New Green Jack New Green Jack

47 responses to “The Wind Car – Episode 6 of 6”

    • Will

      Looking good. The “Mojo” could be a little Austin Powers… but then again, what the hell, why can’t carbon reduction be a little fun. Yeah baby!

      Although on another tip, what about calling it the Ecotricity “Model Z”. Just like the Ford Model T it could serve as the model with which to revolutionise the car industry.

    • Jonny Holt

      Hello Dale,

      Sorry about this but there is already a car which has been on sale for several years called the Mojo.

      Please see both and – the original and also the current manufacturer, who has recently bought the design and manufacturing rights.

      I do not know if either company has trademarked the name for use on vehicles, or has any other form of intellectual property protection covering its use.

      That said, it is a kit car and a lot probably depends on the plans you have for your car. Is it going to be produced in quantity for public sale? There is precedent for this situation in the guise of the (1980s vintage)Ford Sierra, which was allowed to be so named despite the prior existence of a kit car called the Dutton Sierra. I do not know what – if any – agreement was reached between those two manufacturers.

      However the original designer of the Mojo, Jeremy Phillips, is very approachable and would be worth talking to anyway.

      Best regards,


    • drivin98

      Ecotricity Mojo is pretty good, actually. Has a different, maybe friendlier feel than most car names. And besides, like Tina Turner once sang, “We don’t need another zero.”

      Looking forward to the next video.

    • Steve Blake


      This is an exciting project. As a ‘tree hugger’ and a disablied person I often have to compermise with things. I am due a new Drive from Wheelchair mobility car in a month or so and have had to except a desel car which will average in the low 30’s MPG. There are othrs available but I can’t fit in them, to tall in the wheelchair. It would have been great to have the choice of a car which could do between 300 and 400 miles between charges and I could use on the road.

      I rely on the internet and my car to do anything, publice transport is not accessable in the village and cost is a big issue when you have to pay for 2.

      So if you ever get the urge to do anoher project you might consider a electric MOJO for a wheel chair user I like MOJO as well.

      I aplared you for leading the way in many of these fields I just wish people would think of those of use who for no reason of there own can’t aford to join in and do things when we would like to. We use less power now then ever before but we could never get say our own wind trubine or solsr panels, first the houseing assocation are hard to convince and second cost is a big factor.

      Your bit about fuel poverty really does ring home here



      PS Give Tim a kick we need to get sorted for the elections in June.

    • Johnathon

      I reached your site via the article on ‘naturally’ powered cars which ran 17.02.09 (today). That article makes a point, that I think is quite valid, that your main competition is the Tesla. You concept is interesting, but weighing it to a rusted anchor like Mojo dates it in the 90’s. That’s a mistake that I doubt Tesla will make. Being a California native, who lives near LA, I can assure you: we may not all be anglophiles, but even the most inamoured amongst us will find “Ecotricity Mojo” to awkward to say. You’ve got too many syllables. Great sports cars have short, timeless names that catch the cajones: Stingray, Spyder, Cobra. Sure, all the cool animal names are taken; but, even Prius is more memorable and timeless than Mojo. Your name needs to be as original as the curves of your car. It needs to be more brawny than brainy. Even though brainy geeks can afford more sports cars than most brawny dullards, the sports car fantasy is all about the 007 id that knuckle-walks to the gleaming chick-magnet and has a voice like a Harley Davidson when he says “This car rocks.” Such an Uber-dude may use the word “Mojo” on occassion, but he’s not married to that cougar.

      May I suggest: Zephyr, Vespivane or Falx. Vespivane, from Vespid (wasp) and vane (the arms of a windmill) and Falx from the Latin for scythe (root of falcon) both give a unique spin, though the former is still quite a mouthful. Zerocarbonista Zephyr is just too easy; but, simple is almost always best.

      Good luck to you.

    • Gary Andersen-Jones

      Hi Dale

      Without meaning to sound arrogant, why not use a name, acronym, abbreviation etc that best describes the car, and/or its purpose, rather than anything else. It worked for the mini.

