This article's argument is, in a word, crap. The author wants to compare efficiency of cars vs. bikes on the basis of fuel costs (after a scattershot discussion of CO2 emissions from those aerobically respirating vs a bus spitting out fumes), then cites fast food as a baseline fuel source. We can game this anyway we want: why not eat 7 bananas, which are $0.20 at my local market, and claim differently? And let's conveniently forget that EVERYONE needs food, regardless of how they expend or conserve their caloric "fuel". I'd like to see a more scientific analysis of carbo emissions of bicyclists vs cars vs public busses. I strongly suspect bikes come up with high marks in the average case.