4 ms·
I don't think it's a nitpick. I think this is a very important point. Is the hypothetical fuel more expensive than food?
by romaniv 11y ago
I don't think it's a nitpick. I think this is a very important point. Is the hypothetical fuel more expensive than food?
- ajuc 11y agoLED is much more efficient than kerosene lamp, so I guess yes.
- daveloyall 11y agoI think your muscles are pretty energy efficient. The kinetic potential battery (the weight lifted against gravity) is also very efficient. Food is very energy dense. https://what-if.xkcd.com/128/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/128/ (sandwich vs battery) Uh, change of topic: isn't the caloric value of a food how much heat can be released by burning it (probably when it is dehydrated)? Plenty of energy stored in a sandwich, sure. But a car battery could power a small spaceheater-like thing for... a while. There's a lot of potential for heat production in a car battery (even without BURNING it). Did Mr. Munroe get this one wrong?
- gus_massa 11y agoFrom Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle#Efficiency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle#Efficiency > The efficiency of human muscle has been measured (in the context of rowing and cycling) at 18% to 26%. The efficiency is defined as the ratio of mechanical work output to the total metabolic cost, as can be calculated from oxygen consumption.