      Better still, throw it open as a competition and use it as a PR exercise once you are comfortable with the car’s credibility as a working vehicle. that would be fun.

      Keep up the good work.

      Best Wishes


    • Jonathan


      Can’t wait for Episodes 7, 8 and however many more come! One thing I need to point out, which you may already know, is that electric cars are not all that “green/renewable” as well. The main reason behind this is the raw materials used to create the LiIon batteries. The natural resources are actually far fewer than that of gasoline. If every [future] car uses batteries, we’ll run out of raw materials to produce them very quickly.

      There are two solutions to this, one is to use the traditional lead acid battery and the other is the use of supercapacitors. The former will require an overhaul to store the higher voltage and capacity of energy while the latter is still in theoretical/pre-production stages.

      Supercaps also benefit from the abundance of their raw materials and are significantly lighter than LiIon and lead acid batts. *Fingers Crossed* I hope they come into fruition within the next few years. I must addd that capacitors are designed to release all their stored energy at once (given that the power source which charged it is disconnected), so some fancy electronics will be required to turn it into a steady stream of electricity.

      Best of luck! Wind power is the way to go for cars; seeing as you create it when you drive!


    • Dave Howey


      You are correct to be concerned about lithium supply, but there are enough reserves to make 1billion+ electric cars, and in the future we might be able to get lithium from sea water, and in addition you don’t have to use lithium batteries; you could use zinc-air or something like that.

      Lead acid batteries have a place (e.g the G-Wiz) but I think the energy density is a bit low. Supercapacitors have way too low an energy density; they are for high power short term ‘burst’ storage. Any by the way, they are not ‘theoretical’, you can buy them today; we use them on our race cars here, see

      Dave Howey

    • David Eastaugh


      Regarding the amount of lithium, this is covered in David MacKay book on page 132, reproduced below.
      From “Sustainable Energy – with out hot air”
      “Is there enough lithium to make all the batteries for a huge fleet of electric cars?
      World lithium reserves are estimated to be 9.5 million tons in ore de-posits (p175). A lithium-ion battery is 3% lithium. If we assume each vehicle has a 200 kg battery, then we need 6 kg of lithium per vehicle. So the estimated reserves in ore deposits are enough to make the batteries for 1.6 billion vehicles. That’s more than the number of cars in the world today (roughly 1 billion) – but not much more, so the amount of lithium may be a concern, especially when we take into account the competing ambitions of the nuclear fusion posse (Chapter 24) to guzzle lithium in their reactors. There’s many thousands times more lithium in sea water, so perhaps the oceans will provide a useful backup. However, lithium specialist R. Keith Evans says “concerns regarding lithium availability for hybrid or electric vehicle batteries or other foreseeable applications are unfounded.” And anyway, other lithium-free battery technologies such as zinc-air recharge-ables are being developed []. I think the electric
      car is a goer! ”

      I hope this helps.
      David Eastaugh
      more from the book at:

    • Alistair McKechnie

      Mojo is great. Buy it if you have to but it’s spot on.

      @ the Californian poster: no-one would call it an “Ecotricity Mojo”, they’ll just call it a “Mojo”. And your alternatives regrettably lack exactly that.

    • James Johnston

      I’m also not too keen on Mojo. It’s association with Austin Powers really means it’s not classy name for a sports car.

      How about ‘Vent’?

      It means wind in several European languages, while in English it is the stem for ‘invent’ and ‘advent’ both very appropriate for new technology ushering in a new era of car design.

    • Sam

      what about epsilon? greek for E

      or gecko maybe, imagery of small and nimble climbing walls..etc

    • Doug


      I think Mojo is a great name. Contrary to what that other guy said, it’s extremely easy to say (literally, it’s something a baby could pronounce). Instead of “Ecotricity Mojo” some might even say Eco Mojo, which has a nice rhythm to it. Another thing, for us Yanks, Mojo has an association with a particular fictitious Brit.

      In future installments, could your team talk more about the drivetrain you’re using? Looks like UQM motors with a belt drive. Are you still using a dual motor setup? I’m sure those kind of details would be pretty interesting for many of us.

