you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It's not a take. It's factual. Thermal efficiency is a measurement of how much energy is wasted through heat rather than being used to perform work.

Muscles are fantastic in many ways. But what they're not. Is thermally efficient. That's ok.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 year 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.

  • source
  • parent