New propulsion sytems for ships

[Guillermo]

Originally Posted by Vega

... the wave energy park will be installed this summer in Póvoa do Varzim ....

Thanks for the info Paulo. Although I'm not an expert in waves energy production I had the opportunity to have a closer look at it last year, as I was visited by an spanish company developing a new system looking for advise on anchoring and floatation problems. Searching for info I came to knew about the Pelamis and the Portuguese location. Most interesting. We could even think of 'snake ships' carrying bulk materials one continent to another just taking energy from waves...

[Guillermo]

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

GREEN PAPER
Towards a future Maritime Policy for the Union: A European vision for the oceans and seas
"....European coastal waters posses many opportunities for offshore renewable energy installations. Offshore wind, ocean currents, waves and tidal movements carry a vast amount of energy. Commission projections are that wind power could generate 70,000 MW by 2010, including 14,000 MW offshore. Other emerging technologies include wave energy devices and tidal current turbines that can be deployed on the shoreline and offshore. In all these cases, competition with other users of coastal waters such as shipping or fisheries is possible, while the needs of the local population have to be respected. This will increase the need for spatial planning as called for in Chapter IV.
As easily accessible offshore oil and gas resources get depleted and producers start considering less accessible reserves, such as the deep sea, a number of questions arise: what could be done to facilitate exploitation of such resources without compromising environmental and economic concerns, what new technologies are necessary to reach such resources and what innovative business models and regulations would be appropriate in this context?
Energy consumption in the transport sector experiences the fastest growth in the EU, but there is potential for energy savings. First, a shift from road transport to shipping can contribute to these savings, because of the relatively low energy consumption of shipping per ton of goods transported. Secondly, shipping could contribute to energy efficiency gains, e.g. through the use of wind and solar energy and biofuels.
Another emerging area is methane hydrates. The present estimate of this resource is around 10,000 Gt carbon equivalent, which amounts to as much as all other fossil fuel resources combined. This form of energy could help diversify sources of supply and releases less CO2 into the atmosphere than oil or coal per unit of energy obtained. Its exploitation, however, presents major technical challenges in terms of collection, conditioning, transport and conversion to commercial methane gas.
Europe is leading the search for methane hydrates and research into the risks and consequences of their accidental release, which could seriously contribute to the greenhouse effect.The sea transport of energy, by pipelines or tankers, creates both economic opportunities and raises concerns from the perspective of safety and potential environmental impacts of accidents. These could be addressed in guidelines for a dedicated Trans-European Network (TEN) for hydrocarbons, covering all infrastructure elements...."

From the Waterborne Technical Platform:
"...Deep sea, short sea and inland waterway, the three areas of activities of waterborne transport cover a multitude of types of markets requiring dedicated ships, landside infrastructures, supporting operational services and systems, as well as maintenance of vehicles and equipment.
A non-exhaustive summary of types of ships and services includes: large volume dry bulk; liquid bulk and gas, conventional cargo, containerised cargo, specialised cargos (e.g. temperature controlled and heavy lift), passenger ro-ro ferry, ro-ro cargo ferries, passenger ferries and cruise ships, short sea shipping, sea river shipping, to-wage, icebreaking, dredging and infrastructure support, offshore supply and so on. The demand for quality ships and installations throughout their entire life cycle is involving designers, yards, equipment manufacturers and other suppliers."

More at: http://www.waterborne-tp.org/

[Guillermo]

I have had not time, neither the patience, to translate the conclusions document on the Vigo conference on new propulsion systems for fishing vessels.

Just not to make the wait any longer, here some of the ideas I got:

- The energy problem in the fishing sector is particularly concerning, because it has more difficulties to transmit the increases in costs towards the customers.
- The fishing fleets are very different in size and fishing methods, this making energy and propulsion requirements very variable.
- Fishing fleets tipology and available solutions have to be well studied (is already being done) before going into the choosing and applying of such solutions.
- An horizon of at least 3 years is needed to the better understanding of the problem.
- Several entities and authorities are commited to this studies at this moment in Spain. A better coordination is needed not to duplicate efforts, although the process of getting EU fundings (R+D+i) stablishes by itself a filter to that end.
- In all investigation programs the fishing vessels' owners associations have to be (and are) deeply involved from the very beginning.
- The adoption of alternative energies and propulsion systems has not a simple or unique solution.
- There are not 'magical' recipes, able to globally solve the problem at this moment.
- Some alternative energies are already under study, as is the case of LPG and LNG in Puerto Celeiro.
- Future seems to be not so dark, because the high oil prices and enviromental concerns are bringing a very wide array of possible solutions developed the world around.
- But this same wide array brings complexity to the finding of the proper solutions, from the point of view of technical and economical feasibility.


