>the penultimate transportation, gods perfection of LEGS mogs all crude soulless “wheels”

>god's perfection
>meanwhile two wheels and some chains are 3x more efficient than walking

>>2044333 (OP)
Do you even know what "penultimate" means?

>>2044333 (OP)
>Murricans need a diagram from a research group to know how to walk
>It's called the Mayo Foundation
Can't make this shit up

Don't most running guides tell you to look slightly downwards as if you're holding a tennis ball under your chin

>>2044343
That's not a guide on running, it's a guide specifically meant for the elderly/people recovering from surgery and need physical therapy

>>2044333 (OP)
It's bad for the environment and I'm not even joking. The environmental impact of farming is the reason why nutrition is not environmentally neutral. The impact of bicycle production is offset surprisingly early in the bicycles life. I did the math once for uni.
Now comes the disgusting truth: Assuming average western grid energy mix the electric moped (aka ebike) is even more efficient / eco-friendly and the production of the additional bits and pieces is again offset surprisingly early in the things lifespan.
Still not doing that degenerate shit tho.

>>2044344
How is that going to help when they trip over something as thier steely gaze is locked to the horizon

>>2044366
I can see this in terms of enviornmental impact relative to distance covered by walking vs cycling, since cycling uses the same energy needed to walk but goes 3-4 times faster which is a major jump in efficiency. I do, however, struggle to see how e-bikes are more efficeint because they're so much heavier and manufacture of lithium-ion batteries alone no doubt carries a massive enviornmental penalty, not to mention most e-bikes sold in many parts of the world are speed limited to about 20mph, which is plenty fast but can still easily be surpassed by a cyclist.

>>2044368
You're meant to do it as part of a physical therapy group and usually just a few laps around a single suburban block where there isn't much to trip on. Again, this posture is just meant for old people and people recovering from surgery to get back on their feet

>>2044369
Well like I said I once did the math (of course you can always debate the data and the method but usually if youre in or out by orders of magnitude that strongly implies youre right or wrong.
There is a reason why I called the results 'surprising' as in 'counterintuitive' or 'not what widespread sentiment and media would want us to believe' (our opinions do not form in a vacuum).
Cycling at leisurly pace is, per distance covered (!) more efficient than walking. It's faster as a neat side effect. Time trial your trip and it will quickly become less efficient than walkjng leisurly (but even faster).
The weight of the bicycle (or electric moped) has very little impact on its efficiency. Aerodynamic resistance absolutely dominates bicycle efficiency at any reasonable speed. Below that it's rolling resistance which does not scale linearly with load.
I dont get the speed argument about the electric moped. I didn't really get it's first occurence either. Efficiency of modes of transport is generally evaluated on the basis of energy per distance, joules per meter that is. Speed is not a factor. Speed usually leads to a penalty.If a mode of transportation is faster at the same efficiency as another then that's nice to have but the efficiency is the same.
Anyways the reason to why you most likely underestimate the CO2-equivalent efficiency of the electric moped ('ebike') is for two very simple reasons: Very high well to wheel efficiency compared to the very poor efficiency of human / mammal mechanical energy output and also the generally underestimated high CO2-equivalent cost of food production. The average grid energy mix in developed countries is just that much better. So the electric drive starts with 'cleaner' energy and has far better efficiency well to wheel. As such every bit of the work the human does not do but the electric bits do is a net benefit. It quickly offsets the CO2e of 'muh lithium'. >cont

>>2044374
>cont.
I should have been more clear, I am concerned with CO2 equivalent alone. I am not trying to and I can not come up with a way to quantify environmental impact such as land use change (beyond CO2e) of lithium mining operations.
I do believe tho (no data, no math just sentiment) than 'muh lithium environmental damage' is retars boomer cope and usually the same types who go bananas when seeing any kind of renewable installations but completely fine with heating living spaces, drivig cars, flying planes, seeing no issue with oil spills, particle emissions and what not. But muh lithium and rotor blades.

>>2044336
This is playing god. You will pay for your hubris.

>>2044380
As far as I know being multicellular must then be hubris too. Either that or with cretion god set in motion everything that then was to come. In which case no invention is.

>30 mins (and more) walk per day reduces overall mortality rates
>slows down aging
>makes your brain more efficient
>improves your memory and learning capability
>improves digestion
>improves sleep
>improves mood
>gets you some sun
take the walkpill. it's comfy out there.

>>2044410
>blocks your path

>>2044423
looks like hell

>>2044437
It's not that bad. Those bridges have sidewalks and its not like you're going to be walking on the freeway itself.

>>2044439
No, but it can turn "just across the street" into a half hour walk with lots of noise, exhaust fumes and no shade on blistering pavement.

>>2044374
The embodied energy of an e bike is so large you would need to ride one continuously without repair for 1,400 years to ‘break even’

>>2044336
>Stairs
>uphills
>sidewalks
>crowded areas
>uneven surfaces
>pointy rocks and objects that are no issue for shoes but fuck up wheels
nice efficiency

>>2044568
That is completely wrong. Like I said I've done the math. If you insist I'll see if I can still pull my spreadsheets up and you'll point out where exactly the data, a calculation, assumption or the logic is wrong.
I remember doing some fun examples too, like how would the electric moped fare if someone had very weird eating habits like only eating oats. I dont exactly remember the results but I have a feeling the result was even that isn't going to flip the scale.

>>2044596
>stairs
stairs are made for legs. wheelchair-accessible places have ramps, so if world was made for cyclists, we'd have ramps everywhere
>uphills
exact same work done on foot and on bike, you just need a low enough gear
>sidewalks
what's the problem?
>crowded areas
bikes go 2 km/h with walking traffic just fine, they just take a bit more space than a pedestrian and can't strafe
>uneven surfaces
there are whole bike types and sports disciplines dedicated entirely to handling uneven terrain, and even roadbikes can do it if you are brave enough
>pointy rocks
>no issue for shoes
you've never been around pointy rocks in your life
bonus points- on bike you can wade through puddles and not get wet, can't do that by walking

>>2044612
>I need special ramps waahh
>I need new gear or a specialized bike :(
>I must yield to chad walkers
>My dumb machine is a liability to me and others while I go slower than joggers
>same as 2 again
>they don't exist, ok?