How a bunch of Hippies combined with (and often the same as) highly educated Ivy League graduates just may have changed the world.

This is a story – in writing and audio – about the so-called “Prickly Mountain Gang” from the 1970’s.

From the article:
“Prickly Mountain became a caldron of entrepreneurial stew. Suddenly, everyone had a business. Norton, along with other Prickly residents Andy Palmer, Chris McCarthy and Michael Goldfinger, started a furniture company called Union Woodworks. They leased space in the old Bibbin Mill, now co-owned by Sellers. Others soon followed: Randy Taplin was already established as a furniture maker; his wife, Nancy, was a working artist; Serena Fox started a graphic design business; Pierre Moffroid started importing tankless water heaters; Mac Rood and Rob Bass started exploring the manufacture and sale of composting toilets. Sellers also looked to be employed. He was hired at Goddard College in Plainfield to teach a class in design and building. One of his students, Don Mayer, was interested in bringing back the windmills that years earlier had been a common source of renewable energy on farms in the Midwest. Lessons of the past; solutions for the future. “Sure,” Sellers told him. “We can make that happen.” Before long Mayer, with Sellers, founded the North Wind Power company. And then two others, Duncan Syme and Richard Travers, started woodstove companies. It wasn’t long before many of these businesses and enterprises began cross-pollinating with the ideas and skills of other residents of Prickly Mountain. A wind turbine soon was constructed at Dimetrodon. (“The worst wind power site ever!” says Norton ruefully.) The commonalities soon led to a unique blend of practical skills and unbridled creativity.”

One might even say I, with a 40+ year career in Alt Energy and Tech, was directly influenced by this “gang”.

(Opinion/Editorial)

Electrification may be the right destination but are we doing it in the wrong order?

Electrification has become one of the principal answers to climate change in the United States. Replace your gas furnace with a heat pump. Replace your gas car with an EV (Electric Vehicle). Replace the kitchen range with an electric or induction model.

The intentions are good. In many cases the efficiency is higher. But are we putting the cart before the horse?

Consider where I live – Massachusetts. Our state is using substantial incentives to encourage homeowners to replace oil and gas heating systems with electric heat pumps – these “rebates” and grants are paid for in ALL electric bills. At the same time, Massachusetts has electric prices among the highest in the country. A 2024 Harvard study estimated that, at the electric and fuel prices then in effect, about half of Massachusetts households and almost ALL heating with natural gas would experience higher annual heating costs after switching to a heat pump.

Heat pumps themselves are not the problem. They are remarkable machines that can deliver two or three units of heat for each unit of electricity they consume. But efficiency and cost are not the same thing. A highly efficient appliance running on very expensive electricity can still cost more to operate than the supposedly less-efficient system it replaced. Our comparison calculator will illustrate this for you.

This raises a fair question: Why were homeowners pushed toward electrification before the underlying economics were put in place?

CLEAN ELECTRICITY FIRST

There is also the matter of where the electricity comes from.

In 2025, New Englands power plants generated about 13% of their electricity from renewables and another 6% from hydroelectric power. Natural gas is, by far, the largest fuel – in some states and regions providing 80% of generation.
The basic picture is clear: our regional grid is less than 20% renewable, similar to the USA National Figure.

Electrification can still reduce emissions, especially when an efficient heat pump replaces oil heat or an EV replaces an inefficient gasoline vehicle. But the benefit is not electric equals clean OR “Electric equals cheaper”.
An electric appliance or vehicle is only as clean and as economical as the system supplying its electricity.

Perhaps we should put much more of our money and effort into renewable generation, transmission, storage, and grid modernization first. Then, as electricity becomes both cleaner and less expensive, accelerate the push toward electrification.

That would be an intelligent sequence rather than an ideological one.

THE EV PRICE LOTTERY

Electric vehicles present another version of the same problem.

An EV owner with inexpensive overnight charging may pay only a few cents per kilowatt-hour. Another owner may pay more than 30 cents at home, while public fast charging commonly costs around 50 cents per kilowatt-hour. In much of the country, this determines whether an EV is exceptionally inexpensive to operate or offers little fuel-cost advantage over an efficient hybrid.

Imagine if gasoline cost $3 per gallon in one state and $12 or $15 in another. We would consider that an enormous national problem. Yet we appear willing to build transportation policy around electricity that can vary almost as dramatically depending on where and when someone charges.

There is another difference. Most consumers have multiple gasoline stations competing for their business. A homeowner normally has one electric utility delivering power. Alternative suppliers may exist in some states, but the wires, delivery charges, and much of the bill remain under monopoly control.

Electric rates can occasionally decline, especially when fuel costs or special charges change. Over the long term, however, homeowners have good reason to expect that utility bills will rise as generation, transmission, distribution, storm resilience, and grid improvements are added to the system.

That uncertainty matters when government is asking families to make major investments in electric heating and transportation.

