• PlaidBaron@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    6 days ago

    Thats not my point. Its just not relevant to the overall efficiency of the bicycle compared to the car. Thermal efficiency isnt what we’re talking about here.

    • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Thermal efficiency is exactly what the top comment was talking about. That’s where it started.

      • PlaidBaron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        Not really. Thats how youre interpreting it. When you consider the primary goal is to move a single person (in most cases), the bike wins out. You’re wasting energy moving a large amount of mass.

        • Atomic@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          The bike will in most cases use less calories to travel the same distance. Absolutely. But, That is not the same, as being energy efficient. Energy efficiency is a measurement of input (energy) to output (work).

          If you’re driving a Reliant robin. You will probably surpass the muscle powered bike in both Calories consumed and energy efficiency.

          That doesn’t mean the bike won’t be more environmentally friendly.