Dare to Say No

I'm actually amazed at the lack of flames ...

I think there needs to be some reality injected.

Clothing is a necessity for most people ... where is the outrage over the design and sale of any clothing that is not durable and practical? Shoes? Almost anything.

With the world energy crisis looming darkly overhead. Why are we talking about any personal transportation options at all? For the collective good we should all be looking at lowest carbon footprint per ton/mile ... find out what the most sustainable way to move folk around is, and remove all other options. That doesn't work for you? Too bad so sad, the designers know better.

Rick, what is the total effect your hobby has on the environment? How much fossil fuel was wasted in the manufacture of the materials and components you use to enjoy yourself? What is the total cost per kilometer for your personal transport? Include the manufacture and delivery of the food you eat to provide the calories to crank the pedals and the manufacture and related costs of any support vehicles to transport it to the water.

One of the things that kills me is looking at the small picture and ignoring the total. Things like wind turbine fields ... just how carbon neutral are they ... after you consider the energy and resources use to build 50 metre carbon fibre blades, the diesel to haul them off to god know were, and erect the damn thing before one watt of "clean energy" is produced? Seems to me I read that the wind energy industry has a net negative effect.

Rather than worry about 1000 Chinese commuters fighting for their litre of fuel, why aren't we looking at removing the need to commute at all?

These are truly complex issues and there are no simple "feel good" answers.

At what point do we stop having individual freedom and devote all our efforts to the good of the collective? A world economy based on never ending expanding markets and a never ending cycle of moving production to take advantage of the lowest wages on the planet is not sustainable. Boat designers saying no is not going to change that.

If I want to think about the net total effect of my working career, I'm owed gross consumption for many years. The properly maintained vehicles that left my service departments were measurably cleaner in emissions and burned less fuel.

The engines in my boat are computer controlled common rail diesels that pollute less than 10 home built "high efficiency" boats with backyard marine conversions of junkyard auto engines. Look at the power forum here ... the crap used to power boats should not be allowed. Maybe the government should step in and have corporate fuel/ton/hour targets for boats? How about mandatory annual exhaust emission testing? Vapor recovery systems for fuel tanks? How about regulating the emissions of the building process? Including the manufacture of basics like resins and cloth?

If you think that reducing the fuel burn from 100 liters per hour to 50 liters per hour will have a large net effect on the entire process from design and construction to artificial reef graveyard, you are kidding yourself. Sure it is a highly visible positive result, but really ... total net effect?

I don't burn any more diesel than I have to. I keep the boat "as new" the bottom is as fast as fresh out of the mold or it gets cleaned the next day. I could chose not to use the boat at all and save all that energy so ... so what? So a bunch of nature lovers can load up their SUV (that hasn't been serviced in years, has low tyre pressure and bad wheel alignment) with rotomolded kayaks built in some overseas factory on a coal burning power grid and drive to Mexico to paddle/pedal over to thank my for doing my part?

If people like me don't buy new, more efficient technology there is no reason to develop it. Just because my 20% more efficient means 100 liters per hour instead of 120 ... it is still a 20% reduction in fuel usage. Hell 20 years ago this boat might have had gasoline engines with carburetors and no emission controls or fuel management and burned 175-200 liters per hour at the same speed.

Am I still a Sniveling Dilettante Consumer?

 

Rick, I didn't work in automotive. I spent almost 30 years with "big tobacco". I retired a few years ago. It was a real challenge. 5 majors in the US making essentially hundreds of brands of an almost identical product. Differentiating your products in that environmant was real marketing.

You gotta love those hybrid marketeers too. Notice it's spelled a little differently in the trade. We call 'em marketeers, like those swashbuckling Three Musketeers!

The more I think about it I think that we need a big gas tax in the US. Perhaps we could target a price of $5 US per gallon. When prices are relatively low as they are today the tax would keep prices high and discourage consumption. If and when prices increase the tax could be lowered so that the retail price remained at $5 US. I know the politicians would probably never go for this but think about it. With a stable retail fuel price at least vehicle manufacturers could figure out what to produce. As it is today it seems to me that by the time you can get a product to market the fuel price could go against you (either up or down based on speculation) and demand for whatever you made could evaporate.

regards,

MIA

 

MIA
I don't smoke - but that is a very emotive topic so I will not go there.