ELECTRIFICATION STILL MAKES SENSE FOR SOME

None of this is an argument against electrification – entire countries have moved successfully to Electrification with 100% renewables, in the process cleaning up their air and environment greatly. However, the USA is a massive land mass with a large population and legacy infrastructure. We can’t, at will, change to renewable and reasonably priced grid – doing so will take decades.

Some uses make sense now. An induction or electric range uses relatively little energy compared with heating a house or powering a car. It also avoids combustion pollutants inside the home. Even in a high-electricity-cost state, the difference in annual cooking cost is unlikely to determine a household budget.

A heat pump may be an excellent choice for someone replacing electric resistance heat, oil heat or living where electricity is inexpensive. An EV can be a great financial and environmental choice for someone with affordable home charging. The calculation simply does not come out the same for every household or every part of the country. Certain states and regions, California being the largest example, have substantial renewables to fuel your EV or Heat Pump.

That is precisely why one-size-fits-all electrification policies deserve more scrutiny.

PUT THE FOUNDATION UNDER THE HOUSE

The solution is not to retreat to fossil fuels. It is to build the foundation that widespread electrification requires.

The United States needs something approaching a Manhattan Project for clean electricity: vastly more renewable generation, storage, transmission capacity, and a modern grid capable of carrying the additional load from vehicles and buildings.

We also need regulatory policies that make electricity prices more stable and that allow ordinary consumers to benefit as renewable generation becomes less expensive. Otherwise, lower generation costs can be swallowed by rising delivery charges and grid expenses before homeowners ever see them.

Electrification is an important part of our energy future. But paying people to switch to a system that may cost them considerably more before making that system cleaner, more affordable, and more dependable is not sound energy policy.

Build the clean electrical system first. Make its benefits visible in consumers bills. Then the public will not need to be pushed so hard toward electrification.

They will choose it themselves.

SOURCES

Harvard Kennedy School, Heat Pump Adoption Not Cost-Effective for Majority of MA Households, Says New Study:
https://www.belfercenter.org/belfer-news/heat-pump-adoption-not-cost-effective-majority-ma-households-says-new-study

ISO New England, New England Power Grid Regional Profile:
https://www.iso-ne.com/static-assets/documents/100010/new-england-power-grid-regional-profile.pdf

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Improving Interconnection to the Electric Grid:
https://www.mass.gov/info-details/improving-interconnection-to-the-electric-grid

In an attempt to simplify decision making and educate, we will be posting many Energy and Efficiency Calculators. Since our Menus and Site Navigation are not yet finished, this post will temporarily keep track of them until we clean things up.

NEW – Compare the cost of all Home Heating Fuels.

Heat Pump Vs. Natural Gas for Cold Climates in the USA.

Should I Fly or Should I drive? The “MPG” of Air vs. Car Travel.

Compare Cost per Mile of Gas Passenger Vehicles vs. Electric Vehicles.

The real TOTAL Efficiency of Gas, Hybrid and Electric Cars

This is a more complicated question than it first seems. AI doesn’t “think” things out – it goes and grabs a figure from Reddit, Facebook or Quora & quotes it. However, if the user prompts AI to research the topic – like “using sources like DOE and other engineering data, what is the Natural Gas powered grid to road effiiciency of an Electric Vehicle?” , you will get a more accurate answer.

As dad might say “Ask a Stupid Question, get a Stupid Answer” – it’s interesting that Media, the Public and therefore AI seems always biased in terms of the upsides. That is, it will easily make a mistake by saying “An EV is 40 to 50% (or even 60%) efficient well-to-wheels, but never make the same error on the downside, which would have to be “EVs are 12-18% efficient” to match the distance from the proper figures. I thought it might be instructive to give two examples of AI responses when it is properly questioned.

Example #1:
(AI says) “When accounting for real-world U.S. grid averages, transmission, charging losses, and vehicle operation, the true well-to-wheel efficiency of an electric vehicle powered by natural gas is 23% to 29%. Idealized engineering specifications that rely on best-case laboratory assumptions overstate efficiency, whereas factoring in operational averages properly brings the total below 30%”
(my notes: This one is very accurate– note it reflect our figures as Nat Gas Grid Example).

Example #2 – Chat GPT consistently reported number vastly higher – and used pages of calculation to “prove” itself.
(AI) “So roughly 38% well-to-wheels efficiency under that particular assumption.”
is an example of initial output. It even declared that Pessimistic! In another interesting slant, it tried to compare EV’s to Gasoline cars even though this was never mentioned or asked about. That’s a bias – and, of course, it was off on the upside with ICE vehicles also.
(AI)” The answer is approximately 50–60% WTW for a reasonable modern-grid calculation” is yet another of the wrong answers it returned.

