Yes they did.
I'm a subscriber to their channel.
IMHO, some of the things they do is OK, and some is ill-conceived.
It appeared that the intent of the episode was to help validate their decision to covert to electric.
I believe the real motivator was the 40 year old diesel was baffed and they believed an electric motor would be lower cost.
They ran into all kinds of trouble with the drive system, and it was quite noisy. Perhaps not as noisy as the diesel, but certainly no where near "silent".
They had a severe problem with speed and range.
Once, they had to hunker down and sit through a hurricane at anchor, risking his life (she left him their) because they did not have speed and range to escape the forecast path, in the calm before the storm.
Often they are forced to sit at anchor longer than desired to wait for favourable wind, where most cruisers with diesels would just motor to get where they want when they want.
Then they had an electrical problem due to a high current, high impedance connection.
This left them propelling the electric boat with the gasoline outboard on the dinghy strapped to the mother ship.
They explained that the electric was NOT to replace the diesel, but to replace a sculling oar, that they would otherwise have if they did not replace the diesel.
The other two couples who were in that episode touting the benefits of electric propulsion were either about to, or in the process of a build, and had no actual life experience with an electric cruising boat.
Then a couple episodes later the crew of UMA burned who knows how much gasoline turning countless donuts in an abandoned marina.
Kinda blows the primary factor to reduce carbon footprint outa the water.
Then, they changed out the electric motor, drive, and batteries after a couple years (obviously it was not living up to their expectations) for a much more expensive system including a bunch of LFP batteries (likely donated or sponsored) that would cost much more than putting in a used diesel, or about the same as a new.
The last episode I watched, their dinghy gas outboard failed (from admitted lack of proper maintenance) and they put on a Torquedo they had aboard that was donated by a Patreon.
(Wait a minute, they have a Torquedo aboard that one could claim was reducing their carbon footprint but they are using a 5 HP gas outboard? Why?
Then they advised that the Torquedo was unsatisfactory due to limited speed and range, and they are going to replace it with an even bigger gasoline outboard.
Long story short, I give that episode and their reasoning for electric propulsion an "F" grade on the sincerity scale.
I'm not suggesting electric propulsion is bad, in fact I recommend it to clients where it is a viable technology for their use case.
But there are a lot of factors to consider.
On my cruising boat, after motoring 30 hours at 5 knots, I start looking for a marina with diesel as I have about 4 hours left.
If I converted to a turnkey commercially available electric system (with only 8 hours at 5 knot range) ) I would have as much money and weight into it as I would a diesel system with 34 hours at 5 knot range.
What's more, the diesel system can be refueled very inexpensively in about 10 minutes, whereas the electric system will take at least 24 hours, and cost at least one night of marina fees.
If one will be doing a lot of motoring, like down the ICW, or just getting from one anchorage to another between norther's, an electric propulsion system is not a viable option, without an ICE generator onboard, and then what is the point?