I see there is a temporary respite in fuel prices. The emerging economies are recovering faster than almost all analysts predicted 9 months ago.

Iron ore production took a 5 minute hit at the end of 2008 - exporters in Australia had a Christmas break for the first time since production began in the 60's. By the time they got going the demand was gang busters and has stayed that way through the year. Iron ore sales are a very good indicator of economic activity. It is basic and is a leading indicator for higher value commodities.

The producers have expansion plans back on the table. The forecast demand for iron ore is to double over the next five years. It doubled in the 5 years prior to 2008. So in 12 years the production will quadruple. These are volumes I never imagined possible.

On the east coast of Australia we are back to massive ship cues lined up for coal:
ttp://www.dailymercury.com.au/story/2009/06/20/ships-queue-up-for-coal-off-Mackay-ports/
I was told last week the queue was now 92 ships off Mackay. These are not toy ships they will be 150 to 250kt. The terminal mentioned in the link increased capacity by 50% in the last three years and is now considering options to double the capacity over the next 5 years, it is currently rail bound and this is being debottlenecked. These are not piddling volumes by world standards.

Australia has recently made a deal with China to double our LNG gas production to help support their growing demand for that stuff.

All of these commodities that Australia can supply to China increases their capacity to consume oil. It goes to making cars and other energy intensive consumer goods that the more energy intensive economies have used for decades.

Oil is getting harder to get. It is not like iron ore and coal that you can find almost anywhere in Australia by scratching about a bit. There is no ready substitute for oil and it is integral to modern economies.

I doubt if USD5/gallon is far down the track - possibly mid 2010 if things do not take another breather. Maybe a tax that took it to USD10/gallon would be more realistic in terms of what will come - that is probably 3 or 4 years away. I paid AUD1.80/l (or USD6.4/gallon) for diesel in Australia in early 2008. Diesel is currently about USD6/gallon in Europe. A tax now that took it to USD10/gallon might be useful long enough for product planning purposes and more realistic of where it will be in the near future.

What is the USA putting on the table at Copenhagen? There will be extreme international pressure for the high energy intensive economies to pay the rest of the world for their energy indulgences and perceived impact on the globe.

Australia and Europe have had quite high taxes on fuel for years. Generally the economy of the cars you see in the various countries correlates to the level of tax on fuel in the country.

Rick W

 

As someone who doesn't live in a high-rise apartment crammed with bodies, doesn't work from home, doesn't live within walking distance of a supermarket, has no access to public transportation, and spends his off time in a bigger outdoor arena than the local neighborhood park, I tend to resent people who want to balance their solutions to energy consumption on my back.

We can't all be city dwellers. And if it weren't for rural folks who need transportation at a reasonable cost, there would be no cities anyway. Keep that in mind when you start proposing higher gas taxes to punish me for my lifestyle, unless you're volunteering to help me pay them every time I fill up.

 

With all due respect , I don`t think most people would buy that.

Put that wind turbine field aside a " conventional " power station.
Just how carbon neutral are those ? ... after you consider the energy and resources used to build them.

Tally the power produced by either in 5 , 10 , 15 or 50 years .

Then add the fuel that was burned by the conventional power plant , during all those years.
Wind energy industry has a net negative effect ?

Who was this " information " released by ?
Coal , Gas , Oil , lobby ?

 

Randy
My boat is an integral part of my of life and overall well-being. I do not regard it as a waste. You might think I am a waste of space but there are 6.7bn of us and we all have a right to live. I believe my pedal boating is a tremendous overall benefit to my well being. You will not have the opportunity to experience this because your outlook on what is sexy precludes it. I have spent time in small and large high speed and low speed power boats as well as small and large sailing boats so I have a good basis for comparison and know what I am NOT missing out on.

I know there are not many people approaching 60yo who can cover 92km on the water in under 8 hours using their own steam with a little bit of current assist. The time and money I put into boats now is an investment in my future health. It gives me the basis to go on enjoying the pleasure of being on the water for many more years.