So the question is why? The reasons are simple. AI doesn’t care about truth or accuracy at all. It will spit out wild numbers and back them up with math that isn’t needed nor relevant. It even admitted this:
“using actual U.S. average heat rates and losses, rather than the usual marketing-style” – WHAT? Of course, AI is going to reflect everything we do in the USA – and everything is marketed. It also states:
(AI) “The biggest problem is that people routinely quote the most favorable efficiency number from each stage without maintaining a consistent system boundary.“

In other words, people like PR and BS, if I might be blunt.

ChatGPT will eventually, but only if sources (like the Department of Energy and the Manufacturers of the Gas Turbine units, etc. are pointed to, give a number closer to reality:
“So is there an “upward bias”?

(AI)”I think there is a very real methodological bias, although I wouldn’t necessarily call it intentional“. (that is ChatGDP talking).
and, so – finally, ChatGPT can come to reality like this:

“If we’re asking the question you actually intended:

(AI)“Starting with the chemical energy in natural gas/coal, how much ultimately becomes useful mechanical energy at the wheels of a real-world EV operating on the U.S. grid?”
(AI) “I’d use ~28–31% as a reasonable engineering estimate“

(AI)”with something like ~30% as the central figure.”
(my comment = Close enough – but it takes a LOT to get the Chatbot to address the actual question).

Flying can actually be more green than driving – especially if the load is light (1-2 people) and the distance is great.

Our new calculator is at:
https://theenergyprimer.com/should-i-drive-or-should-i-fly-which-is-more-efficient/

FAQ
Q: Why only up to 1,500 Miles
A: This covers most Flights where folks might consider driving as an alternative. Also, longer driving distances start really adding up in terms of costs for food and hotels and in “lost” days. A

Q: What about my EV? Aren’t I getting almost free Miles and using Renewables?
A: Sadly, not in the USA where only 20% of our Grid is Renewable. Also, as you can see in our other articles and calculators, an EV is roughly equivalent to a decent Hybrid in overall efficiency when charging from the US Electric Grid – so choose the higher MPG – perhals 45 would be safe. Note: this is NOT an exercise in cost. But you can use our upcoming “cost per mile” calculator to compare $$.

Q: What about all the extras like Airport Parking, transport to the airport and back, etc. ?|
A. Yes, both flying and driving have “extras” in cost and energy use attached to them, however for simplicity we will assume they are similar for both transport types (more Hotels and Food with driving, more Paid parking and ground transport with flying).

Q: Are you pro-Aviation? I always thought Airliners were terrible in terms of “green”.
A. This is exactly the reason we did this calculator! Modern Air Travel, with the improved airliner design (Example, Airbus 220) get as much as 110+ MPG per seat! In fact, using the average car load for the USA (1.5 persons per trip), newer Airliners win the efficiency contest in most comparisons.

Q: Hmmm….I never really thought about it that way….
A. That is the goal of this site! To make us THINK about our choices. In fact, here is another interesting mind experiment. If we had to set up transport for distances over 500 miles – not only would Airliners be more efficient in the simple transport, but no infrastructure has to be built between the two points! So if we were starting today we could, in theory, save trillions of dollars and vast amounts of resources by not having the vast ribbons of concrete and blacktop and the services needed to keep our cars and us going. It’s similar to the Mobile Phone revolution – countries that skipped the landline ended up not having to wire every building in their state or nation! Newer nations and newly developed areas would be very smart to limit car infrastructure in favor of Electric Trains and Airliners – thereby preserving much more of the natural landscape.

A Temporary Report on EV Miles Per KWH averages and ranges which will be linked to from our upcoming calculators.

The short answer is Probably Not.
NOTE: This is USA Based and Facts/Opinions based on our Grid being only 20% Renewable! 

The longer answer would be “Compared to What” and also involve “At what Cost?”.

The issues here are complex. If you have a 1 to 4 people living in a 4,000 square foot poorly insulated house and downsize to a 3,200 sq. ft. with similar construction – it is “greener” of course, but it is not green!

This is the type of problem we run into when trying to calculate advantages or disadvantages of Electric Vehicles (EV). We could point out some instances or anecdote where an EV “helps a little”, however – as one major study concludes, “EV’s as currently made and sold are not compatible with Climate Goals”. We can’t “get there” with “it’s a little better” or, “it’s about the same” or even “it’s 30% better”. Note that Hybrids can have 100% better MPG than many non-hybrids and also quite clean in emmissions…that’s also a good evolution, although not as sexy as an EV.

Let’s start at the top and work down through the issues. Some of them may be of more importance to prospective buyers – others less so.

1. The Big Problem is the combination of “Car Culture” and the amount of resources and infrastructure needed for it.

This should be obvious – but many don’t even think this far. An EV will weigh 500-1500+ lbs more than many ICE or Hybrid vehicles. This means it takes more energy and “stuff”  to manufacture. It also means that the wear and tear on roads, bridges and tires is greater. Gasoline infrastructure is mostly built – while we need to spend trillions on improving the electric grid and millions of charging stations.

