Some regular readers may have noticed that I’ve been a bit detached from the blog in the past week. There’s a good reason for that. I’ve been immersing myself in the joys of owning and learning about the nuts and volts of an electric car.
Yes, that evil old Anthony Watts, doubter of Anthropogenic Global Warming, is now driving an NEV (Neighborhood Electric Vehicle) to and from work every day, to lunch, and on errands in town. I put 100 miles on it the first week. Of course this sort of energy efficiency isn’t anything new for me, since I put solar on my home, and on one of the local schools when I was a trustee. But never mind that, I’m still “evil” for doubting AGW. 😉
It would be interesting to see what some other pro-AGW folks drive. I see Jim Hansen has a 85 mile each way commute from his house in Kintnersville, Pennsylvania to Columbia University in NYC.
The NEV is a 2002 Ford “Think” which is no longer in production since California dropped the ZEV (Zero Emissions Vehicle) mandate in 2003. It is one of the rare “pickup truck” models, and as seen below, the former owner drove that point home:
If you are a Ford pickup truck owner, you’ll recognize the logo. The famous Ford F-150 pickup truck is rated for a 1500 pound cargo capacity. This vehicle is rated at 500 pounds, hence the designation, though not an official one.
Those who have owned Fords are often reminded of these famous F.O.R.D descriptions:
“Fix Or Repair Daily”, or “Found On Road Dead”.
Since this operates on 6x 12V Gel Cells, which are under the seats, I’ve added a new one:
Found On Road Discharged
Though not really, I get about 25-30 miles of range from this vehicle, and finding a power plug is easy between my home, office, and some folks around town I know. Currently it has a top speed of 25MPH, which is limited by a controller, but the vehicle can be modded with new programming and an enhanced efficiency motor to reach up to 39MPH. I’m not sure if I need that, as I have not found the speed to be an issue. I mostly take the back streets anyway, and my office is about 2 miles from my home. The only place I can’t go is the Highway, but I don’t need to.
The complete vehicle specs are listed here, from testing done by the US Department of Energy.
Now here is the really important part, look at the DOE rated energy cost:
Energy Cost: @ $0.10/kWh: $0.016/mi
In California, I pay about 15 cents per kilowatt/hour, so my cost would be: $.024/mile or 2.4 cents per mile. With battery replacement every 4 years, I figure that will rise to 3, maybe 4 cents a mile. Even if I’m off by a factor of 100%, and it costs me 6-8 cents a mile to drive, it is still a bargain. In my regular vehicle, given the $3.89/gallon gas price, I figured I was spending about $40-$50 per week in gasoline costs just doing my daily routine and errands.
So, my mission here is simple; I’m not saving the planet, I’m saving money.
That is infectious, and my local newspaper editor, David Little, did his weekly Sunday column on it and the electric car club in town. He’s hooked.
Right now the vehicle is in my garage, I completely disassembled the body and dash so I could locate an intermittent electrical connection and give the entire vehicle a good cleaning and inspection. The former owner lived in a desert area, and there was a lot of sand in it. It has been a joy to work on. It is simple and efficient in design, and easily maintainable with simple hand tools. I’ve located the electrical problem and fixed it. Once I get the vehicle reassembled, I’ll get back to blogging more on the issues related to USHCN and surfacestations.org
In the meantime, I’m having a ball! Bumper sticker suggestions are welcome.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


Hey Anthony! Nice sled!
Anthony,
Good choice.
Sincerely, I’d like to thank you for providing this site as well as all of your hard work.
I just downsized and bought a “small car” myself! (It isn’t electric).
http://www.kitcarmag.com/featuredvehicles/0711kc_1966_cobray_c3/photo_01.html
http://www.kitcarmag.com/featuredvehicles/0711kc_1966_cobray_c3/photo_04.html
REPLY: VERY nice! If they had that Cobra setup for electric I’d buy it in a heartbeat!
Heh, Heh……..Really, you’re doing a great job. Please keep it up.
God Bless.