I eat slightly higher protein diet when I am trying to put on muscle mass but my weight gets down to about 70kg before I do the Murray Marathon each year. There is no additional food just a slight change in what I eat. Last year I gained 2kg over the 5 days of the race because I was in good condition and was careful to eat well. The first year I did the race I lost 5kg.

On my holidays in October I covered 3000km by car and spent around AUD300 to fuel it. On the boat I do 10kph at 120W and my body is about 25% efficient so you can work out what I burn on the boat. It is not much.

I most often exercise on the boat near home. I fuel my car every couple of months. It is not an energy miser but not too bad. My next car if I get one will be more energy efficient. I do work from home so there is no commute. The home is not air-conditioned but we do have gas heating and gas hot water. All our lighting is modern low wattage.

I expect anyone living in Canada who does not flinch at putting 1000l in a pleasure boat each week will have a bigger energy footprint than me. However I also recognise that my footprint will be many time greater than the average person in China and I need to do better, which I can.

Rick W

 

Wind turbine fields are "sold" as being green and having a positive impact. They do not generate enough energy during their service life to replace the total energy used to build them. IOW if the factories that build wind turbines had to be powered by the wind turbines they produce they would not be able to if the energy used in the construction of the raw materials is also considered. The total energy out is no greater than the energy used to create transport and install the units.

The number that gets quoted by Wind Turbine manufactures is 6-7 months to recover the energy use to build it. Fine print says at rated output. Turbine don't "start" until 10 MPH or so, reach maximum output at around 33 MPH and shut down at 50 MPH. How long to get 6-7 months of 33 MPH wind? So more like several years to recover only the energy the factory used. Then add the energy used to manufacture the materials, the cost of the infrastructure to tie the turbines into the power grid and to transport and install the units and you are close to no return during the service life of the unit.

Then add the fact that the power grid must have reserve capacity limits the total usage of wind to about 10% of the total. A good grid can compensate for the loss of 10% capacity by bringing more reliable sources on line, like a coal or oil fired plant. When you go to 20% of the grid from wind you have to build more coal, oil, or nuclear plants to be spinning reserves for when the wind fields are not producing.

Nuclear plants make sense to me. In China, now with eleven operating reactors producing 1.2% of the total electricity produced, the country is well into the next phase of its nuclear power program. Some 22 reactors are either under construction or likely to be so by the end of 2009. Another 27 units are planned, with construction due to start within three years. China aims at least to quadruple its nuclear capacity from that operating and under construction by 2020.

What effect will a boat designer saying no have? Recreational use of fuel for boating is not like a major part of the total fuel used in any country I know of. Sure do you part and buy/use the most fuel efficient vehicles that meet your needs. Just don't pretend that boat designers can have a large impact by saying no to clients.

 

Yes could be right.

Like I said before add those costs to a " normal " fuel burning plant .
Any less you think ? I think MORE !

Yes , granted, wind would need support from other more reliable sources.

We have excellent sites here in Australia for wind power that would make your numbers for wind output look lame.
Unfortunately this is not necessarily the case everywhere.

Absolutely.!!!

The French realized that decades ago and actually did something about it.

Not much.

 

Rick - exactly what is it about your well-being that makes it more important than the rest of us? You don't think that that is the way we all feel about our boats?
It's a well-known statistical fact that people who are happily married live longer. The deduction being that with happiness comes health. If I were unable to go boating on a regular basis, I'd be far from a happy camper. Ipso facto it is good for my health.
Of course, one could justifyably argue that we should all stop boating, thereby shortening our lives and start doing something about over-population!

May I now suggest that we end this completely off-toppic debate and return to the question at hand....

 

I hate to break the news to you but there is no such thing as a green car, or

a green boat, or a green moped, or a green clothes dryer, or green

clothes, or a green bicycle, they are all just baby steps in the real direction

we need to go and here in the "new world" it just isn't going to happen until

there is a real, tangible, threatening motivation to make it so.

"Necessity is the mother of invention."

Listen to yourselves, "I'm doing this and I'm doing that, and I'm doing it

better than your doing it, and I can justify this and I can justify that."

It's all just a drop in the bucket. We need change big time.

US$1000/barrel oil might do it. US$2000/barrel might do it.

An interplanetary war might do it. Or, we can just keep marketing

"Green" products and basically do nothing but make ourselves feel like

we're making these huge sacrifices.

