Solar Tonneau option

[philipsmithj]

Amonst the solar suggestions, I'm not seeing the suggestion of using the bed space on the Terra. A factory integrated solar tonneau or shell could basically provide off grid power. The huge attraction to this product aside from being American made is it's "multi-energy/fuel" options, especially for any off-grid, away from civilization activities. Not to mention, my car is all but forced to be outside the majority of daylight working hours. Why can't it charge without being tethered to a charging station? Looking at home panel standards by sqft, I'd bet there's around a 1Kw capacity if you could work out the roll or I guess in this case, stack away capability for when the height is needed for loads. Could it fold away between cab and bed or be at the front of the bed (it would need to be protected somehow). Solar paint and tint are very cool options, but seem very difficult from an engineering perspective. A solar sunroof or tonneau cover seem way more feasible. If you go with it, you *could* call it the Smith cover . (Microsoft has been commenting suggesters names into their code now for years. It's a good incentive for free suggestions) I'd definitely be a proud owner.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

I totally respect that answer and agree that you got to start somewhere but even the 2010 Prius had solar panel built into the top to run accessory

The 2010 Prius had a PV panel to open a small sun roof and run a fan, not to charge the hybrid battery. It also came after 77 years of successful Toyota business operations and 8 years after the first Prius and two successful previous generation Prii.

 

[mastertroll]

The 2010 Prius had a PV panel to open a small sun roof and run a fan, not to charge the hybrid battery. It also came after 77 years of successful Toyota business operations and 8 years after the first Prius and two successful previous generation Prii.

I get your point. I've watched a lot of videos with the people that are designing these vehicles and I know they have some smart people. I think they can either launch with a package or a trim for people who actually want it.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

I get your point. I've watched a lot of videos with the people that are designing these vehicles and I know they have some smart people. I think they can either launch with a package or a trim for people who actually want it.

But this is such a small niche. I’m in that niche, but I don’t want Scout to waste resources on it.

It’s not about whether they’re smart enough to do it. I know they are. But they have an incredibly tough timeline and cost profile ahead of them and any additional items they spend time and development money on add to the overall cost of the base vehicle, not just the trim/option/package. Development costs are not only applied to the package or option, they’re distributed across the entire vehicle line. Scout tasking a team to develop a tonneau option would add to the overall costs of the vehicle, which is the opposite of what they should be trying to do.

If you look at the in-house developed extras from most manufacturers, you’ll see a lot of stuff that’s been unsuccessful. The solar tonneau cover for the CT. The range-extending battery for the CT. Rivian has cut several things from their purchase package (kitchen, etc), not all of which were in-house developed.

Meanwhile, the long-running very successful manufacturers have very strong relationships with the 3rd party aftermarket industry and upfitters. You can buy an aftermarket bumper, winch, sliders, and under armor for your Toyota, Ford, or whatever brand before you even take delivery of your truck. You can get accessories and parts shipped for your Subie before the new Outback is even on lots. RAM mirror replacements are available well before the truck is. I can buy almost any accessory I want for my Lightning because it’s just an F-150.

Scout would be much better off sending detailed CAD and other specifications to 3rd party developers as soon as they’ve nailed down the size, shape, capacities, and everything else necessary for those developers to start working on solutions. IMO, they’d be even better served if they have chosen to match certain dimensions of existing manufacturers. For example, if the bed dimensions were exactly the same as the 14th Generation F-150, then all of the existing bed caps, tonneau covers, racks, etc., would be immediately available to Scout customers.

As @R1TVT said, Scout doesn’t need to develop these in-house. And they shouldn’t spend the time and money on doing so. If they enable a few upfitter connections for various things, electrical, mechanical, etc., release the specs, and encourage 3rd parties to develop unique solutions, we’d all be better off.

 

[dreamweaver]

But this is such a small niche. I’m in that niche, but I don’t want Scout to waste resources on it.

It’s not about whether they’re smart enough to do it. I know they are. But they have an incredibly tough timeline and cost profile ahead of them and any additional items they spend time and development money on add to the overall cost of the base vehicle, not just the trim/option/package. Development costs are not only applied to the package or option, they’re distributed across the entire vehicle line. Scout tasking a team to develop a tonneau option would add to the overall costs of the vehicle, which is the opposite of what they should be trying to do.