Some actions:

- The adoption, in the short term, of heavy fuels to substitute diesel-oil (50% cheaper), may be only feasible for a very short number of the biggest fishing vessels, requires big investments, and seems not to be the way to go, due to the enviromental issues.
- Diesel-electric may already bring interesting fuel savings, depending on the types of vessels, and is specially interesting for fleets to which this system also brings the added values of less vibrations and noises and better propulsion control, relevant to more efficient fishing operations (tuna, etc). It seems also very desirable from the point of view of the crews' working conditions for all kind of vessels, reducing stress. Payback of the extra investment costs is around 4-5 years for a well supported decission.
- A program to develope more efficient propellers and improving the efficiency of actual old engines for existing fleets is under development, under the 'Superprop' project.
- Authomated Kites, with easy button control not only for sailing but also for the releasing-recovering maneouvres, seem to be a very interesting inmediate alternative for certain fisheries. Prototypes should be tested in operating conditions as soon as possible.
- More efficient hull forms have to be encouraged, abandoning the tendency to bulky forms actually used in some of the cramped coastal fishing boats. This has to be carefully evaluated, as length (the main parameter to consider) is the most expensive, from the point of view of construction.
- As said before, LPG and LNG are already being tested as alternative fuels for existing units.
- Bios do not seem to be a short term solution, due to the high price (yet) and low availability (low production).
- Fuel Cells and other systems seem to be too far away in the horizon.

[FAST FRED]

"First, a shift from road transport to shipping can contribute to these savings, because of the relatively low energy consumption of shipping per ton of goods transported."

The problem here is the companys use of "just in time" supply chain.

As the tax extractors frequently tax inventory , the companys response is to have NONE.

So parts get unloaded from a truck , and get used almost instantly .The factorys output is shipped hourly , or at least daily.

A boat delivery system is usually 10X slower than a truck , many times 30X , so warehouses would need to be rebuilt , and the price of anything would go up as the TAX EXTRACTORS would get a shot at the inventory, as well as the added staff , and handeling.

Using the cheapest delivery system may not be the efficent way to compete .

FAST FRED

[SeaSpark]

Nice to hear the people in the Vigo conference consider kite power a serious alternative.

Kite power is one of the fields were huge improvements can be made on a relatively low budget. Thinking about automated kite systems the name Robosail popped up http://www.robosail.com/ . Many of the systems needed to build an automated kite are already present on the boat they have build. Software could be adapted to handle a kite instead of sails (or both perhaps on a yacht).

Seriously think people developing a automated kite should contact this firm.

[Guillermo]

One of the presentations in Vigo was the european project SUPERPROP for fishing and tug boats, aiming to reduce fuel compsumption in existing units by means of systematic updating of the propulsive (propeller and stern area) system to the new optimum working point.

More info at: http://canal.etsin.upm.es/superprop/...escription.htm

[Guillermo]

Interesting paper on ducted propulsors with stereeable outflow using smart materials technology:
http://www.continuum-dynamics.com/re...tductpaper.pdf
Also usable for hydrofoils....

[Kiteship]

Originally Posted by marshmat

I don't like seeing politics here but I think it's necessary to correct this statistic.
The probability of losing a shuttle orbiter with all crew is approximately 1.7 % on any given flight. (Two shuttles have been lost in ~114 flights.) This is in a total of ~1040 days of flying. So a loss of seven crew every 520 days of flight time, on average.
The probability of an incident in your car depends mostly on your driving skill. But driver error aside, the probability of a mechanical failure in your car causing seven deaths is a lot less than once in 520 days. Say you drive 2 hours a day, every day- the car-crash equivalent to the Shuttle's track record would thus be your car killing 7 people once in 17 years. Do the math.
Keep in mind that roughly 9 in 10 car crashes are due to a bad decision on the part of one or more drivers and not to failure of the vehicle itself. Driver error is not a factor in spaceflight as all spacecraft are fully automated, or very nearly so, during launch and reentry.

