In 1980, a good solar panel could not even convert 8% of the solar energy to electricity. When we started the Sustainable Yacht project in 2010 , the best solar panel available on the market could reach 20%. Three years later, we could install solar panels on the Sustainable Yacht ‘Ya’ doing just over 20%.
And the more panels will be on the market, the faster the developments go.
Faster and faster
Doing a mere 20% in 2010, in 2020, there were solar panels developed converting over 30%. A 10% increase!
In 2023 a Chinese factory developed panels with a 39% efficiency. They do that with a beautiful trick: they use two layers. The top layer consists of a special material, called Perovskite. that layer takes about 10% and that is not much, but it is transparant especially for infra red radiation. Under these transparant cells there are the regular cells as we know them, and they are especially sensitive for infra red. It leads to a total solar to electricity conversion of 39%!
They call it the heterojunction cell or simply tandem cell.
The cell to the right has two layers. The first (with Perovskite) converts solar rays to electricity and it lets the Infra Red go through. The second layer converts these rays to electricity. Such solar panel is also called a tandem panel. (Source US DOE)
Within the same year, German researchers even tipped the 39.9%. The pace of the development increases.
But, take all these new developments with a grain of salt. Donot wait for it to put on your roof. It can take decades before an innovation will find their place on the market. If they will anyway. For example, the Perovskite panels work only on critical Oxigen and water conditions. Especially these conditions are hard to maintain on a durable, sustainable basis, for on your roof, or on a ship. So perhaps these panels will only be used for outer space programmes?
A more versatile deployment, a faster growing market
Nowadays, many people and companies put solar panels on their roofs. Because we like to use that left over surface to make some energy, some money.
But we see smarter solutions. Architects start playing with it. They are designing facades of buildings with transparant solar panels. When in the office, you have a pleasant light in stead of a torching sun trying to cook the workers heads.
Next to climate solutions, solar panels also give a building a ‘face’.
We also see this on boats. More and more biminitops are made from solar panels. Because, why not using this shadow maker also as an energy catcher?
All new deployments enlarge the solar energy market. It makes the development increasing faster and faster.
The key philosophy of living and sailing Sustainable Yacht ‘Ya’ is to use only what you need. So, if you like to sail, then sail and don’t use the engine. Or, if you need a cup of tea, just heat water for a cup of tea and not a full kettle. That kind of things.
But, we also check for efficiency. How efficient are the electric engines? The propellers? All devices are checked upon this matter. On board these efficiency measures help a lot.
All efficiency measures help us to stay fossil free on board, However, efficiency measures don’t appear to help society. For example, isn’t it remarkable that in 1975 we drove our middle class Volkswagen doing about 6.5 liter per 100 km (1 ltr to 15 km) and 30 years later a middle class Volkswagen is doing the same?
How come? Does energy efficiency not work? Despite all the energy efficiencies on the engine, the tyres, all mechanic parts?
The 1973 Volkswagen Beetle consumed 6.5 liter per 100 km. Despite all efficiency measures, the middle-class car 30 years later, here the Volkswagen Golf, uses the same.
The answer lies in the Jevons Paradox.
The Jevons Paradox
We go back into the 19th century, when England’s industry was growing fast. Thus the coal reserves in England slowly decreased. So, solutions began to be introduced that would allow coal to be used more efficiently. As coal consumption became more efficient, coal reserves were depleted more quickly, not more slowly. How is that possible?
In 1865, British economist William Stanley Jevons wrote a book explaining that greater efficiency leads to lower operating costs. This encourages people to consume more instead of less. Jevons concluded that, in our current economic system, greater efficiency does not lead to lower but to higher consumption.
James Watt’s steam machine (left) entered the industry end of the 18th century. A century later, he first steam turbine saw light and was more than a tenfold more efficient. (source: Wikimedia commons, Sandstein https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Sandstein ).