Read this article – just on tires! A 4400 Lb Tesla will “out pollute” 3600 lb Hybrid in this particular fashion.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/03/car-tyres-produce-more-particle-pollution-than-exhausts-tests-show

Buying a EV does nothing to avoid the building of those additional lanes on the interstate. It does nothing to help with the waste of time in traffic – and it currently does nothing to avoid the death and destruction on the highways.

In short, many would say it’s the wrong direction in the first place – to continue the full-on car culture instead of building Bullet Trains and other forms of transport which are 100% proven to be vastly greener. We are not going to get “there” by having vehicles that are 5% or 10% “better and greener” than the last generation. Consider a good modern Hybrid car – they are 200% to 300% better than the gas cars from 15 or 20 years ago.

By pointing to Car Culture as the Main Problem, this writer is not saying “we must get rid of all cars” – rather, the point is that investment should geared toward solving the real problems – at a cost we can afford.

The greenest car you can have is an ancient used model that sits in the garage most of the time.   Remote Working, uBer, eBikes, etc. allow many modern families to get by with one (or fewer) cars. If the USA were to truly plan a greener future, we’d be building Bullet Trains as quickly as we could. A cynic might note that there is not nearly as much profit in Bullet Trains as there is in selling every household an EV or two! Imagine – 100K+ in revenue per household…a dream for capitalism, but not for the Planet.

2. Initial Cost of Vehicle and ongoing Costs.

Short Version – the 5 year cost of ownership or a Tesla Model Y is $55,000 (2025 approx.)
The same for Toyota Rav4 Hybrid is $34,000
The same for a CRV Honda Hybrid is $34,000 to $37,000
A Tesla Y buyer might be spending $20,000 extra over 5 years…

Do your own research at this Link – Tesla is not even in the top 100 vehicles for low cost of ownership. The EV’s that cost the least – in general would be the smaller models and those which cost less up front – since depreciation is one of the largest costs involved in owning a vehicle.
https://caredge.com/ranks/costs

At present, the cost of a mid-level EV from Tesla is 20 t0 50% more than many hybrids. “Green” applies to many things, including money (value for the dollar). Even if EV’s were greener then they are (they might be someday), they have to be affordable. The consumer could spend that extra 20 or 30K on many things which might provide better results (PV on their house, insulation, new furnace, carbon offsets, eBikes, etc.). None of these are as sexy “look at me” as a Tesla, but likely will provide MUCH more help for Mother Nature per dollar spent.

Some parts of an EV may outlast those on regular cars – but others, such as tires, roads and bridges, are going to cost more due to the excess weight.

Fuel costs can differ – in general an EV costs as much or more than a good hybrid in per mile driven (fuel). This site will soon have an accurate calculator for you to see your exact costs per mile.Gasoline can spike – some lucky few live near Hydro plants or have large Solar PV arrays on their own roof...in these cases, the EV gets both greener and cheaper.

Right now – the Energy Mix in most of the USA is such that approx. 60% of the Electricity is generated by Fossil Fuels (Nat Gas and Coal). Therefore, in most cases, the critics who say “Your Tesla is powered by Fossil Fuels” have a point. On the other hand, in a country like Norway where almost 100% of the electric is renewable Hydro, an EV is much cleaner when it comes to the actual emissions generated. In these types of use cases, an EV may only take a year or two to “pay for” the increased use of manufacturing materials.

Yale and others have done extensive studies on comparing EV’s – studying to see if they could be part of the solution to Global Warming (CO2 reduction), etc. – their summary? Exactly what I am saying in this article. The existing EV’s are less compatible with “Green”.
“the current demand level of personal motorized transport is compatible with ambitious climate targets only under two major conditions: (1) consumers must switch to more energy-and material-efficient vehicles, for example, smaller or shared electrified vehicles, and (2) the energy used to charge these vehicles must be highly decarbonized.” 

Current EV’s are not “smaller and shared” – and surely not more material efficient! In fact, some of the popular and newer models weigh as much as 6,000 lbs – DOUBLE the weight of many Hybrids and ICE cars. Double the weight, in general, means double the resources from the Planet.

Q and A – anticipating what many folks might ask

Q: If this is the case, why are so many people – including Elon Musk – promoting these machines?
A: Two Teslas in your garage = $100,000+ in revenue to Tesla. The cost of Bullet Trains, Trams, Light Rail and other upgrades to transportation and efficiency don’t “make money” in that fashion. “Capitalism” and “The Economy” left unchecked attempt to sell (and often create debt) the largest dollar outlay for “solutions”.

Q: What qualifications do you have? What do the real Experts say?
A: I have been in alt energy since the 1970’s – installed Solar Panels commercially starting in 1979. Imported, distributed, installed tens of millions of dollars worth of renewables. Studied energy of all types extensively.
Yale did a study in 2021 – quite detailed asking these same questions. The only way an EV works out, according to their research, is as I myself promote (small, shareable, public transit – and, more renewables. Here is their summary (read carefully).
“the current demand level of personal motorized transport is compatible with ambitious climate targets only under two major conditions: (1) consumers must switch to more energy-and material-efficient vehicles, for example, smaller or shared electrified vehicles, and (2) the energy used to charge these vehicles must be highly decarbonized.” 