If you look at the in-house developed extras from most manufacturers, you’ll see a lot of stuff that’s been unsuccessful. The solar tonneau cover for the CT. The range-extending battery for the CT. Rivian has cut several things from their purchase package (kitchen, etc), not all of which were in-house developed.

Meanwhile, the long-running very successful manufacturers have very strong relationships with the 3rd party aftermarket industry and upfitters. You can buy an aftermarket bumper, winch, sliders, and under armor for your Toyota, Ford, or whatever brand before you even take delivery of your truck. You can get accessories and parts shipped for your Subie before the new Outback is even on lots. RAM mirror replacements are available well before the truck is. I can buy almost any accessory I want for my Lightning because it’s just an F-150.

Scout would be much better off sending detailed CAD and other specifications to 3rd party developers as soon as they’ve nailed down the size, shape, capacities, and everything else necessary for those developers to start working on solutions. IMO, they’d be even better served if they have chosen to match certain dimensions of existing manufacturers. For example, if the bed dimensions were exactly the same as the 14th Generation F-150, then all of the existing bed caps, tonneau covers, racks, etc., would be immediately available to Scout customers.

As @R1TVT said, Scout doesn’t need to develop these in-house. And they shouldn’t spend the time and money on doing so. If they enable a few upfitter connections for various things, electrical, mechanical, etc., release the specs, and encourage 3rd parties to develop unique solutions, we’d all be better off.

Can I get another Amen.

 

[mastertroll]

But this is such a small niche. I’m in that niche, but I don’t want Scout to waste resources on it.

It’s not about whether they’re smart enough to do it. I know they are. But they have an incredibly tough timeline and cost profile ahead of them and any additional items they spend time and development money on add to the overall cost of the base vehicle, not just the trim/option/package. Development costs are not only applied to the package or option, they’re distributed across the entire vehicle line. Scout tasking a team to develop a tonneau option would add to the overall costs of the vehicle, which is the opposite of what they should be trying to do.

If you look at the in-house developed extras from most manufacturers, you’ll see a lot of stuff that’s been unsuccessful. The solar tonneau cover for the CT. The range-extending battery for the CT. Rivian has cut several things from their purchase package (kitchen, etc), not all of which were in-house developed.

Meanwhile, the long-running very successful manufacturers have very strong relationships with the 3rd party aftermarket industry and upfitters. You can buy an aftermarket bumper, winch, sliders, and under armor for your Toyota, Ford, or whatever brand before you even take delivery of your truck. You can get accessories and parts shipped for your Subie before the new Outback is even on lots. RAM mirror replacements are available well before the truck is. I can buy almost any accessory I want for my Lightning because it’s just an F-150.

Scout would be much better off sending detailed CAD and other specifications to 3rd party developers as soon as they’ve nailed down the size, shape, capacities, and everything else necessary for those developers to start working on solutions. IMO, they’d be even better served if they have chosen to match certain dimensions of existing manufacturers. For example, if the bed dimensions were exactly the same as the 14th Generation F-150, then all of the existing bed caps, tonneau covers, racks, etc., would be immediately available to Scout customers.

As @R1TVT said, Scout doesn’t need to develop these in-house. And they shouldn’t spend the time and money on doing so. If they enable a few upfitter connections for various things, electrical, mechanical, etc., release the specs, and encourage 3rd parties to develop unique solutions, we’d all be better off.

This is what separates a company like Tesla from the legacy manufacturers—they do things no one else does. Everyone else is just playing catch-up. Which brings me back to Scout: if they want to truly stand apart from other EV makers, they have a rare opportunity to do something no one else has done.

An EV that can charge itself just by sitting—without being plugged in—isn’t a small thing.

How about we leave the R&D to the people actually building the product? If Scout’s serious about innovation, let them prove it.

 

[J Alynn]

I get your point. I've watched a lot of videos with the people that are designing these vehicles and I know they have some smart people. I think they can either launch with a package or a trim for people who actually want it.

The bigger issue is @Jamie has more or less said there are too many hurdles but there is always a chance.

 

[mastertroll]

The bigger issue is @Jamie has more or less said there are too many hurdles but there is always a chance.

I will gladly pay more as a trim or a package for a vehicle that can charge itself by just sitting there and offset accessory.

 

[J Alynn]

But this is such a small niche. I’m in that niche, but I don’t want Scout to waste resources on it.