Back to the example of the middle-class car. Around 1970, the middle-class people could afford a Volkswagen Beetle. The car companies were improving their new models, such as the Volkswagen Golf and they became more and more efficient. They could make more profit. Also the wages increased each year. They could lower the price a bit. Not in absolute numbers, but relatively. More people could consume more, so more cars were sold. The efficiency measures encouraged the companies to design bigger and faster models, and with more luxuries. The efficiency measures taken, did not create less, but more consumption of fossil fuels. Thus, the expected environmental ‘profit’ has turned into an environmental loss.
You see the same Jevons paradox in the yachting industry. The leftboat is from 1970 and has cost 3 times a middle-class income. The boat tot the right has two times more volume, is faster and also costs 3 times a middle-class income.
Use only what you need
Conclusion is, if we improve the efficiency in a market, the economy and financial mechanism dictates. If we choose for ourselves, we dictate.
The best answer is to consider for yourself how much you need. Do you need that bigger model? That big house? That lot of water in the kettle? That much engine hours when you originally wanted to sail?
Or are your real values to spend time with your family, no matter in what sort of car?
The market shows, that most people are driven by all the impulses one continuously gets through advertising on your phone or your laptop.
You can choose to reduce these impulses, by using Facebook or Instagram less, use Signal instead of Whatsapp, and use DuckDuckGo instead of Google. OK, Mr. Zuckerberg and the other multi billionaires will not be happy, but they don’t have a money problem in the first place. But you get a fair chance to really use what you need.
There are many innovations in the solar industry, but only some reach the market and are spread. And, will they get interesting for boats? Some years ago a new flexible and thin solar panel seems to stand up. It is often called CIGS (Copper Indium Gallium Selenide) thin film panels. They were originally developed for roofs. But, skippers, yacht owners (and people with flat roofs), attention here! The efficiency of CIGS solar panels has improved!
Yachts normally have limited space for solar panels. So in general the most efficient panel (20+%) is used. Sinoltech http://sinoltech.com/eproducts/?id=8 now delivers thin film CIGS panels with a rated maximum efficiency of 16.5%. This lesser efficiency could be beaten by the great property of CIGS that it doesnot loose much yield when there are little shadows of lines or other rigging, because the latter panels are hardly sensitive to some shadow here and there.
Anti-skid
The regular silicon PV deckpanels are covered with an anti-skid layer. The CGIS panels have no anti-skid and can be slippery. Especially on a monohull yacht, easily heeling 20 degrees, precautions should be made.
The saloon deck of a monohull yacht can be covered with deck panels. The current silicium based panels here, are covered with anti-skid. They are sensitive to a bit of shadow and they are costly. So many skippers are reluctant to buy them. What about gluing a light, flexible alternative on the deck?
According to the CE standard the deck should have every 7-10 cm an anti-slip profile. Will we put that standard also on existing yachts? Then we first evaluate the situation.
The CGIS panels will be mounted on the saloon deck. This deck is not often used to walk on. It will only be used close to the mast, or, in case of setting a reef, a short time at the aft of the saloon deck. These areas will not be covered with panels.
Nevertheless, also in the ‘dead’ area, when a crew member will only be standing by exception, we should create some anti-skid. Therefore, there will be put 20 mm anti-skid tape over the full length of the CIGS panel.
The question
This panel is 345 cm wide, so the maximum space between two anti skid areas will be 16 cm. The effective width of the panel is 31 cm. So the 2 cm coverage would result in a 6.5% less effective surface.
In this field test we will find out.
The main question is:
How much loss will a 20 mm coverage over the full length of the panel create?
More specific:
Will this coverage lower the yield of the panel seriously?
Will this coverage lower much more than the 6.5% effective surface coverage?
Are there any other side effects?
Field test
For this field test four older panels of the catamaran SV Alcazar are used. They are 108 X 34 cm, with an effective PV surface of 96 X 31 cm. They are rated 200 Watt in total, but “They are a bit abused perhaps”, skipper Jack commented.
The MPPT is the Victron Smart Solar. The input from the panels is in the 48 volt range, the output is in the 12 volt.
The battery used is a 12.8 Volt (nominal) LFPO4 battery of 100 Ah. At the start the battery was 12.7 V, at the end of the test 13 Volt.