Ah then. You are playing Fun With Statistics. It's one of my favorite games, and is best played with tiny data sets. Re; the space shuttle, the first what, 80 flights were flawless, leading us to conclude that the loss probability is zero--always a good number, and far, far safer than driving. ;-)

Compare all the people killed in the US space program with all the people killed in the US Air Force program (exclude combat), adjust for time (no manned space flight <1949 or so) adjust again for total personnel involved in both industries. Adjust for total miles travelled if you wish. ;-) Be sure to include all training deaths, all test flight deaths, all deaths (and injuries) from civilian contractors supporting both industries.

Now, please tell me which is safer? And which gets the bad rap?

Dave

[SeaSpark]

Great find Guillermo!

Have been thinking about smart or "morphing" material applications in boatbuilding for a long time. This is the first practical (if we can call it practical in this stage of development) application i have seen.

See my "morphing foil" concept thread:

Morphing foils concept

I know it was a kind of daft idea, posted it to make people think more about these materials.

[Kiteship]

Originally Posted by SeaSpark

Nice to hear the people in the Vigo conference consider kite power a serious alternative.

Kite power is one of the fields were huge improvements can be made on a relatively low budget. Thinking about automated kite systems the name Robosail popped up http://www.robosail.com/ . Many of the systems needed to build an automated kite are already present on the boat they have build. Software could be adapted to handle a kite instead of sails (or both perhaps on a yacht).

Seriously think people developing a automated kite should contact this firm.

We have followed Robosail for many years and think their expertrise is great. As with many new technologies, their plans outstrip their accomplishments, but they are very smart people and I wish them well. If they can develop systems appropriate, we will certainly employ their technology--or others much like it.

Flying kites under computer control does not require any new technological breakthroughs--it is more a matter of "industrializing" control systems already very advanced for modern UAVs, winching systems already far advanced for the fishing and cargo handling businesses, etc. The real challenges are in building such systems simple, robust, inexpensive--and completely safe.

In the meantime we have been developing statistics for kite power, compared to other forms of power generation--including land-based things like wind and solar, but more importantly, compared to shipboard power generation. We find that we can generate power--expressed as thrust over time applied to the ship (in other words, after all propeller and other efficiency losses in conventional ships, expressed as KwH), including all costs of purchase, maintenance, crew load and cost of money, at between 70-80% less than current fuel-fired solutions. We also see installation costs, on a per-kilowatt basis, often 90% lower than wind or solar on land, and 30-50% or more lower than marine diesels--who's cost of producing each kilowatt of thrust is simultaneously the highest of all--often more than $0.25/kw.

These savings are due to two things: Sailing's inherently higher efficiency over other forms of alternate energy (there is no efficiency robbing conversion of energy with sails--we apply the momentum of wind directly to the momentum of the ship), and to kite's extremely simple retrofit (and new build) capabilities. Taken together, they mean we can use smaller, simpler installs, with faster payback ratios--sometimes much faster. I don't need to point out, I suppose, that other forms of alternative energy production are largely unusable aboard ship--it's theoretically possible to mount a wind turbine on a ship--or a deckload of solar panels--but no one is seriously considering either of these. Wave power is certainly possible, but we have yet to even see projections for production costs aboard ship, let alone pilot systems.

This leaves aside, of course, all the environmental reasons to consider shutting down (or reducing revs) on marine engines wherever possible.

Regarding Fast Fred's comments on shipping costs and time-in-transit. I fully agree. And yet, shippers *are* shifting from trucks to ships, and the trend is expected to continue.

Cheers,

Dave
www.kiteship.com

[SeaSpark]

Dave,

Congaratulations with your new site. It really stands out, the clear graphic design has managed to display lots of information in one page. The marketing language may be a bit strong to European taste but think it will suit the American market.

The availability of a kiteship thong hopefully is a sign of short term market acceptance of kites for ship propulsion.

Robosail has lots of experience in developing software for controlling a yacht at sea. They have done much of their work in collaboration with universities. Perhaps they can help cutting the costs of developing software for kite specific use. Especially when universities from more than one country collaborate funding research in this area should not be a big problem.

[Kiteship]

Originally Posted by SeaSpark

Dave,

Congaratulations with your new site. It really stands out, the clear graphic design has managed to display lots of information in one page. The marketing language may be a bit strong to European taste but think it will suit the American market.

The availability of a kiteship thong hopefully is a sign of short term market acceptance of kites for ship propulsion.

Robosail has lots of experience in developing software for controlling a yacht at sea. They have done much of their work in colaboration with universities. Perhaps they can help cutting the costs of developing software for kite specific use. Especially when universities from more than one country collaborate funding research in this area should not be a big problem.