Q: Would Full Self Driving Change the “Green Calculation:?
A: YES! In fact, the entire idea of Tesla being green is dependent on full self-driving – something called Level 4 or Level 5 automation. Tesla is currently at Level 2. WayMo (google) appears to be the current leader in this technology with Level 4 cars on the road.
However, we would need a large percentage of cars to have these features to move the needle.
In reality, this is unlikely for decades! Meanwhile, the folks buying these (and the resources used, etc.) are simply fooling themselves (but driving cool wheels in come cases)/

Q: When will Tesla have Full Self Driving?
A: The question should be modified to ask “Will Tesla EVER have Full Self Driving, and – if so, when is it likely?”.
There is no good answer to this so I will bring forward the current situation, delays and opinions of other experts. Tesla claimed, in 2019, that they might have this “Robo-Taxi” functioning by 2020. It didn’t occur. Now, Tesla is predicting 2024/2025, which is 10X as long as the original claims (made on AI Day in 2019). Some experts in AI (Artificial Intelligence) say it may never happen to the extent claimed – “never” meaning 20+ years, IMHO.
The writer, if he had to guess, would say it will be 20 years before self-driving makes an “energy dent” in the big picture of car culture.

Q: How many Companies are Actively working on Self-Driving cars or software?
A: Quite a few! It’s safe to guess about a dozen which have a very serious commitment to the project and many more working on smaller parts of the problem. This includes ALL the big car makers worldwide in addition to the newer EV-only companies, as well as various IC (chip) and computing companies.

Q: If I buy an EV now, will be be able to be upgraded to Full Self Driving with software?
A: Maybe…but probably not-don’t count on it in terms of making an expensive purchase decision. The Self-Driving hardware of Tesla was upgraded in 2019 and odds are it will be upgraded every few years. Newer hardware is vastly superior – and since the self-driving problem has not been fully solved, no one can say exactly what hardware is needed to get to Level 5. These problems have always been underestimated and there is no reason to think this will change.
Companies like WayMo (google) are likely to license out their software and hardware package to existing manufacturers…when and if that happens, you would know that you have a vehicle that passes the regulatory burden. Same with Tesla – if and when they have full approval from all the regulatory bodies and have their cars running in public at level 4 and 5 you will then know that the hardware/software is ready for the job.

Q: Can you detail some of the big problems of so-called “Car Culture”?
A: Sure, first – look around you! Highways are adding more and more lanes – and yet traffic persists. 40,000 dead each year just in the USA – many more terribly injured. Blacktop and roads and parking lots all create excess runoff and pollution – use large amount of energy to produce (blacktop made from coal, oil, etc.). Landscape is often ruined – take notes for just one day and see what your car does and what is needed to support it! Like this:
1. Parked in my garage (cost for garage, insurance, runoff, etc.).
2. Drove down my driveway (blacktop, runoff, heat sink).
3. Drove to Store (roads, lights, danger to pedestrians, large parking lots needed)
You get the idea. Your car is MUCH more than just “a car” – it requires vast amounts of support which costs money – and create many problems.
High Speed Rail, for example, would take up much less space and be many times as efficient per seat-mile. It doesn’t require rest stops, gas stations, hotels along the way, eateries, etc. – you get from here to there without the entire landscape in-between being highly disturbed.
The same is true, to some degree, with newer airliners. You need an airport at each end, but no ribbons of hotels and roads in-between.
Newer airlines get approx. 80 MPG for a single seat, making them more efficient than most cars for longer trips…even when two people are traveling (40 MPG equiv).

Summary – an EV may be a nice car. But, please, do not fool yourself that this is the path to a sustainable situation for wasteful countries and cultures like the USA. We need a real plan – which includes 10’s of thousands of miles of Bullet Trains, properly planned communities and much more.

It’s actually pretty simple. Look at your total lifestyle….if you are living in the typical “upper middle class or above” Western Fashion (flying here and there, have a nice house or two, two or more nice cars, TV’s, computers, etc.) you (and I) are the problem – not the solution.

Buying a Car or two…and then believing we are “Saving the World” due to slick marketing or talking points, is silly. We need real change…which isn’t going to happen by switching car brands.

It’s now going on one year since I had the idea of starting the Droneflyers.com blog and web site. This post will bring readers up to date on the effort and also offer some additional tips and advice.

Statistics of Traffic (Readership)

First, a quick update on readership – a metric webmasters call “traffic”. I use two measurement services to study the traffic – one is google analytics and the other is quantcast. Both are free. In order to get the most accurate measurements, you need to place a piece of code which they give you onto your pages.