In stead of a 20 mm tape, pieces of wood are used, This way it was possible to make the measurements ‘before’ and ‘after’ the coverage within 10 seconds. Nevertheless, when the cloud passes before the sun, also these 10 seconds can be long and make a good comparison impossible. In these cases the measurement was postponed untill the cloud situation was more stable. This explains the differences in the periods between the measurements.
The test is made in Panamarina, Panama. So in the tropics. The date was February 10, so in the dry season.
The set up seen from two sides, with and without the coverage. For the test 4 older panels of 50 Watt each are used, a Victron MPPT and an LFP battery.
The total duration of the test was 2 ½ hours, from 10 to the astronomical noontime. 10 o’clock is perhaps early to begin, especially in the tropics, because in the morning there is normally much overcast. Important is the moment that the sun starts ‘burning away’ this overcast. The test is continued till 12:30, when the sun makes the smallest angle. That is on 12:30 Panamanian time (Panama follows the EST). Now in February the sun will not come to the zenith, the declination is a bit more than 10 degrees at noontime.
We will see that the 10 degrees angle doesnot matter mucht. The 30 degrees angle is of importance, when the sun is strong enough to clear the clouds.
Here under you find the table with the test results.
The table shows a regular pattern, only the 11:33 result deviates.
Some remarks
Generally the sun gets strong when the angle is about 30 degrees. Compared to 10 degrees, the loss in the yield caused by its angle is geometrically less than 15%. Of more importance, from 30 degrees and less, the heavy tropical clouds clear up more and more, so that improves the yield significantly. This is at 11:20-11:25. Based on my personal experience, most clouds are usually cleared before 11 o’clock. It was just this day that the overcast was heavy.
The panels are older, a bit damaged, so they don’t deliver the rated 200 Watt, on the other hand, the four panels are set in serial and deliver in the 48 Volt range.With that high voltages, I guess that there won’t be any loss from the MPPT. Losses an MPPT could have when the panels would be 12 volt So perhaps the numbers are a bit higher.
The panels get hot, once even to about 60 degrees Celsius, so too hot to walk on it with bare feet.
The measurement of 11:33 deviates strongly from the other ones in the results with a large yield. A false measerement? If we donot count this measurement, the overall percentage would be 6.93 %.
Outline and conclusion
The graphics above present already:
When covering the panel with 20 mm tape over it’s full length, the loss will probably be 7%, and most negatively be between 7 and 8 procent.
When the sun’s angle on the surface is 30 degrees and less and (subsequently) the clouds disappear, the yield is booming and the percentage of the loss is bit smaller.
The older (“abused”) panels give lower yield than rated. And, probably the 48 Volt PV feed to the MPPT could give a bit positive influence to the yield. But these both systemic biases are not relevant to the main question, because this is about the percentage of loss.
The final conclusions about the loss are easy: The coverage of this 20 mm tape reduces the effective surface with 6%, and the loss of the yield is most probably 7% , perhaps between 7 and 8%.
So if we deduct the 7% from the rated efficiency of the Sinoltech panels, the 20 mm anti skid tape will reduce the panels efficiency from the rated maximum of 16.5 to about 15.4%.
February 1 our fellow sailors Franz and Mareike subscribed for the transit through the Panama Canal. Their date will be Februari 14. Two weeks waiting, not bad, but normally it is 5 to 7 days.
Five (5) days later, we applied the transit for the Ya. We got the message back that our transit would be March 23 at least….. Suddenly we are planned more than 6 weeks later. As well as any yacht applying now. How come?
The Panama Canal is about 80 km long. It is surrounded by the Gatun Lake and other waters, creating an enormous water basin as a buffer for the Panama Canal.
The planning, the mess, and some causes
Why this mess? All of a sudden, more causes have come together. Firstly, there is the Carnival from 10 to 13 February. This mostly gives a delay of three to five days.