Allan MR MacRae (11:25:35) : “Wind power suffers greatly from the lack of a superbattery and requires almost 100% conventional backup. However I am not convinced that anything, even a superbattery, will save wind power from being a total boondoggle.”
You might want to read this recently published report from the DOE:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/pdfs/41869.pdf
It’s an analysis of the impacts accrued if the US were to convert to obtaining 20% of its electrical energy from wind. While what you say about wind requiring backup is true, that doesn’t make it a boondoggle. They go into great length about how wind energy can be integrated into the existing energy portfolio in a way that optimizes the advantages and minimizes the disadvantages of both.
Nor is it likely to be expensive: they estimate that it would increase the cost of the average household’s electricity bill by somewhat less than 2 cents/day (over CURRENT costs — if costs of traditional fuels increase then the premium would be even less). Other impacts include:
* Reduce natural gas use by 11 percent.
* Reduce cumulative water consumption associated with electricity generation by 4 trillion gallons by 2030.
* Support roughly 500,000 additional jobs in the U.S.
* Reduce carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation by 25 percent in 2030.
Couple wind with a load-following technology like solar thermal (with heat storage) and the need for “conventional backup” as you call it would be reduced considerably.
And I think you’re similarly right and wrong about nuclear too. In other words, though a nuclear plant cannot be turned on and off as load requirements fluctuate, that’s not how they are generally used in the whole energy portfolio. They are intended to supply base load power, while other sources supply dispatchable power. That DOE study I cited indicates that the average “capacity factor” (the ratio of power actually produced/total capacity) of nuclear power plants is 75%. And if the DOE doesn’t know that, who does?
As for your take on batteries, I pretty much agree. However, I’d like to add that the role of vehicle batteries in leveling out grid load would be significantly enhanced by “smart grid” technology. On a smart grid they could not only be recharged at night, but function as an energy storage mechanism.
IMO, if we let it happen (and our congresscritters let it happen) the future could be very bright. We can significantly wean ourselves off fossil fuels, reduce our trade deficit, increase our energy security (and decrease the possibility of a resource conflict in the process), create jobs, improve our environment (burning fossil fuels has deleterious effects besides CO2), and do all that at little or no cost in the long run. But it will require an investment in the short run — not to mention a significant change in the current energy regulatory and deployment structure. I’m sure some people are going to squawk really loud about that. But as that DOE study I cited indicates, significant federal investment and significant government intervention the regulatory and deployment structures in our nation’s energy backbone have happened before. They happened in the 40s and 50s when we went on a binge of building large hydropower plants, and again in the 70s when we went on a binge of building nuclear power plants. And I’m sure there were many critics back then, too.
Hi Rico,
E.ON Netz in 2005 produced its informative Wind Power Report, which clearly outlined the shortcomings of wind power.
At that time E.ON was the largest wind power generator in the world – and may still be. I think E.ON has very significant credibility when they openly discuss the main disadvantages of their very large wind power portfolio.
Summarizing the key points:
1. Note the very low Substitution Capacity from the E.ON Netz report: 8% dropping to 4% in 2020 – this is the key to why wind power is not economic. This means that German wind power requires almost 100% conventional backup power. Quoting the E.ON report: “As a result, the relative contribution of wind power to the guaranteed capacity of our supply system up to the year 2020 will fall continuously to around 4% (Figure 7). In concrete terms, this means that in 2020, with a forecast wind power capacity of over 48,000MW (Source: Dena grid study), 2,000MW of traditional power production can be replaced by these wind farms.”
2. Wind power output varies approximately as the cube power of the wind speed, so wind power causes huge, short-term fluctuations in power supplied to the grid, and can cause serious grid instability.
Quoting the E.ON report: “Handling such significant differences in feed-in levels poses a major challenge to grid operators.”
This report demonstrates the key flaw that is ignored in many analyses of wind power – wind does not blow enough when you need it, so wind power is ineffective at replacing conventional power stations, and the problem worsens as more wind power is added to the grid.
