• SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Humans are actually unusually energy efficient for mammals when walking and even more so when cycling. Here’s a little info graphic showing a breakdown.

    One thing to keep in mind if you have a dog is they’re less energy efficient than humans. While dogs can run faster, a reasonably fit human can easily out distance an equally fit dog when walking or distance running.

    • TDCN@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Nice graphic. But it seems like it doesn’t factor in kg of mass moved. A human and a bike is a lot lighter than a car or a horse. You could also argue that the vehicle weigh should be ignored but then again you could easily argue back that weight of goods move can possibly be a lot higher with a car if you load it up to capacity. Ignore that. I did not see it said 5 riders for the car

      • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I’m back with better data. I’m assuming the travel path is perfectly flat because I don’t feel like modeling elevation changes. I’m being energy efficient (read: lazy).

        For cycling, I’m using the global average human weight of 62 kg, assuming the cycle is 8 kg, and the pace is 10 kph, which is pretty relaxed.

        For walking, I’m using the 62 kg person walking at 4 kph.

        For driving with petrol, we’ll use the same spherical 62 kg human and a 2024 Toyota Prius with a fuel efficiency of 4.8 L/100 km and a mass of 1570 kg. One liter of petrol is approximately 8174 kcal. Double the energy expenditure for an estimate for your typical SUV.

        For electric, I chose a 2024 Hyundai Ioniq 5 N with an energy efficiency of 21.2 kWh/100km and a mass of 2235 kg. One kilowatt-hour is approximately 860 kcal.

        Walking: 0.74 kcal•km-1•kg-1
        Cycling: 0.34 kcal•km-1•kg-1
        Driving(p): 0.24 kcal•km-1•kg-1
        Driving(e): 0.08 kcal•km-1•kg-1

        • TDCN@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          48 minutes ago

          Oh really. It seems to contradict the graphics. Cars are also stupid efficient now. I also ran some quick calculations on my electric bike and it is crazy how many km*kWh⁻¹ you get and how little it cost to run.

          I’ve heard about some research showing that an electric bike over it’s entire lifetime is more environmentally friendly than a traditional one because the amount of extra food you need to consume without the electric help is over time more co2 than the co2 it costs to charge the battery. I don’t know where the research is from since I just heard it from a colleague so don’t quote me on it, but electric motors are really efficient so it sounds very plausible to me.

          • endeavor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 minutes ago

            Seems so. Even cheating it in favor of the bikes. But looking at electric car numbers it should make ebikes even more effecient.

      • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        It still doesn’t give us kcal•km-1•kg-1 (or an equivalent), which is what I was looking for. We could do some math to get us some loose estimates, though. I’ll do exactly that and report back shortly.