7 ms·

I hope that such a flat roof will be covered in solar

by NooneAtAll3 10mo ago

victorbjorklund 10mo ago
Probably more efficient to keep inverters, panels etc on land.
- phinnaeus 10mo ago
  I’m not a sparky but would you need inverters if the panels are just for charging batteries? On the other hand, there is probably already inverters onboard to provide AC power to passenger power points.
  - servo_sausage 10mo ago
    No, you need some kind of DC converter to regulate voltage, but no inherent requirement to go to AC. Lots of small camping and off grid systems do that. Although at the scale of a one off boat i would think it's cheaper to use the more widespread systems for bigger grid connected panel installations; so you are back to inverters.
- NooneAtAll3 10mo ago
  more efficient to leave surface unused?
  - servo_sausage 10mo ago
    Same reason EVs rarely have solar panels; adds weight and complexity, making it more expensive than putting the panels somewhere less wet and salty.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 10mo ago
      ... and doesn't add significant charge. > The surface area of a standard car simply isn’t big enough to hold the sheer volume of solar panels that would be needed to capture a meaningful amount of energy from the sun. https://octopusev.com/ev-hub/why-dont-electric-cars-have-solar-panels https://octopusev.com/ev-hub/why-dont-electric-cars-have-sol... > there just isn’t enough space on top of cars to make a meaningful contribution to the charging needs of the battery https://www.forbes.com/sites/billroberson/2022/11/30/why-doesnt-every-electric-car-have-solar-panels/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/billroberson/2022/11/30/why-doe... The same must be true of a ship. Put the larger solar panel installations at the places where the vehicles charge.
  - scraptor 10mo ago
    More efficient to spend the same amount of money on shoreside panels with lower installation costs.
  - bell-cot 10mo ago
    Talk to a marine engineer about the overhead (equipment, training, emergency procedures, etc.) of adding a small-scale solar plant to all the things that they've already got to deal with on a ship. And recall that this bridge - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_(Baltimore) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_(Balt... - will need a multi-billion dollar replacement, because the tiny engineering staff of a huge freighter could not diagnose and correct a surprise electrical failure. Within the maybe 3 1/2 minutes between the initial fault, and when the collision became physically inevitable.
  - jeltz 10mo ago
    Do you have solar panels on top of your head? If not why do you leave that space unused? Space being there is one of the worst possible reasons. That bloats designs and makes them expensive to build and maintain.
  - victorbjorklund 10mo ago
    Yes, it is more efficient to install it on land. The installation will be cheaper, maintainance will be cheaper and the panels will last longer.
- reactordev 10mo ago
  You would be consuming fossil fuels to charge a ship when the sun is giving you energy for free. At least capture some of that to charge some batteries or extend the length of your voyage.
  - WJW 10mo ago
    The energy is not free, since the solar panels cost money and don't last forever. Even at optimistic prices, it's still something like 0.03 USD/kWh. Install them on a boat and they have to deal with constant vibrations, humid conditions, seagulls shitting all over them, etc etc etc. I used to work on ships and almost everything constantly breaks down without constant maintenance. I bet it would be much cheaper to put the solar panels on land and charge the ship when it's in port.
    - teiferer 10mo ago
      That may all be true, but there are other benefits that could make it worth it. For example it could be, in theory, self-sufficient forever if something else breaks down making it unable to maneuver. Then you can at least sit in the middle of the sea and have your heating and cooking and desalination working until you repair the propulsion.
      - padjo 10mo ago
        You already have MWh of batteries for that.
        reactordev 10mo ago
        No you don’t because after a few days broken down, they are drained without solar.
    - reactordev 10mo ago
      I sailed around the world on a sailboat with solar. I know. It’s still better than none at all. The energy is free. To capture it costs a little bit of money.
- dzhiurgis 10mo ago
  I doubt it but it deff goes well with roro batteries too.
red75prime 10mo ago
It should take around 50 hours to fully charge its batteries under ideal conditions. That is 5 - 10 days realistically. I guess it's impractical considering that it will ferry across the River Plate.
- reactordev 10mo ago
  Any flat surface on a ship that is designed for electric should be covered in flexible solar panels. Why do this if it can’t fully charge the ship? To offset the costs of charging the ship at port, to provide longer range by providing a lower voltage power source for 12V DC charging (cell phones, iPads, 5w LED lights). So the commenter is correct, she needs panels and the fact that this isn’t part of the launch shows that they were more interested in being first than practical.
  - servo_sausage 10mo ago
    It's not a long range vessel, but it should have a fairly long service life. Additional weight and complexity on a one off boat would be more expensive than a seperate much more standard solar and battery system on land. And you might be able to get additional value out of selling electricity from an oversized storage. It's not sensible to draw your system boundaries around the boat by itself; there is significant terminal infrastructure; and even grid electrical infrastructure to consider.
    - reactordev 10mo ago
      I disagree entirely about complexity. It’s not complex at all. I don’t draw a boundary around the boat. I see a missed opportunity to power non-drive electronics from a renewable source such as solar.
      - red75prime 10mo ago
        What exactly is the benefit of having solar panels on the ship? Her accumulators are more than capable of supplying all the electric needs during her ferry trips. Placing 0.002 square kilometer of solar panels on land is cheaper.
rasz 10mo ago
Solar roof is a bunk idea. In case of cars, trucks and this ferry you can gain whole 1-3 additional minutes of operation per whole day of perfect solar radiation.

