all 12 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 15 points 2 years ago (1 child)

Good graph, hate the presentation of "X times less". Just not intuitive and very frequently calculated incorrectly.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago* (4 children)

    What? No, sorry an electric bicycle is not more efficient than a non-electric bicycle. What data fuckery is this?

    Any electrical system is going to loose energy compared to the human body.

    Edit: oh, this should be cross posted to data visualization gore. The more efficient thing is to the right and smaller. But the chart makes it seem like the electric car is the most efficient. Probably they should add red & green colors to make it clear that "electric car big line bad"

    Also "27 time less energy" is like saying "cup half full" and should instead say "27 times more efficient"

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    an electric bicycle is not more efficient than a non-electric bicycle.

    I thought that's exactly what the graph shows, though?? The way I am reading the graph, the ebike is less efficient per mile -- requires more energy per mile -- than a non-electric bike, just as you would expect.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Pretty fucked up. Do actual energy efficiency (calories burned per km) and you'll quickly see the bicycle is far above everything

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    From a quick search:

    • Cycling = 23kcal / km
    • Tesla: 120kcal / km

    There was an article in cars magazine saying that cyclists were especially polluting. In teir study (in europe), the hypothetical cyclist was only eating Argentine beef lol. So no I do not swallow it.

  • source
  • parent