We have got to be the stupidiest species on the planet.

Are we blessed or cursed with the ability to reason?

-Tom

 

Sounds like you have found a passion that stimulates both body and soul. Good on you for that.

When I was in your neck of the world to do some sailing in the Whitsundays I happened to catch a show about a family and their energy foot print. I thought it was taken to an extreme. I'm not shutting down the filter system in the pool to make up for the fuel used on an airplane flight ... the plane was flying whether I was on it or not.

Are you aware of the heath implications of modern low wattage lighting? BBC did a nice bit on that in the last year ... in Canada we are being forced to change to the low wattage bulbs and no consideration was made to the added load on the health care system.

I agree that we can all find ways to use less energy. The degree of lifestyle change we will accept to do that is a personal matter. I can see your point of view, but I don't see how comparing your energy usage to that of someone in China has any relevance. The north american economy relies on low fuel cost. There are simply no alternatives for many. Public transit is just not an option in many places. Working from home is not an option for most. Being able afford a newer car that uses less fuel is not an option for many until they are available in the used market ... in the case of hybrids ... what value with they have after 10 years and need a battery that costs $3000 today? How many years of driving your pattern would it take for a new hybrid to pay for cost of upgrading in fuel and maintenance savings?

I'm sure you will love this next bit of rationalization ... I'm planning to use the boat to commute from BC to Mexico every year. 2500 nm at about 3-4 liters per mile. 5000-10000 liters each way so 10000-20000 liters per year. Cost to ship the boat is $18,000 USD each way so running the boat on her own bottom is cost effective compared to shipping plus airfare for me. Fuel would have to be over $2 per liter to make the shipping option cost effective. Not mention that fact that I get to enjoy 10-20 days on the water each trip.

This planned usage was considered when we checked off the Zeus Drive option that saves 20% on the fuel bill. The weather patterns on the west coast of north america makes the ability to make 23-25 knot dashes between fuel stops a high value feature to me. It minimizes potential exposure to bad weather, an option that would not be available in a 8 knot more fuel efficient trawler type. Since the run north in June is the beginning of hurricane season we need to make time from Mexico up the coast. In the Fall we have to get out of BC in the first part of September to avoid the onset of the winter gale pattern, but don't want to leave San Diego before November first ... so a six week cruise south with many days at anchor or in marinas. The boat has to be comfortable both at sea and at anchor. I don't think that an icemaker, washer/dryer, AC, and a big genset to run them is extravagant in the least. My days of boat camping are long gone.

If at some point in time we expect every human on the planet to have comparatively equal standards of living, what will that standard be? Is it possible to bring those with lower standards of living up to the current average? Is it more likely that some will have to lower their standard of living to reach equality? Will those that have now, give it up so that those don't have can share? Is it more likely that higher standards of living will be forced lower perhaps through economic pressures. Will these changes effect the less than 20% of the population that control over 80% of the wealth and resources? Will it become a 5% wealthy baron 95% serf world economy? 2% and 98%? ... will equality mean that there will more boat owners or fewer boat owners?

Just where does a boat designer saying no fit into this?

I'm going to be around for 30 more years if I'm lucky. I've done just about all the stuff I've wanted to do while I was young and fit enough to do them. Each day is a gift that I'm not owed. I'm not going to make a project out of trying make the tomorrows better, I'm wringing out as much pleasure out of every today that I can manage. Right now burning diesel does not seem like all that big a deal. I can't take it with me, so I'm spreading the wealth on a personal level day by day. Is that so bad?

 

I am sorry to heavily insist, but the only thing that are stubborn are the facts.



What have earned the SEATEC guys who initially invested for building this :
http://www.nigelirens.com/ldl/yachts-product.php?id=15&idcat=1

I recall that this is in a country where dock fuel price is around 7$/gal.

Now, where is the boat ? see here :
http://www.xboat.fr/910-RANGE BOAT TRAWLER.html
http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2006/Seatec-Trawler-Rangeboat-1713597/France

Translation 224500€ without taxes makes 270 000€ with french taxes.

The boat has been built in 2006. It is for sale in "new" condition, with 10 hours on the engine. (engine validation only). No navigation electronics.
The fact that it can be sold wthout taxes means it had never been privately owned. Without navigation electronics,I doubt it has ever been used as a demo boat.

