Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by benj111 2550 days ago
Yes, does it take into account the energy cost of the ambulance that comes to collect you after you had a heart attack after getting fat because you didn't burn off what you were eating....

On the other hand, from what I understand in the Netherlands, ebikes help older people keep cycling for longer so ebikes are still good?

I would guess overall, the difference between bike and ebike is a rounding error compared to not riding at all. Both environmentally, and from a health pov.

1 comments

In any case I definitely know nobody who ate more because they rode a bike. Some might get a bit more exercise or will get a bit less fat but I m firmly against the assumption that you'll et more if you ride in current wester societies.
My eating logs show a dramatic calorie increase when cycling to work vs not. Eye balling looks like ~20% increases are common
When I cycled to work I did eat more, but that was 30+ miles a day up and down hills. It was also on an ebike (whatever that proves) and I would say it was more carbs than air freighted fresh veg and meat, so not the most carbon intensive food.

But yes I don't think most people eat their full extra cycling energy expenditure when they take up cycling.