Best regards, Allan
P.S. Re nuclear plants supplying base load power – that works if there is not too much nuclear capacity as a total percentage of grid generating capacity – but look at Ontario and France, where nuclear predominates. The situation I described (underutilized overnight generating capacity) becomes much more significant as you add more and more nuclear power to the grid.
**********************
Comments and excerpts:
E.ON Netz Wind Power Report 2005, Germany
http://www.eon-netz.com/EONNETZ_eng.jsp
Capacity Factor and Substitution Capacity (Capacity Credit)
E.ON states that in 2004 Germany had an installed wind power of 15369MW and an average feed-in of 2968MW or 19.3% Capacity Factor. In 2004 E.ON operated over 40% of the wind power in Germany (more than the entire installed USA wind capacity), so one assumes their numbers must be representative for their grid size, layout, wind speed, etc.
A very important sentence from the E.ON report is:
“In concrete terms, this means that in 2020, with a forecast wind power capacity of over 48,000MW, 2,000MW of traditional power production can be replaced by these wind farms.”
E.ON calls this factor Substitution Capacity (the US EIA calls it Capacity Credit) – Germany is now at 8% Substitution Capacity, which is low, but will decline to 4% by 2020 if all goes according to plan.
In summary, an analysis by a German industry leader, which operates more wind power than the entire USA, says it must install 12 to 24 times more wind power capacity than the conventional power that the wind power replaces.
Figure 7 of the E.ON report, entitled “Falling substitution capacity”, states:
“Guaranteed wind power capacity below ten percent – traditional power stations essential.
The more wind power capacity is in the grid, the lower the percentage of traditional generation it can replace.”
Full quotation, from page 9 of E.ON report:
In order to also guarantee reliable electricity supplies when wind farms produce little or no power, e.g. during periods of calm or storm-related shutdowns, traditional power station capacities must be available as a reserve. This means that wind farms can only replace traditional power station capacities to a limited degree.
An objective measure of the extent to which wind farms are able to replace traditional power stations, is the contribution towards guaranteed capacity which they make within an existing power station portfolio. Approximately this capacity may be dispensed within a traditional power station portfolio, without thereby prejudicing the level of supply reliability.
In 2004 two major German studies investigate the size of contribution that wind farms make towards guaranteed capacity. Both studies separately came to virtually identical conclusions, that wind energy currently contributes to
the secure production capacity of the system, by providing 8% of its installed capacity.
As wind power capacity rises, the lower availability of the wind farms determines the reliability of the system as a whole to an ever increasing extent. Consequently the greater reliability of traditional power stations becomes increasingly eclipsed.
As a result, the relative contribution of wind power to the guaranteed capacity of our supply system up to the year 2020 will fall continuously to around 4% (Figure 7). In concrete terms, this means that in 2020, with a forecast wind power capacity of over 48,000MW (Source: Dena grid study), 2,000MW of traditional power production can be replaced by these wind farms.
Figure 7. Falling substitution capacity
Guaranteed wind power capacity below ten percent – traditional power stations essential.
The more wind power capacity is in the grid, the lower the percentage of traditional generation it can replace.
Wind Variability and Grid Operability
The E.ON report states:
Whilst wind power feed-in at 9.15am on Christmas Eve reached its maximum for the year at 6,024MW, it fell to below 2,000MW within only 10 hours, a difference of over 4,000MW. This corresponds to the capacity of 8 x 500MW coal fired power station blocks.
Full quotation, from page 8 of E.ON report:
FIGURE 5 shows the annual curve of wind power feed-in in the E.ON control area for 2004, from which it is possible to derive the wind power feed-in during the past year:
1.The highest wind power feed-in in the E.ON grid was just above 6,000MW for a brief period, or put another way the feed-in was around 85% of the installed wind power capacity at the time.
2.The average feed-in over the year was 1,295MW, around one fifth of the average installed wind power capacity over the year.
3. Over half of the year, the wind power feed-in was less than 14% of the average installed wind power capacity over the year.