It may be an efficient fuel burner , but it is a catastrophical thing for bringing a living to the yard that built it. It eventually led the yard to bankrupcy. and that probably is the legal waiting for bankrupcy that led a 2006 boat on sale now in new condition with only 10 validation hours on the engine.

Side note : this ad is existing since at least 4 monthes.

 

fc...

With all due respect, I sense that you spend a decent amount of time considering limitations, rather than the potential. If you look at my posts, you will see that I have never said that a designer should say no to his clients and I have never advocated the business of totally dropping all work in the current mode of design.

Please understand that the conversation's main point is not like a light switch that is either full on, or full off, with nothing in between. It's about recognizing that realities are going to catch-up to existing design/build thinking and sooner, or later, a change will be forced, rather than willingly embraced.

What I have said is designers and boat builders do have a potential to effect a sea change in existing thought as to how to make a difference. By contrast, some others here are continuously advocating a do nothing approach as a suitable solution. Doing nothing in the face of the obvious is not a solution.

If the home next door to yours were on fire and the wind was blowing in your direction, would this same do nothing approach really be your answer when the fire department arrived? Or, would you then become an advocate for action in order to protect that which you hold dear?

Perhaps you feel that fossil fuels have an infinite potential on this planet and the do nothing approach is perfectly reasonable considering that we will never run out of the commodity? A simple few minutes spent on Google would, hopefully, convince you otherwise about this perceived, never ending future life span of existing fossil fuels. They will run out and we will have to develop a whole series of alternate energy sources if we want this industry of ours to continue. That handwriting is already on the wall.

By continuing to post about an initial failure of a fuel-efficient design, you are functionally signing away your ability to reasonably effect change. I'd like to encourage you to work, instead, on possible answers that take the lessons of the cited example and work towards a more functional set of solutions. Dismissing an argument, when you know it has a solid foundation is not moving in the right direction.

Now, here's the real kicker in the whole argument.... The recreational boating industry, as we know it right now, is shrinking every year. Shrinking and not expanding. There are myriad reasons this is so, but one of them that is routinely mentioned in every survey I have ever seen about the industry is this: The costs to buy, maintain, and operate these recreational craft have grown to the point where they exceed the available disposable income of those who would otherwise find themselves engaged in the sport.

The raw truth is that we are likely not going back to the grand old days of being able to throw hundreds of gallons of fuel away on a flashy, waterborne weekend with friends. When this recession does turn around... (?) there will be even larger competition for the available fuel resources than there was before the existing downturn in recreational spending. More competition than before for a finite resource means higher costs for fuel and there's no way to get around that reality.

When you factor the oft quoted survey statement shown above about higher prices pushing recreationalists out of the market, you get a dead, or near dead, industry that twiddled its thumbs while their customers went elsewhere with their interests. Personally, I'd much rather be at the front end of a paradigm shift than trying desperately to play catch-up.

The do-nothing guys may actually be doing me a favor as a business model fulfillment. By refusing to acknowledge that which is in front of them, they are actually creating a much larger potential for my design work, while they are left out in the cold. Seriously, I should probably just stop posting on this and further the distance between myself and the prevailing unwillingness and lack of knowledge on the topic. I'll be miles ahead in the ways that count the most.

 

That's it, just ignore my input and keep dodging the real issues.

Keep talking and you'll all feel better while the planet goes to ****.

-Tom

 

It's lonely out there in front of the pack, isn't it?

Seriously, I believe the sort of design philosophy you're advocating is becoming a respected and integral part of the boating landscape. But it isn't going to replace or absorb everything and everyone else, any more than hybrid vehicles like the Prius have sent pickup trucks, sports cars, limousines and minivans into oblivion. Customers will always have different wants, different needs, and different budgets.

'Boating landscape.' Hmmm. Something not quite right about that.....boating marinescape, maybe?

By the way, I've always believed the distinctive styling of the Prius was designed to feed the hubris of the people who buy them. It isn't enough for them just to know in their hearts they're doing something good for the environment....in return for what those cars are costing them, they damn well want the rest of the world to know they're doing it.