The cause is that the Panama Canal Authority lowered the number of transits. The locks were originally opened 31 times a day, but now it has brought down to 16 times. The problem lies in the lack of water in the Panamanian Lake Gatun. This immense lake provides the water to the Panama Canal, and the level is slowly falling.
When the water level drops below the 80 feet (25 meter) the canal will be to shallow for the largest ships.
Why is there a sudden water shortage?
Firstly, because the Panama Canal lies higher than the oceans. On the picture you see the profile of the canal and the oceans. It means that every time a lock opens on whatever side, the water will flow out into the ocean. Together the locks are about 26 meter higher and they can contain pretty large ships. When such a big lock is opened, there is about 15.000 m3 of water flowing out into the ocean. The Lake Gatun is also the drink water basin for Panama, and this amount is equal to the annual water use of 300 inhabitants.
Every time a lock opens, the water of the lock will flow into the ocean
.
Secondly, since 2016 there is a second set of locks in operation, for even bigger ships. So that doubles the loss of water. But one could question: did they not calculate beforehand if there would be sufficient water for such big extra locks? Yes, of course they did. Yes, they also took into account the smaller rainfalls in every El Nino year, bringing less water into the Gatun Lake.
But these numbers were all based on past data.
The average rainfall over the last century doesnot give any doubt about the continuity for the Panama Canals water supply.
.
El Nino and climate change
2023 was an El Nino year. The Eastern Pacific Ocean becomes warmer as does the air temperature in Panama. The higher the temperature, the less the condensation in the air, so smaller the rainfalll.
Older research shows that in an average El Nino year, the temperature in Panama rises about 2 degrees and the average rainfall drops 15 to 20 mm.source
What we see in this 2023 El Nino year, is an even higher rise of the temperature, so a deeper fall of the precipitation. It has never been lower since the meteorological measurements started, 143 years ago. It looks like a trend is developing of heavier El Nino years, with lesser precipitation.
Mr. Steven Paton, for 33 years the meteorological researcher on the Smithonian Institute in Panama, says: “Historically there has been a [rainfall] shortage on average once every 20 years due to major El Niño events. In the last 26 years this is the third major rainfall deficit. So it seems that something is changing our rainfall patterns.”
“The increase in frequency is consistent with climate change models,” he says, “but the climate change models have not come out saying for sure.” (source )
What now?
This is the everlasting problem with predicting climate change. Just as most of the organisations, the Panama Canal Authority responds and takes action when experiencing the consequenses. One can only accept and adapt. Such a late action costs time, money, damage.
Ya and it’s crew are getting ready to transit the Panama Canal. As with other sail boats we have filled out endless forms, decide how to accommodate 3 extra people (line handlers) for the night as well as feed them 3 meals. These preparations are all part of transiting the canal. However, Ya -a fossil free boat has a few extra preparation
Firstly, the authorities require a minimum speed of 5 kts. Ya best speed verses use of power is 2.3 -3kts, where 300watts. To achieve a speed of 5.0kts, triple the amount of power is required, see diagram below.
Relationship of speed versus the necessary power
This increase in speed over 10-12 hrs would be a considerable drain on the power. Therefore Peter is renting a generator so we can maintain the minimum speed and keep the batteries happy.
Secondly, Ya relies on the 3 aft solar panels to provide energy. Any damage to these panels would significantly reduce our power. The line handlers on land throw lines with a monkey knot on the end of the line to handlers on the boat. If the monkey knot lands on the solar panel, we have damage .
Monkey KnotLine Handler with a Monkey knot in his hand.
may occur. Peter has three pieces of old ply wood to cover the solar panel, preventing any possible damage to the solar panels.
We need 4 line handlers per boat excluding the captain that is 6 people on the boat including the pilot. Once the line handlers and pilot transit the canal, they are transported by taxi back to the start area approximately I hr. In the world of sustainability, the amount of fossil fuel used to take the line handlers up and down the canal by road is considerable. Fewer line handlers would reduce the fossil footprint. Numerous boats have transited the Panama canal. Ya being fossil few has a few different considerations than most.