I hope that such a flat roof will be covered in solar

victorbjorklund 10mo ago

Probably more efficient to keep inverters, panels etc on land.

phinnaeus 10mo ago
I’m not a sparky but would you need inverters if the panels are just for charging batteries? On the other hand, there is probably already inverters onboard to provide AC power to passenger power points.
- servo_sausage 10mo ago
  No, you need some kind of DC converter to regulate voltage, but no inherent requirement to go to AC. Lots of small camping and off grid systems do that. Although at the scale of a one off boat i would think it's cheaper to use the more widespread systems for bigger grid connected panel installations; so you are back to inverters.
NooneAtAll3 10mo ago
more efficient to leave surface unused?
- servo_sausage 10mo ago
  Same reason EVs rarely have solar panels; adds weight and complexity, making it more expensive than putting the panels somewhere less wet and salty.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 10mo ago
    ... and doesn't add significant charge. > The surface area of a standard car simply isn’t big enough to hold the sheer volume of solar panels that would be needed to capture a meaningful amount of energy from the sun. https://octopusev.com/ev-hub/why-dont-electric-cars-have-solar-panels https://octopusev.com/ev-hub/why-dont-electric-cars-have-sol... > there just isn’t enough space on top of cars to make a meaningful contribution to the charging needs of the battery https://www.forbes.com/sites/billroberson/2022/11/30/why-doesnt-every-electric-car-have-solar-panels/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/billroberson/2022/11/30/why-doe... The same must be true of a ship. Put the larger solar panel installations at the places where the vehicles charge.
- scraptor 10mo ago
  More efficient to spend the same amount of money on shoreside panels with lower installation costs.
- bell-cot 10mo ago
  Talk to a marine engineer about the overhead (equipment, training, emergency procedures, etc.) of adding a small-scale solar plant to all the things that they've already got to deal with on a ship. And recall that this bridge - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_(Baltimore) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Scott_Key_Bridge_(Balt... - will need a multi-billion dollar replacement, because the tiny engineering staff of a huge freighter could not diagnose and correct a surprise electrical failure. Within the maybe 3 1/2 minutes between the initial fault, and when the collision became physically inevitable.
- jeltz 10mo ago
  Do you have solar panels on top of your head? If not why do you leave that space unused? Space being there is one of the worst possible reasons. That bloats designs and makes them expensive to build and maintain.
- victorbjorklund 10mo ago
  Yes, it is more efficient to install it on land. The installation will be cheaper, maintainance will be cheaper and the panels will last longer.
reactordev 10mo ago
You would be consuming fossil fuels to charge a ship when the sun is giving you energy for free. At least capture some of that to charge some batteries or extend the length of your voyage.
- WJW 10mo ago
  The energy is not free, since the solar panels cost money and don't last forever. Even at optimistic prices, it's still something like 0.03 USD/kWh. Install them on a boat and they have to deal with constant vibrations, humid conditions, seagulls shitting all over them, etc etc etc. I used to work on ships and almost everything constantly breaks down without constant maintenance. I bet it would be much cheaper to put the solar panels on land and charge the ship when it's in port.
  - teiferer 10mo ago
    That may all be true, but there are other benefits that could make it worth it. For example it could be, in theory, self-sufficient forever if something else breaks down making it unable to maneuver. Then you can at least sit in the middle of the sea and have your heating and cooking and desalination working until you repair the propulsion.
    - padjo 10mo ago
      You already have MWh of batteries for that.
      - reactordev 10mo ago
        No you don’t because after a few days broken down, they are drained without solar.
  - reactordev 10mo ago
    I sailed around the world on a sailboat with solar. I know. It’s still better than none at all. The energy is free. To capture it costs a little bit of money.
dzhiurgis 10mo ago
I doubt it but it deff goes well with roro batteries too.

red75prime 10mo ago

It should take around 50 hours to fully charge its batteries under ideal conditions. That is 5 - 10 days realistically. I guess it's impractical considering that it will ferry across the River Plate.

reactordev 10mo ago
Any flat surface on a ship that is designed for electric should be covered in flexible solar panels. Why do this if it can’t fully charge the ship? To offset the costs of charging the ship at port, to provide longer range by providing a lower voltage power source for 12V DC charging (cell phones, iPads, 5w LED lights). So the commenter is correct, she needs panels and the fact that this isn’t part of the launch shows that they were more interested in being first than practical.
- servo_sausage 10mo ago
  It's not a long range vessel, but it should have a fairly long service life. Additional weight and complexity on a one off boat would be more expensive than a seperate much more standard solar and battery system on land. And you might be able to get additional value out of selling electricity from an oversized storage. It's not sensible to draw your system boundaries around the boat by itself; there is significant terminal infrastructure; and even grid electrical infrastructure to consider.
  - reactordev 10mo ago
    I disagree entirely about complexity. It’s not complex at all. I don’t draw a boundary around the boat. I see a missed opportunity to power non-drive electronics from a renewable source such as solar.
    - red75prime 10mo ago
      What exactly is the benefit of having solar panels on the ship? Her accumulators are more than capable of supplying all the electric needs during her ferry trips. Placing 0.002 square kilometer of solar panels on land is cheaper.

rasz 10mo ago

Solar roof is a bunk idea. In case of cars, trucks and this ferry you can gain whole 1-3 additional minutes of operation per whole day of perfect solar radiation.