Our quantcast stats are public and can be found at:
https://www.quantcast.com/droneflyers.com

If you hit the “month” tab, you will see that we are up to as many as 100,000 pages being read per month. The growth has been fairly slow and steady – expect for a very strong uptick during the holiday season. This was due to interest in quadcopters for gifts AND the amazing amount of free publicity given to drones when Amazon ran their story about using them for future deliveries. Our site traffic doubled during the week following that story. I expect our traffic to settle down somewhat now that the holiday season is over, so rather than compare it to the previous month, I will be comparing (internally) to the same month the year before.

The basics of the chart are shown in the upward angle of the chart. We had about 10,000 page views in the month of Feb, 2013 – the first month I started this blog. In December, we had about 10X that many, and in the previous months 4-6X as many. Once again this reaffirms the wisdom of purchasing an existing (but, in this case, abandoned) blog which had some traffic – as opposed to starting from scratch. I don’t think Droneflyers would be doing nearly as well if we hadn’t spent a few bucks to get a baseline of traffic and articles.

Current Setup of Site

The original site was a blog with articles posted by one author. The current site is still following this basic format, however I added a forum section which allows others to login and post their reviews, comments and questions. The forum part of the site has not been really busy – but that’s OK – in many ways it serves our purpose of not being complicated. In terms of keeping the site going, here are some of the important points which contribute to it’s success:

1. A very focused and clear mission and subject – We are a site geared toward beginners, those getting started in the hobby. More experienced hobbyists have plenty of other sites to visit – there is almost unlimited technical material on drones online! However, there is not much for those getting started – so we are focusing on those who are in their first couple years of R/C (radio controlled) quadcopter experience.

I should note that one of the biggest mistakes I see made on the internet is the tendency to claim too much “real estate”. In my opinion, you will be much better off to be narrowly focused and do a good job on that piece.

2. A mature attitude and member “vibe” – since the site is about quadcopters for beginners, we don’t allow off-topic conversations, arguments and all the stuff which seems to ruin much of the internet these days.

3. A subject which is growing or underserved – this is an “either/or” proposition. Let me explain. My other site, hearth.com, is focused on a very tiny niche subject – mostly people who heat their homes with woodstoves and firewood. Yet it has millions of page views per month – because the subject is underserved (not a lot of independent info) on the internet.
The quadcopter (drone) site covers a quickly growing subject. These consumer drones are really quite new – the last two years has brought the real explosion in their use. Also, to repeat, by focusing on beginners we are chasing a bit of that underserved market.

4. Consistency – although I don’t spend a lot of time on new articles and content for the site, I do make sure that it does not appear or become abandoned. Maybe I’ll post some good pictures, links, a couple comments, etc – and a few other forum members do also. Maybe I will update an existing articles and/or some links. It’s important to not let a week or two go by without adding something to your ongoing blog or forum…

5. Not forcing the issue – I don’t suggest putting a bunch of new features on a blog or forum unless there is a clear use for them. KISS is the word (keep it simple)….better to have fewer features which are used more than to have too many and have them languish. Watch the statistics and only offer new features, forums, subjects and articles based on what people actually want and need.

Promoting and Advertising Updates

In the former installments of this series, I mentioned the use of google adwords and similar programs as a low-cost way to spread the word. In this update, I’ll review most of the ways you need to promote your blog – both free and low-cost….

Cost per click advertising – These are programs such as google adwords – Bing has an equivalent as do some other large sites (Yahoo!, etc.). – My blog, Droneflyers.com, is currently spending about $50-$60 per month in google adwords. This amount sends about 400 extra visitors to the site per month.

Twitter – I have to admit it. I have never been a big fan of Twitter as a consumer. There is just TMI (too much information) to follow! However, Twitter does create a decent platform for you to promote your new site and articles. It also establishes you as a “player” in the particular sector which you blog about. In fact, one company contact me via Twitter and sent me an expensive sports camera (free) to review! It is also a good way for you to find decent links, stories and happenings which relate to your subject – and perhaps post them or blog about them.

Facebook – Many internet sites would benefit from having a page on Facebook. However, most of your real content should be on your site (blog, forum, etc.) NOT on Facebook. Facebook also allows low-cost advertising – called “boosting your post”, while allows your page to quickly become popular. Our Facebook page has only been active for a month (as of this writing), but as you can see we have a lot of exposure and “likes”
https://www.facebook.com/droneflyers

Other Forums and Sites – can provide traffic to your new site for no cost. Take part in valid discussions elsewhere on the net. Some sites allow you to post links to your site (reviews, for instance). Even Amazon product reviews can steer people to your site!

Of course, the original advice always applies – that is “Content Is King”. Adding quality articles, posts, pictures, videos, link and other content to your site is the best way for the search engines to “bless” you….meaning more readership at little or no cost.