2023 is a special year for the fossil free energy. The International Energy Agency has calculated that Europe’s use of energy from sun and wind, saved nearly 100 billion Euros on our energy bills (source).
For the Netherlands it is 2.5 billion each year. Three years after each other. This is not a single year, this is continuous. Without any subsidies or any other extra profits. The new reality is that renewable energy has become cheaper.
This graphic shows the change in competitiveness of solar and wind by country based on global weighted average LCOE, 2010-2022. All sun and wind generated energy beat the competition with fossils now. (source)
Now, if we consume from sun and wind only, it is 16 cent cheaper than our consumption from fossil and other unsustainable fuels (like nucleair energy) (before taxes). So the renewables have beaten the fossil energy sources by competition. From now, we only need the non-renewable energy sources when there is no wind or sun.
The beauty of it is, that everybody takes a profit of it. OK, the private people with fixed contracts take the least and the bigger users with variable contracts, especially the companies, take the biggest profit. But in general the economical outcome is clear, sustainable energy is a joy in everyone’s wallet.
Or?
The big bucks
Sorry, not for everyone. Especially not in the Netherlands. In 2015, the Netherlands signed the Paris Treaty to cut on fossil fuels and convert to renewables. One year later a Member of Parliament asked the Dutch government if the fossil fuel companies like Shell, Exxon-Mobile, Q8 and others, still get subisidies and tax exemptions.
No answer came. After one year of pushing and pulling, the State came up with the number of 4.5 billion. But later, an investigation showed a number double as high: more than 30 billion of tax payers money would go to the big fossil companies. The government didnot give an answer or any accountability.
The differences got worse. In 2023 it became clear that the oil companies made a great year. For example, Shell realized a profit of 34 billion Euros. Still the flow of tax exemptions and subsidies continued. This also happens in many other European states.
Now, nearly nine years after the Paris treaty The Ministry of Economic and Climate Affairs published an appraisal of 39 to 46 billion of subsidies and tax exemptions flowing annually to fossil fuel companies. About 70% of the Dutchmen want to stop this money drain. The discussion is polarizing. The protest group Extinction Rebellion demands clear answer from the State: Why is all this money flowing to fossils, despite the Paris treaty? They organized a series of highway blockades on the road going into the Hague (between the Ministery of Economic and Climate Affairs and the Parliament building). Every time they are supported by a growing number of people.
The police tries to blow the peaceful blockade of Extinction Rebellion away with water canons. The remaining people has the chance to be arrested. They accept it, they want their answer to their question why so much tax money is flowing to the fossil industry. On the viaduct there are supporters.
2.500 Euro for every Dutchman each year
So can we not economize this and make it sustainable as well? Yes! Here is the example if you do that in Holland, with its 18 million inhabitants.
If we give solar and wind energy equal opportunity to fossil energy, 42,5 billion is saved. Plus 2.5 billion we gain already. This equates to 45 billion for 18 million Dutchmen. Or alternatively 2.500 Euro per inhabitant each year.
An English company made a Hybrid Air Vehicle. It is like the old Hindenburg, but then filled with Helium, so it cannot explode. The double body makes its nickname, the ‘flying bum’.
The airship lands and lifts off ‘sur place’. That saves a lot of space, compared to an airplane. Also the aire and noise pollution is incomparably much less than an airjet.
You think it is slow? Well it is not fast, but only the two propellors can create a speed of 145 km/hr. It needs relatively such a little energy that this airship is hybrid-electriccally driven. Taken into account that on the right height it floats with the wind, a speed of 250 km on longer ranges is possible.
The one shown here can take 10,000 kilograms on load and make about 4000 miles. It can stay four to five days in the air. But this desigh can change significantly with its purposes.
This airship is developed for mid ranges. You could go from Paris to Vienna or, what the company is arranging now: making luxury cruises from Saint Tropez to a Mediterranian island.