      Youtube can now host high definition (HD) video. Do you think you could upload high quality versions of previous and future installments?


    • Jonathan

      Dave and David,

      You are taking for granted that Lithium batteries are composed of solely Lithium. The way a battery works is the transfer of ions between a cathode and anode through an electrolyte. Lithium only makes up the anode part of the battery. Common materials for the cathode are cobalt, nickle, manganese and vanadium; of which cobalt is moderately rare and the others aren’t as great of performers.

      Current cobalt consumption is around 66,000 tons per year with an estimated world availability of 11 million tons. That equates to approx 166 years of availability, but only if current consumption rates do not change. Obviously if battery production is ramped up to provide for a 100% electric fleet, this 166 years is going to shorten dramatically.

      Another drawback to Lion batts is their life cycle and memory. Compared to the indefinite cycle time and zero memory of capacitors, batteries are poor performers over the long haul. Additionally this is another burden on EV consumers as their vehicles mature – and they’re not cheap to replace.

      As far as my statement on supercaps being theoretical/pre-productions, this is true. It is true because of the additional capabilities a supercap must meet in order to replace a battery in everyday or EV applications (as I stated in my OP). Like we both said, Dave, current [super]caps have low energy capabilities and instant/full energy release.

      I prefer to address this whole situation from a “fix it once, fix it right” point of view. Yeah, Lion batteries are a viable solution, but for how long? Why not spend extra resources in the beginning to create a solution that will have an indefinite, or nearly indefinite life span? 100 years seems pretty indefinite, but that’s less than 1% of the duration the human race has been around. Hopefully in 100 years we will be mining all our raw materials in space from asteroids, comets and the like; leaving the earth alone to recover.



    • paul

      Hiya Doug

      I can answer the video/HD questions – we have just got an update for our media server which will allow us to do some clever stuff with H.264 and higher bit-rate video… so the embedded video on the blogs will be upgraded shortly to support “HD”

      WRT Youtube – I have been uploading decent quality H.264 encoded files since they upgraded, I am sure it looks better since. I will replace the old ones at some point… but the embedded files here should end up being better anyhow.

      e2a: ah just looked into it – you can’t replace videos with higher quality ones… but the good news is that we have now upgraded the Ecotricity media server, and will be rolling out higher quality videos on here shortly.

    • Jonny Holt

      Hello Dale,

      It seems we are straying onto the territory occupied by your “Where will all the Lithium come from?” topic. No harm in that.

      If the name is still not resolved, some wind based suggestions are on these pages:

      and also

      Quite a few have already been grabbed by other car manufacturers – Maserati and Volkswagen in particular. For those of us brits who remember the 1960’s, Zephyr will always be a Ford.

      My favourite derived from this list would be to use the name of the Mayan god of wind, “Huracan”. Chinook would be good but will forever be associated with accident prone helicopters.

      However, I still like “Vertigo”.

      Best regards,


    • Thomas

      I just saw this for the first time, and am very interested. I’m not particularly what you would call green, but I believe that it is the nature of technology to be improved upon and replaced. Therefore, I wish you luck and success. I though about the name of the car a bit, and had some ideas.
      All of the following are Old English words.

      flyht or fleam – flight
      lyft – air
      maegen – power, virtue, capacity, strength
      forma – first
      īdel – empty
      nīwian – renew

      Anyhow, I thought maegen encompassed some of the ideals of your car. Don’t know exactly how its pronounced though.

    • Steve Blake

      I like mojo it is simple but would like to suggest

      Wind spirit

      The wind spirit is Native American and is a very powerful spirit in their beliefs.

      It also says something about Dale and the spirit of the project. This is in my view a wonderful project and it deserves a good name that expresses the simplicity, style and ethics behind it.

    • Jess

      The name Mojo does nothing for me I’m afraid.

      It is dated and in my mind doesn’t represent an electric sports car at all as it sounds stodgy. I concur with the Californian post, it needs to be a word with fewer connotations.