It’s not about whether they’re smart enough to do it. I know they are. But they have an incredibly tough timeline and cost profile ahead of them and any additional items they spend time and development money on add to the overall cost of the base vehicle, not just the trim/option/package. Development costs are not only applied to the package or option, they’re distributed across the entire vehicle line. Scout tasking a team to develop a tonneau option would add to the overall costs of the vehicle, which is the opposite of what they should be trying to do.

If you look at the in-house developed extras from most manufacturers, you’ll see a lot of stuff that’s been unsuccessful. The solar tonneau cover for the CT. The range-extending battery for the CT. Rivian has cut several things from their purchase package (kitchen, etc), not all of which were in-house developed.

Meanwhile, the long-running very successful manufacturers have very strong relationships with the 3rd party aftermarket industry and upfitters. You can buy an aftermarket bumper, winch, sliders, and under armor for your Toyota, Ford, or whatever brand before you even take delivery of your truck. You can get accessories and parts shipped for your Subie before the new Outback is even on lots. RAM mirror replacements are available well before the truck is. I can buy almost any accessory I want for my Lightning because it’s just an F-150.

Scout would be much better off sending detailed CAD and other specifications to 3rd party developers as soon as they’ve nailed down the size, shape, capacities, and everything else necessary for those developers to start working on solutions. IMO, they’d be even better served if they have chosen to match certain dimensions of existing manufacturers. For example, if the bed dimensions were exactly the same as the 14th Generation F-150, then all of the existing bed caps, tonneau covers, racks, etc., would be immediately available to Scout customers.

As @R1TVT said, Scout doesn’t need to develop these in-house. And they shouldn’t spend the time and money on doing so. If they enable a few upfitter connections for various things, electrical, mechanical, etc., release the specs, and encourage 3rd parties to develop unique solutions, we’d all be better off.

I’ll jump on this train as well. I’m good with a small amount of time designing elements as well if it helps provide for better aftermarket parts but the less in-house developed accessories-the better. Let the experts who build parts do what they do best. Nobody builds seats or dash components in house for the same reasons. Also allows for less storage and more FIFO supply

 

[J Alynn]

Can I get another Amen.

AMEN!!!

 

[cyure]

AMEN!!!

Hallelujah!

 

[J Alynn]

I will gladly pay more as a trim or a package for a vehicle that can charge itself by just sitting there and offset accessory.

You will but majority don’t want to and @SpaceEVDriver pointed out that those development expenses get passed to everyone of us buying one even if only 2% of buyers ever order it. And the cost for it when done will be more than most will likely be willing to pay for it. And I’d much rather see the engineers improve the base vehicle. And on a truly genuine ask-what happens when hail storm strikes, ore wild fires that cloud areas for weeks and reduce the solar gain due to hazy or the weeks cars in the northeast sit with snow on the roof. I’m out on this but again-this topic has flared up multiple times in 2-1/2 years and the ultimate conclusion is always similar.

 

[mastertroll]

You will but majority don’t want to and @SpaceEVDriver pointed out that those development expenses get passed to everyone of us buying one even if only 2% of buyers ever order it. And the cost for it when done will be more than most will likely be willing to pay for it. And I’d much rather see the engineers improve the base vehicle. And on a truly genuine ask-what happens when hail storm strikes, ore wild fires that cloud areas for weeks and reduce the solar gain due to hazy or the weeks cars in the northeast sit with snow on the roof. I’m out on this but again-this topic has flared up multiple times in 2-1/2 years and the ultimate conclusion is always similar.

Then let the people who don’t want to upgrade… not upgrade. Solar panel efficiency may drop in cloudy conditions, but it’s still a valuable backup—especially alongside the onboard generator, which at best might function as a Level 2 charger. And by the way, it hasn’t even been confirmed whether it can charge the vehicle while stationary.

*If you've ever crawled through your final 1–2% of battery range, hunting for a charge or scrambling to get your RV cord ready—only to realize the park won’t let you plug in, or you’re too far from anything for it to matter—you know how brutal that moment is. Having solar onboard to extend range or recharge while stationary is going to be one more thing that will add to adoption. Peace of mind.

 

[R1TVT]

The solution needs to be more than just a solar cover on a bed. It still needs integration into the vehicle's inverter and battery.