Different cruising
The current jets try to transport as much people as they can, and as fast as you can. We are packed like sardines, under a permanent noise. On a current short or medium range trip, you spend most of the time on the arrival and departure procedures. What about an easy cruise to take a rest from that? Why not wine and dine while you fly? This looks possible with such an airship. It also saves a lot on fuels, because the propeller is way more efficient than the jet. Also, the airship takes more profit from the winds on the different altitudes, because it cruises a longer time on the heights with the following winds. It is a bit like sailing: the winds will bring you to your destination.
This Airlander could also be designed for the long ranges. Then it will be like the old fashioned cruises on cruise ships at sea. You step on board, you lift off, and after a day or so you land in -let’s say- Amsterdam. From there you go to Reykjavik. And from there you go in two or three days to New York. Slow, but comfortable.
Hello, I am Sue Smith and the newest crew member on S/V Ya – of Fossilfree around the world. My sailing career started when I asked a solo sailor what it was like to do an ocean passage. A few months later I was invited to sail with him in the Canary Islands for three weeks. We didn’t do an ocean passage, but I was hooked on sailing. My first ocean passage was in Patagonia no less, several years later!! I loved it. After that trip I bought my own boat and lived on it in Bermuda. I became a boat owner and all that entailed. But most of all I just loved sitting in the cockpit and feeling the motion of the ocean underneath me. Over the next 20 years, I went on several sailing adventures in different parts of the world. The most notable was on the tall ship “Europa” to the Antarctic and a few neighboring islands. It was the most fascinating trip, the wildlife was amazing, seeing the icebergs and glaciers from the rigging was spectacular. I didn’t think that trip could be surpassed until I met Peter.
I was introduced to Peter Hoefnagels through a mutual friend. I was curious how he could be complete fossil free on a sailboat. I did my research and indeed he had already circumnavigated the world. An amazing accomplishment in it’s self but to have done it fossil free was an added achievement. After several emails and zoom chats, Peter offer me a chance to crew on “Ya’. I jumped at the opportunity. I thought this would be a fantastic way to see and experience sustainable sailing. These are my first impressions after a week on Ya.
When I arrived in Panamarina I was taken out to the boat in a kayak. So the sustainable sailing extends to the transport to and from the boat, not just the sailboat. My upper body strength is definitely going to get a workout on this boat! Even in the dark that first night, I could tell this was special boat. The cockpit is laid out differently than most. The solar panels provide the shade, instead of a canvas Bimini. There was ample space for people to stand in the cockpit. The seating is non conventional arrangement in that that there are two levels of narrow seating. The companionway is wide and low just three steps to the interior, which is spacious and well thought out.
I have the job of cooking onboard. I am familiar with a regular propane and electric stoves. However, Ya has an induction cooker which is far more efficient to heat cookware directly instead of indirectly. Induction is able to deliver roughly 80% to 90% of the electromagnetic energy to food in the pan. Compared to gas which converts a mere 30% to 40%. A pressure cooker is used a lot on board in conjunction with a insulation box. This method takes longer to cook but saves about 20% of energy. As I understand it, the pressure cooker is brought up to pressure for a few minutes then transferred to a insulation box for the rest of the cooking. What I am figuring out is how long the remaining cooking time is in the insulation box! Also there is a bread making machine and a microwave. My first attempt at bread making was not very successful, due impart to the old yeast and unusual sugar substance. I found some newer yeast and different sugar so hopefully my next loaf of bread will be better.
I have had a tour of the boat outside. However until we actually sail I am not in a position to comment. I do know that it is going to be different in some ways from other boats I have been on. So stay tuned.
Sailed a regatta in Bocas, did repairs, cleaned the bottom with the fishes, kayaked against Tomas’ original Ngobe canoe (and lost), Andre joined, Kathryn joined, Genaro joined, did maintenance, did the Bocas sailing regatta, wrote the book ‘Duurzaam Varen’, Inge joined, met fossilfree soulmate Jack of SV Alcazar, maintenance, sailed with an original San Blas sailing canoe, went in the Tatacoa desert, been screwed by DHL, was blocked at roadblocks, did maintenance and repairs again, and much more, In this movie the images of 2023 on and around ‘Ya’.
