Walking 10 km vs. Driving: Which Consumes Less Energy?

When considering the energy consumption of traveling 10 kilometers, it is important to evaluate the differences between walking and driving. This article will delve into the energy expenditure for both activities, providing a clear comparison and answering the question of which method is more energy-efficient.

Energy Consumption: Walking

Walking is a popular form of physical activity that also has positive environmental impacts. To determine the energy expenditure of walking, we will consider the amount of calories burned per kilometer per kilogram of body weight.

On average, walking 1 kilometer per kilogram can burn about 0.05 to 0.1 calories per kilogram. For someone weighing approximately 70 kilograms, the energy burned during a 10-kilometer walk would be calculated as follows:

Calories burned: 70 kg × 10 km × 0.07 calories/kg/km 49 calories

Conversion to kilojoules: 1 calorie 4.184 kJ

Therefore, approximately 49 calories 205 kJ

Energy Consumption: Driving

The energy consumption for driving a vehicle varies depending on the type of car, driving conditions, and driving style. A typical gasoline car may consume around 8 liters of gasoline per 100 kilometers. Given that gasoline contains approximately 31,536 kilojoules per liter, the energy consumed for driving 10 kilometers would be calculated as follows:

Energy consumed: 8 L/100 km × 10 km × 31536 kJ/L 2524 kJ

Conclusion

Comparing the energy consumption of walking and driving:

Walking 10 km: Approximately 205 kJ Driving 10 km: Approximately 2524 kJ

The conclusion is clear: walking 10 kilometers consumes significantly less energy compared to driving the same distance.

Energy Efficiency Considerations

This question can be interpreted in two ways: which activity consumes more energy—the person walking or the car driving—or which method consumes more energy between walking and driving. In the broader context, walking will consume more energy than driving, but the additional energy consumed by driving is mainly due to the energy required to move the vehicle itself.

In addition, the carbon footprint of driving is significantly higher due to fossil fuel consumption. Walking can also produce CO2 indirectly through the production and transportation of food, but this effect is generally less significant compared to driving a car.

Alternative Modes of Transportation

Cycling is often considered the most efficient mode of transportation in terms of energy consumption, as seen below:

An average cyclist can cover about 20 kilometers in an hour. Assuming a 10-kilometer trip, a cyclist would consume approximately 736 food calories, which is equivalent to about 0.86 kWh.

This figure is surprising, as it is only slightly more than half the energy used to drive an electric vehicle (EV) for the same distance.

For an internal combustion engine (ICE) car, the energy consumption would be about 3 to 4 times higher than walking, and 6 to 8 times higher than walking for the same 10-kilometer trip.

Final Verdict

Moving forward, it is clear that walking 10 kilometers is more energy-efficient compared to driving the same distance. However, the context of the question can change based on whether we are comparing the energy expenditure of the individual or the vehicle, and whether we consider the environmental impact of the activities.

Conclusion

Despite walking requiring more physical energy, driving requires a significant amount of energy to power the vehicle, produce fuel, and maintain infrastructure. Walking is not only more energy-efficient but also has less of a carbon footprint. In conclusion, walking is the better choice when considering energy efficiency and environmental impact.