Here’s the catch with electric ferries: they’re cheaper to run than diesel boats in basically every measurable way. Lower fuel costs, fewer mechanical breakdowns, longer operational lifespans. Harbor operators who make the switch end up saving money year after year. The problem is getting there in the first place.
Maria Andrade, founder and CEO of Harbor Current Foundation Inc., has spent the last year trying to solve that paradox. She’s asking for $10 million to put electric vessels in the water across four U.S. cities, Miami, Annapolis, Charleston, and Boston. Not because the technology is experimental or unproven. It works. It’s already operating successfully in multiple countries. American harbors just can’t access the capital to make it happen.
“The time is now and the solutions are here to make the difference,” Andrade says. She’s not talking about some distant future where electric maritime transport might be viable. She’s talking about right now, with existing technology that sits unused because nobody can pay the upfront costs.
The numbers tell the whole story. Electric vessels eliminate fuel expenses entirely. Diesel engines need constant maintenance, replacement parts, and repairs that electric motors don’t. Over time, the savings are significant. But harbors operate on municipal budgets. They can’t afford the vessel conversion costs, even though diesel boats cost more money to run.
That’s the trap. Everyone knows electric is cheaper long-term. Nobody has the cash to get started.
What $2.5 Million Per Harbor Actually Buys
Harbor Current Foundation breaks down the math pretty clearly. Each of the four pilot harbors needs approximately $2.5 million to make the transition. That covers vessel acquisition or retrofitting existing boats with electric propulsion systems, charging infrastructure installation at docks, feasibility studies specific to each harbor’s layout and needs, community education programs, and operational costs during the initial transition period.
The budget includes contingency funds because pioneering new systems in different marine environments always brings unexpected challenges. It’s not vague aspirational funding. It’s the actual cost to get electric vessels operating in those specific locations within 18 months.
Once they’re running, the economics shift entirely. Electric vessels eliminate fuel costs. Maintenance expenses are lower because electric systems have fewer mechanical problems. The boats last longer. Everything about the operational model improves except that initial capital hurdle.
Harbor authorities know this. Ferry operators know this. City planners know this. They’re still running diesel because they can’t finance the switch.
The Four-City Strategy
Miami, Annapolis, Charleston, and Boston weren’t chosen randomly. Each represents a different type of harbor operation. Miami handles major international port traffic with climate pressures from sea-level rise. Annapolis has a smaller, historic waterfront where changes can happen faster. Charleston’s tourism economy means clean transportation could become a selling point. Boston already runs established ferry systems that are ready to convert.
If electric vessels work across those four different environments, they’ll work almost anywhere. That’s the point. Prove the model in diverse settings, document what succeeds and what needs adjustment, then hand every other U.S. harbor a blueprint they can follow.
But the blueprint doesn’t solve the money problem. It just makes the case stronger for why harbors should find a way to afford it. Which brings everything back to the same fundamental issue: the economics make sense, the technology exists, the benefits are measurable. Harbors are stuck with diesel anyway.
Why Traditional Funding Falls Short
Harbor Current Foundation has applied for institutional grants and works with municipal authorities, but those channels can’t close the gap. Philanthropic support and impact investment become the realistic paths forward. Early donors essentially catalyze the chain reaction that makes widespread adoption possible. Once the four pilot cities demonstrate working electric vessels, the next wave of harbors has proof they can show their city councils and budget committees. Each success makes the case easier for the harbor after that.
Andrade brings a specific skill set to this challenge. After spending more than twenty years raising five children and working as a licensed real estate professional, she understands how people navigate complex transitions. Her approach focuses on showing harbor operators how the economics work in their favor once they clear that initial investment barrier.
“Empathy is the greatest renewable resource we have,” she says. “It fuels collaboration, courage, and change.” That perspective matters when you’re asking municipalities to commit millions of dollars to something they’ve never tried before.
The Bigger Economic Picture
Electric harbor vessels don’t just save money for the operators. They improve air quality for waterfront communities currently exposed to diesel exhaust. They attract tourists and residents who care about sustainability. They create manufacturing and infrastructure jobs. The broader economic benefits extend well beyond fuel savings, but those benefits don’t help a harbor authority trying to figure out where to find $2.5 million in this year’s budget.
This is where the business case runs into reality. Everyone agrees electric makes financial sense. Nobody can explain how to pay for it with existing funding structures. Harbor Current Foundation is betting that targeted philanthropic investment can break the cycle, proving the model in four cities so that larger institutional funding and private investment follow naturally.
The foundation’s timeline is aggressive, 18 months to get pilot vessels in the water, two years to demonstrate the full model across four cities. If it works, every coastal city in America gets a proven blueprint.
The Paradox That Won’t Solve Itself
Walk along any American waterfront and you’ll see the same diesel ferries that have been running for decades. Not because they’re better. Not because anyone prefers them. Just because switching costs money that harbors don’t have, even though switching would save money they’re currently spending.
It’s the kind of economic trap that only breaks when someone from outside the system decides it’s worth fixing. Maria Andrade looked at the problem and founded an organization specifically to solve it. Whether that works depends entirely on whether donors and impact investors agree that harbor communities shouldn’t have to keep breathing diesel exhaust just because the economics are backwards.
The technology is ready. The savings are real. The barrier is capital. Everything else is just details.