    • Dave Howey

      Names… what about simply going for the name of an animal. Probably used already elsewhere, but I think quite a nice approach – familiar, fun but very fast! eg:

      Falcon (or Peregrine) – fastest bird
      Dragonfly (fastest insect)
      Cheetah or Antelope (fastest land animals)
      Sailfish, swordfish, marlin, (fastest swimming animals)
      etc. etc.


    • Dave Howey

      ps also I read that the albatross is a very ‘efficient’ bird… if that helps

    • Chris

      You’re never going to please everybody, so I wouldn’t even try!! Having said that, personally I would like something with a bit more attitude.

      I can appreciate Damons point. The hardcore ‘living in a darkened hut’ greenies will not appreciate a cool or macho name. The last thing they want is another generation of wall street/canary warf yuppies stroking their testosterone fuelled, motorised manhood on wheels. But to me although Mojo sounds quite fresh, it also sounds a bit too soft and cutsey! Like the Volkswagen Lupo! Or even the Ka. Like a small bunny. Easy to belittle (Jeremy doesn’t need the extra help on this!)

      I personally would like it to sound a little more epic!

      The only name I could come up with in this vein, is the Kinesis. A noun derived from the word Kinetic – physical movement, esp. involuntary random movement resulting from a particular stimulus. Which kindof fits with the wind generated power, which I still think is important to highlight.

      BTW, I saw a thing on the news the other day about ‘car clubs’. Have you heard of them dale? Companies like street car? Apparently they’re doing well at the moment. Could be another way to market an electric car. Check out the video:-

    • Chris

      I should just add, I meant Jeremy Clarkson! Not Jeremy who sometimes blogs here!!

    • Chris

      Sod it, I’ve changed my mind. I want you to name it the Baracus. After BA who you’ve got working in your garage with the welding mask on. Or you could name it Hannibal, after the guy with the hat and the grey moustache – obviously a disguise.

    • Dave Howey

      Jonathan, here is a reply on the supercaps vs batteries question, from a friend with a PhD in electrochemistry:

      “I imagine that over time (decades) supercap and battery technologies will become so similar that they will be indistinguishable. Traditional batteries consumed their electrodes to discharge the energy, although modern rechargeable batteries have an electrode architecture upon which a charge carrier (lithium, hydride, etc) is deposited, two different types of electrode architecture with different chemical properties means that the charge carrier has a different chemical potential at each electrode, meaning that if the charge carrier is deposited at the higher energy electrode the battery is charged, and if it is deposited at the other lower energy electrode it is discharged. Supercapacitors have similar architectures, but instead of a charge carrier which is deposited onto the architecture they instead have an ionic liquid separated by the two architectures. When you apply a charge between the two architectures they are basically a capacitor, and can store charge which traditionally would have been limited by the insulating properties of the electrolyte (in a traditional capacitor some kind of insulating material). However, in a supercapacitor the fact that the insulator is an ionic liquid (with huge floppy ions that won’t react with the electrode) means that the anions and cations are attracted to the oppositely charged architectures and cancel the effective electronic charge that has built up at the electrode. The separation of the anions and cations then causes a large chemical potential to have been built up which enables orders of magnitude more charge to be stored on the electrodes than before. Effectively you are converting the electrical charge into a chemical potential. This is known as the double layer effect, and supercaps are called double layer capacitors by electrochemists.

      Therefore, fundamentally the only difference between batteries and supercapacitors is that in a battery the charge carriers chemically react with the electrodes, whereas in a supercapacitor the charge carries are merely adsorbed on the surface of the electrode immobilised by ionic bonds. Therefore in a battery after you have deposited one layer of charge carrier you can lay another one on top giving you a ‘relatively’ high energy density, but it takes some time for the chemical bonds to be formed/broken when you charge/discharge. In a supercapacitor you can only deposit one layer of charge carrier, so the energy density is ‘relatively’ low, but the bonds can be broken pretty much instantaneously giving you huge power densities. I see no reason why these two technologies will not converge.”

