I understand that you are joking, but when you think about it, trains aew very likely more efficient and cleaner than a human (per kill metertravelled).
We need water, cooling, rest, food (that food needs water etc etc).
I once saw a calculation. If someone rode a bicycle from London to Bournemouth (UK), fueled primarily by beef steak, it’s actually more CO2 emissions than driving a small efficient car. That was years ago too, so likely gotten even better.
I believe a more vegetarian based diet still wins however.
But the traveler is going to eat roughly the same amount whether he rides the bike or drives so there is little marginal carbon impacts from riding while 100% of the car emissions are marginal (since the alternate scenario produces none).
But the traveler is going to eat roughly the same amount whether he rides the bike or drives so there is little marginal carbon impacts from riding while 100% of the car emissions are marginal (since the alternate scenario produces none).
the part I think you are missing is the human can only eat so much because it takes not as long to go by car or train as opposed to walking
People eating a wholely natural diet and biking on cleanly made bikes is carbon neutral, most other forms of travel aren’t and won’t be as efficient because of it.
You are might be right but idk. It would be interesting because by walking the humans are getting exercise. If the humans would instead by getting exercise by running on a treadmill or playing a sport the inputs wouldn’t really change. You also have to account for the environmental costs of manufacturing the train and spread that over the km per person travelled
I understand that you are joking, but when you think about it, trains aew very likely more efficient and cleaner than a human (per kill metertravelled).
We need water, cooling, rest, food (that food needs water etc etc).
Just thinking out loud.
I once saw a calculation. If someone rode a bicycle from London to Bournemouth (UK), fueled primarily by beef steak, it’s actually more CO2 emissions than driving a small efficient car. That was years ago too, so likely gotten even better.
I believe a more vegetarian based diet still wins however.
But the traveler is going to eat roughly the same amount whether he rides the bike or drives so there is little marginal carbon impacts from riding while 100% of the car emissions are marginal (since the alternate scenario produces none).
It was the energy differential that was calculated. It was, originally, mostly a dig at how carbon inefficient beef farming was.
the part I think you are missing is the human can only eat so much because it takes not as long to go by car or train as opposed to walking
inb4 challenge accepted
People eating a wholely natural diet and biking on cleanly made bikes is carbon neutral, most other forms of travel aren’t and won’t be as efficient because of it.
but that’s a car, so a train is most likely better
You are might be right but idk. It would be interesting because by walking the humans are getting exercise. If the humans would instead by getting exercise by running on a treadmill or playing a sport the inputs wouldn’t really change. You also have to account for the environmental costs of manufacturing the train and spread that over the km per person travelled