• TDCN@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 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
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 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
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours 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.

        • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          Electric bikes are super efficient, I’m a big fan.

          While the petrol and electric vehicles are surprisingly efficient moving a given unit of weight, that also includes their own weight, constantly, making their overall energy use…not great.

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

          Yes and no. They take less energy to move a given unit of weight around, but they’re massively heavy so they expend tons of energy moving themselves the entire time.

        • endeavor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours 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
      11 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.