You can see how this works: They have enough time while loading to charge the batteries.

Note that they have to have shore battery packs to hold the charging power as the local grid cannot handle the 1MW charging power.

They say that all ferry routes < 30 minutes can be done by this type of ferry. If so, good, but I wonder are there times when you need a lot more energy, like when you cannot dock due to bad weather.

Still, it is a nice idea and would reduce pollution as well as fuel usage.

The obvious solution to the "can't dock" problem is an EV fleet with V2F (vehicle-to-ferry) integration.

Seriously, the numbers are a bit misleading.  10 minutes at 1 MW may be able to replenish the battery of the 155 kWh used in a typical crossing, but it's not enough for a full recharge of the 1 MWh battery.

Ferry-to-vehicle may be a possibility as well.  Cars could be charged using shore power between driving on and the ferry leaving port without depleting the ship's battery.  Excess battery power could be dumped to cars during each voyage; the battery depletion could be managed so that it is fully charged during the time at dock.

Excellent project to test very large quick charge battery packs suitable for buses, trucks, trams, locomotive etc.

The mere size of this project may convince the skeptics that most ground/sea transport vehicles can be electrified.

A small, low cost, on-board genset or fuel cell could manage docking delays?

(We have a huge Hydro-Wind power surplus and our 30+ diesel ferries could use this project as a potential future upgrade)

This MUST be a joke.

Let's look at this as if we were in the real world.

1) This ferry is radically different, so it is likely WAY more expensive than a normal ferry
- offers less water resistance,
- has hulls made of aluminum,
- weighs only half as much as a conventional ferry.
This means a Diesel powered equivalent would be much less expensive or (if also made expensively light weight) would be very competitive with this abortion in every aspect and superior in most.

2) Hybrid cars do not NOT weigh less than an equivalent ICE model so if this ferry were conventional it might weigh even less then this gold plated monster.

2) Battery costs mean hybrid cars (made in production quantities by the way) are:
- a) a questionable way to save money and
- b) an expensive way to reduce imports and
- c) an expensive way to reduce carbon

- so this monster with triple the number of batteries (a set in the ferry and a set on each end of the route) is an outrageous waste of resources - the "Hummer" of ferries bought by people, with other peoples money, with selfish traits similar to those alleged to Hummer owners.

3) If 12 years and millions of EVs have not pushed battery technology as fast as it can be pushed, THIS will NOT help.

Please let this be a joke.

If they said that in the press releases it must be true.

You must know they would not slant or spin the PR to their benefit.

You must know they would not make assumptions that favored their decision.

You must believe in the Easter bunny; No joke.

Well if the numbers they posted are true, then the new boat uses 77% less energy than the outgoing model. That is a huge reduction.

According to my calculations:
Diesel = 37.6 kWh/gal (LHV)
New boat uses 6,300 kWh/day
per year that is 2,299,500 kWh/yr
Diesel fuel equivalent = 61,157 gal/yr
Compare that to the 264,000 gal/yr of the old boat and you can see that it will save a ton of fuel and be way cheaper to run than the old diesel boat.

I'm sure there's a power converter in the middle; DC-DC conversions are quite efficient and not expensive.

To me a DC-DC converter implies DC-to-AC-to-DC so that transformers, inductors and/or capacitors in the AC section can readily vary the AC output voltage which would, in turn vary the output DC voltage to provide the precise voltage/current desired.

201 kWh in 10 min = ~1.2 MW.

That's a LOT of power to invert into AC and rectify back to DC.

I would think they would instead use some type of ballast or impedance regulator - and/or vary the number of batteries that are in series, to control voltage/current.

If they do, it still might be called a DC-DC converter - I suppose you can call it what you want.

Yes, that is basically the common switching power supply, but we are still talking of switching 1.2 MW, so it might be more practical to dynamically (but slowly) adjust one or both battery stacks (shore stack or ferry stack) to get the voltage match desired.

Continuous fast response would not be needed and the current would only need to be rerouted around one cell for instance, not interrupted.

I know IGBTs and the like have replaced thyristors for HVDC power transmission but long distance power transmission has a big revenue base - I assume they are expensive - maybe not; and maybe cost does not matter.

Our half dozen aluminum factories use many 100 times the power required to recharge a large electric ferry and they are connected to the grid ....without battery buffers....

Let's not underestimate the capacity of a properly designed e-grid.

Recharging 100+ ferries and a few million electrified vehicles with clean power from a well designed grid is not that much of a challenge.

"If they do, it still might be called a DC-DC converter - I suppose you can call it what you want."

C'mon guys, that's about as close as you'll get to an admission from TT that he hasn't got a clue what he's talking about.

No, TT, taking cells out of a string is not a DC-DC converter.

Large DC-DC converters have efficiencies in the high 90's.They are standard designs, so they are relatively cheap.