board members currently serves as the managing director of federal affairs for the Koch Brothers and another is the President of a drilling company!  Heck the author of that study wrote a position paper on the same site advocating for the end of recycling due to its expense. 

Who makes money making raw products and not from recycled (and for that matter, fossil fuel consumption)...many, but especially the Koch brothers and oil drillers!

Edited August 31, 2016 by 85 Barefoot

[1HELLUVALIFE]

3 hours ago, 05hammerhead said:

This is just not true. Nuclear is a great alternative.  

 

 

My point being nuclear only makes up 20 percent of the electricity used in US, the majority of the power, 67 percent still comes from fossil fuels. 

[85 Barefoot]

Just now, 1HELLUVALIFE said:

My point being nuclear only makes up 20 percent of the electricity used in US, the majority of the power, 67 percent still comes from fossil fuels. 

A stat that will be changed with innovation.

[1HELLUVALIFE]

Just now, 85 Barefoot said:

A stat that will be changed with innovation.

Along with  restrictions. 

[The Hulk]

think of the shore power you would need to charge!

[sunvalleylaw]

3 hours ago, 2008vlx said:

http://boesch.swiss/en/boats/boesch-620-acapulco-de-luxe here in switzerland waterski boat are aviable by this swiss manufacturer. they offer 2 electric option on almost all of their boats.

I would like to learn more about this boat.  

 

Just now, The Hulk said:

think of the shore power you would need to charge!

Very powerful cars are managing it.  I think especially with boats on a lift, it could happen.  Also, innovation may include solar options as part of it.  

[The Hulk]

6 minutes ago, sunvalleylaw said:

I would like to learn more about this boat.  

 

Very powerful cars are managing it.  I think especially with boats on a lift, it could happen.  Also, innovation may include solar options as part of it.  

it takes a 20w solar panel (1ftx2ft) in size approx 1 month of sunny weather to charge a standard 12v "smaller" group 24 size battery, slightly longer for a larger group 27 size.

that thing has 62.6 kWh battery! holly molly! haha.. on a middle of SUNNY summer day (northern latitude) it would take about 16,000w of solar panels to charge that thing. a 10w panel in reference is slightly under 1ftx1ft size so your talking about 12,000-13000 sqft of solar panels to charge that thing up on a fully sunny day no clouds in the sky in the middle of summer in a northern latitude on a long nice summer day..

...for a single days charging.....solar is gonna require a huge lake house with a big roof! i like it!