It's #WorldBicycleDay and a good time to mention this graph from Scientific American, first published in 1973, and updated 2025.

[markhburton@mstdn.social]

@Two9A @KingmaYpe
You'd have to include at least the energy used in generation, transmission and battery losses, and conversion losses motion to electricity at source, and vice versa at the motor.
That's not taking account of the additional mining, processing, manufacture and distribution of the motor battery, and charger.

[two9a@hachyderm.io]

@LovesTha @KingmaYpe I dunno, the widebodies with the gargantuan turbofans are astonishingly efficient. I found figures for the A330neo as operated by Cebu Pacific (with 459 seats crammed into economy) of 250 tons takeoff weight, 1.75L/100km of Jet-A used per seat; that translates to 0.6 cal/g/km if my sums work out.

[woo@fosstodon.org]

@Two9A I just remembered that he also dragged that lock over the roof of a black car he hadn't seen, because dropped handlebars aren't a great idea in built-up areas, smashed his head and faced a crazy insurance claim.

[mr_harm@mastodon.social]

@Two9A interesting that a fighter jet is quite efficient in comparison to most walking animals...

[joncounts@mastodon.nz]

@Two9A There are velomobiles and then there’s Australian Aidan Lampe in a velomobile, who just set a world record by biking 1,512 km (!!!) in 24 hours, averaging over 63 km/hr.

Extraordinary.

ligfietsers (@ligfietsers@mastodon.nl)

Confirmed & Insane: The new 24-Hour Velomobile World Record is 1,512 km / 940 Miles #ligfietsers https://www.recumbent.news/2026/05/31/confirmed-insane-the-new-24-hour-velomobile-world-record-is-1512-km-940-miles/ #Velomobile #Races

Mastodon.nl door Stichting Activityclub (mastodon.nl)

[esorette@rivals.space]

@Two9A where are the trains ? am I missing something ?

[two9a@hachyderm.io]

RE: https://floss.social/@LovesTha/116685207077107467

@esorette A figure found by @LovesTha puts freight trains in the lower right, about twice as energy-efficient as aeroplanes: https://hachyderm.io/@LovesTha@floss.social/116685207112065538

[lovestha@floss.social]

@Two9A @esorette what i didn't say was that freight trains can be off the chart to the right

They be heavy.

[jochenlingelba1@h-net.social]

@Two9A And here is the original 1973 article: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24923004

[armb@infosec.exchange]

@joncounts @Two9A I don't believe the "velomobile weighs less than bicycle" as shown on the chart though.

[two9a@hachyderm.io]

@armb @joncounts Mm, I mentioned elsewhere that I think the "human on velomobile" is one data point, and the person they found to measure energy output was just particularly small and light. It was always going to be in the ballpark of "human on bike" though.

[alper@rls.social]

@Two9A Can somebody update this and add an e-bike?

[kingmaype@mastodon.green]

@Two9A @markhburton

Fatbikes in NL take about 20 Wh/km:

Hoeveel stroom verbruikt een elektrische fiets? | ANWB

Hoeveel kWh een elektrische fiets verbruikt hangt af van meerdere factoren. Lees hier alles over het (besparen van) stroomverbruik met een elektrische fiets.

ANWB (www.anwb.nl)

A Wh is about 0.86 calories.

[maccruiskeen@social.linux.pizza]

@Two9A @LovesTha @KingmaYpe Sure, but I think for my commute to work (3mi) the bike still cmes out ahead. But I am not going to able to bike to Europe.

[two9a@hachyderm.io]

@KingmaYpe @markhburton Which would be 0.0086 calories per kg per km if you're a hundred kg's and jump on an ebike.

That's below the bottom of the Y-axis on this chart, by some distance.

[luc0x61@mastodon.gamedev.place]

@Two9A Curious that electric trains aren't mentioned, given the low friction and efficient transmission of power. Maybe because it was an abandoned transportation in the 1970s America, to support the combustion engines local industry.

[kingmaype@mastodon.green]

@Two9A @markhburton

Times 20, but still off scale.

[lpryszcz@genomic.social]

@Two9A where do train and bus fall?

[two9a@hachyderm.io]

@lpryszcz Elsewhere in this thread, calculations are floating around of 0.3 cal/g/km; that'd be on the scale of an aircraft (or above that) in weight, but more energy efficient.

[laughingcoyote@social.vivaldi.net]

@Two9A I recall Astronomer Carl Sagan in his promotion of the bicycle as the most efficient mode of transport said that if the surface of the earth were glass (meaning very flat and smooth), lizards would have evolved wheels rather than feet. An additional element is that the power source of the bicycle and the the passenger(s) are the same, self-contained, unit, so you don't have to move around a power source, much of the drive train, container, as well as large tires to support this load in addition to the passenger, which also minimizes friction in both the wheels and airflow. Probably a key element in energy efficiency then becomes the energy subsidies in the food source, but this holds for both bicycle and other other forms of transport as people must eat to sustain themselves whether or not they ride bicycle to get around. Furthermore non-bicyclists require exercise separate from their transport to burn off stored excess energy and sustain their health which adds additional energy costs including transport to and from the gym, and even more if they don't exercise and are forced to utilize the highly energy and resource intensive medical system to keep themselves functioning. I'll note my wife is going on 88 years, riding a bicycle between 10 and as much as a hundred miles a day, despite knee problems walking.