Yes, I am talking about more than the cover. You're also helping me to make my point, because there is so much more to it than the cover - particularly for Scout to worry about in terms of ongoing service and maintenance of the tonneau and transfer systems (plus inverter) - this is all without considering the small square footage of the tonneau itself.

For the record, any truck CAN charge with solar today. You just need to source the best solution for yourself, convert the energy produced and feed it to your vehicle from another battery. This is nothing new, it just isn't as compelling on a large truck battery. Why Scout would ever get bogged-down in this (when they have yet to roll out their first "new" truck and SUV) is beyond me.

The real reason it's not so compelling is math.

I totally respect that answer and agree that you got to start somewhere but even the 2010 Prius had solar panel built into the top to run accessory

Charging accessories is easy. Charging a 130-150 kWh truck battery could take weeks depending on WX, time of year, temperature, etc.
If you want all the details on why this doesn't even make sense on a car like a Tesla (let alone a truck), watch this:

 

[mastertroll]

Yes, I am talking about more than the cover. You're also helping me to make my point, because there is so much more to it than the cover - particularly for Scout to worry about in terms of ongoing service and maintenance of the tonneau and transfer systems (plus inverter) - this is all without considering the small square footage of the tonneau itself.

For the record, any truck CAN charge with solar today. You just need to source the best solution for yourself, convert the energy produced and feed it to your vehicle from another battery. This is nothing new, it just isn't as compelling on a large truck battery. Why Scout would ever get bogged-down in this (when they have yet to roll out their first "new" truck and SUV) is beyond me.

The real reason it's not so compelling is math.


Charging accessories is easy. Charging a 130-150 kWh truck battery could take weeks depending on WX, time of year, temperature, etc.
If you want all the details on why this doesn't even make sense on a car like a Tesla (let alone a truck), watch this:

View attachment 8171

Energy Required for 150 Miles of Range

• 150 miles ÷ 2.5 mi/kWh = 60 kWh

---

Charging Time to Deliver 60 kWh​

Harvester Output	Time to Deliver 60 kWh	Range Added per Hour
6.0 kW	10.0 hours	15.0 miles/hour
7.2 kW	8.33 hours	18.0 miles/hour
9.6 kW	6.25 hours	24.0 miles/hour
11.5 kW	5.22 hours	28.75 miles/hour
17.6 kW	3.41 hours	44.0 miles/hour

---

Fuel Cost Estimate (Gas @ $3.15/gal, 0.8 gal/hr consumption)​

Output Power	Runtime	Fuel Used	Fuel Cost
6.0 kW	10.0 hr	8.0 gal	$25.20
9.6 kW	6.25 hr	5.0 gal	$15.75
11.5 kW	5.22 hr	4.2 gal	$13.23
17.6 kW	3.41 hr	2.7 gal	$8.51

---

Harvester Fuel Efficiency Metric (to deliver 60 kWh = 150 miles @ 2.5 mi/kWh)

Output (kW)	Time (hr)	Fuel Rate (gal/hr)	Fuel Used (gal)	Fuel Cost ($3.15/gal)	Cost per kWh	Cost per Mile
6.0	10.00	0.8	8.00	$25.20	$0.42	$0.168
9.6	6.25	1.0	6.25	$19.69	$0.33	$0.131
11.5	5.22	1.2	6.26	$19.73	$0.33	$0.132
17.6	3.41	1.5	5.11	$16.11	$0.27	$0.107

---

Conclusion:
Higher output = shorter runtime = less total fuel = lower cost per kWh and per mile.
The 17.6 kW Harvester delivers ~36% lower cost per mile than a 6.0 kW unit.

Full Battery Recharge: 150 kWh @ 17.6 kW Output


Time to Full Charge:
150 ÷ 17.6 = 8.52 hours


Fuel Use (1.5 gal/hr):
8.52 × 1.5 = 12.78 gallons


Fuel Cost ($3.15/gal):
12.78 × 3.15 = $40.27


Cost per Mile (350 mi range):
$40.27 ÷ 350 = $0.115/mile



Why the Harvester Should Be a Full-Capability Generator and Mobile Charger


1. Vehicle Charging to Full Capacity

• With battery sizes in the 130–150 kWh range, topping off requires 8.5 hours at 17.6 kW
• That’s only achievable if the system operates while stationary
• Enables complete overnight recovery in remote or infrastructure-limited locations

