Isn’t this HAMR example clouded by a lot of assumptions?

By using an hourly metric, it ignores that some people need or want to be somewhere more than a few miles away. If someone needs to travel 60 miles, it will take 3–4 hours longer on a bike than a car. If a person needs to travel many miles, they can use the all the time saved in a car to:

• do the equivalent exercise to extend their life
• earn more money to offset the difference between car & bike operating costs

I’d suggest this HAMR analysis is only valid for people who have the option to travel short distances and/or have a low marginal value for their time. But I’m too lazy to do the math to figure out what the break even point is… 😉