FenrirIII@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 9 days agoMuricalemmy.mlexternal-linkmessage-square86fedilinkarrow-up1541arrow-down115file-textcross-posted to: greentext@sh.itjust.works
arrow-up1526arrow-down1external-linkMuricalemmy.mlFenrirIII@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 9 days agomessage-square86fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: greentext@sh.itjust.works
minus-squareLedivin@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8arrow-down2·edit-28 days agoFood -> exerting force is not even remotely fuel efficient
minus-squaregrue@lemmy.worldMlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·7 days agoIIRC, even considering those losses, biking is still one of the most efficient forms of land transport. What I found interesting was a study that found that e-bikes were even more efficient than regular ones.
minus-squareNaz@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·7 days agoIt’s about 22-24% efficient which is the same as a carbon engine. Chemistry and physics, yo, stochiometric ratios. No free lunch. The difference is the mass component of F = M•A
Food -> exerting force is not even remotely fuel efficient
IIRC, even considering those losses, biking is still one of the most efficient forms of land transport. What I found interesting was a study that found that e-bikes were even more efficient than regular ones.
It’s about 22-24% efficient which is the same as a carbon engine.
Chemistry and physics, yo, stochiometric ratios. No free lunch.
The difference is the mass component of F = M•A