2. Mobile Generator Functionality for External Loads

• 17.6 kW = enough to support homes during outages (fridge, HVAC, lighting, EV, internet)
• Essential for emergency preparedness, natural disasters, and grid interruptions
• Also powers job site equipment, trailers, and field systems where grid access is unavailable

3. Bidirectional Energy Design Enables V2H and V2V

• Leverage the battery and Harvester together to support home backup (V2H)
• Power other EVs or recharge Scout from external energy sources (V2V and true off-grid)
• Maximizes energy utility, not just vehicle propulsion

4. Time and Energy Are Decoupled From Motion

• Energy recovery and generator operation shouldn’t be limited to drive cycles
• Harvester should function independently of vehicle drivetrain status

---

Solar Assist: Supplemental Charging & Load Reduction​

Assumptions:

• Solar panel output: 1.0 kW (e.g. Worksport Solis-style bed-mounted system)
• Sunlight availability: 4–6 hours/day of peak sun
• Vehicle efficiency: 2.5 mi/kWh

---

Daily Solar Contribution​

• Energy generated:
  1.0 kW × 4–6 hrs = 4–6 kWh/day
• Range added:
  4–6 kWh × 2.5 mi/kWh = 10–20 miles/day

---

Weekly Impact​

• Energy: 28–42 kWh/week
• Range: 70–105 miles/week
• Fuel offset (Harvester @ 1.5 gal/hr):
  • Time saved: 28–42 ÷ 17.6 = 1.6–2.4 hrs
  • Fuel saved: 1.6–2.4 × 1.5 = 2.4–3.6 gallons/week
  • Cost saved: 2.4–3.6 × $3.15 = $7.56–$11.34/week

---

Summary​

• Solar adds 10–20 miles/day passively
• Reduces Harvester runtime and fuel use by 15–20%
• Improves system efficiency, especially during idle or low-demand periods
• Enables silent, fuel-free energy recovery when parked

Scout has a unique opportunity to redefine what an electric vehicle can do by unlocking the full capability of its onboard generator. With 17.6 kW or greater output, the Harvester isn't just a tool for range extension, it’s a mobile energy platform capable of fully recharging the vehicle, powering external equipment, and supporting homes during outages. Enabling stationary operation allows this system to deliver energy where and when it’s needed most, operating efficiently under steady loads and independent of motion.


Once that core functionality is active, solar becomes a seamless complement. A 1 kW panel, such as a bed-mounted array, can contribute 10–20 miles of range per day, reducing fuel use and extending system flexibility. If Scout includes solar input connectors or a plug-in solar accessory that interfaces with the onboard charger, users could scale energy intake at camp or on worksites. This pairing turns the vehicle into a modular, resilient off-grid energy hub—more than just transportation."


Realistically 10-20 miles a day is doable with a 1kw setup. That could be the difference of you using energy on site or not.

 

[R1TVT]

I would watch the video I posted that talks about real math.

The problem is that in the real world all of that "hypothetical" math goes out the window (not to mention you're only charging to half the battery capacity in your model). An AI calculation using "best case" is never going to fly in real world conditions. Not to mention that you do not have constantly sunny days, nor continuous sunny days, as assumed in that model, not to mention that the angle of the sun will differ with the seasons, as will temps that can negatively impact that model. You still have not accounted for the space and weight of the entire system that you are asking Scout to include in the truck. I would be shocked if Scout eliminated a bunch of usable bedspace to support an edge case, but who knows.

We can agree to disagree on whether or not Scout would be wise to tackle this on their own, when the aftermarket already provides solutions. Its not my hill to die on. If I were ever to add solar to my truck, I would need to be doing a lot more boondocking, would want a camper or RTT and would want to mount Renogy panels and build out a custom system on top of the roof as opposed to over the bed. I doubt I will ever be able to justify that. For the majority of buyers, you are requesting that Scout spend a ton of engineering time on something that would support an edge case

 

[mastertroll]

I would watch the video I posted that talks about real math.

The problem is that in the real world all of that "hypothetical" math goes out the window (not to mention you're only charging to half the battery capacity in your model). An AI calculation using "best case" is never going to fly in real world conditions. Not to mention that you do not have constantly sunny days, nor continuous sunny days, as assumed in that model, not to mention that the angle of the sun will differ with the seasons, as will temps that can negatively impact that model. You still have not accounted for the space and weight of the entire system that you are asking Scout to include in the truck. I would be shocked if Scout eliminated a bunch of usable bedspace to support an edge case, but who knows.