Show me the $$$

In some of the former posts I mentioned the potential revenue sources for your blog/site. However, there is little need to concern yourself with these until you have decent traffic on your site – realistically, until you have a couple thousand pages read per week you are unlikely to be able to “monetize” your site if you are a publisher. However, some of you may be in the business of E-commerce, that is…selling things directly from your web site. Your content may be a way of educating and informing the customer. In such a case, it’s possible that $$ can be gleamed from a smaller readership…assuming the readers are targeted. As an example, if you sell consulting services, it may be that one out of every 500 visitors to your site contacts you for paid advice.

My experience is mostly with web publishing – that is, sites which provide information as opposed to products and services. In my case, income can be made in these ways:

1. Ad programs such as google adsense allow you to make money from ads served by google.

2. Sponsors you obtain – in this case you have to find sponsors who are willing to pay you for banners, text links or other promotion on your site.

3. Affiliate links – these are the Amazon (and similar) programs where you can place product links on your site and get paid a small commission if your readers click on them and make a purchase.

4. Book sales, etc – I used my blog writings as the basis for a book – called “Getting Started with Hobby Quadcopters and Drones”. This is an e-book (paperback available also) which I self-published at a very low cost. The book is selling well.

Currently, I am making 70% + of my site income from Amazon affiliates, 20% from book sales (which may be unrelated to the site – they find the book on Amazon) and 5% from Google Adsense.

While the site is not making enough for a full-time living, it is doing very well and is more than paying for my pursuit of this hobby and my investment of time and money. If I was able to invest more time into the effort it’s likely that it could provide 2X or 3X the current income, which would bring it up close to being a “full time job” in terms of $$.

In closing, I hope these posts provide some hints for YOU to succeed on the web.

Craig

Part #3 is here – and other others are linked from there!

Ok, so enough time has gone by now that a basic judgement can be made as to whether the new blog/forum is (or could be!) a successful venture. As you may remember, I purchased an abandoned blog appox 4 months ago, in late January, 2013.

I have spent some money and quite a bit of time adding content and doing various forms of promotion – in fact, the official Grand Opening is NOW, during which we are giving away various prizes along with copies of a free quadcopter ebook which I am working on.

I’m pleased to note that our traffic (visitors to the site) is WAY up – in addition, the site is actually making some money, although this is not the current intention. It was curiosity, they say, which killed the cat and I couldn’t help but throw some ads and other tests onto the site to see if it would be possible to someday “monetize” it.

Some comments on the chart:
The basics show an increase in page views from less than 1,000 per week to over 7,000. The actual statistics are even better, since I have added a forum to the site which does not have it’s statistics measured in this chart.

Your mileage may vary, but in a very general sense, crossing over the 1,000 page views per day seems to where a site can be economically feasible. Of course, monetary income is only one possible reason (and often one of the lesser) for having a blog or a web site, but it’s nice to get some of the costs covered and make a bit of side income. In my case – since I am investing a couple grand in this venture – it will be satisfying to see a bit of payback eventually come in.

Income vs. Expenses

Based on the current traffic, a site such as this could easily make $2-300 per month in income…and possibly more if the owner spent some time acquiring sponsors and tuning the site. Such a site would pay off the initial monetary investment within the first year or so, and then could provide a positive cash flow. The ongoing costs once all my giveaways, etc. are done with will be less than $40 per month. This includes a decent web host (server) and the costs associated with the forum software, add-ons an upgrades.

Of course, good blogs and web sites require a substantial investment in time and talent also. If I billed myself by the hour, I’d have been broke long ago!

Where the Money comes from?

Most of my previous experience has been with two common forms of selling ads:
1. Private sponsors – this means signing up vendors who might want to put their products or message in front of your sites’ readers.
2. Google Adsense – this involves putting a small piece of code on your site and becoming a partner with google in serving ads (from googles clients).

A third option which I have tried before with poor results involves referring blog visitors to Amazon.com for purchases, and receiving a small fee from Amazon for doing so. In contrast to my former experience, the Amazon links I have on the droneflyers blog are doing quite well.

Yet another option would be to open some kind of a web store and sell related products yourself – something which would probably bring in the largest revenue of any of these options. However, running a physical business requires more time and has additional responsibilities tied to it.

In the case of my new hobby site, it’s my guess that referrals to Amazon along with some adsense will be the best way to create income with little hassle. However, independent (directly contacted and sold) sponsors may be willing to pay higher rates…just that I am not that ambitious at the moment!

I’m going to consider this the final installment to this series – as the site and blog are officially underway. Thanks for reading and I hope you were able to pick up some tidbits of information to make your new blog successful.

Craig

Part #1 is here
Part #2 is here
This (below) is Part #3

Ok, I know y’all are waiting with baited breath as to the report forthcoming after 3 weeks of taking over the Droneflyers blog – so I will start with the fun stuff (the charts!) and then detail how I got there and also what my predictions are for the next couple of months.

