[plorg]

The obvious difference is that a human on a bicycle is moving on the order of 10 times less mass than a human in a car. Like my sibling post notes, it could be different for, e.g, a motorcycle, but a cyclist also produces about 0% of the SOx, NOx, or particulate emmissions of those vehicles, whichever is a somewhat different conversation.

[danieltillett]

Well those particulates and gases are still produced in the production and transport of food. If you eat more food then more will have to be grown and transported.

[DanBC]

How many calories do you think two hours of cycling uses?

It's not much, and it's comfortably within what most people are eating already.

[danieltillett]

Maybe, but without some good data it is hard to say. I do know that us sloth-like generation eat far less than our ancestors.

[AstralStorm]

The extra movement that increases the resting metabolic rate would cost about 500 kcal combined with the load. Estimating for an hour of cycling daily.

This means about one extra meal to match which would actually cut into waste if it is done smart. Or perhaps you do not even have to adjust anything. (obesity is a thing)

[flukus]

Some of that food could be a carbon sink, depending on how it's grown, how it's transported and where it ends up. With the later it might even get a second life generating electricity.

[danieltillett]

Yes this is all true, but it makes it really hard to know what the carbon footprint actually is.