The feed-in capacity can change frequently within a few hours. This is shown in FIGURE 6, which reproduces the course of wind power feed-in during the Christmas week from 20 to 26 December 2004. Whilst wind power feed-in at 9.15am on Christmas Eve reached its maximum for the year at 6,024MW, it fell to below 2,000MW within only 10 hours, a difference of over 4,000MW. This corresponds to the capacity of 8 x 500MW coal fired power station blocks. On Boxing Day, wind power feed-in in the E.ON grid fell to below 40MW.
Handling such significant differences in feed-in levels poses a major challenge to grid operators.
Allan MR MacRae (21:34:08): I must confess my virtually complete ignorance of the status of wind energy in Germany. But the Substitution Capacity numbers in the Eon report you cited seemed extraordinarily low — especially considering it was coming from a company that controls a considerable amount of the market. On a closer read I got the distinct impression that they were primarily complaining about the limitations in the existing grid. That does appear to be a big issue…
http://www.windaction.org/documents/7995
And it is one that was addressed in the DOE study I cited in a previous comment as well: wind power cannot be optimized without a robust, widely integrated high voltage grid.
I don’t know how related it is, but it seems Eon is the subject of a couple of anti-trust suits. Eon, along with RWE, France’s EDF and other big groups, was raided by EU and national competition officials in 2006 in the wake of a long-running energy sector inquiry which accused them of preventing rivals from entering the market through their control of grids and of forcing up wholesale and retail prices. Eon was recently fined for breaking official EC seals on a room containing seized documents.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/feb/28/utilities
[…] I drive a 2002 Ford Think, the open frame model. I’m pretty happy with it, at 3 cents a mile, and I’ve put about 300 miles on it around town since buying it 3 weeks ago. It has gotten a lot of attention in my hometown of Chico, and people are constantly asking me how much it cost and where could they get one? The town is blessed with many alternate back routes, so I don’t have to travel the main congested roads. […]
I’m about to purchase a 2002 Ford Think! also. Please everyone pray that the deal goes through. I’ve been wanting one for a long time. Oh, and by the way, It is not cheaper to ride a bike. Riding a bike burns calories. Burning more calories means eating more food. Food is EXPENSIVE!
REPLY: Good luck, contact me here if you need help. -Anthony
Well CRAP ! it was a scam ! The Ford Th!nk I wanted to buy, listed on Craig’s List, is a scam. I did some research and found the EXACT same reply letters on an online Scam Forum. I was wondering why the guy wasn’t directly answering my questions.
🙁
REPLY: try Ebay, that is where I bought mine.
HELP!!!! Can you help me find where to buy one and how much they typically go for…. thanks!
Kalyn
REPLY: Ebay, $4000-6000
is the Ford Think for sale? If so, how much and where is it?
REPLY: Try Ebay, that is where I got this one.
I will be getting my Ford Think next week but having problems finding insurance. Does anyone have info? I live in Florida. Thanks
REPLY: I use Allstate, they have it in the database already.
Just fyi, golf carts also have regenerative braking systems and a range of about thirty miles on a full charge. Many of them (Club Car’s Pathway models spring to mind) also have ISO-certified Roll-Over Protection Systems and safety belts. Street tires are easily installed. No McPherson suspensions or safety glass, though. No glass at all, actually…
So, pretty much a golf cart, yeah. Except parts are probably a little tougher to find…
Anthony,
ANTHONY,
IN RESPONS TO THE ELECTRIC COBRA:
“REPLY: VERY nice! If they had that Cobra setup for electric I’d buy it in a heartbeat!”
The electric Cobra is produced by SST
Have a look here:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/tag/SuperCars+Exposed/
You could do with a less powerful engine and a cheaper battery pack.
Maybe you could find an unfinished kit on e-bay and you perform the electric conversion yourself if you can find the time.
There is also a British kit car producer that offers an electric version of the Cobra.
I have to look for the link and send it to you as soon as I have found it again.
Regards,
Ron de Haan
Nice ride. I could use one of those to go the store…
I hope you don’t mind a late addition to the list of bumper sticker suggestions… mine is an extension of Paul Clark’s… “Powered by volts, driven by Watts”