So, without further ado, here are our WordPress stats – click on the pic for the larger version!

I’m very pleased. Based on these statistics, the decision to purchase an existing blog (with some visitors) seems valid, as I doubt I would have ever been able to build things up this quickly. The stats are self-explanatory – more people came and read more pages and stayed longer! So, let’s get into some details so that YOU can figure out what may be best for your efforts……

One question which you may be asking yourself is “Well, I don’t know shit….so how the heck am I gonna be able to find and buy a blog or domain which get’s some visitors….you know, like Craig did?”.

A valid question. However, there are many sites where people are selling domains and chances are that you can find one to buy for a very reasonable price which may be related to your subject. Here are some places you can buy existing web sites:

https://flippa.com/
https://marketplace.digitalpoint.com/
and eBay!

There are various ways of confirming the statistics given by the domain sellers. You are welcome to email me for more details on this, but the basics are that any serious webmaster can give you direct access to their google stats so that you can see the figures without them having manipulated them. Some larger sites may have enough traffic to be verified by Quantcast – you can go to http://www.quantcast.com and type in the domain name (try it with hearth.com, etc.).

You could also check in the basic common sense ways! See if you can find the site by searching in google for the terms which are related to it! Notice whether article or forum posts on the site were written recently – or has it languished for years?

So what should you pay for a site? Obviously, as little as possible! For those starting “hobby” sites, you have to have a total budget and work within it. Because I am already in the web space…that is, I have income from existing properties, I can probably afford a bit more for my startup effort. I intend to spend approx $3K total in the first year for everything, from buying the site to advertising to giveaways, but it could be done with much less. Still, a total budget at or over $1,000 for the first year is probably an advantage in terms of quicker growth.

Let’s move on to how I was able to double the traffic within 2-3 weeks. Firstly, as I keep repeating, starting with SOME visitors is key to being able to do this. I cannot stress that enough – you are probably already sick of hearing it!

The next move is to make sure there is some newer content on the site. This may involve a couple hours of you adding and editing existing articles, changing the “about” section and contact info, etc.
There is no use spending time and money promoting a site which visitors will be disappointed with! As will be covered in later posts, Content is King. In fact, you should paste that phrase as a desktop background or print out a piece of paper and tape it to your wall! Content is King. Content is King. Content is King. Content is King.

Along with your initial remodeling, you should start a google account (if you don’t already have one) and install the google analytics tracking code on your site. This will allow precise measurement of your stats.

Your next step is to spend a small amount of money advertising. Don’t skip this step – it will cost you dearly. Come up with a budget…even if it’s $1 a day, to promote your site. Open up two accounts – one on Google Adwords and one on Bing Advertising and place your ads using keyword selection. These systems allow you to bid on relevant words and show your ads (text or graphic) to visitors who type them into a search engine. You only get charged when a visitor is actually sent to your site.

I set up google adwords with a small budget, around $2. daily, for the Droneflyers site. I bid very low for the visitors – maybe a maximum of 15 cents per. The graphic below shows my 3 week history with adwords:

To translate this – google showed my ad over 45,000 times (impressions) and sent 332 visitors to the Droneflyers.com web site – for a total expenditure of $37.02, or about $2 per day.

Why do I suggest you pay for advertising – even if your Blog or site is a hobby site with no income? My theory is that google and bing add some “weighting” to advertisers who appear on their site – not because they sell out for the $$$, but because the willingness to advertise a product shows that your site is a bit more serious and respectable (better for search results).

My prediction for the next couple of weeks? The growth will slow – I don’t expect traffic to double, but rather (hopefully) to maintain at the current level and rise slowly. I plan to officially launch the site and new forum on Apri 1 or thereabouts – at that point I will do some giveaways, PR and other efforts!

Well, it may be time to wrap up this post as I don’t want things to drone (pun intended) on for too long nor to present too much information and have some of it exit your ears after your brain fills up. Although my first intention was to finish up at Post#3, I will continue for at least another post. The next post will detail the free ways I used to build up traffic as well as some of my dilemas and predictions for the future of this failure…or successful….blog.

Quick Update – as of May, 2013 we are still experiencing rapid growth. The chart below shows the record upward growth – to well over 5,000 page views per week. Furthermore, the site has started to bring in some small revenues…more on that later!

Happy Blogging!

Craig

P.S. A fellow author and friend asked me WHY it was very important to increase traffic. My answer is as follows:

The key to the benefit in traffic is that it means you are not writing or forming a community for nothing. Being general here, but most people write or blog for one of two reasons – either to get “read” (the old author thing) or to get read and eventually make a buck. You cannot make ad or sponsorship money from a web site without having a ton of visitors. And, if you are an author, you are gonna feel bad if only 4 people read that tome you spent a couple years writing. So traffic=value. In a broader internet sense, you may want to check out the meaning of Metcafes Law – that is, the power of the network increases with the square of the user numbers (traffic!) or something like that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe’s_law