    • Dave Howey

      (2) Jonathan – again – on the issue of whether there is enough lithium (and x, y, z other elements), the paper to read is “Geochemical constraints on sustainable development: Can an advanced global economy achieve long-term stability?” by William F. Pickard. Abstract as follows: “The eighty-one stable chemical elements are examined individually with respect to (i) recent annual demand and (ii) worst case long-term
      availability in a distant future in which they must be extracted from the background sources of air, seawater, and ordinary rock. It is shown that, if a conventional use scenario is envisioned, the supplies of ruthenium, rhodium, palladium, tellurium, rhenium, osmium, iridium, platinum, gold, and especially phosphorus will be questionable while the supplies of copper, zinc, molybdenum, silver, cadmium, tin, antimony, tungsten, mercury, lead, and bismuth will be inadequate. It is therefore concluded that, in the long run, only the promotion of massive recycling and substitution technologies will suffice to maintain the global industrial society now developing.”

      So– Lithium may be the least of our worries!

    • leo

      i have an idea…
      the car should remain nameless.

      after all, what’s in a name?

    • Joe Casasanta

      OK Dale. I’m a bit cheesed off that you put out episode 6 of 6 and the car is still not completed. The car still looks like a high performance all electric. WHERE’S THE WIND TURBINE(S)!!!

      I hope all this work is a fixed price contract. Sounds like you might need an expediter to help move things along…..

      In any case, I’ll get over it. You’re still a true pioneer in my eyes.

      BTW I’ve got your car name: Zero-C Voltaero

      The Angry American

    • Justin Noe

      Here are a few more ideas:
      “Boreas” (Greek god of wind)
      “Notos” (Greek god of wind)
      “Euros” (Greek god of wind)
      “Zephyros”(Greek god of wind)
      “Typhoon” (Not a greek god!)

    • JOSHUA

      Hello Dale,
      I love the idea of a wind turbine powered high performance electric car. If I had a wind turbine, some land and an electric car, I’d be completely self sufficient, the turbine combined with the new ultrafast charge batteries (Toshiba) would provide a steady powersource to run everything and sell some back to the grid. Having said that, instead of getting into the electric car prototyping business, why not support an existing manufacturer of EV’s – The Lightning GT or the Tesla Roadster, which happens to be manufactured at Lotus’ Elise plant, one of your customers? Or pioneer in helping Mayor Boris push forward his plans for introducing charging points all over London?

      Anything to stimulate the EV industry.


    • BP

      Two more Greek-inspired suggestions:

      Anemos = “wind”


      Mojo brings to mind chewy sweets, though I haven’t seen them for years.


    • robin

      Hi Dale, give the car a name that means something and has impact. It’s important that the car continues to drive change. R

    • Robin

      Why not just stick the your Green Union Jack on it with the letters GB – Green Britain! Point the car in the direction we need to go.

    • Bruno Innecco

      Hello Dale,

      I saw an article on your car here in Brazil, and wanted to congratulate the initiative… The typical British bold way of doing things.

      I have a suggestion for the name, if I may:


      It is how Brazilian surfers call the wind coming from the land towards the sea, leaving a white courtin of water behind the waves (

    • Leo Tombs


      I definately think ‘Vent’ is the name to go for, popped straight into my head…and its still there

    • Roxi

      What we really do NOT need is wind powered sports cars. What we do need is basic sustainable transport that is affordable. Is this just a big PR gimmick by a bloke with more money than sense? Probably!

    • Dave Howey

      Come on Roxi, where’s your sense of imagination? People need to understand that electric cars are not milk floats, they are serious vehicles. This project demonstrates that electric cars are something to aspire to. Yes you’re right, we need a much better sustainable public transport system, we need more people on cycles etc (cf Holland). But we also need to win hearts and minds to electric vehicles. What’s wrong with that?

    • Derek Thomas


      Suggest you look at the following link for affordable electric cars. Its just a matter of time.

      Dale is doing a great job.

    • Afe

      The mojo is looking great…and im excited for the time when a revolutionary battery for electric cars comes to life…