If I had a revolution I'd swap cars for bikes

Jack May wrote:
"ComandanteBanana" wrote in message
...
On Oct 5, 1:23 pm, "Jack May" wrote:
"ComandanteBanana" wrote in message

...

If I had a revolution --I do-- in one those Banana Republics out there
(hey, plenty of them, don't just think about America), I'd probably
take cue from Chavez --yes, he can be smart too-- and swap cars for
bikes. Good bikes for that matter.
In other words you like using food for bike fuel so you can kill off as
many
third world people as possible.

You don't seem to know much about energy efficiency, do you?

When you are powered by bananas, you only carry yourself plus the
weight of the bicycle, say, 1/20th the weight of you carrying an SUV.

You are a total moron. Food production is one of the most oil intensive
uses in the economy. It takes on the order of ten times as much oil
energy for the food you eat to power your bike as is in the food itself.
It is only morons like you that can understand that manual energy source are
high intense users of oil. A bike will often expend more oil per mile than
a small car. There is a lot research in this area trying to figure out how
much oil energy everything takes to run. Since you understand NOTHING, you
have been assuming just because you don't know where the energy comes from,
it must be green and use no oil. That are a total joke with your total
ignorance of what you write about.



That argument would only hold as 'true' if a person consumed more food
to expend the energy used in transporting themselves. IE: when I was in
the military (1) I ate at a rate of 6000+ calories per day to keep up
with the energy requirements. As a normal 'fit' person who also cycles
and has a fitness regime of running and upper body work most weekdays I
eat what my wife puts in front of me, about 2000 calories per day. Your
average non exercising person consumes far more 'food oil' per day as
they don't measure their intake against calorific value so that whilst
at extremes (1) you might hold some truth over a short distance in
general your argument is unsupportable for the majority of the
cycling/fitness population.

This is of course purely a 'common sense' response. To make a true
analysis one would need to work out the calorific equivalent of a gallon
of petrol and then ascertain how much of that was used over a given
distance. As you propose the idea and have suggested research is
available I would ask you devise a method to 'prove' the assertion using
a 'small car' by which I take it you mean a vehicle of 1000 cc.

FYI:

I read that 1 litre of petrol is the equivalent of 9.7 kWh

1 kWh = 3600 kJ of energy

1 Kcal = 4.2 kJ

So unless I have made a mistake, 1 Litre of petrol has around 8314 kCal

Source: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Calorific_...itre_of_petrol

Calories Expended During Certain Activities:

Biking 12-13.9 mph (moderate effort) Male 334 Female 258

Source: http://www2.gsu.edu/~wwwfit/physical....html#Calories

The average cycle journey of 6 miles is roughly 30 minutes.

Source: Memory

Sniper8052

[Removed rec.bicycles.rides, where this was NEVER on-topic.]

Jack May writes:
You are a total moron.

=v= Always a sign that Jack is about to make sweeping and
unsupported assertions. When asked for references backing
up his assertions, he'll mumble something about being too
busy to run Google for somebody else.

It takes on the order of ten times as much oil energy for
the food you eat to power your bike as is in the food itself.

=v= I'll try anyway. Got a reference for that, Jack? Oh, I
know how to run Google. I even already know of a few sources
of similar claims (already debunked, though), but not of the
claim that it's "ten times as much." What's your reference
for this specific figure?

=v= If you can provide one, maybe people will take your wild
claims more seriously. (Then again, as you well know, there's
always the danger that your reference will be debunked.)
_Jym_

P.S.: Still waiting on that specific Los Alamos reference,
as well. You've apparently based so much of what you write
on it, I'm sure you'd like us all to see the source so that
we can verify the credibility of those writings, too.

Jym Dyer wrote:
[Removed rec.bicycles.rides, where this was NEVER on-topic.]

Jack May writes:
You are a total moron.

=v= Always a sign that Jack is about to make sweeping and
unsupported assertions. When asked for references backing
up his assertions, he'll mumble something about being too
busy to run Google for somebody else.

It takes on the order of ten times as much oil energy for
the food you eat to power your bike as is in the food itself.

=v= I'll try anyway. Got a reference for that, Jack? Oh, I
know how to run Google. I even already know of a few sources
of similar claims (already debunked, though), but not of the
claim that it's "ten times as much." What's your reference
for this specific figure?

=v= If you can provide one, maybe people will take your wild
claims more seriously. (Then again, as you well know, there's
always the danger that your reference will be debunked.)
_Jym_

P.S.: Still waiting on that specific Los Alamos reference,
as well. You've apparently based so much of what you write
on it, I'm sure you'd like us all to see the source so that
we can verify the credibility of those writings, too.

Hehe Jim, welcome to the technology-laggards-line, waiting for some
reference for claims by the master himself!
I think this might take some timeeeeeee ...
;-)
T.
--
"Vergleich es mit einer Pflanze - die wächst auch nur dann gut, wenn du
sie nicht jeden zweiten Tag aus der Erde reißt, um nachzusehen, ob sie
schon Wurzeln geschlagen hat."
Martina Diel in d.t.r
--
(PC TUW-IVV)

Hehe Jim, welcome to the technology-laggards-line, waiting
for some reference for claims by the master himself!
I think this might take some timeeeeeee ...

=v= We'd be hearing crickets chirping and seeing tumbleweeds
roll past, if Jack's preferred transportation mode wasn't
drowning out the former and running down the latter.
_Jym_