All you say is true, Spark; I will speak with the Robosail guys. Thanks for the kudos. The thong has a story (don't these things always?): A yachting customer was bragging to his wife that our product worked so well, he'd like to advertise it. She said something to the effect, "Yeah, how are you going to do that? Buy a billboard? More like a thong, maybe." So, in all sincerity, they asked me to provide a thong with advertising on it--thinking such a thing impossible, of course. Well, I live in California, where *nothing* is impossible, so I sent one the next day.

Frankly, I forgot it is still on the Cafepress page... Should I leave it there? ;-)

Dave

[Kiteship]

Originally Posted by SeaSpark

Great find Guillermo!

Have been thinking about smart or "morphing" material applications in boatbuilding for a long time. This is the first practical (if we can call it practical in this stage of development) application i have seen.

See my "morphing foil" concept thread:

Morphing foils concept

I know it was a kind of daft idea, posted it to make people think more about these materials.

Morphing wings are already becoming a reality in military aircraft. Plus, these are relatively easy to do, with inflated wings. For that matter, kites are beginning to use morphing wings, which change not only their AoA but also their profile, at various places along their span, under the pilot's control. By using sophisticated bridles, much is possible.

For that matter, wasn't the Wright Brothers' wing-warping scheme a form of wing morphing?

[Kiteship]

Originally Posted by Guillermo

- Authomated Kites, with easy button control not only for sailing but also for the releasing-recovering maneouvres, seem to be a very interesting inmediate alternative for certain fisheries. Prototypes should be tested in operating conditions as soon as possible.
- More efficient hull forms have to be encouraged, abandoning the tendency to bulky forms actually used in some of the cramped coastal fishing boats. This has to be carefully evaluated, as length (the main parameter to consider) is the most expensive, from the point of view of construction.

Very exciting to hear that kites are being seriously considered, Guillermo. Can you direct me to a URL where I can direct investors? What else can I offer to do? I would love to become involved in your operation. Please contact me or my CEO, Jeremy Walker about this: jeremy@kiteship.com

Many years ago I worked in the offshore albacore jigging fishery. We competed mainly against Japanese boats, in the mid-Pacific. These boats were 30-50% longer than ours, used smaller midship sections, very similar power and were 20-30% faster than we (which translates either as faster to market--or considerably better fuel mileage). They also were a bit heavier, meaning they could carry both more fuel and more fish than we could. We spoke to several skippers, and these boats were only a very little bit more expensive to build than ours--about the same proportion as their increased displacement. (Think about it; if they could use similar power, and were simuilar displacement, the difference is only a bit of steel)

So I guess I don't understand your statement about length being a major issue in construction? Length is expensive when paying for slip space, but if the boat is moored, or docked stern-to, this is not an issue. Even if it were more expensive, in this day and age, an increase in fuel mileage of 20-30% pays for a lot of dock space, methinks...

I have long wondered about American (and European) fishboat hull design. Hulls seem to be maximized for the shortest length possible. Good idea, 20-30 years ago. Today, fuel efficiency and engine size seem so much more important.

(And, yes, a "slipperier" hull is better for kites, too!)

Dave

[Guillermo]

From the other thread:

Originally Posted by SeaSpark

The first application of morphing materials could be in the aft sections of a conventional hull....The hull shape could be optimized for upwind/downwind performance or for displacement/planing mode. The last could also work for power boats...

I think boating future will evolve this way, not only for propulsion purposes, but also for may others, as varying form stability when needed, etc. Exciting idea.

Originally Posted by Kiteship

..I don't understand your statement about length being a major issue in construction..

It's a general statement which may be not true for some particular cases, but you know....Generally speaking, for an specific fishing ship project, increasing beam or draught uses to be less expensive than increasing length; first of all because increases in beam or draft use to be small compared with length increases. That's one of the reasons why certain fishing vessels became fuller and shorter these last decades. Power was cheap! But, as you say, with actual fuel prices, tendency may invert and slenderer hulls are becoming to be considered again.

Originally Posted by Kiteship

...Very exciting to hear that kites are being seriously considered..

Guys from SkySails seem to be quite advanced in the solving of launch-recovery problems, as well as kite flight controlling. I've had the opportunity to see some most interesting info from their very last tests on a 50 m long vessel.
They even went already into commercial applications. See their News