We can agree to disagree on whether or not Scout would be wise to tackle this on their own, when the aftermarket already provides solutions. Its not my hill to die on. If I were ever to add solar to my truck, I would need to be doing a lot more boondocking, would want a camper or RTT and would want to mount Renogy panels and build out a custom system on top of the roof as opposed to over the bed. I doubt I will ever be able to justify that. For the majority of buyers, you are requesting that Scout spend a ton of engineering time on something that would

I’m running a portable 1kW solar array and a Delta Pro Ultra I built for off-grid use. I’ve got a clear read on what appliances actually consume—fridges, HVAC, cooking gear, etc.—and I know panel efficiency is the real constraint. Those 100W foldables aren’t going to move the needle. But if a setup like mine could be integrated into a vehicle and reliably deliver 10–20 miles of range per day? Assuming you’ve got at least 1kW of solar and solid efficiency, I’m sold.

*And just to be clear—we’re not talking about a fully solar-powered car. We’re talking about augmenting power with solar: a vehicle that can charge itself while stationary, or extend its range by layering solar on top of the generator.

 

[J Alynn]

Speaking of edge cases. I see lots of videos of what I’ll call (I don’t know the proper names-so please correct me) Alabama mobile pools in the back of pick-ups-you know-some pond liner and 200-300 gallons of water. I think SM should run heating coils around the inside of the bed so I can bring the water up to hot tub temps. Maybe even a line from the air compressor to get the bubble action. I mean hell -mobile hot tub even when you are boondocking. They should patent this idea and hook me up with some Kudos.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Speaking of edge cases. I see lots of videos of what I’ll call (I don’t know the proper names-so please correct me) Alabama mobile pools in the back of pick-ups-you know-some pond liner and 200-300 gallons of water. I think SM should run heating coils around the inside of the bed so I can bring the water up to hot tub temps. Maybe even a line from the air compressor to get the bubble action. I mean hell -mobile hot tub even when you are boondocking. They should patent this idea and hook me up with some Kudos.

I think you’re on to something here. The heat source could be the motors and battery that heat up as you drive. You wouldn’t even have to expend extra energy.

 

[SpaceEVDriver]

Speaking of edge cases. I see lots of videos of what I’ll call (I don’t know the proper names-so please correct me) Alabama mobile pools in the back of pick-ups-you know-some pond liner and 200-300 gallons of water. I think SM should run heating coils around the inside of the bed so I can bring the water up to hot tub temps. Maybe even a line from the air compressor to get the bubble action. I mean hell -mobile hot tub even when you are boondocking. They should patent this idea and hook me up with some Kudos.

I’ve been thinking about this some more. You could use the motor and battery coolant to heat up the water, but what about when that’s just not enough?

Hear me out: Solar water heater panels in the form of a tonneau cover.

In ideal conditions, the Earth receives about 1 kW of power per square meter.
The tonneau cover would be about 66 inches by 72 inches, or 3 square meters.
Conversion from visible light to thermal energy happens at a...

Nah, I don’t want to bother. You get the joke.

 

[J Alynn]

I’ve been thinking about this some more. You could use the motor and battery coolant to heat up the water, but what about when that’s just not enough?

Hear me out: Solar water heater panels in the form of a tonneau cover.

In ideal conditions, the Earth receives about 1 kW of power per square meter.
The tonneau cover would be about 66 inches by 72 inches, or 3 square meters.
Conversion from visible light to thermal energy happens at a...

Nah, I don’t want to bother. You get the joke.

A simpler, lighter option would be an aluminum hinged frame with a layer of blue bubble solar pool cover material which in the sun for 4 useable hours would rocket up the temps of the water. Toss in a chlorine tablet every two weeks and a bit of algaecide to prevent green and you are good to go. And even better-hear me out. You skip those chemicals two weeks before the trip, connect a bubbler to the air compressor hose and as you catch fish you keep them in there. Throw in a few aquatic critters to reduce algae and you’ve got food for weeks. Get it hot enough maybe even a seafood boil if you are near the coast. Fancy chef talk would be sous vide. Just keep the annoying little girls with head gear away so they don’t tap on the glass and scare the fish.